# 660 vs 395 for milling



## 4x4American (Nov 24, 2012)

what yawl think? basically im wondering if either one is hands down better for milling or if its a stihl/husky preference


----------



## Locust Cutter (Nov 24, 2012)

4x4American said:


> what yawl think? basically im wondering if either one is hands down better for milling or if its a stihl/husky preference



Well I'd have to say For-vs-Chevy to a point. The 2 saws are divergent ways of getting to the same destination. On these two Stihl and Husky had an identity crisis and swapped methodologies; the 660 has better top-end stock and is lighter, while the 395 has better torque, better A/V, more weight and MUCH better oiling. I really liked my 660 but contrary to many on here, I found the torque a bit wanting. RPM is nice when you're limbing, but when I'm trying to buck a 4'+/- Burr Oak, or large Hedge, torque pulls the chain. I would imagine a 660 would do just fine as I have seen many photos of individuals using them for exactly that purpose. However, I would prefer to have a bit more grunt. If the 3120 and 880 were out of the price range, personally I would opt for the 395 or the Dolmar 9010/Solo 394. 

If I were felling large trees daily and didn't go with either a 385 or a 460/1, I would definitely choose the 660 over the 395 for it's lighter weight. However being a weekend hack, who can basically drive up to the victim(s) of the day, the next big saw will be a 395xp because of it's torque and better A/V setup. If and when I get an Alaskan mill, I believe that it would excel there too. If you have either built by any of the reputable builders on this site, the it's paper/rock/scissors... Hope this helps.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 25, 2012)

Locust Cutter said:


> Well I'd have to say For-vs-Chevy to a point. The 2 saws are divergent ways of getting to the same destination. On these two Stihl and Husky had an identity crisis and swapped methodologies; the 660 has better top-end stock and is lighter, while the 395 has better torque, better A/V, more weight and MUCH better oiling. I really liked my 660 but contrary to many on here, I found the torque a bit wanting. RPM is nice when you're limbing, but when I'm trying to buck a 4'+/- Burr Oak, or large Hedge, torque pulls the chain. I would imagine a 660 would do just fine as I have seen many photos of individuals using them for exactly that purpose. However, I would prefer to have a bit more grunt. If the 3120 and 880 were out of the price range, personally I would opt for the 395 or the Dolmar 9010/Solo 394.
> 
> If I were felling large trees daily and didn't go with either a 385 or a 460/1, I would definitely choose the 660 over the 395 for it's lighter weight. However being a weekend hack, who can basically drive up to the victim(s) of the day, the next big saw will be a 395xp because of it's torque and better A/V setup. If and when I get an Alaskan mill, I believe that it would excel there too. If you have either built by any of the reputable builders on this site, the it's paper/rock/scissors... Hope this helps.



very helpful, not really much need for any further discussion, you pretty much nailed it, thanks!


----------



## Freakingstang (Nov 25, 2012)

660's suck on the mill.... they are ony for cutting cookies at GTG's... opcorn:












This one has been modded, but it never lacked any torque... I always thought it was the other way around, the 660 was torquier than the 395. Where as the 395 reved up quicker and held a higher rpm in the cut, until you leaned on it and it slowed way down... anways, either saw willbe fine. This was 30" oak from yesterday.


----------



## WidowMaker1 (Nov 25, 2012)

Id take the 395 over the 660, way better torque and far stronger IMO .....If you can afford too, the 3120 or 880 is a better choice on the Mill.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 25, 2012)

Freakingstang said:


> 660's suck on the mill.... they are ony for cutting cookies at GTG's... opcorn:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



thank ya, yea i have a tired 066, i think that my 461 pulls the 36" bar better than it does, i dont think it'd be best for milling, i bought it from a logger who beat the crap outta it but i got a good deal on it. what kinda mill setup you got there i like it looks good and simple


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 25, 2012)

WidowMaker1 said:


> Id take the 395 over the 660, way better torque and far stronger IMO .....If you can afford too, the 3120 or 880 is a better choice on the Mill.



if i had enough for a 3120 i'd for sure and twenty years ago get that bad boy...but that thing is so dern expensive! i can get a 395xpw shipped for around a grand, which i dont think is that bad. the thing that i dont like is that i have so many bars for stihl and only a couple small mount bars for husky


----------



## gemniii (Nov 25, 2012)

As mentioned the Stihl lacks in the oiling department IN THE U.S. !
But you can get an upgraded oiler and it works great. I've got two. Now with a 40" bar cutting stump the chain doesn't get dry.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 25, 2012)

gemniii said:


> As mentioned the Stihl lacks in the oiling department IN THE U.S. !
> But you can get an upgraded oiler and it works great. I've got two. Now with a 40" bar cutting stump the chain doesn't get dry.



if i got a 660r i believe it comes with a high output oiler that should be enough right?


----------



## Locust Cutter (Nov 25, 2012)

It ought to be. You will have to watch the oil tank though, as it will go dry before the fuel tank will with that oiler... I've heard of individuals rigging up supplemental oil tanks to keep up with the demand... Either way you'll be ok, but different strengths and weaknesses.


----------



## Freakingstang (Nov 25, 2012)

4x4American said:


> thank ya, yea i have a tired 066, i think that my 461 pulls the 36" bar better than it does, i dont think it'd be best for milling, i bought it from a logger who beat the crap outta it but i got a good deal on it. what kinda mill setup you got there i like it looks good and simple



It is a GB MKIII alaskan that I bought new four or five years ago. This weekend was the first i had used it. The oiler turned to the max was barely adequate in my opinion. It would empty the oil tank evenly with the fuel. I've heard the 660R high output oiler will lube more, but I"m positive that it would empty it before the fuel. That was a 36" bar on a 36" mill setup and it only yeilds about 29-30" worth of useable cut. It worked good for the little bit I had to do, but it does take awhile and you will definately use some fuel! If I had to do a ton of milling, i would seriously look at a bandmill setup. This chainsaw is ok for the amount I use it. Chains are expensive, the mill is right around 300 bucks. plus a long bar... its an expensive initial investment, but if you use it enough it will pay for itself in not too long of a timeframe.


----------



## gemniii (Nov 25, 2012)

I believe the only difference between the 660 and the 660R is the wrap handle. The Aussies and perhaps others get the high output oiler automatically.


----------



## BobL (Nov 25, 2012)

Locust Cutter said:


> It ought to be. You will have to watch the oil tank though, as it will go dry before the fuel tank will with that oiler... I've heard of individuals rigging up supplemental oil tanks to keep up with the demand... Either way you'll be ok, but different strengths and weaknesses.



I haven't milled much with the 660 (with Aussie oiler) but I don't recall the oil tank going dry before the gas tank - maybe I had the oiler turned down a tad. 

My experience with upping the oil to the chain at the usually point and then sending the chain screaming around two sprockets before the chain even gets to the cutting side just ends up spraying any excess oil off the chain, hence using an aux oiler that adds the oil to the chain just before the chain dives into the wood is a far better alternative to upping the oil flow at the usual place. 

One school of thought is that the extra oil coming off the chain assists with cooling and less wear and tear even when using an aux oiler. However, FWIW my experience is that using a the same aux oiler with my 076 (with the paltry oil delivery rate of 19 mL/min) seems to generate about the same B&C wear as the 880 with its 38 mL/min.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 26, 2012)

Freakingstang said:


> It is a GB MKIII alaskan that I bought new four or five years ago. This weekend was the first i had used it. The oiler turned to the max was barely adequate in my opinion. It would empty the oil tank evenly with the fuel. I've heard the 660R high output oiler will lube more, but I"m positive that it would empty it before the fuel. That was a 36" bar on a 36" mill setup and it only yeilds about 29-30" worth of useable cut. It worked good for the little bit I had to do, but it does take awhile and you will definately use some fuel! If I had to do a ton of milling, i would seriously look at a bandmill setup. This chainsaw is ok for the amount I use it. Chains are expensive, the mill is right around 300 bucks. plus a long bar... its an expensive initial investment, but if you use it enough it will pay for itself in not too long of a timeframe.



I have a few projects I'd like to do and will need a bit of wood for, I can get it from my boss at the sawmill for a good price, but it still gets expensive. I think that an alaskan mill will be perfect for these few projects I have and will absolutely pay itself off. Further on down the line, I'd like to have my own business, logging woodlots and then milling the wood and selling it. I've been doing some research on a Wood-Mizer lt40 hydraulic. It will take some time, but I dream about quitting my job and having my own business working for myself. I know I can do it, I have the work ethic necessary. I work two jobs right now and beat the crap outta myself saving up for a wood-mizer.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 27, 2012)

gemniii said:


> I believe the only difference between the 660 and the 660R is the wrap handle. The Aussies and perhaps others get the high output oiler automatically.



well, when I looked into the 441 R-CM and the 461R, I found that the R means it comes with dual felling dogs, larger clutch cover with a oversized mud flap type deal, 3/4 wrap handle, and a high output bar oiler. I was kinda figuring that was the difference between all of the R vs non R models.


----------



## glennschumann (Nov 27, 2012)

*Air filters*

I run an 066, and it cuts fine. The only advantage to a Husky (if you have both dealers near by) is that if memory serves, the Husky has the air injection which keeps the filter clean(er). I clean the 066 filter after every pass on big logs... I think the Husky can go quite a while before cleaning. Just my thoughts.

Schumann


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 27, 2012)

glennschumann said:


> I run an 066, and it cuts fine. The only advantage to a Husky (if you have both dealers near by) is that if memory serves, the Husky has the air injection which keeps the filter clean(er). I clean the 066 filter after every pass on big logs... I think the Husky can go quite a while before cleaning. Just my thoughts.
> 
> Schumann



thanks for the input, good food for thought. do you just give it a quick knock out or do you blow it out with compressed air and wash it and stuff in between each pass cause if so i'm going with a husky


----------



## stikine (Nov 27, 2012)

FWIW, the air filtration on the 395 is great for milling applications.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 27, 2012)

someone in the chainsaw thread told me that i'll burn up a new saw if i use it for a mill and that it's not worth it to go and spend a grand on a saw for a mill...they're made to run aint they


----------



## Justsaws (Nov 27, 2012)

4x4American said:


> someone in the chainsaw thread told me that i'll burn up a new saw if i use it for a mill and that it's not worth it to go and spend a grand on a saw for a mill...they're made to run aint they



I use 660s, I do not use the rain cover on the air filter so I do not have to clean the air filter off typically until after at least a 1/2 gallon of gas through the saw, usually just wait until time to swap chains as the saw will be shut down for that. Pull the pre-filter and tap both pieces and good to go. It is hard to say how often to clean the air filter as different types of wood give different results. Dry versus wet wood gives different results as well being how much dust fines will float in the air. The last round of Maple I milled up I did not have to clean the air filter after a full gallon of fuel, or sharpen the chain. Easy milling, fun and done. Next batch is dry Black Locust, not the same.

I do not turn the saw off to top off the fuel and oil tanks, it is not uncommon to consume 2-5 gallons of gas during a good milling session. 5 gallons of gas through the mill saw in a day is a loooooooong day and not typically very enjoyable unless it is Spruce or Pine, that is just fun milling.

I am aware of zero brands that cover damage to the saw during milling under warrenty. Personally I would look for a good used saw or 2, in case one "burns" up from being used or more likely drops a fuel line or plugs up an oiler pick up. Plus it is a good idea to have a saw to use to flush up the logs, etc that is not attached to the mill. 

I use 660s because they are more common/easier to find used and typically cheaper than the 395s in my area. I also prefer the clutch setup, chain adjuster and bar cover setup for milling but I could get over that. The 395 is the better unit in terms of power, it will mill faster, 12" wide to 30" wide, that is the range of mills that I use and I have used both power heads. If could get 395s for the same price a 660s I would use 395s.

I am on my second 660, the first one was a hard used loggers saw and the crank case was cracked, that crack finally spread enough to cause an air leak. Finished milling that day with the back up 660. Pulled the P/C off, replaced the crankcase and good to go, all used parts. Milled with the cracked crankcase saw as the primary power head for at least 3 years before the crack finally creeped to much.

To answer your original question, the 395 is the better saw for milling, BUT not enough for me to pay any extra. Beyond that it comes down to clutch, cover and chain adjuster, I prefer the 660 setup to that of the 395 however I would not pay extra for it.


----------



## BobL (Nov 28, 2012)

4x4American said:


> someone in the chainsaw thread told me that i'll burn up a new saw if i use it for a mill and that it's not worth it to go and spend a grand on a saw for a mill...they're made to run aint they



That may be the case for a cheap saw but is not correct for a brand name saw. As Justsaws says, milling will immediately void your warranty. I was lucky to pick up a never used 880 that was still under warranty but in Australia warranty cannot be transferred to another owner so I managed to get the seller to knock a bit more off the price and in the end I picked it up with a 60" B&C for just under half the RRP. 

A brand new saw should be run in normally according to the manual and after that it can be used for milling provided it is run a tad rich so the max RPM is a few hundred RPM below what it is normally tuned for. That aside I also know someone that bought a brand new 660 and started milling with it immediately and it has survived just fine.


----------



## WidowMaker1 (Nov 28, 2012)

BobL said:


> milling will immediately void your warranty.


 only if you tell them :msp_wink:


----------



## Rudolf73 (Nov 28, 2012)

4x4American said:


> well, when I looked into the 441 R-CM and the 461R, I found that the R means it comes with dual felling dogs, larger clutch cover with a oversized mud flap type deal, 3/4 wrap handle, and a high output bar oiler. I was kinda figuring that was the difference between all of the R vs non R models.



That is correct, the R models also includes a chain catcher/roller. Good value for money if you want those extras.


----------



## Freakingstang (Nov 28, 2012)

Justsaws said:


> I
> 
> I do not turn the saw off to top off the fuel and oil tanks, it is not uncommon to consume 2-5 gallons of gas during a good milling session. 5 gallons of gas through the mill saw in a day is a loooooooong day and not typically very enjoyable unless it is Spruce or Pine, that is just fun milling.



Do not let the saw run out of fuel! I too refuel with the saw running. I used more than a gallon and a half, almost two millin up that 30" oak. At the end of the day I was wore out and had saw dust everywhere. The tree was fairly green (felled in the last couple weeks) and I checked the air filter after every second tank. Just remove the prefilter, tap it a couple times and good to go again. I couldn't imagine going through 5 gallons in a day! 

Like others have said run the saw a little rich to prevent burning it up.


----------



## mad murdock (Nov 28, 2012)

4x4American said:


> someone in the chainsaw thread told me that i'll burn up a new saw if i use it for a mill and that it's not worth it to go and spend a grand on a saw for a mill...they're made to run aint they


Like I eluded to in the other thread, I mill with a husky 372XP. I also have a stihl 075 that I have used, and it mills well, just a lot more to swing weight wise. I retooled my 372 with the stihl picco chain on a 32" bar, it cuts faster than he 075 pulling .404 chain. I like the husky air intake setup, I clean it maybe everym10 tanks of gas. A sharp chain will really cut down on the fineness of the sawdust, which helps things run cleaner. I run my premix 32:1 and have not had a single issue with my saw wear and tear wise. I have milled abt 6,000 bd ft with it. The last 100 or so has been with the smaller profile chain setup, and I can not overstate how much faster the milling goes with it now as compared
To the 3/8 chain I was using previously.


----------



## Dobbs (Nov 28, 2012)

I have a MS 650 w/36" bar on my mill that I like real well. Has done anything I have put it on.

that is sawing a big pecan


----------



## BobL (Nov 28, 2012)

I agree not to let the saw run out of fuel, but before I knew much about saws I used to regularly let my all plastic Homelite run out of fuel. I don't know what it is with that saw but nothing seems to worry it.

While I can understand why there might be dust problems with cutting orientations in non-milling CS operations, I don't understand why there is so much concern about air filtration in relation to milling. I can't think of much that would be dustier than some of the hardwoods that I have milled that have been on the ground for nearly 100 years. In these cases I have just tapped out the air filter maybe just once or maybe twice during a milling day. 







From what I have seen the main problems with dust are not so much with filters but with chains, especially the raker setting.


----------



## 4x4American (Nov 28, 2012)

thanks for all the good input yawl! I can get a 660 and a 395 for damn near the same price. I like stihl alot seein as how i have a bit of parts for stihl and I like the whole stihl setup better than husky and also i have a bunch of stihl bars and chains, and only .325 stuff for my one husky i own. the 395 is pretty BA saw i gotta say....also that 3120...wow that thing is heavy.


----------



## srcarr52 (Nov 28, 2012)

I have a ported 394 that pulls a 36" with and 8 pin milling without a problem. It does need an auxiliary oiler at that length.


----------



## hamish (Nov 29, 2012)

4x4American said:


> thanks for all the good input yawl! I can get a 660 and a 395 for damn near the same price. I like stihl alot seein as how i have a bit of parts for stihl and I like the whole stihl setup better than husky and also i have a bunch of stihl bars and chains, and only .325 stuff for my one husky i own. the 395 is pretty BA saw i gotta say....also that 3120...wow that thing is heavy.



If you like Stihl and have bars and chains for it already then go the Stihl route, with both saws it mainly boils down to personal preferance.

Yes bigger saws are heavy, as are longer bars, and fatter women....................what did you expect?


----------



## BobL (Nov 29, 2012)

4x4American said:


> ...wow that thing is heavy.



On a CS mill weight can really work to your advantage.

Instead of pushing the saw/mill along a log laying on the ground, if you put the log on a slope (and add a slippery coating, like high density Polyethylene, under the mill rails) a heavy saw will easily cut under it's own weight with a relatively shallow slope. Lighter saws will need more push - or you can add weight :msp_biggrin:


----------



## john taliaferro (Nov 30, 2012)

I have also taken the rain cover off the filter on my 660 ,now it stays lots cleaner and is easey to brush clean . Heavy Is Good .


----------



## glennschumann (Dec 3, 2012)

*Filter*



4x4American said:


> thanks for the input, good food for thought. do you just give it a quick knock out or do you blow it out with compressed air and wash it and stuff in between each pass cause if so i'm going with a husky



I just knock the dust off the filter and slap the prefilter band a few times on something hard to clean it out. It isn't a big deal, but I'd prefer to not have to do it all the time.


----------



## excess650 (Jan 8, 2013)

I'm a little late getting tot his thread, but my primary milling saw is an 066 with WP big bore kit and dual port muffler. I've been running 3/8 .050 on 32" and 36" bars, but may have to give the lowpro a try. The 066 BB has noticeably more grunt than my 660, also dual port, but the 066 BB is tuned richer. Yeah, I've heard the complaints and arguments about the aftermarket BB kits, but mine has worked hassle free without modification.:msp_thumbup:

I have a 3120, and just ordered a 42" B&C, 3/8 .063, so it will get the heavy duty work that really makes the 066BB grunt. The 3120 is too heavy for me to use for bucking logs, so it will go onto the mill. I bought the lightly used 3120 for a bit more than used 660s were going for at the time, so relatively inexpensive compared to new.

My first go with milling was with a 272xp with 28" B&C. It didn't take long to realize that the 272xp was underpowered for 20"+ rips so was the reason for the 066. I just redid the top end on a 440, opened the muffler and retuned. It seems strong, but I have no illusions of using it on the mill. 70cc saws are great for bucking logs, but really don't have enough torque for milling. There is no replacement for displacement.:chainsawguy:


----------



## excess650 (Mar 18, 2013)

I'm revisiting this thread after having purchased a lightly used 394xp. The 394 is definitely heavier than the 066/660, but has much better anti-vibe, and OILER. Ive since discovered that my 066BB wasn't oiling as well as it should due to the plug missing from the end of the oiler piston bore. The plug has been replaced as well as the piston and adjuster screw (high output oiler kit), so now I'll see how well it oils the 36". To be honest, despite not using much oil, the bar didn't seem to suffer, and the chains didn't stretch.

I wil be comparing the 394 to my 066BB soon. I have a 40" boxelder waiting....


----------



## srcarr52 (Mar 18, 2013)

excess650 said:


> I will be comparing the 394 to my 066BB soon. I have a 40" boxelder waiting....



That 394 should walk all over the 066 on a mill. Those things are torque monsters.


----------



## excess650 (Mar 18, 2013)

srcarr52 said:


> That 394 should walk all over the 066 on a mill. Those things are torque monsters.



That is good to hear. ''Searches" that I've done here seemed to indicate that the 394 may have more torque than the 395, and that both are ahead of the 066/660. This 394 was intended to be the backup to the 3120 with sharing bars and chains in mind. I really like the "feel" of the Husqvarnas.


----------



## srcarr52 (Mar 18, 2013)

excess650 said:


> That is good to hear. ''Searches" that I've done here seemed to indicate that the 394 may have more torque than the 395, and that both are ahead of the 066/660. This 394 was intended to be the backup to the 3120 with sharing bars and chains in mind. I really like the "feel" of the Husqvarnas.



I'm yet to build a 395 but that is what I hear as well. I'm guessing it has something to do with the tiny quad ports they put in the 395 and the more restrictive intake, all could be fixed with work. I like the 394/5 AV much better than the 660 but you don't get to use it much on the mill. If you're used to the 3120 on the mill then the extra weight of the 394 compared to the 660 isn't going to bother you. 

What size mill are you running? I'm running a 36" bar with full comp and an 8 pin sprocket on my ported 394. Sometimes I even run lo-pro which makes pretty quick cuts.


----------



## Trx250r180 (Mar 18, 2013)

anyone else have this problem milling with a 660 ? View attachment 285404


----------



## excess650 (Mar 18, 2013)

srcarr52 said:


> I'm yet to build a 395 but that is what I hear as well. I'm guessing it has something to do with the tiny quad ports they put in the 395 and the more restrictive intake, all could be fixed with work. I like the 394/5 AV much better than the 660 but you don't get to use it much on the mill. If you're used to the 3120 on the mill then the extra weight of the 394 compared to the 660 isn't going to bother you.
> 
> What size mill are you running? I'm running a 36" bar with full comp and an 8 pin sprocket on my ported 394. Sometimes I even run lo-pro which makes pretty quick cuts.



I have a 36" Granberg, but have only run a 36" bar on my 066BB without bark dogs, so limited me to 32" width. The few times the 3120 was on the mill it was wearing its original 30" .404 and waltzed through stuff the 066BB was struggling with. I've just converted the 3120 to 3/8 and have a 42" B&C for it (3/8 .063 ripping chain). 30" oak and walnut made the 066BB work pretty hard.

I've not tried low-pro, so that may be a plus for the 066BB. I'm debating as to whether to get a 36" Husky bar, or just use Stihl to Husky adaptors to use my 32" and 36". I have 24" and 28" both Husky and Stihl bars, 32" and 36" Stihl, and a 42" Husky.

How big is your mill?


----------



## excess650 (Mar 18, 2013)

trx250r180 said:


> anyone else have this problem milling with a 660 ? View attachment 285404



The ONLY failure I had with the 066BB was a clutch carrier/spider that broke. It didn't even mess up the threads on the crank.

Another thing I don't like about the 066/660 is the inboard clutch. While it makes it easier to change the B&C, it also puts more heat into the powerhead than an outboard design.....trade offs!


----------



## srcarr52 (Mar 18, 2013)

excess650 said:


> I have a 36" Granberg, but have only run a 36" bar on my 066BB without bark dogs, so limited me to 32" width. The few times the 3120 was on the mill it was wearing its original 30" .404 and waltzed through stuff the 066BB was struggling with. I've just converted the 3120 to 3/8 and have a 42" B&C for it (3/8 .063 ripping chain). 30" oak and walnut made the 066BB work pretty hard.
> 
> I've not tried low-pro, so that may be a plus for the 066BB. I'm debating as to whether to get a 36" Husky bar, or just use Stihl to Husky adaptors to use my 32" and 36". I have 24" and 28" both Husky and Stihl bars, 32" and 36" Stihl, and a 42" Husky.
> 
> How big is your mill?



Home built 36", bolted instead of clamped so I'm limited to around 32.5" with the 394 on it. I got lucky and scored a NOS Oregon 36" 50 gauge Husky mount bar a while back for it so I could run lo=pro. I only have two lo-pro chains so sometimes I switch to regular 3/8's, I just have to put on a different drive sprocket. 

Here is an action shot with a friend (CADDGUY) running it.

View attachment 285406


----------



## excess650 (Mar 18, 2013)

srcarr52 said:


> Home built 36", bolted instead of clamped so I'm limited to around 32.5" with the 394 on it. I got lucky and scored a NOS Oregon 36" 50 gauge Husky mount bar a while back for it so I could run lo=pro. I only have two lo-pro chains so sometimes I switch to regular 3/8's, I just have to put on a different drive sprocket.
> 
> Here is an action shot with a friend (CADDGUY) running it.
> 
> View attachment 285406





Where did you get a .365 sprocket to fit? I was a little concerned that the 066BB or 394 might break a low-profile chain. I've never run that on anything bigger than a 42cc Crapsman/Poulan.

While I've toyed with the idea of getting a 48" mill and 50"+ bar, it would ONLY be used for cutting crotch logs. 30" slabs of any thickness and length get heavy fast. My plan is to get another Alaskan so as to have 2 different sizes ready to cut, AND to have spare parts in case of breakage.


----------



## srcarr52 (Mar 18, 2013)

excess650 said:


> Where did you get a .365 sprocket to fit? I was a little concerned that the 066BB or 394 might break a low-profile chain. I've never run that on anything bigger than a 42cc Crapsman/Poulan.
> 
> While I've toyed with the idea of getting a 48" mill and 50"+ bar, it would ONLY be used for cutting crotch logs. 30" slabs of any thickness and length get heavy fast. My plan is to get another Alaskan so as to have 2 different sizes ready to cut, AND to have spare parts in case of breakage.



I had to make it.


----------



## OldMontanaFart (Apr 3, 2013)

srcarr52 said:


> I had to make it.



Do you care to share the details of how you did that? I'm pondering trying the lopro for milling and would like to know how involved this process might turn out to be...


----------



## excess650 (Apr 3, 2013)

OldMontanaFart said:


> Do you care to share the details of how you did that? I'm pondering trying the lopro for milling and would like to know how involved this process might turn out to be...



I'm thinking Logosol sells rims and bar tips to accomodate lowpro on bigger saws. Bailey's may know...


----------



## excess650 (Apr 3, 2013)

*394xp*

I did have the chance to mill the boxelder log, and commented elsewhere, but will here as well. I made the first (2) cuts with my 066BB before I ran out of mill width with my 36" bar. I put the 42" on the new to me 394xp, and slabbed the remainder of the log. I tuned both saws to my ear, running my fuel, so....despite making wider cuts, the 394xp held noticeably more rpm in the cut. Its definitely stronger than my 066BB. The 394xp also oils well enough to run the 42" without concern. While the Stihl's side chain adjuster is definitely more handy, I drilled a clearance hole through the mill upright so as to have easier access for the Husqvarnas.


----------



## ttyR2 (Apr 3, 2013)

Why not buy a spare air box lid, drill a big hole in the side and glue a piece of 2 or 3ft long PVC on it. Extend it up where the sawdust isn't flying. Should stay clean a long time that way. Or route behind where the saw is so it's out of the sawdust.


----------



## BobL (Apr 3, 2013)

excess650 said:


> I did have the chance to mill the boxelder log, and commented elsewhere, but will here as well. I made the first (2) cuts with my 066BB before I ran out of mill width with my 36" bar. I put the 42" on the new to me 394xp, and slabbed the remainder of the log. I tuned both saws to my ear, running my fuel, so....despite making wider cuts, the 394xp held noticeably more rpm in the cut.



I'd like to see this comparison done with the same fully sharpened and raker set chain before I passed any judgement.


----------



## Madacobain (Apr 12, 2013)

*Best saws.*



WidowMaker1 said:


> Id take the 395 over the 660, way better torque and far stronger IMO .....If you can afford too, the 3120 or 880 is a better choice on the Mill.



I have an MS880 with a 60inch bar in an Alaskan mill, I have cut a fair bit of NZ Totara and microcarpa timber, what a bit of magic is all I can say, it pumps, I also have a 440 Stihl with a 900 bar in another Alaskin mill that I start out on a big log with, I have the depth set at 140mm for the first cut, then get the MS880 into action, saves me time in re setting bar depths but I find I only use my big bar when needed as it cost a bit of coin maintaining big bars and chains, I find the ms880 easier to use at the other end of the bar because the torch is good pulling the motor end into the log so its easier to move the saw about 4-6inches in front of the motor at the tip side of log to control the bitting in.
Another thing I do to save time is to use my spade to peel off the bark as the bark holds dirt that takes the edge off the chain so thats more down time sharpening and sharpening undually wears out chains faster. 5 minutes debarking puts big wide lengths of bark on the ground if ground is wet so good footing is saftey, plus it gets rid of lots of ants straight off. the moral of the storey is a Stihl will go lots longer in milage than any other saw, brake downs are very rear, the oldest Stihl I have is 10 years old and never ever let me down, the only other Stihl that has ever stopped or slowed down was because I cut that many slabs one day that I had to clean out the air filter, I run a rev counter on my saws for piece of mind, my 3 Stihl saws are used constantly and with that record I would never want to use another make. Stihlmilling and thats why.


----------



## Big Saw man (Jul 9, 2013)

Locust Cutter said:


> Well I'd have to say For-vs-Chevy to a point. The 2 saws are divergent ways of getting to the same destination. On these two Stihl and Husky had an identity crisis and swapped methodologies; the 660 has better top-end stock and is lighter, while the 395 has better torque, better A/V, more weight and MUCH better oiling. I really liked my 660 but contrary to many on here, I found the torque a bit wanting. RPM is nice when you're limbing, but when I'm trying to buck a 4'+/- Burr Oak, or large Hedge, torque pulls the chain. I would imagine a 660 would do just fine as I have seen many photos of individuals using them for exactly that purpose. However, I would prefer to have a bit more grunt. If the 3120 and 880 were out of the price range, personally I would opt for the 395 or the Dolmar 9010/Solo 394.
> 
> If I were felling large trees daily and didn't go with either a 385 or a 460/1, I would definitely choose the 660 over the 395 for it's lighter weight. However being a weekend hack, who can basically drive up to the victim(s) of the day, the next big saw will be a 395xp because of it's torque and better A/V setup. If and when I get an Alaskan mill, I believe that it would excel there too. If you have either built by any of the reputable builders on this site, the it's paper/rock/scissors... Hope this helps.



I have a new 660 and a new 395 both do great jobs milling. If you never ran both of these saws side by side anyone would think the 660 is the stronger faster saw. Not so, its louder and has a rough feel to it, it does have more low end torque to it. But the 395 is quite and smooth and if you keep the RPMs up and the chain running it will smoke the 660. Even my pawn shop 385xp will out cut it. But I have to say when I go to the woods to power cut firewood or help a friend with a tree, I take my 660s, they have a good feel and will cut all you need.


----------

