# Stihl MS180 MS200 MS211 Comparison



## Trigger-Time (Jun 6, 2009)

In no way did I need a another saw of any kind, but what the heck.
Been selling few parts saw's and some I put together out of parts.
So I went to dealer and dropped $800 for the MS211, chains and
saw parts.

Anyway, I thought I would do a comparison of these 3 saws over time.
Today will just be some pictuers and Specifications. First spec pic is for
018, but it's the same as 180 (AFAIK)

Tomorrow I will weigh the little fellers  and some more spec.
Yes I put a used bar on the 211 and put the new one up.























*Stihl's web site shows the 211 having more HP than 200, but repair
manual shows both at 1.7KW ....Both are same bore and stroke
and the 200 listed at more rpms.*












*Video is just for how each saw sounds, MS200 spark screen out, MS180
muffler opened a little, MS211 stock.*


<embed width="448" height="361" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" src="http://s116.photobucket.com/flash/player.swf?file=http://vid116.photobucket.com/albums/o27/Trigger-Time_photos/Movie/180200211.flv"></embed>


----------



## josh1981 (Jun 6, 2009)

they all sound great man. i love thast 180 i have one also muffler modded big difference right there, that 211 is sure nice too! sounds great!

looks like engine is a little more difficult to work on 211- am i right?


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 7, 2009)

The 211 needs at least 15 tanks of fuel to come alive. I don't have much time on a 200 but the 211 felt better and had more power. The 180 doesn't stand a chance.


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 7, 2009)

2000ssm6 said:


> The 211 needs at least 15 tanks of fuel to come alive. I don't have much time on a 200 but the 211 felt better and had more power. The 180 doesn't stand a chance.



At least 15 tanks! My 441 and 211 took forever to come alive but when they do it's like they blew the guts out of the muffler. I have a buddy that runs a 390 and he about $hit the first time he ran my 441 yesterday. I never seen whiter knuckles in my life. As far as the 200 goes, my 211 is much faster than my bros 200t, he laughed his but off at it when I bought and now he owns one for cutting around the house and can't say enough about it. After the local dealer ran one for a few days cutting up some wood for the shop burner he said he pushes that saw to every homeowner wanting a saw and even to the local tree services. Said he orders 15 at a time and they fly off the shelf. My question is how did you spend $800? You must have bought alot of chains and parts.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

josh1981 said:


> looks like engine is a little more difficult to work on 211- am i right?



Really don't know yet.........I did put a bigger bucking spike on it 





2000ssm6 said:


> The 211 needs at least 15 tanks of fuel to come alive. I don't have much time on a 200 but the 211 felt better and had more power. The 180 doesn't stand a chance.



I changed carb on 180, IMO it won't be as as bad as you think......we will see.



huskystihl said:


> At least 15 tanks! My 441 and 211 took forever to come alive but when they do it's like they blew the guts out of the muffler.
> 
> As far as the 200 goes, my 211 is much faster than my bros 200t,
> 
> ...



After just one tank 211 sounds better.

I don't think even after the 211 is broken in it will run off from my 200.
Rope test or just starting saw 200 has more compression and they are
same bore and stroke.


Yes, I bought a few parts and a set of tines for Wife's little Stihl tiller.



.


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 7, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> I changed carb on 180, IMO it won't be as as bad as you think......we will see.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thats cool, I'm not doubting your saws abilities. We are just giving a friendly reminder that the 211 takes longer to break in than any of the older saws. I'm looking forward to the tests. The 211 is a very nice saw, love mine and would add another in a second.


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 7, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> Really don't know yet.........I did put a bigger bucking spike on it
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The rope thing on the new motors isn't very reliable at all. When I got my 441 it was a demo and ran very strong but my 9 yr old son could start it without the decomp. That worried me a bit so I compression tested it warm and it was 155. I think they have added some sort of a spring assist with the new motors. I could be wrong but for some reason they pull much easier. Give the 211 a good 10-15 tanks and run it with the 200, you'll be surprised, Like I said I can take my bros 200t with his running a 14" and mine running a 16" and beat it in the cut but mine is very very broke in.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

I may get a bad fooling, *I know the 211 is not broke in *but running
the 180 and 211 side by side and 180 running .050 *7T *and 211 running
6T, 211 feels no faster than 180. I need to get a 6T for 180 so all will be 
the same, I could switch drums around...........but I will wait and get another drum.


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 7, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> I may get a bad fooling, *I know the 211 is not broke in *but running
> the 180 and 211 side by side and 180 running .050 *7T *and 211 running
> 6T, 211 feels no faster than 180. I need to get a 6T for 180 so all will be
> the same, I could switch drums around...........but I will wait and get another drum.



The one thing that impressed me about mine when it new was the pulling power, you could lean into it and it just kept going. After it gets broke in it's a little screamer. Why don't you do me a favor and mod the muffler so all the 211 owners can see what happens.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

huskystihl said:


> The one thing that impressed me about mine when it new was the pulling power, you could lean into it and it just kept going. After it gets broke in it's a little screamer. Why don't you do me a favor and mod the muffler so all the 211 owners can see what happens.



Not yet..........I want one saw, thats not so loud 

I keeps rainning here, off and on..............I would hate to work in the PNW


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

I don't know if you can tell what I was trying to do by this chart.


Saws where weighted with 16" .050 Picco Bar and chains and full
of fuel and oil. In chart I used 5 lbs per gallon to subtract fuel and oil weight.
I belive the power head weight of MS200 that stihl has listed is wrong, I think
the weight they have listed is for the MS200T, Like I said before, Repair manual
list MS200/MS200T 1.7 kw/2.3hp not the 1.6kw/2.1hp listed on web site.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

One thing makes me think about the torque of these saws. Look at what rpms clutches
engages at, MS180 4100 rpm, MS200 3700 rpm and MS211 5100rpm!!!

Seems 211 needs to get wound up................





.


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 7, 2009)

My buddies wife just gave him a 211 for an early fathers day gift. He brought it out to run it for a few tanks and before he did I grabbed it to make sure the carb was right, I turned it upside down and happened to notice a crack right below the sprocket.. Brand new never made a cut with it. Hopefully the dealer hands him a new on tomorrow and doesn't pull the normal stihl only sends parts crap.


----------



## josh1981 (Jun 7, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> Really don't know yet.........I did put a bigger bucking spike on it
> 
> 
> 
> ...



thats cool.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

Carb on 211,

L screw is not limted, H screw is. I taped off carb and cut
limt stop off screw..........really no need to, just don't like'm


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 7, 2009)

huskystihl said:


> My buddies wife just gave him a 211 for an early fathers day gift. He brought it out to run it for a few tanks and before he did I grabbed it to make sure the carb was right, I turned it upside down and happened to notice a crack right below the sprocket.. Brand new never made a cut with it. Hopefully the dealer hands him a new on tomorrow and doesn't pull the normal stihl only sends parts crap.



He should get a new one, we hope..........When I was looking at the 211 at dealer, he had to go help parts guy, Logger brought a Husky 395 in that he bought 3-June and he was upset! Looks as if factory didn't get clutch on tight or threads where bad on clutch. Clutch had come off on first tank of fuel. Dealer put a new clutch on, told him if had any more problems to bring it back...........Logger said, OH I will!! then grined




.


----------



## josh1981 (Jun 7, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> Carb on 211,
> 
> L screw is not limted, H screw is. I taped off carb and cut
> limt stop off screw..........really no need to, just don't like'm



nice engine!! looks real easy to work on


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 7, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> He should get a new one, we hope..........When I was looking at the 211 at dealer, he had to go help parts guy, Logger brought a Husky 395 in that he bought 3-June and he was upset! Looks as if factory didn't get clutch on tight or threads where bad on clutch. Clutch had come off on first tank of fuel. Dealer put a new clutch on, told him if had any more problems to bring it back...........Logger said, OH I will!! then grined
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I would assume that because it's a brand new saw that he should just hand him a new one. It hasn't even seen a wood chip yet. Why would you want a new saw that needs parts from the dealer before you even used it.


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 8, 2009)

2000ssm6 said:


> The 211 needs at least 15 tanks of fuel to come alive. I don't have much time on a 200 but the 211 felt better and had more power. The 180 doesn't stand a chance.




IMO, I like the feel of the MS200 (rear handle) better than 180 or 211.
Top and rear handle are little farther apart on the 200, I also like
the oblong (kind of flat) top handle on 200 and 200 is more compact
and holds more fuel and bar oil than 180 or 211 and weighs less than
the others.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 8, 2009)

Stihls_are_best said:


> IMO, I like the feel of the MS200 (rear handle) better than 180 or 211.
> Top and rear handle are little farther apart on the 200, I also like
> the oblong (kind of flat) top handle on 200 and 200 is more compact
> and holds more fuel and bar oil than 180 or 211 and weighs less than
> the others.



And unfortunately costs nearly double!


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 8, 2009)

blsnelling said:


> And unfortunately costs nearly double!



Yes it is, but you only live once, so do it right when you can.


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 8, 2009)

Stihls_are_best said:


> Yes it is, but you only live once, so do it right when you can.



I chose the 211 over the 200 due to price. If the funds get better, a 200 will be on my list.


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 8, 2009)

2000ssm6 said:


> I chose the 211 over the 200 due to price. If the funds get better, a 200 will be on my list.



I'd just buy two 211's. I don't mind dumping a-lot on a saw but it better do more than be able to limb. I know a-lot of guys will disagree but i've always kept my small saws within reason so I could free up cash for the power saws. If I was a full time climber you could bet I would have a 200t but i'm not so when I have to the 192 fills the bill.


----------



## spiffy1 (Jun 8, 2009)

Light enough that my wife ejoys trimming instead of adding it to my list, the 200's price didn't seem bad; After dropping the 200 out of a tree a couple times and not hurt a bit (maybe the 211 would fair well - don't know), I don't regret the price at all.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 8, 2009)

Wood is Post Oak

211 brand new .050 chain 6 tooth sprocket.

180 used .050 Picco chain 7 tooth sprocket, 

I know 211 is not broken in but 180 running *7T sprocket*. I use the 180
cutting small sprouts and such and like the chain speed on small stuff.

<embed width="448" height="361" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" src="http://s116.photobucket.com/flash/remix/player.swf?videoURL=http://vid116.photobucket.com/albums/o27/Trigger-Time_photos/180%20200%20211/ebe0bdca.pbr&hostname=stream116.photobucket.com"></embed>


----------



## josh1981 (Jun 8, 2009)

nice. that 211 sure ate it up quick. damn good saw.


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 9, 2009)

josh1981 said:


> nice. that 211 sure ate it up quick. damn good saw.



Look like 180 was right with 211, where is the 200?


----------



## B_Turner (Jun 9, 2009)

How about vibration? How does the 200 and 211 compare?

I am considering a 200 because it is so much lighter than the 211 (to run with a carving bar). 211 sounds like a real bargain, though.

My new 339xp is very smooth, although like I posted in another thread I can't get it to behave well in terms of idling and response. So far it is not fun to run, and it has me thinking about a 200 again (never run one).


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 9, 2009)

B_Turner said:


> How about vibration? How does the 200 and 211 compare?
> 
> I am considering a 200 because it is so much lighter than the 211 (to run with a carving bar). 211 sounds like a real bargain, though.
> 
> My new 339xp is very smooth, although like I posted in another thread I can't get it to behave well in terms of idling and response. So far it is not fun to run, and it has me thinking about a 200 again (never run one).



The 211 is very smooth but doesn't have that sloppy feeling most springy saws do. Even with limited run time on a 200, the 211 felt better.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 9, 2009)

I'm not sure what app you're using to encode your vids, but the audio and video are out of sync. I use Windows Movie Maker, which is free from Microsoft. I'm not trying to nit pick here. Just trying to help you out. Now continue on with the comparison


----------



## bcorradi (Jun 9, 2009)

Great informative thread Gary


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

B_Turner said:


> How about vibration? How does the 200 and 211 compare?
> 
> I am considering a 200 because it is so much lighter than the 211 (to run with a carving bar). 211 sounds like a real bargain, though.
> 
> My new 339xp is very smooth, although like I posted in another thread I can't get it to behave well in terms of idling and response. So far it is not fun to run, and it has me thinking about a 200 again (never run one).



Vibration is something I don't give too much thought, it really don't bother
me. Unless its a non-AV old saw. With that said, I don't really notice the 211
beaning a really smooth running saw. If I'm running 440, 064 then pick
up 361, I think this is a smooth running saw. Not so with 211 after running
200 or 180.......I'm not a AV spring kind of guy, give me some stiff rubber
AV mounts. But I don't run a saw all day long 5 days a week. Unless milling
it's rare for me to run a saw over 3 hours at a time.

Dad and I both bought Husky 335XPT's years back. Good running saw's
but damn where they had to start first time, could never get them to idle
right.....you could have it idling right set them down, heck next thing
you know chain was turning and digging dirt. Dad still has his and want's
me to sell it for him........guess what saw he has.......MS200T 

I know noise bothers you, 200 with screen and holder out is loud and
muffler is to right rear of saw. I can't see 211 even after broken in
ever rev as quick or haveing torque the 200 has. 211 will beat 200
cutting fries though


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

bcorradi said:


> Great informative thread Gary



Thanks..............it may take some time before I get the 211 run in.


----------



## B_Turner (Jun 9, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> I know noise bothers you, 200 with screen and holder out is loud and
> muffler is to right rear of saw. I can't see 211 even after broken in
> ever rev as quick or haveing torque the 200 has. 211 will beat 200
> cutting fries though



Are you saying the 200 has more torque?

Is the 211 cutting noodles better because it clears better?

If there is a replacement for the 200 coming (at the same price point) I wonder what it would be like.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

B_Turner said:


> Are you saying the 200 has more torque?
> 
> Is the 211 cutting noodles better because it clears better?
> 
> If there is a replacement for the 200 coming (at the same price point) I wonder what it would be like.



More torque, I think it will, same cc's and 200 IMO is higher rev and richer
running engine.........Book says 14000 rpm for 200 but mine has a good 4 stroke at 14500 rpm........and their must be a reason for 211 clutch not 
engaging until *5100 rpm*, and it's right on the money, I checked it with tach.
200 clutch kicks in at 3700 rpm.


Is the 211 cutting noodles better because it clears better? Yes, cover way more open. More open than 180 W/Quick Adjust.


Replacement for 200, I have no idea.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

211 making fries.........from fish gill thread


<embed width="448" height="361" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" src="http://s116.photobucket.com/flash/remix/player.swf?videoURL=http://vid116.photobucket.com/albums/o27/Trigger-Time_photos/180 200 211/0e1c8dfd.pbr&hostname=stream116.photobucket.com"></embed>


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 9, 2009)

All that being said you have to admit that for a homeowner saw the 211 is very impressive and almost has a wow factor for a cheap a$$ homeowner saw. As i've said before mine was a joke situation when I bought it but quickly went to a let's see how long it lasts to I can't believe it's still running thing. In fact if you haven't run one in person the video sound is dead on that they almost sound muff modded.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

huskystihl said:


> All that being said you have to admit that for a homeowner saw the 211 is very impressive and almost has a wow factor for a cheap a$$ homeowner saw. As i've said before mine was a joke situation when I bought it but quickly went to a let's see how long it lasts to I can't believe it's still running thing. In fact if you haven't run one in person the video sound is dead on that they almost sound muff modded.



Muffler is mod in video......I wasn't going to but I did.

http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=101133


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 9, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> Muffler is mod in video......I wasn't going to but I did.
> 
> http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=101133



I know it was probably to new to tell but do you think it made a diff?


----------



## B_Turner (Jun 9, 2009)

Trigger-Time said:


> 211 making fries.........from fish gill thread
> 
> 
> <embed width="448" height="361" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" src="http://s116.photobucket.com/flash/remix/player.swf?videoURL=http://vid116.photobucket.com/albums/o27/Trigger-Time_photos/180 200 211/0e1c8dfd.pbr&hostname=stream116.photobucket.com"></embed>



That is an amazing little noodler.


----------



## huskystihl (Jun 9, 2009)

Nice work by the way! How did you make the slits in it?


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

B_Turner said:


> That is an amazing little noodler.



Wait until you see 026 or 036 with same .050 Picco chain


----------



## Trigger-Time (Jun 9, 2009)

huskystihl said:


> I know it was probably to new to tell but do you think it made a diff?


Yes I do.



huskystihl said:


> Nice work by the way! How did you make the slits in it?



Thin cut off wheel on a Dermel Tool.


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 10, 2009)

This vid is from another thread but it shows the torque the 211 has. About 9 tanks of fuel at the time. 
[URL=http://s574.photobucket.com/albums/ss187/2000ssm6/?action=view&current=MOV00383.flv]

[/URL]


I agree with huskystihl, this 211 is pretty sweet to be a cheapy. While the 200 may be a better saw for zipping off small limbs, the 200 doesn't have the torque of the 211 for full 16" bar cuts.


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 11, 2009)

2000ssm6 said:


> I agree with huskystihl, this 211 is pretty sweet to be a cheapy. While the 200 may be a better saw for zipping off small limbs, the 200 doesn't have the torque of the 211 for full 16" bar cuts.



IMO, it takes less torque to make the cuts you are making than any other
cut you can make......wood cuts easiest with the grain, you just have to watch and make sure clutch cover does not get plugged up....and what wood are you splitting in video?..........200 has no problem with 16" bar
even in white oak.


----------



## mountainlake (Jun 11, 2009)

Stihls_are_best said:


> IMO, it takes less torque to make the cuts you are making than any other
> cut you can make......wood cuts easiest with the grain, you just have to watch and make sure clutch cover does not get plugged up....and what wood are you splitting in video?..........200 has no problem with 16" bar
> even in white oak.



Looks like basswood to me, close as it comes to butter. Steve


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 11, 2009)

Stihls_are_best said:


> IMO, it takes less torque to make the cuts you are making than any other
> cut you can make......wood cuts easiest with the grain, you just have to watch and make sure clutch cover does not get plugged up....and what wood are you splitting in video?..........200 has no problem with 16" bar
> even in white oak.



The wood is sweetgum, a soft wood I believe. Making noodles is the hardest I've ever worked a saw. My 044 that pulls a 32" well felling and bucking, doesn't do so good when pulling noodles. I usually drop to a 25" for it and the 460, both saws are ported. If I did more long bar noodling, a 880 would be on my shopping list. It just seems to me, that type of cutting takes more torque than hp. I could be worng though.


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 11, 2009)

2000ssm6 said:


> The wood is sweetgum, a soft wood I believe. Making noodles is the hardest I've ever worked a saw. My 044 that pulls a 32" well felling and bucking, doesn't do so good when pulling noodles. I usually drop to a 25" for it and the 460, both saws are ported. If I did more long bar noodling, a 880 would be on my shopping list. It just seems to me, that type of cutting takes more torque than hp. I could be worng though.



IMO, cutting anything with the grain cuts easier than across the grain.

Which way is it easier to whittle a piece of wood with a knife, with or across the grain?

Also, if cross cutting a 16" dia log you are cutting 201 sq. inches
Ripping that same 16" dia, 16" long you are cutting 256 sq. in
that is = to your 16" dia plus a 7"X7" sq. beam.

PS not trying to start anything, JIMO


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 11, 2009)

B_Turner said:


> That is an amazing little noodler.



Seems to work well, just a lot slower than I would like - I don't see the point of using such a small saw for noodling........


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 11, 2009)

SawTroll said:


> Seems to work well, just a lot slower than I would like - I don't see the point of using such a small saw for noodling........



True.......but,

If it's the only saw you own, have no log splitter and it's Elm or some knotty pieces of wood, it's nice to know it can do it.


----------



## BarkBuster20 (Jun 11, 2009)

uhm whatever you may think about the grain of wood its harder on a saw to be noodling thats just common sense. yes whittling is done with the grain. but if it was easier on saws to noodle wouldnt people be using smaller saws to mill.


----------



## Stihls_are_best (Jun 11, 2009)

BarkBuster20 said:


> uhm whatever you may think about the grain of wood its harder on a saw to be noodling thats just common sense. yes whittling is done with the grain. but if it was easier on saws to noodle wouldnt people be using smaller saws to mill.




I take it you have never done any CSM.

Milling you are cutting end grain.........BIG difference than cutting with grain, Common seance............Hmmmmmmm

IMO easiest to hardest......with grain (from side of log), cross cutting and end grain cutting (milling)
again IMO only thing that may make cutting from side of log harder, is you have trouble with long chip clearness.
and clogging of clutch cover and operator has some control of that buy what
angle you hold bar to log.


----------



## Philbert (Jul 19, 2009)

Thanks for all the reports on the new saws.

So I looked at a MS211 at a dealer, and compared it to a MS250 on the shelf (we have several 210's and 250's). I noticed that the trigger was harder to pull and the cover is more awkward to replace.

Is this because of the strato-charge (harder trigger), and the centrifugal dust separator (tighter fitting cover)?



Philbert


----------



## huskystihl (Jul 19, 2009)

Philbert said:


> Thanks for all the reports on the new saws.
> 
> So I looked at a MS211 at a dealer, and compared it to a MS250 on the shelf (we have several 210's and 250's). I noticed that the trigger was harder to pull and the cover is more awkward to replace.
> 
> ...



The cover is no big deal but the trigger design is completely different and never loosens up either. You get used to it. There is really no comparrison in the 210 performance wise though.


----------



## Philbert (Jul 23, 2009)

*Fuel Capacity*

So did the fuel tank really go from 470cc on the MS210 to 280cc on the MS211?

At first, I though that this just meant I would have to refuel more often, or that they took up tank space to make more room for something else. Then I noticed that the bar oil reservoir only went down from 200cc to 180cc.

Since they usually try to balance fuel and bar oil consumption, does this mean that the new saw is that much more fuel efficient?

Just curious.

Philbert


----------



## 7sleeper (Jul 24, 2009)

Philbert said:


> So did the fuel tank really go from 470cc on the MS210 to 280cc on the MS211?
> 
> At first, I though that this just meant I would have to refuel more often, or that they took up tank space to make more room for something else. Then I noticed that the bar oil reservoir only went down from 200cc to 180cc.
> 
> ...



Good question!!

7


----------



## Trigger-Time (Nov 15, 2010)

Over a year later using the 3 little saws MS180, MS200 and MS211.
I like the MS200 the best, I have had zero problems with 180 and 200.
The 211 is leaking bar oil where oil hose comes out of oil tank.
It's not just a few drips overnight, it puddles overnight. As soon as
I take the time to fix the leak it will be traded off. Power wise all
three are very very close. In video cutting a limb off a White Oak
that I was going to mill. But after getting into it, it is bad in the middle.

I forgot to put 6 tooth sprocket on MS180, it's wearing a 7 tooth
and MS200 & MS211 have 6 tooth sprockets all 3 have 16" BC with .050 3/8 Picco.
I will try to get better video in some green 8 or 10 inch wood next time.
And a better video.

First up MS211 then MS180 and last MS200


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4loMekhd-k0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4loMekhd-k0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


----------



## blsnelling (Nov 15, 2010)

Which saw was second in the vid? It struggled a lot more to keep up revs. I'm surprised to see you're keeping the 180 over the 211.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Nov 15, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Which saw was second in the vid? It struggled a lot more to keep up revs. I'm surprised to see you're keeping the 180 over the 211.




180 was 2nd but it has a 7 tooth sprocket and others 6 tooth.
But the times I got 180 was just as fast as others.


Edit: I may have posted wrong Vid, first vid I done 180 was way to rich running like 12,000 rpm.
I will check when I get home.



TT


----------



## blsnelling (Nov 15, 2010)

Trigger-Time said:


> 180 was 2nd but it has a 7 tooth sprocket and others 6 tooth.
> But the times I got 180 was just as fast as others.
> 
> 
> ...



The tune sounded fine. I've not run a 211, but from everything I've read, it sounds like it would be way more saw than a 180. Just curious how you make your decision on which one to keep.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Nov 15, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> The tune sounded fine. I've not run a 211, but from everything I've read, it sounds like it would be way more saw than a 180. Just curious how you make your decision on which one to keep.



It's really not the 211, it's I like the 200 so much better.
MS200 is lighter and feels much lighter than it is.

The MS180 is my beater saw it get's all the little dirty nasty jobs.
And I do like the quick adjust chain. I like to fell over when I check
compression the other day 170lbs.

MS211, just have never really liked it, and sure don't like the exposed
leaking oil line.


TT


----------



## blsnelling (Nov 15, 2010)

Trigger-Time said:


> It's really not the 211, it's I like the 200 so much better.
> MS200 is lighter and feels much lighter than it is.
> 
> The MS180 is my beater saw it get's all the little dirty nasty jobs.
> ...



Thanks for the clarification. The MS200 is obviously the strongest saw by a mile. It holds so many more RPMs in the wood.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Nov 15, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Thanks for the clarification. The MS200 is obviously the strongest saw by a mile. It holds so many more RPMs in the wood.



Yes, the 200 is a gusty little saw but as you know
they cost too much.

I have a like new MS440 and MS660 that am going to sell.
Have been thinking about buying another MS200 just to
put up and keep for the days when am old and can't use
a bigger saw........that time will be here before I know it.



TT


----------



## 046 (May 19, 2016)

have been wanting a MS200 but those almost never come up for sale ... so purchased MS170, MS180 and MS211 to see the differences for myself. 

it shouldn't be too hard to get my $$ back on the saws I don't keep.


----------



## Ross (May 20, 2016)

This is one of my favorite threads of all time! Great to see it resurrected!!!


----------

