Why do "Chinesium" chainsaws need a richer oil mix?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Because quality of components is lower, softer etc. 2 strokes are already oil deprived with these modern ratios. More oil helps longevity

I hope you are joking or, for example, Husqvarna used such "lower, softer quality" components in the past.
An excerpt from a 1990s manual, where they still allowed four-stroke engine oil.

1715324089919.png

A slightly later manual:

1715324271708.png

And here is a fairly recent one.

1715324553026.png

Stihl service manual (017, 018):

1715324763044.png

Stihl service manual (010, 011):
1715324874528.png

An example from a fairly recent Zenoah's manual:

1715325047270.png
 
Dead right, when you have a look at what the crankcase is made of it is aluminum not magnesium, I have seen a couple that have been dropped and crankcase has cracked.

I can assure you that you will find crankcases made of magnesium alloy among the wealth of Chinese OEM production. You can also have e.g. a metal clutch cover or starter housing.
Farmertec/Holzfforma/whatever is just the most advertised snippet here, of what Chinese OEMs have to offer.
And magnesium alloy (which must also contain aluminum) is not necessarily more durable than aluminum. On the contrary. It is simply lighter than it.
 
Last 3/4 as long is up for debate.. I seriously doubt it.
If I couldn't afford a new 661, I would buy a nice used 661.
But let's be honest here $1500 is peanuts. You probably spend more on your phone bill over the course of a year.
Actually, my cell phone bill is $35/month and I have a hard time justifying that cost. I know a lot of people who treat $1,500 like peanuts. Most of them are absolute fools. Those that aren't fools could easily afford go buy a new corvette off the lot at lunch today on a whim. As a business expense, a $1,500 tool isn't that big of a deal because the asset gets depreciated, and the business (should) budget for replacing the tool at a fixed interval. For a private individual, especially one who only uses a tool like that less than 40 hrs per year, $1,500 is a waste of money. The only reason to spend it is for the bragging rights of owning the orange and white tool. To me, that makes as much sense as buying a brand new truck to drive 40 miles each way back and forth to work.

Buying a used saw makes a lot more sense, but my experience has been that the used saws are also going to need some wrenching, and are more prone to need seals and other rubber parts replaced within a few years of buying the saw. For me, that's the biggest advantage of the clones. They have all new rubber, I can do all the wrenching up front in way less than an hour; after which they will run trouble free for a lot longer than one of my used saws will.
 
So only name brand chicom saws for you? The fact is almost nothing is 100% made in the US anymore else your getting eggs from the neighbor down the road some part of the process in making an item(and even the egg) comes from overseas, not saying I like it just the way it is.
And THIS is why I was initially willing to try a clone. When I opened up a then 20 year old Stihl and it had Chinese parts under the cover, the whole idea that OEM is better quality went right out the window.

If $1500 is the target price what makes a better saw a new stihl 661 or a clone 660? The real stihl is 100% stock of course but with the clone saw you have $1300 dollars to play with. So you could send it off to a pro porter and have a OEM cylinder/piston put on it and have it ported but you'd still have a lot of money left over.
That's where I'm at as well. If I wanted something more reliable, I'd look into something that has been upgraded from someone like Bluesawz.
 
Actually, my cell phone bill is $35/month and I have a hard time justifying that cost. I know a lot of people who treat $1,500 like peanuts. Most of them are absolute fools. Those that aren't fools could easily afford go buy a new corvette off the lot at lunch today on a whim. As a business expense, a $1,500 tool isn't that big of a deal because the asset gets depreciated, and the business (should) budget for replacing the tool at a fixed interval. For a private individual, especially one who only uses a tool like that less than 40 hrs per year, $1,500 is a waste of money. The only reason to spend it is for the bragging rights of owning the orange and white tool. To me, that makes as much sense as buying a brand new truck to drive 40 miles each way back and forth to work.

Buying a used saw makes a lot more sense, but my experience has been that the used saws are also going to need some wrenching, and are more prone to need seals and other rubber parts replaced within a few years of buying the saw. For me, that's the biggest advantage of the clones. They have all new rubber, I can do all the wrenching up front in way less than an hour; after which they will run trouble free for a lot longer than one of my used saws will.
The rubber parts on clone saws are one of the "must change to oem" items mentioned in threads about chicom knockoffs
 
I hope you are joking or, for example, Husqvarna used such "lower, softer quality" components in the past.
An excerpt from a 1990s manual, where they still allowed four-stroke engine oil.

View attachment 1176150

A slightly later manual:

View attachment 1176152

And here is a fairly recent one.

View attachment 1176156

Stihl service manual (017, 018):

View attachment 1176157

Stihl service manual (010, 011):
View attachment 1176158

An example from a fairly recent Zenoah's manual:

View attachment 1176159
That’s a very good point. I suppose I am thinking why it’s a good idea to run more oil, rather than less in machines that don’t have very good QC and lower quality parts. The reason they recommend more oil is as a couple others have already mentioned is probably the quality / type of oil that may be ran to cover all their bases.
 
You will find plenty of them. They expire after 14 years.
One example of such a (expired) design patent (ornamental design for a chain saw).

View attachment 1176141
OK, looks like I was wrong and @Hermio was correct.
Regardless clone saws are still cheaply made chicom knockoffs that are not legal for sale in the US.
 
And THIS is why I was initially willing to try a clone. When I opened up a then 20 year old Stihl and it had Chinese parts under the cover, the whole idea that OEM is better quality went right out the window.


That's where I'm at as well. If I wanted something more reliable, I'd look into something that has been upgraded from someone like Bluesawz.
If an OEM has the proper quality and documentation procedures, it doesn't matter where the product is made. A Stihl saw made in China would be just as good as one made in Germany if they set up all of the same procedures. We saw this when the Japanese car manufacturers started to manufacture here. There was no loss in quality. Meanwhile, after about 50 years in the US market, the big 3 American auto manufacturers are far from matching the quality of Honda, Toyota and Subaru. It's the system, not the country. I am not saying the Chinese clones are as good as the originals. I have no experience with them. My best guess is they are not. But I would be pretty sure a genuine Stihl saw made in China would be just as good as one made anywhere else.
 
Common amongst people that don't have a clue. Patents cover a technology, not a model... there never was a patent on the Stihl 066 or Husky 372xp.
They are completely illegal. No emmisions on them and they are counterfeit.

You will find plenty of them. They expire after 14 years.
One example of such a (expired) design patent (ornamental design for a chain saw).

View attachment 1176141
who doesn't have a clue?
 
How do you know this? I was unable to find any information on Holzfforma EPA compliance.
Compliant machines are required to have a sticker stating as much. In addition they are required to have a certificate of compliance. These chicom knockoffs have neither of these.
The epa has a certificate of compliance data base that you can check btw.
 
Manufacturer
Manufacturer Code
Engine Family
Model Year
Engine Family Industry
Service Class
Marine Generator?
Useful Life
Small Volume Manufacturer (Y/N)
Small Volume Engine Family (Y/N)
Carryover?
Carryover Engine Family
Bond Required (Y/N)
Altitude Compensation Method
ABT Program?
Limited Applic Enforcement
Cylinders
Cylinder Arrangement
Engine Fuel Category
Test Fuel
Fuel Metering
Electronic Control?
Displacement
Displacement Units
Max Engine Power
Max Engine Test Speed
Engine Type
Valve Location
Exhaust Valves Per Cycle
Intake Valves Per Cycle
O2 Sensor?
O2 Sensor Type
Closed Loop Control AF Ratio
Engine Cooling Mediums
Crankshaft Orientation
Method of Aspiration
Country 1
Country 2
Country 3
Hydrocarbon Type
Aftertreatment Device?
Non-Aftertreatment Device 1
Non-Aftertreatment Device 2
Pollutant Units
CO FEL
CO Result before DF
CO Standard
CO Cert Level
CO Df
DF Type
HC-NOx FEL
HC-NOx Result before DF
HC-NOx Standard
HC-NOx Cert Level
HC-NOx DF
CO2 Result
CH4 Result
N2O Result
Farmertec Power Machinery Co.,Ltd.​
FPM​
NFPMS.035403​
2022​
Small SI​
Handheld-Class IV​
50 Hours / 5 Years​
No​
No​
Yes​
MFPMS.035403​
Yes​
No Compensation Required​
No​
1​
Single Fuel​
CARB LEV3 E10 Regular Gasoline​
Carburetor​
N​
35.2​
Cubic Centimeters (cc)​
1.3​
10000​
2-Stroke​
No​
No​
Air​
Multipositional​
Naturally Aspirated​
China​
HC​
Y​
g/kW-hr​
259.15​
536​
280​
1.08​
Steady-State Multiplicative​
31.25​
50​
34​
1.102​
1386.78​
0.65​
7.06​
Farmertec Power Machinery Co.,Ltd.​
FPM​
NFPMS.076502​
2022​
Small SI​
Handheld-Class V​
50 Hours / 5 Years​
No​
No​
Yes​
MFPMS.076502​
Yes​
No Compensation Required​
No​
1​
Single Fuel​
CARB LEV3 E10 Regular Gasoline​
Carburetor​
N​
76.5​
Cubic Centimeters (cc)​
4.4​
9000​
2-Stroke​
No​
No​
Air​
Multipositional​
Naturally Aspirated​
China​
HC​
Y​
g/kW-hr​
223.87​
536​
230​
1.029​
Steady-State Multiplicative​
52.35​
72​
57​
1.082​
1060.24​
0.53​
2.25​
Farmertec Power Machinery Co.,Ltd.​
FPM​
NFPMS.091501​
2022​
Small SI​
Handheld-Class V​
50 Hours / 5 Years​
No​
No​
Yes​
MFPMS.091501​
Yes​
No Compensation Required​
No​
1​
Single Fuel​
CARB LEV3 E10 Regular Gasoline​
Carburetor​
N​
91.6​
Cubic Centimeters (cc)​
5.2​
9000​
2-Stroke​
No​
No​
Air​
Multipositional​
Naturally Aspirated​
China​
HC​
Y​
g/kW-hr​
317.14​
536​
328​
1.035​
Steady-State Multiplicative​
55.66​
72​
59​
1.053​
799.44​
0.42​
2.61​
Farmertec Power Machinery Co.,Ltd.​
FPM​
NFPMS.121504​
2022​
Small SI​
Handheld-Class V​
50 Hours / 5 Years​
No​
No​
No​
Yes​
No Compensation Required​
No​
1​
Single Fuel​
CARB LEV3 E10 Regular Gasoline​
Carburetor​
N​
121.6​
Cubic Centimeters (cc)​
6.4​
8500​
2-Stroke​
No​
No​
Air​
Multipositional​
Naturally Aspirated​
China​
HC​
Y​
g/kW-hr​
267.22​
536​
288​
1.078​
Steady-State Multiplicative​
56.01​
72​
61​
1.082​
924.63​
3.56​
0.61​
 
How do you know this? I was unable to find any information on Holzfforma EPA compliance.
I hope my above post is fairly clear and you can see the 4 engines of 35.2, 76.5, 91.6 and 121.6 cc.

That is, Holzfforma G111, G466, G660, G888.
 
Back
Top