# I call B.S. on Stihl. My dyno doesn't lie. MS 461 is king over MS 660



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

I did a bunch of dyno testing lately using my stock 461 as a base saw for 660 testing. I'm testing some modifications on a brand new 660. My 461 is broken in and the 660 was broken in on the dyno with two tanks run through it. Both saws are running 91 octane ethanol free gas mixed 40:1 out of the same can. the first test I had a 7 pin on the 461 and the 660 had an 8pin sprocket. I tested both saws and did the calculations for the ratio difference. I was amazed that the 461 was putting the 660 to shame. I got to thinking that maybe the 8 pin on the 660 was a disadvantage as the chain speed and shaft speed may have caused more drag.

The next test I ran an 8 pin sprocket on both saws and carefully checked the chain tension was slightly sagging on both saws when I attached them to the dyno. Again the 461 spanked the 660 through most of the rpms. The 461 max hp was at 9000 rpms and the 660 at 8500 rpms. The 461 had max torque at 6500 rpms and the 660 at 7000 rpms.

The 461 was 3.3% stronger at 10000 rpms, 3.3% stronger at 9500 rpms, 3.6% stronger at 9000 rpms, 2% stronger at 8500 rpms and 1.8% stronger at 8000 rpms. The 461 and the 660 were dead even at 7500 rpms then finally the 660 had a 3.7% gain at 7000 rpms and a 2% gain at 6500 rpms. 

I now know why I sold my 660. My 461 runs a 36" bar well. How is Stihl getting there Hp #'s. I'm going to get the stock port timing #'s, squish and compression before I tear it down to see if there's something ailing this 660. Lets hope the 661 is much stronger than the 660 cause I dont see need for the 660 with the 461 over powering it through all the useable rpms.


----------



## bryanr2 (May 30, 2014)

opcorn:


----------



## bryanr2 (May 30, 2014)

In the opening sentences you said "your 461 is broken in and the 660 was broken in on the dyno with 2 tanks thru it" How many tanks do you have thru the 461? I wouldnt think a saw would be broken in with 2 tanks. Maybe 10-15.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

bryanr2 said:


> In the opening sentences you said "your 461 is broken in and the 660 was broken in on the dyno with 2 tanks thru it" How many tanks do you have thru the 461? I wouldnt think a saw would be broken in with 2 tanks. Maybe 10-15.


Yeah My 461 might have 20 tanks through it. I ran the 660 hard through two tanks. I pulled it down hard through a range of rpms and then letting it cool down before giving it a workout again. I'm no master at breaking a saw in but my guessing is that the hard workout on the dyno on two tanks is worth more than 5 tanks in wood.


----------



## cutforfun (May 30, 2014)

Go cut some wood!! 30" or larger and see what saw has more power?


----------



## weedkilla (May 30, 2014)

So glad to hear the dyno is running again. Hope to see you inundated with saws shortly! 
I'm sure this thread will disintegrate as quickly as the previous ones as your data disagrees with what people would like to believe. The rest of us commend what you have done and eagerly await more tests.


----------



## treesmith (May 30, 2014)

I never thought I'd give a dislike but you just made my 660 cry...


----------



## cgraham1 (May 30, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> I'm sure this thread will disintegrate as quickly as the previous ones as your data disagrees with what [most] people would like to believe.


Let's hope that people will keep an open mind this time.

opcorn:


----------



## MustangMike (May 30, 2014)

I won't say it was fair comparison, but my 044 recently out cut a 066, both with 24" bars. My 044 has a dual port muffler (the 066 just had 2 small holes added), a K&N air filter, and square file chain, so it was not a even comparison. I was still surprised that the 044 was cutting noticeably faster. Not sure how sharp the chain was on the 066, but the owner is a pro.


----------



## KenJax Tree (May 30, 2014)

i bought a 660 a few years ago and ran 2 tanks through it and hated it so i sold it and bought a 390xp and never looked back.


----------



## KenJax Tree (May 30, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> I won't say it was fair comparison, but my 044 recently out cut a 066, both with 24" bars. My 044 has a dual port muffler (the 066 just had 2 small holes added), a K&N air filter, and square file chain, so it was not a even comparison. I was still surprised that the 044 was cutting noticeably faster. Not sure how sharp the chain was on the 066, but the owner is a pro.



Mike were both bars buried in 24"+ wood? My 562xp will cut faster than my 372xp with 20" bars until they're buried then the 372's torque wins.


----------



## treesmith (May 30, 2014)

I'm quite partial to my mate's 390xp, it's completely stock and runs a 36" pretty well in dead Aussie hardwood


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

So the next step is to put 36" bars on both and put them in 3'+ wood...?


----------



## Streblerm (May 30, 2014)

I know it isn't a 660 but I was initially unimpressed when I got my 394. I was running against a 70cc saw and sharing a 24" bar and chain. I was thinking why would I want to lug around all this weight for a saw that cuts the same or maybe a touch slower? When I finally got a 34" bar and buried it in some hardwood I began to understand what the 394 was all about.


----------



## weedkilla (May 30, 2014)

reindeer said:


> So the next step is to put 36" bars on both and put them in 3'+ wood...?


Kind of - but only to show what revs each saw is happiest pulling in the cut, so we have a better idea what part of the power curve is relevant. Probably 8500-9500 is my guess. If they bog down to below 7000 then the advantages of the 660 will be evident. In a cookie cut situation I don't see why they would, in the real world it will happen. Cutting won't show anything that the dyno won't - but the two are required together to get the full picture. 

Then it just comes down to reading the data that is produced by a dyno and having a good knowledge of the revs your saw actually works at in a cut. Tachos and dynos go together as tuning tools - irrespective of the engine type.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

reindeer said:


> So the next step is to put 36" bars on both and put them in 3'+ wood...?


I'll do that test if I can find a 3 ft log. I'd bet my paycheck that the 461 would still win. This to me this is a clear win for the 461. The 461 had more torque from 10,000 all the way down to 7500 rpms. The 660 has a little more torque below 7500 rpms so it would be a little more resistant to stalling out if it grabbed or was pushed to hard in the wood. How often is a saw bogged down to 7000 rpms or below? I'm still in shock that the 660 fell short from 10,000 to 8,000 rpms. There even at 7500 rpms but the 660 was only 3% stronger from 7000-6500 rpms.


----------



## weedkilla (May 30, 2014)

Chadihman, have you seen the kwf/dlg tests for these saws? Do you know if the us versions of these saws are the same as the euro ones?

Does anyone know how those tests are conducted? Ie- multiple saws sampled, one saw supplied by the manufacturer that may be a little more carefully prepped than normal, random pick from the warehouse.......?


----------



## Duane(Pa) (May 30, 2014)

I'm in. I like a good showdown........ and fumes


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Kind of - but only to show what revs each saw is happiest pulling in the cut, so we have a better idea what part of the power curve is relevant. Probably 8500-9500 is my guess. If they bog down to below 7000 then the advantages of the 660 will be evident. In a cookie cut situation I don't see why they would, in the real world it will happen. Cutting won't show anything that the dyno won't - but the two are required together to get the full picture.
> 
> Then it just comes down to reading the data that is produced by a dyno and having a good knowledge of the revs your saw actually works at in a cut. Tachos and dynos go together as tuning tools - irrespective of the engine type.


You beat me to it. Yep most saws run 8500-9500 rpms in the wood so the 461 will win if the saws never drop below 7500 rpms. The 660 is only 3% stronger at 7000 rpms and 6500 is getting really close to clutch slippage.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

I have to do a wood test soon as this 660 is getting a mod soon then it's onto more testing. I have some 30-36" english walnut rounds I could cut some cookies out of. I have a 36" bar and a bunch of loops of new loops of RSC and A bunch of square ground chain. I'll place a tach in view of the video camera so you guys can see the rpm in the cut. Tomorrow I'll have a couple hours free to do some wood tests.


----------



## weedkilla (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I have to do a wood test soon as this 660 is getting a mod soon then it's onto more testing. I have some 30-36" english walnut rounds I could cut some cookies out of. I have a 36" bar and a bunch of loops of new loops of RSC and A bunch of square ground chain. I'll place a tach in view of the video camera so you guys can see the rpm in the cut. Tomorrow I'll have a couple hours free to do some wood tests.


I'm interested to find out if you notice any reason to tune differently in the cut vs on the dyno. Logic - to me - says that if the weather, altitude and fuel are the same then the tune should be the same, but I'm curious nevertheless!
While I'm asking stuff - will you let us know how many bananas each saw produced? Just as a baseline for when a 372/385/390 et al come up against your dyno?


----------



## Homelite410 (May 30, 2014)

Thanks for your work Chad!


----------



## treeslayer2003 (May 30, 2014)

Chad, i have said the same thing about these two saws.......however, after the 660 was ported it was a different story.
according to Randy and the other builders, the 660s port timing is flawed from the factory.


----------



## blsnelling (May 30, 2014)

How were the saws tuned?


----------



## mdavlee (May 30, 2014)

treeslayer2003 said:


> Chad, i have said the same thing about these two saws.......however, after the 660 was ported it was a different story.
> according to Randy and the other builders, the 660s port timing is flawed from the factory.



461 is more impressive stock than a 660. I don't doubt the test results are wrong. A new 660 is a turd with muffler work and port work. The 661 is a step up. I need to get time to send a husky up that way and maybe a 460.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (May 30, 2014)

another thing, a late 660 is not the saw an early 066 is. as stock.


----------



## weedkilla (May 30, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> I myself was all for this dyno stuff....But then this joke pops up....
> Well Im not saying the dyno is wrong but man in our hardwood and hands on use of said saw's this is so not true IMO.....
> I kind of get now why the porters shy away from dyno's and say yeah good and all but ya can keep it!.........


Really?

How many of those 660's are totally stock? I think it's pretty clear that stihl has choked their 90cc saw hard - I assume it was the most difficult to make meet EPA standards. I've got a feeling that basic mods might make the numbers quite different. We'll all know soon.....


----------



## blsnelling (May 30, 2014)

Aussy 660s have a much more open muffler. That's a huge difference.


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

As Randy has stated before, you may want to run that 660 a lot more to break the bottom end in - they are tight from the factory.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

I'm going to do some more break in. Remember I had a 660 of my own that tested very much the same as this one except that one pushed ahead in torque at like 8000 rpms rather than 7000 rpms like this one. That test the 660 had 20 tanks through it and the 461 was new at the time with maybe two tanks. Both saws are tuned by ear. I have a muffler test to do on this 660 also so stay tuned. Im sure the 660 will win after a muffler mod. Call bs on the dyno I really don't care. I live my life to preach the truth. You won't get bs from me.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

I call BS, too. The MS461 has 85% as much brake horsepower as a MS660. The 395XP Husky equivalent to a MS660 has a 1/10 bhp more horsepower and weighs almost one pound more.

The MS660 has the best caps, too. It is the standard.


----------



## MustangMike (May 30, 2014)

KenJax Tree said:


> Mike were both bars buried in 24"+ wood? My 562xp will cut faster than my 372xp with 20" bars until they're buried then the 372's torque wins.



Like I said, it was not a fair comparison, as I had square file chain on the 044. Both bars were buried, but it was in 30" White Pine. Hardwood may have changed things.


----------



## struggle (May 30, 2014)

The 461 we run brand new never fueled at at a GTG was very impressive saw and could pull a 36" I think without a problem. They are very strong runners no doubt. 

It has been on my short list for sometime to replace my 460 but I just can't justify the expense at this time


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> I myself was all for this dyno stuff....But then this joke pops up....
> Well Im not saying the dyno is wrong but man in our hardwood and hands on use of said saw's this is so not true IMO.....
> I kind of get now why the porters shy away from dyno's and say yeah good and all but ya can keep it!.......(oops edit) if it's a USA EPA 660 I get it? that thing is a dog......


Let's get the wood test done then you can bash me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Termite (May 30, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> T
> And yes I agree Stihl has choked their 90cc saw hard in the USA with the EPA crap to the point an EPA ms660 is on-par power wise to an old 038 mag I guess .... And yeah the Aussie ms660 still cranks out the hp it was designed to as we don't have the full wrath of the EPA here yet.....Cheers just my 2c ..........



We have the EPA and you have gun control let's hope we can be freed from each.


----------



## Termite (May 30, 2014)

Homelite410 said:


> Thanks for your work Chad!


 
I agree, thanks Chad.


----------



## SCHallenger (May 30, 2014)

opcorn:Sounds like a plan!


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> Time is not on our side and I can tell you now 100%......real world aussie hardwood....
> 
> ....And yeah to us (at my work and my part of the world north east QLD)



Hard wood is *HARD* all over the world. It ain't some kind of franchise, Bud.

Queens Land is a rough soundin' pleece, I will give you that.


----------



## treesmith (May 30, 2014)

Aussie hardwood seems a different level of hard...

Gotta admit though my mastermind 660 loves chomping it up, we've got stock 660s, 460s and 461s at work, the 46s wear a 20" and the 660s a 25". They cut differently both with 3/8 .063 RS


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

No wood is a match for my honed chrome.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> .....






thats better


----------



## sawfun (May 30, 2014)

Those results dont surprise me as M adsens dyno'd several 461's and reported about 1/2 hp more than they were rated stock. As far as the 660's go, I sold my 02 066 dual port due to vibes and unimpressive performance. Bought a 395 and wouldn't look back. Way more power with a 36" bar buried and smooth as silk. It also balances a perfectly with a Sugihara lightweight bar. The 066 didnt balance well even with a Stihl lightweight bar. I hope the 166's are a major improvement.


----------



## Wood Doctor (May 30, 2014)

I have read this thread with interest since I have an 046 and a 660 sitting side by side. I have often thought that the power of each was about the same, each pulling a 32" bar. I recently added a dual port muffler to the 046 and did some additional tuning. Dang thing seems stronger than the 660 now and, of course, it weighs about a pound less.

Regardless, I love both of these big saws. It's fun to offer them a 30" elm or cottonwood log and then let the big dogs eat.


----------



## old-cat (May 30, 2014)

Have Randy the Mastermind port an MS461 and a 660 then do the dyno tests!


----------



## treeslayer2003 (May 30, 2014)

old-cat said:


> Have Randy the Mastermind port an MS461 and a 660 then do the dyno tests!


now i like to see that...........if things go right, i might just do that.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> How is Stihl getting there Hp #'s?



On a state of the art direct drive dyno that measures either saw's brake horsepower @ 9500 RPM. That's the revs the motors are designed to make peak power at in the wood. On Stihl's dyno the MS461 makes 6 bhp and the MS660 makes 7 bhp. Stihl figures state that the MS660 is 14.3% stronger than the MS461. "Stronger," is a little ambiguous but let's call it that.




chadihman said:


> The 461 was 3.3% stronger at 9500 rpms.



Your figures are skewed 17.6% from those of the engineers who designed the saw. Your variables are, air/fuel mixture, chain tension and operating temperature. I'm not saying your MS660 might not be a lemon, could be.


----------



## MustangMike (May 30, 2014)

I thank Chad for his work and look forward to seeing further results both "in the wood" and "from the dyno".

This is valuable information that no one else is providing. If you don't like it, don't read it.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> On a state of the art direct drive dyno that measures either saw's brake horsepower @ 9500 RPM. That's the revs the motors are designed to make peak power at in the wood. On Stihl's dyno the MS461 makes 6 bhp and the MS660 makes 7 bhp. Stihl figures state that the MS660 is 14.3% stronger than the MS461. "Stronger," is a little ambiguous but let's call it that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No my numbers are not skewed. I tested the 461 and 660 within 20 mins of each other to keep weather conditions the same. I see changes in HP with changes in temp and humidity that's why I'm using my 461as a base saw to compare change from the 660 mods I'm doing. I'm thinking most of stihls #'s are computer generated and a really good running saw is used for there dyno testing. We all know every saw runs a bit different.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> This is valuable information that no one else is providing. If you don't like it, don't read it.



I'll read anything I want, MustangMike; especially something with a bombastic title. I see a lot of people providing valuable information here. Maybe you can read some of it. I'm glad this kid is trying to build a working dyno.

Some good questions are raised, too. was this one answered?



blsnelling said:


> How were the saws tuned?


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> No my numbers are not skewed.



They _deviate_ from established figures from Stihl's lab. Is that a milder way to put it. Sorry, I don't really use enough smileys. What type of instrument did you test the chain tension with?


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'm going to do some more break in. Remember I had a 660 of my own that tested very much the same as this one except that one pushed ahead in torque at like 8000 rpms rather than 7000 rpms like this one. That test the 660 had 20 tanks through it and the 461 was new at the time with maybe two tanks. Both saws are tuned by ear. I have a muffler test to do on this 660 also so stay tuned. Im sure the 660 will win after a muffler mod. Call bs on the dyno I really don't care. I live my life to preach the truth. You won't get bs from me.



According to the thread I read, the 660 posted similar results as you state, but the dyno could NOT stop the 660, and could easily stop the 461 when you put them under load.

http://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/sthil-ms-461-vs-stihl-ms-660-dyno-tested.241447/


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> No my numbers are not skewed. I tested the 461 and 660 within 20 mins of each other to keep weather conditions the same. I see changes in HP with changes in temp and humidity that's why I'm using my 461as a base saw to compare change from the 660 mods I'm doing. I'm thinking most of stihls #'s are computer generated and a really good running saw is used for there dyno testing. We all know every saw runs a bit different.


 
I asked about operating temperature, not ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure. Besides confirmation bias, what leads you to believe Stihl's data is generated via computer model? That's just a target. They test real saws.



chadihman said:


> a really good running saw is used for there dyno testing..



Right.


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 30, 2014)

old-cat said:


> Have Randy the Mastermind port an MS461 and a 660 then do the dyno tests!



Randy ran my 660 against a new 461 ,he ported both ,in about a 24 inch log with a 28 inch bar the 461 was about a second faster in a 30 or so second cut ,he did comment he could lean a little harder on the 660 ,the 660 was ported for milling also ,that could have been another factor ,if you are in bigger wood all day the 660 is built stronger ,bigger bearings ,clutch etc ,when i mill with a 70cc saw the clutch gets pretty warm over the 660 also ,just depends what you use the saw for ,packing a 660 all day will make you a knuckle dragger over the 461 though


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> Hard wood is *HARD* all over the world. It ain't some kind of franchise, Bud.
> 
> Queens Land is a rough soundin' pleece, I will give you that.



Actually, no. It isn't. Most of the harder woods, according to the Janka Scale, are not grown in the US. And woods with similar names, like Beech and Cypress, are significantly more hard outside of the US.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

Trx250r180 said:


> ,packing a 660 all day will make you a knuckle dragger over the 461 though



Dang I thought this was genetic.



reindeer said:


> Actually, no. It isn't. Most of the harder woods, according to the Janka Scale, are not grown in the US. And woods with similar names, like Beech and Cypress, are significantly more hard outside of the US.


 
Osage Orange, _Maclura pomifera_ 2760lbf; hard enough to compare with anything still legal to cut.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

Some good questions are raised, too. was this one answered?[/QUOTE]
Yep


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> What type of instrument did you test the chain tension with?


My good old fashioned brain. I stated earlier that I carefully adjusted the chain to slightly sagging on the dyno bar.


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> Dang I thought this was genetic.
> 
> 
> 
> Osage Orange, _Maclura pomifera_ 2760lbf; hard enough to compare with anything still legal to cut.



Not sure what legality has to do, since we aren't talking about illegally cutting wood. But the Aussies will more commonly cut denser would than you would. Which was the point. Osage Orange isn't even as hard as Iron Bark, a typical Australian hardwood. I mean, if you want to quote wood that isn't terrifically common like Osage Orange, the Aussies have 'Snakewood'. It has a janka rating of 3800+, and is often used as ornamental wood.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

reindeer said:


> According to the thread I read, the 660 posted similar results as you state, but the dyno could NOT stop the 660, and could easily stop the 461 when you put them under load.
> 
> http://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/sthil-ms-461-vs-stihl-ms-660-dyno-tested.241447/


Might have blew that pump most of the way with the 461


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Might have blew that pump most of the way with the 461



"might have" sounds a lot like an "If" or a "but", doesn't it? You know where I stand on engineering and dynos. Let's keep it honest. Break that 660 in, put a factory dual port on it(which is where STIHL gets the HP rating), and put it head to head with the 461.


----------



## SierraWoodsman (May 30, 2014)

bryanr2 said:


> In the opening sentences you said "your 461 is broken in and the 660 was broken in on the dyno with 2 tanks thru it" How many tanks do you have thru the 461? I wouldnt think a saw would be broken in with 2 tanks. Maybe 10-15.


+1. Ring's may not be completely seated yet.


----------



## cutforfun (May 30, 2014)

i like the dyno info you come up with, but i dont think you can brake in a saw with the dyno in two tanks of fuel. get some more cutting done with the 660 and re do the test.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

reindeer said:


> "might have" sounds a lot like an "If" or a "but", doesn't it? You know where I stand on engineering and dynos. Let's keep it honest. Break that 660 in, put a factory dual port on it(which is where STIHL gets the HP rating), and put it head to head with the 461.


 I'm sure a muffler mod will prove different. I tested a dual port on my 461 and it didn't show any improvement. I know the 660 does. So you think Stihl tests with dual port? I'll get some more run time on this 660 and retest. It has almost 3 tanks through now. What do you think broken in is? 5,10,15,20


----------



## porsche965 (May 30, 2014)

Conventional saw like the 660? I'd say 5-10 just guessing. Stratos seem to be 15 or more.


----------



## wyk (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'm sure a muffler mod will prove different. I tested a dual port on my 461 and it didn't show any improvement. I know the 660 does. So you think Stihl tests with dual port? I'll get some more run time on this 660 and retest. It has almost 3 tanks through now. What do you think broken in is? 5,10,15,20



Since it hadn't changed from the dual port to the non dual, I would assume it is an old rating. So, for one, you are right - it is over-rated. But, why not give STIHL a fair shake and try with and without the dual port after ya break her in. I doubt anyone would argue she isn't broken in after 15 tanks. But, that's a lot of wood...

So, that 461 didn't show any improvement at all? It didn't even change the powerband?


----------



## porsche965 (May 30, 2014)

15 tanks for a 660, even though they use a considerable amount of fuel, IS a lot of wood in the hands of a good operator!


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

porsche965 said:


> 15 tanks for a 660, even though they use a considerable amount of fuel, IS a lot of wood in the hands of a good operator!


Sure is. Big tank on a 660


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 30, 2014)

i only get 3 cuts to a tank on my 660 ,saw be broken in in about an hour of cutting


----------



## mdavlee (May 30, 2014)

I was about to say set that puppy up milling for 2 hours and you'll burn 3 gallons. Last milling I did I got 1 cut per 1.5 tanks.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (May 30, 2014)

jeez Brian, mines not that bad.......i can normally fall close to a load with it........no topping just falling.


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 30, 2014)

treeslayer2003 said:


> jeez Brian, mines not that bad.......i can normally fall close to a load with it........no topping just falling.



cut the tree the tall way and see how good on fuel it is


----------



## RedFir Down (May 30, 2014)

Trx250r180 said:


> cut the tree the tall way and see how good on fuel it is
> View attachment 352833


That is a nice piece of fir! Whats your plans for it?


----------



## MustangMike (May 30, 2014)

After 5 tanks it should be broken in, lets be reasonable here (unless you are sending donations for fuel).

And if Stihl rates it with the dual port muffler, they should offer it that way here.

Funny how the new Stihls don't seem to benefit much from Muffler Mods, but the old ones do. Perhaps someone can give an explanation?


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 30, 2014)

RedFir Down said:


> That is a nice piece of fir! Whats your plans for it?


I sliced it into 5/4 x 6 deck boards for my front porch ,i still have to finish planing some of it ,then i can install it


----------



## OnTheRoad (May 30, 2014)

reindeer said:


> Not sure what legality has to do, since we aren't talking about illegally cutting wood. But the Aussies will more commonly cut denser would than you would. Which was the point. Osage Orange isn't even as hard as Iron Bark, a typical Australian hardwood. I mean, if you want to quote wood that isn't terrifically common like Osage Orange, the Aussies have 'Snakewood'. It has a janka rating of 3800+, and is often used as ornamental wood.


Where I am from, Osage Orange (aka Hedge) is very common. I can't find a comparable Janka number for your Iron Bark. How much harder is it compared to Hedge, as a percentage on a Janka scale?


----------



## one.man.band (May 30, 2014)

looking at the dyno graph from DLG testing gives a max. HP value of 7.0 HP (5.2kW) @ 9500 rpm, for a 066 ('98 w/decomp).

the DLG rpms vs. HP vary from those posted here. since, the rpms are different, the curves of HP/TQ will differ as well, due to the math.

these are two saws sold with differing uses in mind. which saw do you think can withstand milling, or long bar use...over a longer lifespan.......the bigger or smaller cube?........ even if they had equal HP/TQ.

hope the new saw withstood the dyno break in. wow.

over it here.

-omb


----------



## StihlFroling (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Yeah My 461 might have 20 tanks through it. I ran the 660 hard through two tanks. I pulled it down hard through a range of rpms and then letting it cool down before giving it a workout again. I'm no master at breaking a saw in but my guessing is that the hard workout on the dyno on two tanks is worth more than 5 tanks in wood.



Couldn't be further from the truth. What percentages are you running on your load? Does the load cell have the same geometry relationship on both saws? 1/64ths" count big time. What was the start compression and post break in? Has it peaked yet? Owning a dyno is one thing, having the years of expertise and knowledge on how to operate and interprete data is another. specifically with saws and two stroke power curves. Not any other engine. I'm not saying this is impossible, but it surely is something to look into more.

Stijl uses an Eddie Currant


----------



## Deets066 (May 30, 2014)

I have never ran either of the above stated saws but I have run both 066 and 046 stock and this is not the case at all for these saws. Each has their place, bigger wood, bigger saw. Not saying your info is wrong, but when stihl tests saws they test a great number of saws not just one of each.
Thanks for the great info and would like to see more on this topic.


----------



## walexa07 (May 30, 2014)

Chad, I commend you on going through the trouble to provide solid data like this to us. I hate that there are so many truly negative naysayers on here. I can't say I'd blame you if you decided to just quit posting any of your findings, but I do hope you can see through the negative comments and understand that many here appreciate what you do so much. Reminds me of an old saying, "those who can, do. Those that can't, teach". You are definitely one who can do - not some armchair scholar.

My personal constructive criticism would be that what you have is a somewhat single set of data points, and I don't think you would argue with that. There are many variables at play here, and some have been mentioned. You could have a really well running 461, a 660 that isn't broken in, and possibly some other things along those same lines going on. It could also be that your findings may be average for stock versus stock. Regardless, your findings are significant in my eyes and many others. I am anxious to see what you find with more testing, modding, etc. - and you seem to be a real straight shooter - so I know you will report whatever you find.

I wish I could afford to send you 3 new 461s and 3 new 660s for testing/comparisons. Although I know it would still happen, it would be difficult for some of the naysayers to argue with those kinds of averages IF they turned out in favor of the 461. 

Keep up the good work, buddy........

Waylan


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

I've read the whole thing and no one is saying he can't or he shouldn't. Why would the kid want to quit posting here? There's plenty of interest from the right crowd. Either he has a superb cherry MS461, a wounded duck MS660 Magnum, both or a faulty process. There's no nay saying in it. Don't act like a bunch of chicks.


----------



## Deets066 (May 30, 2014)

No naysaying here just stating my opinion, which is why we are all here right? Great findings and like I said before I would like to see more! Thanks


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> I've read the whole thing and no one is saying he can't or he shouldn't. Why would the kid want to quit posting here? There's plenty of interest from the right crowd. Either he has a superb cherry MS461, a wounded duck MS660 Magnum, both or a faulty process. There's no nay saying in it. Don't act like a bunch of chicks.


 Last I knew I was 32, married with two young kids and work a full time job pulling wrenches. Why am I a kid? I tested two 660's against my 461 and the 461 won on both at the rated hp rpm. A few others stated a 461 beats a 660.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

Yeah it's not Stihl bashing or inventor bashing. We always want to make them run better. I have lots of 70cc class Stihls that out run average 90cc class saws. I'm sure it can happen.

But we're from the woods and now we are on the internet. If you call BS on our favorite saw, get your ducks in a row first and brace yourself. That's all.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

I know there's more guys out there with a 461 and a 660. Lets see some timed cuts. Maybe I tested two lemon 660's but I doubt it.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Last I knew I was 32, married with two young kids and work a full time job pulling wrenches. Why am I a kid?



Because I was doing all those things when you was daydreaming in shop class.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

I'm braced and my ducks are in a row. Now what?


----------



## Brush Ape (May 30, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'm braced and my ducks are in a row. Now what?



Never give up.


----------



## sawfun (May 30, 2014)

Don't let the jokers and jerks diswade you. This is a great thread with excellent information. Thank you for your effort and work. There seems to be no end of armchair wannabes that spout paper specs but haven't actually done much in the area of conversation themselves. Almost any idiot can look at a web page and think they now really know something in depth on the subject. Reading and real work experience are significantly different.


----------



## chadihman (May 30, 2014)

StihlFroling said:


> Couldn't be further from the truth. What percentages are you running on your load? Does the load cell have the same geometry relationship on both saws? 1/64ths" count big time. What was the start compression and post break in? Has it peaked yet? Owning a dyno is one thing, having the years of expertise and knowledge on how to operate and interprete data is another. specifically with saws and two stroke power curves. Not any other engine. I'm not saying this is impossible, but it surely is something to look into more.
> 
> Stijl uses an Eddie Currant


I'm going to assume you havent seen any of my build threads or the video of my dyno working. I have the torque #'s from 10,000-6500 rpms on both saws. I calculate the hp at every 500 rpm increment. I can tell you all about torque and Hp from 6500-10000 rpms. Now tell me how I don't know how to interpret data. Not getting pre break in compression is my only regret.


----------



## MustangMike (May 30, 2014)

Chad, I'll be 62 in August and I've done lots of things, BUT I HAVE NEVER BUILT A DYNO!

More power to you, and keep up the good work.


----------



## treesmith (May 31, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> Osage Orange, _Maclura pomifera_ 2760lbf; hard enough to compare with anything still legal to cut.



Sorry for derail

Just for comparison, these janka scale(hardness) figure are taken from several woodfloor supply companies so comparable to standing dead trees, a very common reason to cut it down

American

Osage orange - 2760 lbf
Hickory - 1820 lbf
Hard maple - 1450 lbf
White oak - 1360 lbf
Beech - 1300 lbf
Red oak - 1290 lbf
Black walnut 1010 lbf
Gum - 850 lbf
Elm - 830 lbf
Cypress - 690 lbf
Cottonwood - 430 lbf

English 

Yew - 1600
English oak - 1400

Aussie 

Grey ironbark - 3750 lbf
Grey box - 3370 lbf
Ironbark - 3150 lbf
Grey gum - 3150 lbf
Red mahogany - 2700 lbf
Spotted gum - 2470 lbf
Sydney blue gum 2030 lbf

Aussie cypress 1370 lbf - harder than US oak 1360 lbf

These are just a few, the small garden trees are the same, dense heavy and really hard. I've noticed European ash is harder here too


----------



## MCW (May 31, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> Time is not on our side and I can tell you now 100% for real if the 046/461 out cut an aussie 066/660 in the HAND we would be using them the end! ....BUT as it stands in real world hardwood the aussie 660 gets the job done without men standing about doing nothing waiting, an aussie 660 keeps the young lads running! lol...
> And as far as stock saw's go we only use stock saw's for work....One or two 660/066 Ive brought home and hit with a dremel Yes true I was a mastermind wannabe for a bit there LOL..And from that I got nothing to jump up and down about with the use of a dremel ...
> 
> And yeah to us (at my work and my part of the world north east QLD) a 660 is not a big or heavy saw it's definitely one of the lighter things you will pick up in a working day around here LOL....
> And yes I agree Stihl has choked their 90cc saw hard in the USA with the EPA crap to the point an EPA ms660 is on-par power wise to an old 038 mag I guess .... And yeah the Aussie ms660 still cranks out the hp it was designed to as we don't have the full wrath of the EPA here yet.....Cheers just my 2c ..........



I know a couple of full time firewood cutters who bought 461's thinking they could get the same grunt and save a bit of weight over their 660's (Australian delivered dual ports). They were very disappointed and have gone back to their 660's. The 461's are a good saw, no doubt about it, but to say they'll beat a stock 660 means they'll also beat a stock 385XP and 390XP. That's a big call in my book. I'm not doubting the dyno results, but I think real world testing will show a different scenario. 
Personally I'm not the world's biggest 660 fan but they are tough saws.


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

walexa07 said:


> Chad, I commend you on going through the trouble to provide solid data like this to us. I hate that there are so many truly negative naysayers on here. I can't say I'd blame you if you decided to just quit posting any of your findings, but I do hope you can see through the negative comments and understand that many here appreciate what you do so much. Reminds me of an old saying, "those who can, do. Those that can't, teach". You are definitely one who can do - not some armchair scholar.
> 
> My personal constructive criticism would be that what you have is a somewhat single set of data points, and I don't think you would argue with that. There are many variables at play here, and some have been mentioned. You could have a really well running 461, a 660 that isn't broken in, and possibly some other things along those same lines going on. It could also be that your findings may be average for stock versus stock. Regardless, your findings are significant in my eyes and many others. I am anxious to see what you find with more testing, modding, etc. - and you seem to be a real straight shooter - so I know you will report whatever you find.
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

sawfun said:


> Don't let the jokers and jerks diswade you. This is a great thread with excellent information. Thank you for your effort and work. There seems to be no end of armchair wannabes that spout paper specs but haven't actually done much in the area of conversation themselves. Almost any idiot can look at a web page and think they now really know something in depth on the subject. Reading and real work experience are significantly different.



+1


----------



## mdavlee (May 31, 2014)

MCW said:


> I know a couple of full time firewood cutters who bought 461's thinking they could get the same grunt and save a bit of weight over their 660's (Australian delivered dual ports). They were very disappointed and have gone back to their 660's. The 461's are a good saw, no doubt about it, but to say they'll beat a stock 660 means they'll also beat a stock 385XP and 390XP. That's a big call in my book. I'm not doubting the dyno results, but I think real world testing will show a different scenario.
> Personally I'm not the world's biggest 660 fan but they are tough saws.



Matt over here with softer woods and shorter bars there's no real difference in stump power with a 24". You're just carrying a gas guzzling pig in the 660. It does have the good caps though. I was thoroughly impressed with a MM ported 461 when I got to run them.


----------



## MCW (May 31, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> Matt over here with softer woods and shorter bars there's no real difference in stump power with a 24". You're just carrying a gas guzzling pig in the 660. It does have the good caps though. I was thoroughly impressed with a MM ported 461 when I got to run them.



I agree but these saws are used under a whole heap of different scenarios so I'm pitching in with some real world feedback from guys who use these things as tools for production, nothing more. If the 461 was indeed better than the 660 under real work scenarios I'd have expected the 660 to have been abandoned by fallers everywhere as the 461 has been out a while now. Personally I'd buy a 461 over a 660 anyday.
If a 461 can beat a 660 in softwood, it will also beat it in hardwood. Torque is torque and if these dyno readings are correct then a 461 should beat a 660 from an 18" bar to a 72" bar in any wood.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

I'm sorry I bashed the beloved 660 so bad. I do believe that the 660 has its place. Its a bigger tougher saw period. It may lack power but it gains over the 461 at 7500 rpms and below. The 660 should be a little more resistant to bogging. At 7000 rpms the 660 had almost 4% more power. Saws don't see much 7000 rpm work but it will help with a big bar.


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

don't think anyone is doubting the sincerity or integrity of chad's work, including me.

some of you have been around a dyno, some have not. calling b.s. on stihl and dlg based on a single dyno run is a bold statement, imo.

for those that have been around a dyno realize that 3 to 5 consecutive runs can produce results can vary -10% to +10% between runs on the same motor.

don't know what chad's numbers are, since he did not post them up, other than %'s.

maybe these numbers may help you for baseline numbers (taken from kwf and dlg), for each saw:

ms461:
4.4 kW (5.9 HP) @ 9750 rpm
5.0 kW (3.7 lb-ft) @ 7500 rpm

066:
5.2 kW (7.0 HP) @ 9500 rpm
6.0 kW (4.4 lb-ft) @ 6000 rpm

questions of the how the testing method was performed may shed some light on the differences between the results.

most of us are grown men here. amazes me sometimes of wordsmiths on here, who comment on things that they know so little about.

-omb


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

one.man.band said:


> ms461:
> 4.4 kW (5.9 HP) @ 9750 rpm
> 5.0 kW (3.7 lb-ft) @ 7500 rpm
> 
> ...


----------



## KG441c (May 31, 2014)

I would love to know the output on a ported 461 compared to the stock 660. I was told by a top porter that a properly ported 461 would smoke a stock 660


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

KG441c said:


> I would love to know the output on a ported 461 compared to the stock 660. I was told by a top porter that a properly ported 461 would smoke a stock 660


Your top porter is right. Its shines stock.


----------



## mdavlee (May 31, 2014)

I wouldn't want to mill with a 461 with over a 28" bar over a 660. I've got some limited run time on a 461 and a good bit on a 660. For blocking firewood I'm sure a 660 will win with it's cc advantage. I don't mine the 088 when I'm just blocking wood in a pile or bucking a tree trunk. If I've got to do much walking around and reaching with it then I want something else.


----------



## MCW (May 31, 2014)

Hey don't think I'm a 660 or Stihl fan boy either. I hate the balance and fuel consumption of the 660's which is why I run 7900's and 390XP's now for falling. I'm simply saying that guys I've spoken to who use these saws (stock) to make a living have continued to use their 660's after buying 461's. These guys aren't on AS, aren't biased between models, and don't have any weird fetish for 660's like many members here 



KG441c said:


> I would love to know the output on a ported 461 compared to the stock 660. I was told by a top porter that a properly ported 461 would smoke a stock 660



It's easy to get a ported 70cc saw to smoke a stock 660. Not hard at all. My ported and pop upped 7900 will thump a stock 660 everywhere.


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

check what i posted, then you can use any online calculator to verify what i posted.

Torque Conversion Chart Metric to English

Newton Meters (N-m) =	Foot Pounds (ft. lbs.) 
1 =	0.7 
2 =	1.5 
3 =	2.2 
4 =	3.0 
5 =	3.7 
6 =	4.4 
7 =	5.2 
8 =	5.9 
9 =	6.6 

check your messages. trying to help you.

-omb


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

check what i posted, then you can use any online calculator to verify what i posted.

Torque Conversion Chart Metric to English

Newton Meters (N-m) =	Foot Pounds (ft. lbs.) 
1 =	0.7 
2 =	1.5 
3 =	2.2 
4 =	3.0 
5 =	3.7 
6 =	4.4 
7 =	5.2 
8 =	5.9 
9 =	6.6 

check your messages. trying to help you.

-omb


----------



## MustangMike (May 31, 2014)

I think the dual port muffler (and perhaps some other changes) may be a good part of the difference in this debate. When I put a dual port and low restriction air filter on my 044 it made a very noticeable difference.

I think the US version of the 660 is likely built for torque and long bars, not for speed.

That said, I got to pull the trigger on some ported 660s at the Upstate GTG and they were absolute animals.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

Very interesting thread. I'm curious to see how the numbers play out after 10 more tanks and a dual port cover.


----------



## WKEND LUMBERJAK (May 31, 2014)

MCW said:


> Hey don't think I'm a 660 or Stihl fan boy either. I hate the balance and fuel consumption of the 660's which is why I run 7900's and 390XP's now for falling. I'm simply saying that guys I've spoken to who use these saws (stock) to make a living have continued to use their 660's after buying 461's. These guys aren't on AS, aren't biased between models, and don't have any weird fetish for 660's like many members here
> 
> 
> 
> It's easy to get a ported 70cc saw to smoke a stock 660. Not hard at all. My ported and pop upped 7900 will thump a stock 660 everywhere.



Fetish that is a good one.


----------



## MCW (May 31, 2014)

WKEND LUMBERJAK said:


> Fetish that is a good one.



Heh heh. It's true though. I've heard so many guys over the years say that the 660 is the best saw they've ever used. Dig a little deeper and you find they've only used 2 saws in their life and one was a Poulan


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

I'm surprised the 660 was that close......

They are turds stock.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

No......I didn't read the whole thread.


----------



## MCW (May 31, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I'm surprised the 660 was that close......
> 
> They are turds stock.



Well the US delivered versions are at least but the OP didn't specify in the thread title.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

MCW said:


> Well the US delivered versions are at least.



Do the OZ versions have a different jug?


----------



## WKEND LUMBERJAK (May 31, 2014)

and it wasn't one of the old good poulans.


----------



## treesmith (May 31, 2014)

I bought a 660 because of the 066 that stole my heart, luckily my 660 came from MM


----------



## KG441c (May 31, 2014)

Id.like a 660 but think ill stick to my 461 and gwt it ported and my ported 362c and just bought this 026 last night for $40 that im goin through


----------



## treesmith (May 31, 2014)

390 is nice stock, prefer the feel of it over a 395


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

The 660/066 is a very durable saw. But a strong runner???? Hell no. 

The Husqvarna 385 is stronger. 

The bad part? 

I'm a Stihlhead.


----------



## WKEND LUMBERJAK (May 31, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> The 660/066 is a very durable saw. But a strong runner???? Hell no.
> 
> The Husqvarna 385 is stronger.
> 
> ...



That 's it I new there was something Wrong with you .


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

Randy... how much gain do you see from a 660 after porting?


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Randy... how much gain do you see from a 660 after porting?



The difference is huge. 

Most of the gain comes from the machine work though. 

The lower I can get the exhaust the better, but there is a point that the bottom of the piston skirt begins to go up into the exhaust port, AKA free porting.

I take .060" from the squish band. That gets my exhaust duration down, adds intake duration, and raises compression in one step. Then the upper transfers are "massaged" extensively.


----------



## walexa07 (May 31, 2014)

Stihl Australia shows 7.1 bhp and Stihl USA shows 7.0 bhp. Are Australia hp numbers reflecting a dp muffler? If so, would that only be good for .1 bhp? I can easily believe Stihl publishing hp data based on the max they can get with factory equipment, whether more restrictive equipment is required or not.

I do believe the 660 is capable of more power than the 461, just on the basis of "there's no replacement for displacement", and it's a more durable chassis no doubt. It's just interesting that the EPA has pushed them to detune this saw so much.

Waylan


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 31, 2014)

Depends what you use the saw for ,the 660 was not built for cutting 12 inch cookies ,it was made for a bigger bar falling timber,look at the clutch alone or the bigger bearings ,if i mill with the 460 or 461 the clutch drum will turn blue ,the 660 it does not ,yes the both have similar power and do the job ,but i do not think the smaller saw will hold up like a 660 long term if put to use in place where a bigger saw should be


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

Well said Brian.


----------



## Gologit (May 31, 2014)

Trx250r180 said:


> Depends what you use the saw for ,the 660 was not built for cutting 12 inch cookies ,it was made for a bigger bar falling timber,look at the clutch alone or the bigger bearings ,if i mill with the 460 or 461 the clutch drum will turn blue ,the 660 it does not ,yes the both have similar power and do the job ,but i do not think the smaller saw will hold up like a 660 long term if put to use in place where a bigger saw should be


 

Exactly right. I like my 461 but if I'm into big timber on an every day basis I want a bigger saw.

All this cookie cutting stuff and number juggling is fine and I'm sure the motor heads are having fun with it. It doesn't really address the main issue though.

The 461 is a fine little saw and yes you can run a 32 or 36" bar on it. But if you do, and you work the snot out of it all day every day, will it last as long as it's big brother? I don't think so.


----------



## redfin (May 31, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Randy... how much gain do you see from a 660 after porting?



I was very much dissapointed with my stock 660 until Randy played with it. Even with a 25 in oak my 044 would keep up with it.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

What a lot of you guys are missing is this. The 660 doesn't really shine until the wood gets big. Like Bob and Brian both said, the saw is tough in large timber, or for milling. 

Does it need to be ported to be a serious runner? Hell yes.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

So what rpm does a stock 660 run at in big wood or milling? I fully agree that the 660 has more torque but this particular one only had more torque below 7500 rpms. Im not saying they all do and I'm also speaking of a U.S. stock 660.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

I'm not saying it will have more power...........just that it will live longer than a 461 in big stuff.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> What a lot of you guys are missing is this. The 660 doesn't really shine until the wood gets big. Like Bob and Brian both said, the saw is tough in large timber, or for milling.
> Does it need to be ported to be a serious runner? Hell yes.


Not this 660 unless they often hang in 7000 rpm or lower range. Maybe I have a cherry 461 but the 660 is supposed to be 1 HP more. That's a big jump.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

What you are saying is that the 660 is even, or so, with the 461. 

Stihl says that it should be one full HP more powerful though. 

Right? 

I am not at all surprised.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 31, 2014)

Gologit said:


> The 461 is a fine little saw and yes you can run a 32 or 36" bar on it. But if you do, and you work the snot out of it all day every day, will it last as long as it's big brother? I don't think so.



They are comparing the MS461 to a MS660 here. Them two saws are barely cousins.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> What you are saying is that the 660 is even, or so, with the 461.
> 
> Stihl says that it should be one full HP more powerful though.
> 
> ...


You didn't read my first post in thus thread did you?. Its OK I do the same thing all the time.
I'll fill you in. The 660 is supposed to be 1 HP stronger than the 461. I broke the brand new 660 in on the dyno with a little over two tanks then tested both stock saws back to back twice on the dyno from 10,000 all the way down to 6500 rpms. I recorded #s every 500 rpms. The 461 was 2-3% stronger at 10,000, 9500, 9000, 8500, and 8000 rpms. Then at 7500 they were tied. Then the 660 was 3% stronger from 7000-6500 rpms.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

Yeah I read your first post......that's what I just said. 

The 461 and the 660 are ever......or so. 

But Stihl says the 660 is suppose to be 1 HP stronger.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

I broke it down for the Brush Ape.


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> So what rpm does a stock 660 run at in big wood or milling? I fully agree that the 660 has more torque but this particular one only had more torque below 7500 rpms. Im not saying they all do and I'm also speaking of a U.S. stock 660.



I have not put a tach on my saw milling ,i will note when the jug was stock i used all the throttle in a pass ,only mod was a dual cover and stock opening opened up some ,Randy ported it where he thought it would work good for milling ,now the power has more pull ,and in a pass i only need to use about 2/3 throttle now and it chugs right through real smooth with a 28 inch bar ,if i hold it wide open sounds like it is spooling up too high with this bar ,am sure when i throw a 42 on it ,i will need the rest of the throttle ,nice to know i have extra power to spare now i may get one of those little tachs and zip tie it on see what it reads some time ,am kind of curious now 
Yes i have been told saws need to run at wide open throttle in a pass ,i have pulled my muffler cover and checked my plug ,it gets plenty of fuel doing the way i do ,inside the can is oily still


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

I would slow it down with more fuel Brian. Part throttle scares me.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 31, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> But Stihl says the 660 is suppose to be 1 HP stronger.



It is at 9500 RPM.


----------



## treesmith (May 31, 2014)

Can't remember if I've posted this before but anyway, this was the second job for my Mastermind 660 and the first time it wore the 36", believe it or not this tree was planted by the homeowner and only 42 years old, roughly identified as a type of blue gum and rock solid. We used a stock 395 too. I don't think a 461 would have managed it, certainly no where near as well.


----------



## mdavlee (May 31, 2014)

The last 660 I ported ran around 10k in the wood milling about 22" wide. I didn't have to push hard on it with the chain set up. I haven't tached the 046 in the wood milling so I can't compare. I d get more bd ft milled per fuel with the 088 over a 660 or 390.


----------



## Trx250r180 (May 31, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I would slow it down with more fuel Brian. Part throttle scares me.



with the stock muffler cover on it was dryer inside vs the dual port cover ,maybe from running hotter not letting it breathe ,i was trying to quiet it down some at that time ,i put the dual cover back on and with no carb adjustments it is wetter inside the muffler ,piston is nice and oily also,does not feel the slightest bit lean in the cut when i am milling ,but i let the chain feed itself and i have an aux oiler so the chain stays wet ,cutting rounds i go wide open ,milling it does not seem to need to be wide open in the stuff i cut ,just makes more noise and the cut is not as smooth ,trust me i was worried about the part throttle too lean ,maybe the rich oil mix makes up for it


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

Sounds like you have it covered Brian. 

Experience is our best teacher.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

I'm going to do some more break in on the dyno as i want to save the wood for timed testing. I'm thinking now I'll load it to 9000 and let it run till the tank is out. Seems to me it wouldn't be any harder on it than milling till it runs out.


----------



## blsnelling (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'm going to do some more break in on the dyno as i want to save the wood for timed testing.* I'm thinking now I'll load it to 9000 and let it run till the tank is out*. Seems to me it wouldn't be any harder on it than milling till it runs out.


 With a brand new saw?!!! I sure hope you at least richen it up a LOT! You do realize that a chainsaw is not designed for that kind of use, right? Even when milling with a well broken in saw tuned rich, I'd never run it that hard that long.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> With a brand new saw?!!! I sure hope you at least richen it up a LOT! You do realize that a chainsaw is not designed for that kind of use, right? Even when milling with a well broken in saw tuned rich, I'd never run it that hard that long.


9000 seems better than 10 or 11k. Guys take em right out of the box and run em hard and have no trouble. It has some time on it now


----------



## mdavlee (May 31, 2014)

I've run them for a tank, stop refuel and finish the milling cut. I don't think a tank lasted more than 7-10 minutes that way on a ported saw. If I can I refuel them running if I catch it before it runs out. After tank 2 I've been milling with the 046 like that. It seems to be fine with 200 lbs of compression.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

When I was milling this last time, I ran it wot 2 minutes and then let it idle for 1 minute. A bit of overkill maybe, but better safe than sorry.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

I'm just taking a guess here but I'm thinking a saw reaches its max temp in a minute when it's under a load wot. Probably reaches a certain temp then stops climbing. If that's the case what does it matter if it runs 1 minute or 10 minutes under load?


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

I'd guess that depends on ambient temperature. Cool and dry vs hot and humid.


----------



## wyk (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> 9000 seems better than 10 or 11k. Guys take em right out of the box and run em hard and have no trouble. It has some time on it now



Even in milling, you rarely do a full cut on a whole tank at 9K or so unless you hate your saw. Brad is warning you about loading that saw for so much for so long. Saws aren't generators, they aren't designed to run under load for hours. Give the thing SOME rest between loading it.


----------



## redfin (May 31, 2014)

What's the difference between a saw running wot under load for extended periods or a 2 stroke lawn mower cutting the grass? 

I do understand the lawn moweres run at a much lower rpm but each is designed for their rpm and heat tolerance.


----------



## mdavlee (May 31, 2014)

reindeer said:


> Even in milling, you rarely do a full cut on a whole tank at 9K or so unless you hate your saw. Brad is warning you about loading that saw for so much for so long. Saws aren't generators, they aren't designed to run under load for hours. Give the thing SOME rest between loading it.



The last outing one cut was almost 2 whole tanks for my 390. The first time it ran out and died 5' into a 9' long cut. I didn't know what happened and then checked the tank and it was dry. I started stopping in the middle and refueling with it running after that.


----------



## wyk (May 31, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> The last outing one cut was almost 2 whole tanks for my 390. The first time it ran out and died 5' into a 9' long cut. I didn't know what happened and then checked the tank and it was dry. I started stopping in the middle and refueling with it running after that.



Is that how you broke your 390 in?


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

OK guys I like #'s so I'll share some more. I just finished running a tank through the 660. This time I used an inferred temp gun and took temps from the front muffler cover and the jug at the opening in the shroud above the clutch cover.
First 1 min idle. 198°f at the muffler and 164 on the cylinder. Then 1 min under load at 9k.. Muffler 720 cylinder 315. After 2 min under load at 9k. Muffler 770 cylinder 330. 3 min muffler 765 cylinder 295. After 4 min muffler 768 cylinder 305 and the same patter for the remaining time under load. I then idled it for 1 min and the muffler was back to 326 and the cylinder 250°f. So it does reach a Max temp and stay there. Pretty close to my guess. I should play the lottery.


----------



## wyk (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> OK guys I like #'s so I'll share some more. I just finished running a tank through the 660. This time I used an inferred temp gun and took temps from the front muffler cover and the jug at the opening in the shroud above the clutch cover.
> First 1 min idle. 198°f at the muffler and 164 on the cylinder. Then 1 min under load at 9k.. Muffler 720 cylinder 315. After 2 min under load at 9k. Muffler 770 cylinder 330. 3 min muffler 765 cylinder 295. After 4 min muffler 768 cylinder 305 and the same patter for the remaining time under load. I then idled it for 1 min and the muffler was back to 326 and the cylinder 250°f. So it does reach a Max temp and stay there. Pretty close to my guess. I should play the lottery.



Does the sprocket reach a max temp and stay there? Steel is a very poor insulator, and the chain heat goes to the sprocket, goes to the, uh, other sprocket/clutch housing, goes to the bearing, goes to the PTO side shaft...

Pain in the ass to get that temp, tho.


----------



## mdavlee (May 31, 2014)

reindeer said:


> Is that how you broke your 390 in?



It's got about 15 tanks through it now so yeah sort of. It was ported and had one tank on it before milling the other day after machine work.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

reindeer said:


> Does the sprocket reach a max temp and stay there? Steel is a very poor insulator, and the chain heat goes to the sprocket, goes to the, uh, other sprocket/clutch housing, goes to the bearing, goes to the PTO side shaft...
> 
> Pain in the ass to get that temp, tho.


Didn't get those temps. I could probably leave the clutch cover off and get a temp of the clutch and sprocket. Now just ran another thank through. I'm doing one or to more tanks and calling it broken in. Then I'll test again against the 461. Then I have a special front muffler cover for testing different opening sizes and how it affects power and fuel consumption.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Here's a video. It's sunny and beautiful here in Pa today.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

Interesting setup. How are you getting your numbers from that? I see some kind of electronic piece in front of the oil tank


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Interesting setup. How are you getting your numbers from that? I see some kind of electronic piece in front of the oil tank


Scale goes on the platform that reads torque from the twisting action of the hydraulic pump. The hydraulic pump is a variable brake controlled by a needle flow valve. Electronic box is just a shaft rpm sensor. I spent a lot if time and effort making sure the shafts were lined up just right and it payed off because this dyno is smooth running.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

So are you measuring PSI and volume?


----------



## blsnelling (May 31, 2014)

one.man.band said:


> ms461:
> 4.4 kW (5.9 HP) @ 9750 rpm
> 5.0 kW (3.7 lb-ft) @ 7500 rpm
> 
> ...





chadihman said:


> I got 9.32 lb- ft at 7500 rpms on my 461?
> I got 9.67 lb-ft at 6500 rpms on the 660?



Why such a dramatic difference?


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> So are you measuring PSI and volume?


Neither


----------



## Brush Ape (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Saws don't see much 7000 rpm work ..........





chadihman said:


> 9000 seems better than 10 or 11k. Guys take em right out of the box and run em hard and have no trouble.




​


Mastermind said:


> Experience is our best teacher.



Thank you for your service to our community.



chadihman said:


> This time I used an inferred temp gun.........



Infrared. (lol)


----------



## redfin (May 31, 2014)

Oh nose the grammer polees are in the hoose!


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Neither



I guess I'm not understanding then.


----------



## 046 (May 31, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> one.man.band said: ↑
> “ms461:
> 4.4 kW (5.9 HP) @ 9750 rpm
> 5.0 kW (3.7 lb-ft) @ 7500 rpm
> ...



real world performance is what counts .. there's NO way a 461 is out performing 660 .. provided both saws have similar hours and prepped the same


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> I guess I'm not understanding then.


Sorry I was eating dinner with my Kiddo's. 
The pump is just a brake to put a load on the saw. The output side of the pump has a needle valve inline. I can adjust the needle valve closed or open to vary the pressure between the pump and the needle valve. The load on the saw is increased as the needle valve is tightened. Now here's how I get my #'s. The pump is bolted inside a square piece of tubing and a shaft is welded onto the tubing. The shaft and tube were machined to keep the shaft and pump input shaft perfectly in line. I mounted bearings to hold the pump. The driven shaft from the saw has a love joy coupler that mates a Lovejoy on the pump. The pump rotates. A torque arm is attached to the rotating pump housing. I put a digital scale on the end of the torque arm. As the needle valve is closed the pressure increases and loads the saw. The pump tries to twist because its mounted in bearings and pushes on the torque arm and I get a reading on the digital scale. The torque carm is 18" long so I multiply whatever is on the scale by 1.5 and that's ft-lbs. I measure the shaft rpm. 
Torque x rpm/5252= Hp


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

046 said:


> real world performance is what counts .. there's NO way a 461 is out performing 660 .. provided both saws have similar hours and prepped the same


Are you calling me a liar?


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> Why such a dramatic difference?


Something wrong with his #s


----------



## Haywire Haywood (May 31, 2014)

Now we're on the same page. Thanks for the explanation.


----------



## MasterMech (May 31, 2014)

Had it ever been shown that a saw will pick up another 15% in power output during break in? That's a pretty big swing, and one would think the 15cc advantage would at least make the 660 marginally stronger. Broken in or not. If it hasn't picked up noticeably after 4-5 tanks, I'm not sure it ever will.


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Something wrong with his #s



think you mean these numbers.


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

tried to help.......

message 1:

hey chadiham

hope the following will help:

-the attached file is a complete dyno graph of an older 066. i do not have references for an MS461, other than the numbers i posted in the thread.

-some of the posts made in the thread, had some good ideas for you to consider:
heat of the motor can sway results. monitoring temps can stabilze results. the longer the tests take to complete, the less power/TQ the motor will show... just the nature of 2ST's. after about 20 minutes of testing, power/TQ values will differ, decreasing up to 20%.

don't know if you keeping throttle pinned during the tests. be careful, if you are modulating the throttle at the same time turning the valve, it can sway the numbers.

like what you are trying to accomplish here. wish you the best and most accurate results possible.
-----------------------------------

message 2:

looking at the TQ values you posted, they are between 2.2 and 2.5 times
greater than the kwf and dlg values for these saws.

have a suspicion it may be due to the math you are using.

if i am off-base here please disregard, and may be telling you
what you already know, sorry.

don't know how long your torque arm is on your dyno.

maybe your values need to be divided by the torque arm length,
instead of multiplied.

you can easily tell if this is the case.

an easy check of this is to place a known weight directly on the scale.
then suspend it off your arm.

the suspended weight off of the arm,should end up being equal
the weight the scale see when the math is done.

one other thing comes to mind. you have up to 2% loss for each
gear the saw spins. so your reading on the scale now would in
actuality be low for the motor itself. but because the chainsaw spins
a chain with gears, it's a wash, and closer to reality.

another thing is atmospheric corection for weather.don't have time
to give you those tonight, but will give you those if you want them.

hard to do, but make sure your tach is acurate. trigger position is
solid. as mentioned before, it will effect the math.

usually the #'s read are averaged over a few or many tests.


hope it helps.

regards

-------------------------------------


----------



## one.man.band (May 31, 2014)

good luck.


----------



## Wood Doctor (May 31, 2014)

Proof is in the pudding. Here's an MS660 with a 36" bar and a cottonwood. The sawyer shown here is my logger buddy. He's just under 6' tall, has lots of hours on an 046, but he tends to like his 660 better for his work.


----------



## weedkilla (May 31, 2014)

Chadihman, I'm not going to bite on the merits of the beloved 660, you have shown the data that you collected from the saws you have and I'm grateful for that. 
I'm curious if you've tried using the dyno as a fuel tuning tool yet? I'd imagine that if you tune your saw by ear, and consider this the leanest point you are willing to run the saw, are there any points in the rev range you can pick up some power with a richer tune? I have a feeling that the answer will vary for every saw that runs on the dyno, but i'd be happy to be wrong!

This - to me - is the best use of a dyno, as a tuning tool. Whenever two engines are dynoed someone gets butthurt. Whenever a dyno is used to develop one engine - there is a happy person at the end. 
Again, thanks for sharing what you find.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

one.man.band said:


> tried to help.......
> 
> message 1:
> 
> ...


Sorry I was wrong. I have greater torque because the pump shaft is only spinning 1/3 of the saw speed. Shaft rpm x torque/5252 = hp


----------



## weedkilla (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Sorry I was wrong. I have greater torque because the pump shaft is only spinning 1/3 of the saw speed. Shaft rpm x torque/5252 = hp


Can I say - comparing numbers from two dynos is always fraught with danger. Even on production dynos from the same manufacturer. Just consider the numbers from your dyno relevant to the other numbers from your dyno - and with time you will get a feel for what the likely variation is between different runs on different days on your setup. 
With no knowledge of the exact setup and spec of the saws that go to dlg and kwf or the way stihl choose to generate the numbers that they show in their spec sheets (advertising material) none of that is any way relevant to what is being shown here.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Chadihman, I'm not going to bite on the merits of the beloved 660, you have shown the data that you collected from the saws you have and I'm grateful for that.
> I'm curious if you've tried using the dyno as a fuel tuning tool yet? I'd imagine that if you tune your saw by ear, and consider this the leanest point you are willing to run the saw, are there any points in the rev range you can pick up some power with a richer tune? I have a feeling that the answer will vary for every saw that runs on the dyno, but i'd be happy to be wrong!
> 
> This - to me - is the best use of a dyno, as a tuning tool. Whenever two engines are dynoed someone gets butthurt. Whenever a dyno is used to develop one engine - there is a happy person at the end.
> Again, thanks for sharing what you find.


No I haven't used it to tune a saw yet. I. Can slowly load the saw and hear the four stroke to two stroke change.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 31, 2014)

*I call B.S. on Stihl.*


chadihman said:


> Sorry I was wrong.



Now apologize to Stihl.


----------



## weedkilla (May 31, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> *I call B.S. on Stihl.*
> 
> 
> Now apologize to Stihl.


Nope. Wrong. The numbers don't matter - except relevant to each other. This 660 didn't produce more power than this 461, on this dyno, no matter how the numbers are corrected.


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> *I call B.S. on Stihl.*
> 
> 
> Now apologize to Stihl.


What? I was wrong in saying his #s were wrong. My #s are right for my calculations. I have higher torque #s because of the gear reduction to keep my hyd pump happy. 13,000 rpms would never work on a hyd pump. I'll say it again Shaft rpm x torque/5252 = HP. Divide my torque #s by three and that's the engine torque. I'm not looking for a HP # to match Stihls. My dyno was built to compare two saws HP and mod one and retest and find the increase. My 461 wasn't used to bash the 660. Its just the base saw to compare the 660 mods to.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 31, 2014)

I'd own a Stihl MS461 either way. Six horsepower can get a lot of work done.

What's unique about mammals is that if you subject a six horsepower beast to a seven horsepower load, it eventually becomes a seven horsepower beast. If you subject a six horsepower machine to a seven horsepower load, it breaks.


----------



## MS460WOODCHUCK (May 31, 2014)

I just want to see the two saws with 36'' bars buried in wood with the same bar, chain and 7 pin sprocket. That will end the subject of the 461 having more power than the 660 either way it turns out. Does anyone own both models of saws that would be willing to do this?


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

We all know the 461 stock runs stronger than the beloved 460. Stihl says they both have 6hp. ?????


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

I really need that dyno.


----------



## blsnelling (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> We all know the 461 stock runs stronger than the beloved 460.


We do? Define stronger?


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

MS460WOODCHUCK said:


> I just want to see the two saws with 36'' bars buried in wood with the same bar, chain and 7 pin sprocket. That will end the subject of the 461 having more power than the 660 either way it turns out. Does anyone own both models of saws that would be willing to do this?


The 660 would win if my two saws were pushed hard into the wood pulling at 7000 rpms. The 461 would win if the saws were cutting at 8000 rpms or higher.


----------



## Mastermind (May 31, 2014)

Great thread Chad!!!!!!!


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> We do? Define stronger?


Ok... I do... I own both.


----------



## blsnelling (May 31, 2014)

In stock form, probably so. I was thinking ported in my previous reply.


----------



## Brush Ape (May 31, 2014)

chadihman said:


> The 660 would win if my two saws were pushed hard into the wood pulling at 7000 rpms. The 461 would win if the saws were cutting at 8000 rpms or higher.


 
How are you gonna keep it cutting faster with the same bar length as the 660 as the RPM increase?


----------



## chadihman (May 31, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> How are you gonna keep it cutting faster with the same bar length as the 660 as the RPM increase?


I give up.... No more of me on this thread. Let it dwindle away


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I give up.... No more of me on this thread. Let it dwindle away


Don't take it to heart, you made a pretty bold statement, did you expect anything less? Keep doin what you do, everybody loves hearing this stuff even if they don't agree with it.


----------



## CapitaineHaddoc (Jun 1, 2014)

This is an interesting thread, like the first one you write about yours tests, Chad.

Just an idea, but we all know that there's something weird with the 660's specs, they change all around the world, and that's not only because the australian model have the dual port muffler, the european version is also displayed as stronger than the US version. The US one is probably de-tuned, certainly to meet EPA requirements.

The 461 is a more "modern" saw, and i don't think Stihl made less powerfull recent saws than the old ones (there's some exceptions, i know).

Could the 461 be a way more powerful saw than the specs says? Chad say he tuned both saws by ear, so the saw could be stronger than it was brand new (and tuned from factory to meet EPA's requirements). Am i wrong?


----------



## treesmith (Jun 1, 2014)

I'm glad you posted either way, Chadihman, definite food for thought and well worth discussing


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 1, 2014)

Didn't know that they had a regular and a "magnum" 660. Maybe they should call the weaker one a 660 "Yank".


----------



## wyk (Jun 1, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> I'd own a Stihl MS461 either way. Six horsepower can get a lot of work done.
> 
> What's unique about mammals is that if you subject a six horsepower beast to a seven horsepower load, it eventually becomes a seven horsepower beast. If you subject a six horsepower machine to a seven horsepower load, it breaks.



Beasts can break, too...



chadihman said:


> The 660 would win if my two saws were pushed hard into the wood pulling at 7000 rpms. The 461 would win if the saws were cutting at 8000 rpms or higher.



Cutting wood is all about chain speed, all else being equal as far as chain and bar length, oiler, etc are concerned - If your saw can hold more speed, it will cut faster. 

Do not only compare your dyno VS others unless you intend to use that other dyno as a baseline, and even more importantly, do not get caught up in the same thing every one else on AS has - buying in to marketing. Selling a product is 90% marketing, 10% product, so they say. It's not what your product can do but what you can make people think it can do for them. A prime example is fretting over the factory stated horsepower, which could be simply carried over a couple of decades in the 660's case. If your dyno says the 461 is more powerful and produces more torque, and the 461 is faster in 3' wood with a 3' bar than a current ms660, that is a lot of data right there with some merit(assuming the 461 oils that bar...). Is it perfect? Leveling the playing field is nearly impossible, and leaves a big open door for marketing to stuff it's foot into. No - absolutely nothing is perfect. Even the Hubble telescope didn't work quite right when it was first put in to service - and I would think few things on this planet had any more engineering time spent on it than that thing. But what you are doing is important - causing us to rethink marketing speak, engineering speak, and all the data produced by it. Data is important. Having the ability to interpret data is even more important.


----------



## wyk (Jun 1, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> Don't no but something is up.....the last aussie ms660 mag I got this is what's in the book that came with it.....View attachment 353061



Stihl currently say their 660 Magnum produces 7.1HP on their Aussie website. Imagine how much an engineer with a solid marketing background could do to mess with people's heads...


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Do the OZ versions have a different jug?



Probably not but I know where this is heading...

...a build thread


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

I think the thread title could have been a bit less provocative. We're comparing a single 461 against a single 660.
Stihl are probably talking to their lawyers as we speak 

In saying that though I do actually enjoy these types of tests as it is an objective meaurement, not subjective. Without a dyno most people would assume that a simple muffler mod increases power by 20%, just from the sound.


----------



## WKEND LUMBERJAK (Jun 1, 2014)

What are you saying my ears ring for nothing .


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

WKEND LUMBERJAK said:


> What are you saying my ears ring for nothing .



Possibly, but possibly not


----------



## WKEND LUMBERJAK (Jun 1, 2014)

the cheapest mod for a saw is a sharp chain.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

WKEND LUMBERJAK said:


> the cheapest mod for a saw is a sharp chain.



Don't be silly. That's crazy talk...


----------



## WKEND LUMBERJAK (Jun 1, 2014)

MCW said:


> Don't be silly. That's crazy talk...




I know I've been in the Coffee


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

WKEND LUMBERJAK said:


> I know I've been in the Coffee



Do you add hot water or just eat it neat out the tin?


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I give up.... No more of me on this thread. Let it dwindle away



Don't let the Brush Ape get under your skin.......that is his goal. 

What you have done with your creation is nothing short of remarkable. 
To say I am jealous would be an understatement. 



Deets066 said:


> Don't take it to heart, you made a pretty bold statement, did you expect anything less? Keep doin what you do, everybody loves hearing this stuff even if they don't agree with it.



Well said.


----------



## cgraham1 (Jun 1, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Whenever two engines are dynoed someone gets butthurt.


So true...

It's a shame that threads get derailed by those people. Funny thing is, it's usually the same few people who mess up most of the threads...


----------



## bubmiller (Jun 1, 2014)

Can we delete this conversation and replace it with the one that should have happened? I was hoping to learn something valuable from it. All I learned so far is that we're like a bunch of kids arguing cause our feelings were hurt. I don't recall the OP telling anyone they have to sell there 660?? Yet we've made a whole thread trying to discredit his research????

Sent from my GT-I8190 using Tapatalk


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

bubmiller said:


> Can we delete this conversation and replace it with the one that should have happened? I was hoping to learn something valuable from it. All I learned so far is that we're like a bunch of kids arguing cause our feelings were hurt. I don't recall the OP telling anyone they have to sell there 660?? Yet we've made a whole thread trying to discredit his research????
> 
> Sent from my GT-I8190 using Tapatalk



I wouldn't call most of the responses arguing at all. Not one single person on this site should think they can start a thread, about anything, and not have to explain their reasoning to other members. 
I certainly don't agree with people starting to get abusive or those that resort to name calling.


----------



## redfin (Jun 1, 2014)

You could delete and redelete till your fingers fall off. You will still get the same end resullts. Or you could just move to China and let them decide what you read or post on the internet.

Chad, I appreciate your work. I have enjoyed reading all your threads regarding your dyno.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

I'll start a new thread when I get this 660 good and broken in. I agree the title is a bit harsh but I did that to get some conversation. I'm a Stihl head mostly because I work for a dealership that sells and services Stihl products. Manuals, parts, tools, and new saws are at my fingertips. I'll test the stock 660 on the dyno five times against the 461 again and get an average put together for both. I'm guessing the same thing. I already tested a 660 earlier and tested this 660 twice.

I enjoy the conversation. I don't enjoy guys bashing my dyno that have not a clue as to what there talking about. There's really only been a few of those. 
The 660 has its place but from what I'm seeing its not as special as Stihl makes it out to be. Or maybe Stihl should make a bigger 461 as it seems to be a fine saw design.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jun 1, 2014)

Chad, I give you a lot of credit for building and developing the dyno - I'm a lot more impressed with what you've done with it than I expected to be when you first started talking about it. That your results ruffle some feathers should be no surprise, as so much of what gets thrown around here is based on old wive's tales and corporate marketing. 

If you were a manufacturer that had a larger displacement model that was less stressed, studier, heavier but didn't really make any more power than a smaller saw that was more highly tuned, you could never write that in a spec. Look at the reaction you'd get. There is no paradox in a larger displacement saw making the same power, it just means it is under less stress, and that may make perfect sense in a product lineup.

Why do people put so much stock in published manufacturer's specs? Do you think there is some enforcement body that makes sure all these things are true - like some sort of truth-in-advertising requirement? Advertising is deception to make you spend money on things you don't need, to increase the want so it overwhelms the need - and these kinds of specs are purely advertising. Clearly no one cares what lies might be told in the attempt to get your money, as that is what our society is all about. The only thing that keeps such specs at all accurate is the PR risk if their customers discover they are BS, which in turn damages brand loyalty.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'll start a new thread when I get this 660 good and broken in. I agree the title is a bit harsh but I did that to get some conversation. I'm a Stihl head mostly because I work for a dealership that sells and services Stihl products. Manuals, parts, tools, and new saws are at my fingertips. I'll test the stock 660 on the dyno five times against the 461 again and get an average put together for both. I'm guessing the same thing. I already tested a 660 earlier and tested this 660 twice.
> 
> I enjoy the conversation. I don't enjoy guys bashing my dyno that have not a clue as to what there talking about. There's really only been a few of those.
> The 660 has its place but from what I'm seeing its not as special as Stihl makes it out to be. Or maybe Stihl should make a bigger 461 as it seems to be a fine saw design.



They did but it was recalled.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 1, 2014)

Chad, i been saying that for years..........it is MO that the 1128 saws are better balanced with a better power curve........just not quite big enough for big hardwood and long bars. the 660 just dosn't feel as comfortable..........
don't get me wrong, i have and use a ported 660........i just like the 461 better.
i think it was Randy that said the porting is flawed in the 660 as well as some newer big huskys.........he fixes that.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 1, 2014)

A new 660 port timing is way too high for torque. They work fine for a 20" bar but Clint's the only one that runs one like that.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> A new 660 port timing is way too high for torque. They work fine for a 20" bar but Clint's the only one that runs one like that.



Do you think the timing issue is an oversight on Stihl's part or something they needed to do for emissions and/or reliability?
There is also a chance that they deliberately detuned the 660's timing so it wouldn't embarrass the 880. That should keep the conspiracy theorists happy 
With the amount of fuel a 660 goes through I'm surprised they can pass any emission standards anywhere on earth!


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'll start a new thread when I get this 660 good and broken in. I agree the title is a bit harsh but I did that to get some conversation. I'm a Stihl head mostly because I work for a dealership that sells and services Stihl products. Manuals, parts, tools, and new saws are at my fingertips. I'll test the stock 660 on the dyno five times against the 461 again and get an average put together for both. I'm guessing the same thing. I already tested a 660 earlier and tested this 660 twice.
> 
> I enjoy the conversation. I don't enjoy guys bashing my dyno that have not a clue as to what there talking about. There's really only been a few of those.
> The 660 has its place but from what I'm seeing its not as special as Stihl makes it out to be. *Or maybe Stihl should make a bigger 461* as it seems to be a fine saw design.



That is the 661.......

Coming soon. 

Hey, I owe you a woods port.......when are you gonna cash in?


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 1, 2014)

MCW said:


> Do you think the timing issue is an oversight on Stihl's part or something they needed to do for emissions and/or reliability?
> There is also a chance that they deliberately detuned the 660's timing so it wouldn't embarrass the 880. That should keep the conspiracy theorists happy
> With the amount of fuel a 660 goes through I'm surprised they can pass any emission standards anywhere on earth!



I think its been done to help pass EPA stuff along with the pencil eraser sized muffler outlet.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

MCW said:


> Do you think the timing issue is an oversight on Stihl's part or something they needed to do for emissions and/or reliability?
> There is also a chance that they deliberately detuned the 660's timing so it wouldn't embarrass the 880. That should keep the conspiracy theorists happy
> With the amount of fuel a 660 goes through I'm surprised they can pass any emission standards anywhere on earth!



It's an EPA thing Matt.....

I think they raised the exhaust and choked the muffler opening down in an effort to use the muffler can as an afterburner of sorts.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

Matt........you need me to port a 660 jug and send it to you. Your world would be forever changed.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> I think its been done to help pass EPA stuff along with the pencil eraser sized muffler outlet.



I'd think so. Stihl engineers ain't stupid and being German they will have a reason for everything they do. I can't see the port timing of a 660 being an oversight on Stihl's part.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Matt........you need me to port a 660 jug and send it to you. Your world would be forever changed.



No it wouldn't as no matter how well you port a 660 it will still balance like a pig and use truckloads of fuel  I'll stick with my 390XP thanks which is the reason I sold my 660's.
I do have a Chinese 660 in the shed though...


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

I agree that the 660 is an unbalanced saw.......I forgot that you moved to the 390XP.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 1, 2014)

chinese?


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

treeslayer2003 said:


> chinese?



Two Chinese companies are making 660 copies now. In typical Chinese fashion the carby needed replacing with an OEM Walbro. Don't laugh though, it's the best running stock 660 I've seen. Obviously not hamstrung by the EPA 
Don't flame me though as I was asked to test one by a Chinese company I do business with which isn't the manufacturer. I did have to pay for it but got a bargain.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 1, 2014)

thats interesting Matt. i don't doubt it.........mine was a pure pig as stock, a real let down. but then i thought the same of a new 385. i guess we can just blame the epa for it all lol.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

treeslayer2003 said:


> thats interesting Matt. i don't doubt it.........mine was a pure pig as stock, a real let down. but then i thought the same of a new 385. i guess we can just blame the epa for it all lol.



The bastards...
Tree hugging hippies...


----------



## wyk (Jun 1, 2014)

MCW said:


> I think the thread title could have been a bit less provocative. We're comparing a single 461 against a single 660.
> Stihl are probably talking to their lawyers as we speak
> 
> In saying that though I do actually enjoy these types of tests as it is an objective meaurement, not subjective. Without a dyno most people would assume that a simple muffler mod increases power by 20%, just from the sound.



Some say because women have two bottoms that they are well in excess of 20% more powerful...


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 1, 2014)

LMAO.......more powerful than a 425 cat if ya make um mad lol.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

reindeer said:


> Some say because women have two bottoms that they are well in excess of 20% more powerful...



I was simply talking about making the hole bigger!


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> That is the 661.......
> 
> Coming soon.
> 
> Hey, I owe you a woods port.......when are you gonna cash in?


So sorry Randy. I'm in no hurry and I'm torn between sending my 261 cm, 361, 460, or my 461. I have a 361 in a box. All parts are there just a basket case that I haven't made time for yet. I also have a 460 basket case.


----------



## wyk (Jun 1, 2014)

MCW said:


> I was simply talking about making the hole bigger!



Don't be modest. Sure, you've made a few holes bigger, alright...


----------



## treesmith (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'm torn between sending my 261 cm, 361, 460, or my 461


Decisions, decisions, nice problem to have


----------



## wyk (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I agree that the 660 is an unbalanced saw.......I forgot that you moved to the 390XP.



I don't mind the balance on a 660. I just get tired of the white finger after using one all day. That thing seems like it was designed to vibrate.


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 1, 2014)

MCW said:


> Without a dyno most people would assume that a simple muffler mod increases power by 20%, just from the sound.



..........or the, "_Feel_." Even a Mighty Brush Ape feels better on some days than others.

To judge an engine's performance by how good it feels is too esoteric. Some guys only like a vibrating leaking old Mac. Some want it smooth. When you are young and dumb and full of rum, you're a hammer when everything looks like a nail. Everybody appreciates Chad Dynoman's contribution. Strap on some of them $200 clones on that thang and see how many hard working tree men are willing to buy Chinese junk.

And don't ever think I try to exclude _myself_ from being a dumbass. I've got more stuff stuck and blowed up more stuff than a regular guy will ever aspire to.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> So sorry Randy. I'm in no hurry and I'm torn between sending my 261 cm, 361, 460, or my 461. I have a 361 in a box. All parts are there just a basket case that I haven't made time for yet. I also have a 460 basket case.



No hurry here either. I just want to pay when I owe. 

I'm sure you understand that.


----------



## dl5205 (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> ...So sorry Randy. I'm in no hurry and I'm torn between sending my 261 cm, 361, 460, or my 461...



Not to derail further, nor am I trying to tell you what to do, but I would port the 261. From observation, not from experience, I think a ported pro 50cc saw becomes most folks "Go-To" saw. It appears as though Randy does a fair job on the 261, plus you'll have the M-Tune.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

I'd have to agree. 

My MS261C-M is the one saw I have that will not be sold. 

And of course there are a couple others......for personal reasons.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I'd have to agree.
> 
> My MS261C-M is the one saw I have that will not be sold.
> 
> And of course there are a couple others......for personal reasons.


Ok 261cm it is. I'll ship it tomorrow if you want it now.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

I'd rather set a date.....

Have you seen this thread? 

http://www.arboristsite.com/communi...ling-system-for-saw-work.258135/#post-4834049


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

August 28th is open.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> August 28th is open.


That sounds good to me. I'm in no hurry.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 1, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> August 28th is open.



LOL "Strategic Aluminum Removal (SAR) by appointment only"


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

Sept 1st is now open.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> LOL "Strategic Aluminum Removal (SAR) by appointment only"




I gotta use that.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

Book me Randy


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 1, 2014)

Done.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 1, 2014)

IDK bout that, 288 was the last husky i liked.........all in what ya like.
and yes, i consider most 288s stronger than MOST 064s....but not all. and yes i still prefer the fit of stihl.


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'll do that test if I can find a 3 ft log. I'd bet my paycheck that the 461 would still win.



How much do you make?


----------



## cgraham1 (Jun 1, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> How much do you make?


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> How much do you make?


Enough. Blessed


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Enough. Blessed



And when you start making and selling saw dynos you'll make a few extra dollars as well


----------



## treesmith (Jun 1, 2014)

The next test can be a brand new 461 and a broken in and ported 660, just to even it up a little


----------



## fossil (Jun 1, 2014)

It's always nice to see some data to go along with opinions. Good work!


----------



## fossil (Jun 1, 2014)

I haven't been following your work but have you done any testing on common muffler mods to see what kind of gains can be had there? It seems like a very common mod that people make to their saws but I haven't seen any testing or timing to validate gains.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

fossil said:


> I haven't been following your work but have you done any testing on common muffler mods to see what kind of gains can be had there? It seems like a very common mod that people make to their saws but I haven't seen any testing or timing to validate gains.



The gains vary between saw models. Some mufflers already flow enough for a standard saw.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 1, 2014)

fossil said:


> I haven't been following your work but have you done any testing on common muffler mods to see what kind of gains can be had there? It seems like a very common mod that people make to their saws but I haven't seen any testing or timing to validate gains.


 Yes A 460 loves a good mm a 461 not much gain. A 361 lots


----------



## singinwoodwackr (Jun 1, 2014)

treesmith said:


> Sorry for derail
> 
> Just for comparison, these janka scale(hardness) figure are taken from several woodfloor supply companies so comparable to standing dead trees, a very common reason to cut it down
> 
> ...


dang! I think I'd be running carbide chain on some of that stuff.


----------



## Trx250r180 (Jun 1, 2014)

Randy need one of those ticket machines in the lobby of the dmv


----------



## singinwoodwackr (Jun 1, 2014)

My .02...

Bought my first 066 in '92 to replace a borrowed 031 and pair with my 266xp that I'd had for a couple years. I was working on a firewood crew that mainly used 266xps until the 044s came out. Most of us used 24" bars, some of the taller guys, 28s as we did 95% of our cutting standing up (wore out tips fairly fast ). This had mainly to do with the procedure of taking an Almond tree apart. Trees were Almond with branches ranging from 4-10" and average stumps @ 12-18", sometimes smaller. Only one 75yr old orchard had trees in the 25-30" stump range and branches to 16-18".
We all got paid by the cord cut/split (maul), wood piled at the stump and brush piled in the middle of 2 rows of trees so speed was all we cared about.
The 266s were much faster than the 031 I also had and about equal with the 044s. I preferred the Husky to the Stihl so kept my 266. All saws stock, single port muff...nobody ever thought of modding 
One guy bought one of the 'new' 066s and brought it out to compare with the other saws used in the orchard. (saw was stock with dual port, Magnum 'red-eye', 24" bar, comp chisel chain, round file, 8t sprocket.) Wow, there simply was no comparison between it and any of the other saws, none. It would zip through the smaller hard Almond branches in fractions of seconds and blow through the thicker stuff equally faster than anything else we had. Weight difference? you bet but those who got the 66s got used to it fairly quickly. I could keep 2 brushers humping where one used to suffice. 

One day I bashed in the front muff cover and had to pick up a replacement. All the shop had was the flat cover (no port) so, not knowing anything about muffler differences, bought it and installed. The saw wouldn't even run...duh. Retuned it and it was a complete dog, slower cutting then my 266xp. WTF?
That's when I learned the difference. Stihl's spec sheet at the time put the Mag dual port red-eye at 7.8hp and the 'other' model with SP at 7.0hp. (I still have the sheet).

I've never used the 'newer' 660s so can't comment on it but there was absolutely no comparison between an 044 and an 066 DP Mag back then.


----------



## MCW (Jun 1, 2014)

singinwoodwackr said:


> My .02...
> 
> Bought my first 066 in '92 to replace a borrowed 031 and pair with my 266xp that I'd had for a couple years. I was working on a firewood crew that mainly used 266xps until the 044s came out. Most of us used 24" bars, some of the taller guys, 28s as we did 95% of our cutting standing up (wore out tips fairly fast ). This had mainly to do with the procedure of taking an Almond tree apart. Trees were Almond with branches ranging from 4-10" and average stumps @ 12-18", sometimes smaller. Only one 75yr old orchard had trees in the 25-30" stump range and branches to 16-18".
> We all got paid by the cord cut/split (maul), wood piled at the stump and brush piled in the middle of 2 rows of trees so speed was all we cared about.
> ...



Interesting about the almonds. I've cut a lot of them myself and they are tough to cut. Not to mention all the dust in the bark from constant machinery movement through orchards. Saws doing this sort of work get a lot harder workout than logging as it's non stop, all day. Nowadays orchards are cleared with an excavator/dozer/loader but smaller saws are still used for pruning and canopy management. 
You're also correct regarding "saw fitness". Once you spend some long days on the bigger saws it all gets easier.


----------



## Deleted member 83629 (Jun 1, 2014)

put a poulan wildthing on the dyno i dare yee.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 2, 2014)

jakewells said:


> put a poulan wildthing on the dyno i dare yee.


That would probably beat the 660 also!


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 2, 2014)

Don't underestimate the difference a dual port makes on a big saw like that, it has to breath.

Singin states w/o the dual port it was a dog. I think we are on to something.


----------



## LegDeLimber (Jun 2, 2014)

Chadiham: have you noted the screw settings on the flow limit screw?
Let's say that you mount one saw and set the dyno to keep the saw at 
a semi-arbitrary rpm like 9000 while the saw is at WOT.
Now without touching the dynos settings, shut down and put the other saw in
and run it up to WOT and see what rpm it's delivering.

Have you been counting turns of the flow restricter and noting them (like carb screws)
and making any comparison between saws?

With folks talking about a chain & bar load, this would be as close as you could get 
to an equaly loaded run, right?
No way to say that saw "A" or "B" got a knotty or rotten spot of wood
or even if the same chain was run on both saws, 
It might not have been sharpened as well for each saws cuts.
No saying that one bar had a better groove, etc....


----------



## KG441c (Jun 2, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I really need that dyno.


Now were talking!!


----------



## chadihman (Jun 2, 2014)

jakewells said:


> put a poulan wildthing on the dyno i dare yee.


send it.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 2, 2014)

LegDeLimber said:


> Chadiham: have you noted the screw settings on the flow limit screw?
> Let's say that you mount one saw and set the dyno to keep the saw at
> a semi-arbitrary rpm like 9000 while the saw is at WOT.
> Now without touching the dynos settings, shut down and put the other saw in
> ...



The only problem I see with keeping the needle the same and swapping saws is the oil gets warm and pushes through the needle valve easier. Good Idea though!

Here's how I do it. I put the first saw on it and let it idle for a minute then load it and blip the throttle a bunch of times. I then load the saw at 9000 rpms till it reaches max operating temp. If you read post #157 you'll see the saw reaches a max temp and maintains after a minute of load. I then get a video camera set up to view rpms and the torque reading on the scale. The first test is at 10,000 rpm. I hold the saw WOT and set the loaded rpm at 10,000 then let off the throttle and the scale is zeroed. I then hold the throttle WOT for 30 seconds or so. Then while I'm holding the throttle WOT I set the loaded rpm to 9500 rpms with the hyd needle valve. I check to make sure the scale returns to zero then I hold it WOT for 30 seconds. I continue this pattern for every 500 rpms all the way down to 6500 rpms. Then I watch the video with a pen and note paper ready. I let the video play till I see and here when I'm setting the loaded rpm then I pause the video and slide the video counter through the 30 second rpm pull and record the scale and rpm #'s. It works really slick and leaves a page of chick scratch that I then start calculating all the #'s to get torque and Hp at every 500 rpms from 10,000 -6500 rpms.


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 2, 2014)

opcorn:

Carry on.. Just subscribing


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 2, 2014)

How does your 460 fair against 660s Dex?


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 2, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> How does your 460 fair against 660s Dex?



It only ran against one, but it beat it  

The 441's did as well


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 2, 2014)

A 71cc MS441 beat a 91cc MS660?

Bullsh!t I say........


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 2, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> A 71cc MS441 beat a 91cc MS660?
> 
> Bullsh!t I say........





MasterMech was there as well  Seen with our own eyes! LOL...


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 2, 2014)

All in the chain then....


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 2, 2014)

My brother ran his MS 460 today, the first time since I removed the carb limiters, installed the dual port muffler cover and a HD-2 filter. He loved it. Said that it not only ran stronger than it ever did before, but the trigger response was noticeably better.

I was happy he liked it, and that square file chain doesn't hurt either.


----------



## Wood Doctor (Jun 2, 2014)

With that dual port muffler on board, you have to enrichen that fuel mixture. I noticed that immediately with my 046. Seemed like the engine was going to tear itself to pieces with over 14,000 RPM and idling was rough. The saw just plain ran too hot under load. After some adjustments, it settled down.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 2, 2014)

DexterDay said:


> It only ran against one, but it beat it
> 
> The 441's did as well


And my 066 beats my 088 


In small wood! Throw the big bars on and see if a 441 will beat a 660


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 2, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> And my 066 beats my 088
> 
> 
> In small wood! Throw the big bars on and see if a 441 will beat a 660



That was a 24" Cant... I don't call 24" wood "small" wood. At least around here anyways


----------



## MCW (Jun 2, 2014)

DexterDay said:


> That was a 24" Cant... I don't call 24" wood "small" wood. At least around here anyways
> 
> View attachment 353310
> View attachment 353311



Are you talking stock saws or modified? If a stock 441 can beat a stock 660 in a 24" cant then you need to lean on the 660 a bit more  
Sometimes the extra torque of the larger saws needs to be muscled a bit to be noticed.


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 2, 2014)

All your MS660's nothing but junk. Send 'em to Brush Ape for proper disposal. Send your paychecks too.


----------



## Deleted member 83629 (Jun 2, 2014)

they have a purpose either in big wood or a door stop a 441 would be big enough for my firewood needs ms660 seems overkill to me unless you got some monsters you are cutting.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 2, 2014)

24" bar is 70cc territory all day


----------



## KG441c (Jun 2, 2014)

Do u think a ported 362c will pull a 24" b/c?


----------



## MCW (Jun 2, 2014)

jakewells said:


> they have a purpose either in big wood or a door stop a 441 would be big enough for my firewood needs ms660 seems overkill to me unless you got some monsters you are cutting.



You'll also need to carry triple the fuel to run a 660 over a 441


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 2, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> 24" bar is 70cc territory all day


That's a 28" bar barely peeking out of that Cant.

A 28" ES Light is only 26" after the Dawgs


Yes. A ported 460 and 441 took a 660's lunch money..


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 2, 2014)

Never ran that peticular model, but have run an 039 and 036 with 24" bars stock. Worked fine, but now that I have many other larger saws I only run 20" on 60cc saws.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 2, 2014)

DexterDay said:


> That's a 28" bar barely peeking out of that Cant.
> 
> A 28" ES Light is only 26" after the Dawgs
> 
> ...


Yeah I don't doubt it a bit, especially if mastermind built them. But, like I said before drop them in some big wood and the 660 will shine. Will a 441 even oil a 42" bar? I doubt it.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 2, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> Yeah I don't doubt it a bit, especially if mastermind built them. But, like I said before drop them in some big wood and the 660 will shine. Will a 441 even oil a 42" bar? I doubt it.



A 660 don't oil a 42" very well. I mod the oil pumps too.


----------



## treesmith (Jun 2, 2014)

I'm looking forward to putting your 461 against your 660, Randy


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 2, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> A 660 don't oil a 42" very well. I mod the oil pumps too.


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

DexterDay said:


> Yes. A ported 460 and 441 took a 660's lunch money..



If a ported 70cc saw can't beat a stock 660 then you'd want your money back from the porter 
It's not exactly a secret that this occurs in the saw world.


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> A 660 don't oil a 42" very well. I mod the oil pumps too.



HO oiler keeps up but that isn't fitted standard to most US 660's.


----------



## cgraham1 (Jun 3, 2014)

redfin said:


> You could delete and redelete till your fingers fall off. You will still get the same end results.


Or you could just use "ignore" for the people you don't want to hear from. I currently use it on two members and it makes threads so much more pleasurable for me to follow.


----------



## Deleted member 83629 (Jun 3, 2014)

stihl should have use a manual oiler override like echo did on there larger saws, a little extra oil will not hurt especially in hard seasoned wood.


----------



## singinwoodwackr (Jun 3, 2014)

MCW said:


> HO oiler keeps up but that isn't fitted standard to most US 660's.


yup, my 066 with the HO oiler puts out more than needed with a 36" bar...haven't been able to try the 42 yet


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 3, 2014)

How's the 395s stock oiler? 

Ian


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> How's the 395s stock oiler?
> 
> Ian



Awesome. Husky have kept the outputs of their oilers right at the pointy end. They'll oil a 42" bar easily. Not sure what they'd be maxxed out at but it's certainly more than 42".


----------



## Stihlman441 (Jun 3, 2014)

This is interesting a *ported *461 V *ported* 660 same 25'' bar and chain on both same wood.
Both 8 pin sprockets and agressive .038'' raker chain.

461


660


----------



## lone wolf (Jun 3, 2014)

2 second difference what do you come up with?


----------



## KG441c (Jun 3, 2014)

MCW said:


> Awesome. Husky have kept the outputs of their oilers right at the pointy end. They'll oil a 42" bar easily. Not sure what they'd be maxxed out at but it's certainly more than 42".


Does anyone know if the 461r oil pump piston will fit the 362? They r different part numbers. Also wondering if u shorten the oil control screw on the regular output oiler if it will increase flow?


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

MCW said:


> HO oiler keeps up but that isn't fitted standard to most US 660's.





singinwoodwackr said:


> yup, my 066 with the HO oiler puts out more than needed with a 36" bar...haven't been able to try the 42 yet





Haywire Haywood said:


> How's the 395s stock oiler?
> 
> Ian



Not in hardwoods it didn't on mine. 

A HO oiler on a 460 will oil a 36" about the same. 

It will drip off a 36".


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 3, 2014)

MCW said:


> I wouldn't call most of the responses arguing at all. Not one single person on this site should think they can start a thread, about anything, and not have to explain their reasoning to other members.
> I certainly don't agree with people starting to get abusive or those that resort to name calling.



Take a page out of this master's playbook.

Nobody is above the long arm of the law, and even that is subject to scrutiny by your peers. MCW and our brethren down under use aplomb on these web exchanges. Look into it and you'll even perceive what I'm on about. Truth is the reason the Brush Ape silhouette darkens your door.

Professionals never act like sheep. Leaders accept challenge.


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> Not in hardwoods it didn't on mine.
> 
> A HO oiler on a 460 will oil a 36" about the same.
> 
> It will drip off a 36".



Do you mean a 395XP won't keep up or a 660 on a 42" bar? Both the 390XP's I've owned have had sufficient oil in our hardwoods for 42" bars and the 395's are certainly no worse.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

MCW said:


> Do you mean a 395XP won't keep up or a 660 on a 42" bar? Both the 390XP's I've owned have had sufficient oil in our hardwoods for 42" bars and the 395's are certainly no worse.



660 wouldn't to suit me. The 390 and 385 doesn't put out enough for a 36" to me. I like the 395/3120 oil amount to flow.


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

KG441c said:


> Does anyone know if the 461r oil pump piston will fit the 362? They r different part numbers. Also wondering if u shorten the oil control screw on the regular output oiler if it will increase flow?



Can't help there sorry


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> 660 wouldn't to suit me. The 390 and 385 doesn't put out enough for a 36" to me. I like the 395/3120 oil amount to flow.



Must have different oilers on our 390's then. I'm normally pretty fussy with oil output on longer bars but it looks like I may have met my match 
Wanting the oil output of a 3120 with the oil boost lever on isn't very environmentally friendly! You won't have any bar and chain wear although you may start killing penguins in the antarctic.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

MCW said:


> Must have different oilers on our 390's then. I'm normally pretty fussy with oil output on longer bars but it looks like I may have met my match
> Wanting the oil output of a 3120 with the oil boost lever on isn't very environmentally friendly! You won't have any bar and chain wear although you may start killing penguins in the antarctic.



There's not different oilers listed. I was milling with the 36" also. That may have been part of it. It didn't burn the paint off but wasn't real wet on the drive links.


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> There's not different oilers listed. I was milling with the 36" also. That may have been part of it. It didn't burn the paint off but wasn't real wet on the drive links.



Ah ha. Milling is a whole different animal. I don't have a mill setup for under 42" so only use the 3120 when milling. The old 3120 will be tested soon. Have a couple of big Redgum logs that will use every inch of the 55" cut. In fact I'll have to trim the sides off one of the logs so the mill can actually fit...
I might give the 390XP a run as a sidekick just to trim it up


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

It was adequate cross cutting the logs. I would like a little more though.


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> It was adequate cross cutting the logs. I would like a little more though.



More the merrier


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

That bar is .050" also so that may be art of the problem.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Got four more tanks through the 660 and last night I tested the 660, 461 and a ported 361. I'll post all the #'s later but the 461 still has the 660 beat until below 7500 rpms. Here's the really cool part about last nights testing. The ported 361 had more HP than the 660 at 10,000 rpms and was just a tad under the 461 at 10,000 rpms. That 361 has lots of torque in the high rpm range. That will keep it pulling through wood at a higher rpm which relates to faster cutting. It doesn't have the torque down low like the 660 or 461 most likely due to lower cc's


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 3, 2014)

Chad, thanks for more excellent information. Kind of what I would have thought, a ported saw for the "fastest" work, and a big cube saw for a long bar that won't get hung up, and something in the middle if you are only using one.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

The ported 361 would beat the 660 in wood under 24". Put a large sprocket on the 660 to get the chain speed up and the 660 in its sweet HP spot and the 660 wins. Its all about sizing the sprocket, bar size and chain to match the saws max HP rpm range.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 3, 2014)

You would think that Chad. 

I can't get those results though. 

The high rpm screamers will win in a cant race......even if the big saws are geared up. 

It's weird. 

Of course, my chains leave a lot to be desired.......and that may well be why things don't work out as planned.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> You would think that Chad.
> 
> I can't get those results though.
> 
> ...


Interesting! Sure is wierd


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 3, 2014)

It's about having the chain, saw, gear, and operator all working together. 

I'm a mile behind on chain......and as an operator I suck.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

I sure would like to have another stock 660 to test to make sure this ones not a dud. What are the chances I tested two duds?


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I sure would like to have another stock 660 to test to make sure thus ones not a dud. What are the chances I tested two duds



If they're newer ones wit the stihl/ks cylinder I don't doubt your results.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> If they're newer ones wit the stihl/ks cylinder I don't doubt your results.


Hmm..... Maybe Stihl made that later 660's turds to make the 661 shine.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

BTW the 361 was ported by Brad


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Hmm..... Maybe Stihl made that later 660's turds to make the 661 shine.



Maybe so. Or mahle didn't like what they wanted to pay for cylinders any more.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 3, 2014)

Brad's 361's are serious runners. I ran one he did for Nik that was a beast.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Wow! I didn't think this thread would make it 17 pages. I think the title got the Stihl heads attention and the Stihl haters wanted to throw more BS into it.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Brad's 361's are serious runners. I ran one he did for Nik that was a beast.


That's the one I tested. It belongs to me now


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 3, 2014)

It's missing midgets and pie though......


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Nic is such a generous guy. He posted on Facebook he was selling and giving the money to charity. He noted Brad had ported it and I was quick to BIN. Thanks Nic!!!! Aka fatguy


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 3, 2014)

I'd like to see the 660 tested with a DP cover.


----------



## singinwoodwackr (Jun 3, 2014)

yea, IMO the 660/066 is wasting time/effort w/o a DP muff. The difference between the two is ridiculous.

oh...did somebody kill the 461 vid? sabotage?


----------



## cgraham1 (Jun 3, 2014)

I owned two stock 361s and I hated them. Maybe I need to find a ported one to try out.


----------



## treesmith (Jun 3, 2014)

I'm curious as to how much force/resistance is put on the saws to bring down the RPMs and if it's the same for each saw, just trying to get it through my head


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> I'd like to see the 660 tested with a DP cover.


Patience grasshopper


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

treesmith said:


> I'm curious as to how much force/resistance is put on the saws to bring down the RPMs and if it's the same for each saw, just trying to get it through my head


I'll try and help you understand. I need to know what you do and don't understand.


----------



## Trx250r180 (Jun 3, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Patients grasshopper




Ok how bout a triple port test then


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 3, 2014)

That's the only thing that kept me from being a doctor... lack of patients.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Trx250r180 said:


> Ok how bout a triple port test then


I have a variable opening muffler cover that I'm going to test. I'll post what size opening in the front cover does best.


----------



## cgraham1 (Jun 3, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> That's the only thing that kept me from being a doctor... lack of patients.


I wasn't gonna say anything.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> That's the only thing that kept me from being a doctor... lack of patients.


Fixed it. I'm a not so smart operator using a not so smart phone. Darn auto spell.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 3, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Fixed it. I'm a not so smart operator using a not so smart phone. Darn auto spell.



Yep, gets me all the time. Now on with the quad port testing.....


----------



## MCW (Jun 3, 2014)

When I saw that the 361 beat the 660 I thought you've got to have the world's biggest dud of a 660. Then you said the 361 was ported and I gave a sigh of relief


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 3, 2014)

I know these request for test must get to be pain in the A**, but I would love to see an older Stihl air filter tested against the new HD-2, both with and w/o the pre filter.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 3, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> MCW and our brethren down under use aplomb on these web exchanges.
> Professionals never act like sheep. Leaders accept challenge.



If you lived this close to New Zealand you would understand why acting like a sheep isn't something to take on lightly.


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 3, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> If you lived this close to New Zealand you would understand why acting like a sheep isn't something to take on lightly.



We don't take it lightly either. lol. There's nothing sheepish about any of Stihls line of Pro saws. I wouldn't be as effective without them. I was going to hold out for a M-Tronic MS461 model to be offered until after my next MS261C-M gets delivered. I'm just going to order one now and see what the buzz is about.


(However subtle in it's calculated artifice, Pro Stihl Operators/Rock Stars have a highly keen sense for the ubiquitous _Agenda_.)


----------



## MasterMech (Jun 3, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> I know these request for test must get to be pain in the A**, but I would love to see an older Stihl air filter tested against the new HD-2, both with and w/o the pre filter.


Correct me if I'm wrong Chad, but I believe that's been done.


----------



## treesmith (Jun 3, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'll try and help you understand. I need to know what you do and don't understand.



Early mornings and late nights don't help  so the force on the scale is the datum, yeah, gotcha, that is the reference point which tells you the resistance, which gives the figures for calculating the torque/HP, as opposed to being a unrelated variable. I was just thinking the system through in my head. I know if I'd bought a stock US 660 I'd be furious with those EPA muppets


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 3, 2014)

I must have missed it, what were the results?


----------



## dl5205 (Jun 3, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> It's missing midgets and pie though......




It's early in June yet, but this is in the running for "Post of the Month".


----------



## Wood Doctor (Jun 3, 2014)

dl5205 said:


> It's early in June yet, but this is in the running for "Post of the Month".


Pi = 355/113. That's the best I can do with two numbers that I can remember. No one has been able to beat that approximation. Good luck.


----------



## dl5205 (Jun 3, 2014)

...and 4/3 pi r cubed is the volume of a sphere...

It was the cool ol' midget I really liked.


----------



## treesmith (Jun 3, 2014)

3.1415927

I have no idea why I remember that 20 years later


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 3, 2014)

Pies are ROUND, not square.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 3, 2014)

The love of pie is irrational and has no end.


----------



## MasterMech (Jun 3, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> I must have missed it, what were the results?


The HD2 is worth a bit of power, no filter is worth a bit more. Lol


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

Chad did you test a max flow also?


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 3, 2014)

Chad, You should give up your day job and test saws all day to feed our addiction


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> Chad, You should give up your day job and test saws all day to feed our addiction


If it paid I'd dyno and mod saws all day.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 3, 2014)

Yeah, I just get to work on mine and most of my buddies for free


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> Chad did you test a max flow also?


Yeah the max flow didn't do anything for power with the white,green and cover or no cover vs the HD2 although after an hour of sawing might test different. The max flow will handle dirt better before cutting air flow down.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

MasterMech said:


> The HD2 is worth a bit of power, no filter is worth a bit more. Lol


Hd2 is better flowing than the HD and will make a difference i especially in a muffler modded saw or a ported saw. Id say the max flow is as close to nothing as possible and I didn't see any difference from HD2 to max flow. Hd2 will handle it's needs.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

I don't like how the HD 2 packs with dust or needs an extra per filter to an already stupid expensive filter. I run max flow now on both stihls.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> I don't like how the HD 2 packs with dust or needs an extra per filter to an already stupid expensive filter. I run max flow now on both stihls.


I have really been thinking of doing the same, the hd2 requires a LOT of cleaning.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 3, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> I don't like how the HD 2 packs with dust or needs an extra per filter to an already stupid expensive filter. I run max flow now on both stihls.


Yeah the pleated HD2 has more surface area but seems the sawdust packs in the pleats pretty good. I have to bang em out pretty hard to get it clean and hope I don't damage it.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 3, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> I have really been thinking of doing the same, the hd2 requires a LOT of cleaning.



If you do a lot of cutting in a day its worth it. Basically a go cut and clean when you get home.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 3, 2014)

I usually always brush the filter clean every tank, but with the hd2 you have to take them off, tap, brush, or alternative method. 
Ok I think I just talked myself into a max flow. Haha or maybe it was cad.
What color filters do you guys run on the max flow?


----------



## Dieselshawn (Jun 3, 2014)

I did a muffler opening test with my mastermind 260 on my dyno not long ago.

There is 2 openings, one in front which is a 1" long, 1/4" wide oval hole which was my first muffler mod from several years ago and Randy's neatly welded deflector with a 1/2" by 1/2" square hole on the recoil side.

Basically a dual port ms260 muffler.

I made a tin cover for both openings and dyno'd saw to see which the saw runs best with.

It runs best with both open.


----------



## MasterMech (Jun 4, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Yeah the pleated HD2 has more surface area but seems the sawdust packs in the pleats pretty good. I have to bang em out pretty hard to get it clean and hope I don't damage it.





Deets066 said:


> I have really been thinking of doing the same, the hd2 requires a LOT of cleaning.




None of that is the filter's fault. That's one thing I love about my 261 and 441 over my old 460s and the 034. Tank after tank after tank and still have clean filters.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 4, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> I usually always brush the filter clean every tank, but with the hd2 you have to take them off, tap, brush, or alternative method.
> Ok I think I just talked myself into a max flow. Haha or maybe it was cad.
> What color filters do you guys run on the max flow?



I usually run green. They're a little more open pores and still filter the fine stuff.


----------



## MCW (Jun 4, 2014)

It's interesting how northern hemisphere timbers vary compared to ours in Australia. I've had absolutely no issues with HD2's packing out with chips as our drier, harder woodchips tends to drop clean out of the filter cleats once the saw stops. I have however had major issues with unoiled Husky filters passing fines in our wood when you guys in the north haven't in your timber species.


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 4, 2014)

MCW said:


> It's interesting how northern hemisphere timbers vary compared to ours in Australia. I've had absolutely no issues with HD2's packing out with chips as our drier, harder woodchips tends to drop clean out of the filter cleats once the saw stops. I have however had major issues with unoiled Husky filters passing fines in our wood when you guys in the north haven't in your timber species.


I get some fines sneaking through, but don't worry too much about it.. You really gotta put a lot of hours on a saw to see the measurable wear from ingesting some sawdust.. Most guys just don't put that many hours on a machine...


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 4, 2014)

MCW said:


> It's interesting how northern hemisphere timbers vary compared to ours in Australia. I've had absolutely no issues with HD2's packing out with chips as our drier, harder woodchips tends to drop clean out of the filter cleats once the saw stops. I have however had major issues with unoiled Husky filters passing fines in our wood when you guys in the north haven't in your timber species.



When milling the small chips that are still a bit wet pack up an HD 2 pretty quickly. The huskies will filter everything out that it makes for me milling.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 4, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> When milling the small chips that are still a bit wet pack up an HD 2 pretty quickly. The huskies will filter everything out that it makes for me milling.


Depends on the husky for me, my 346 and 562 are terrible unless they have a clean smear of grease where the filter meets the air box. Saying that - they can easily do a day without cleaning, so it's easy to keep them set up that way.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 4, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Here's the really cool part about last nights testing. The ported 361 had more HP than the 660 at 10,000 rpms and was just a tad under the 461 at 10,000 rpms. That 361 has lots of torque in the high rpm range.


I'd like to see that saw compared to a 562XP. I'd also love to see a dyno graph of that saw. I think you'd find that it makes good useable torque and HP from 8K, all the way to probably 12K or more.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 4, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> I'd like to see that saw compared to a 562XP. I'd also love to see a dyno graph of that saw. I think you'd find that it makes good useable torque and HP from 8K, all the way to probably 12K or more.


Your a computer guy Brad. Come up with a simple to use graph that I can input my #s and I'll have a graph for all to see.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 4, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Your a computer guy Brad. Come up with a simple to use graph that I can input my #s and I'll have a graph for all to see.



Send me the numbers and rpms.


----------



## MCW (Jun 4, 2014)

Hedgerow said:


> I get some fines sneaking through, but don't worry too much about it.. You really gotta put a lot of hours on a saw to see the measurable wear from ingesting some sawdust.. Most guys just don't put that many hours on a machine...



With some of what I cut we're not only talking about wood dust, we're talking about real dust as well. I've posted photos before of windbreak falling on corporate farms where constant machinery movement means the trees are packed with dust from the tracks. 95% of the fines getting past the filters on my 550XP, 390XP, and even the 3120XP was real dust, not wood dust. In Casuarinas the wood dust is pale yellow, the real dust is red/brown.
I'd rather not give my saws a 20 thou rebore in the first few hundred hours 

Even in species like dead Redgum Stihl Australia have acknowledged wood dust is an issue, even honouring some warranties on MS880's that had terminal failures related to poor filtration of fines. This isn't something I've made up either. Stihl Australia started fitting the "Extreme Conditions" filter kits to certain Stihl models under warranty for free to stop dust ingression. This filter was only offered in Australia and South Africa. When the HD2 came along all these problems stopped.


----------



## MCW (Jun 4, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Depends on the husky for me, my 346 and 562 are terrible unless they have a clean smear of grease where the filter meets the air box. Saying that - they can easily do a day without cleaning, so it's easy to keep them set up that way.



More often than not the issues with Husky filters is fines going straight through the filter material itself. I've never had to grease the base of a filter as spray on filter oil has stopped the problem immediately although they then clog up faster.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 4, 2014)

Are you talking about the flock or the mesh filters. I can see the mesh filters letting in all kinds of dust, but that's what my 346 has been wearing for 10 years.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 4, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Are you talking about the flock or the mesh filters. I can see the mesh filters letting in all kinds of dust, but that's what my 346 has been wearing for 10 years.


I'm talking flock and pretty sure MCW is too. 
His situation would be worse than mine, he lives in 10-15" rainfall country, I live in 35-40" rainfall. What he calls dust is bloody great clouds of red sand.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 4, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> What he calls dust is bloody great clouds of red sand.



LOL... sounds really pleasant to work in.


----------



## MCW (Jun 4, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> LOL... sounds really pleasant to work in.



Yeah it's awesome


----------



## chadihman (Jun 4, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> Send me the numbers and rpms.


I found a program to graph it on. I want to retest the saws at higher than 10,000 rpms to give the ported 361 credit for its high rpm torque. I'd like to figure my percentage in loss from the drag of the dyno parts and ad that percentage to all my #'s.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 4, 2014)

I need to wrap these tests up quickly as I need to move on with the mod tests. The owner of this saw has been very patient and I thank him for it.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 4, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I'd like to figure my percentage in loss from the drag of the dyno parts and ad that percentage to all my #'s.



You'll do well if you achieve this accurately, the rolling road type dynos have a mode where you slip the car into neutral and as the car coasts down it calculates losses in the drivetrain. There is some fairly sophisticated computing behind calculating these losses and this is a huge part of the variation between different dynos. In the end all tuning work is carried out on raw data, with the correction for losses just used to give the customer a pretty graph that has a higher number to make them feel better about themselves.


----------



## banana boat (Jun 4, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I mod the oil pumps.




I would like to see a mastermind thread on this.....


----------



## MasterMech (Jun 5, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> You'll do well if you achieve this accurately, the rolling road type dynos have a mode where you slip the car into neutral and as the car coasts down it calculates losses in the drivetrain. There is some fairly sophisticated computing behind calculating these losses and this is a huge part of the variation between different dynos. In the end all tuning work is carried out on raw data, with the correction for losses just used to give the customer a pretty graph that has a higher number to make them feel better about themselves.


Right on. We shouldn't be too concerned at this point if Chad's dyno says a 660 makes 3 hp or 30 hp. We want it to tell us if a 660 makes more hp than a 461, or if a muffler mod is worth real power or just acoustic gains. We want to know if a particular set of timing numbers makes more usable power or a peaky G2G toy. All of which his dyno already will do.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jun 5, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I found a program to graph it on. I want to retest the saws at higher than 10,000 rpms to give the ported 361 credit for its high rpm torque. I'd like to figure my percentage in loss from the drag of the dyno parts and ad that percentage to all my #'s.


Wouldn't a simple spreadsheet be the easiest? LibreOffice works great and is free, but if you must pay for inferior software you could use MS Execl.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 5, 2014)

Here's a line graph from the first test. This is torque not 
hp


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

Here's a HP graph. I like the graph. It makes it easy to see results without digging for #'s


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 6, 2014)

Funny how it all seems so much clearer in a graph.
The nice smooth curve of the 461 is the classic shape of a healthy motor that is working well.
The jumpy shape of the 660 curve is the classic shape of a motor with issues, at least when there aren't devices to change inlet or exhaust timing.
Just looking at the graphs you would expect the 660 to pick up power by going through the ignition timing, fuelling and exhaust, but wouldn't be surprised if compression ratio or port timing needed help. Now we know from what respected builders have said that in this case there are problems in the port timing, but I wouldn't be surprised if the shape of that graph cleaned up with exhaust and ignition timing mods, perhaps a decrease in squish. But I'm sure it won't see a significant increase in peak torque and power until it's ported.
Graphing gives another benefit - when calculating the work capacity of an engine it is often better to look at area under the graph, rather than peak numbers. In the case of a chainsaw you would just cut off the graph at the edges of likely rpm in the cut, and measure everything below that. That is a graphical way that shoes how "torquey" motors often beat "peaky" motors.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 6, 2014)

You can also see how the 461 is going to fall on it's face if the rpm in the cut drops much below 8500, but the 660 may just keep pulling down to 7000 - assuming the operator doesn't lift of course.


----------



## wyk (Jun 6, 2014)

Did you move to Japan? We read left to right in the Western hemi 

Nice graphs, though. Graphics really help with visualizing the differences.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

reindeer said:


> Did you move to Japan? We read left to right in the Western hemi
> 
> Nice graphs, though. Graphics really help with visualizing the differences.


Yeah I didn't like the look of the rpms low to high but I'll do it the right way. I also like the second graph better as the line colors are easy to see. This is the only way I'm going to display dyno results from now on. I'm going to make a new graph with 660, 461, and the ported 361 with higher rpm readings included. There's quite a bit work that goes into testing a saw to making a graph. Lots of notes and calculations involved. I check it over twice to make sure I didn't mess up the #'s. I wish I could find a program that I could simply input my dyno #'s and the program would do all the calculations for the graph.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 6, 2014)

Can you flip the graph around so that the low RPMs are on the left?


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 6, 2014)

I wanna see one of my ported 660s now.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> Can you flip the graph around so that the low RPMs are on the left?


I'll do so.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

Heading 3 hrs to NJ for an in field baler repair.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 6, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Heading 3 hrs to NJ for an in field baler repair.


I love not making hay anymore.


----------



## redfin (Jun 6, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> wanna see one of my ported 660s now.


Not sure where in Pa Chad lives but maybe him and i could hook up to test mine.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 6, 2014)

I'd love to see a few more of my saws on there as well...MS261 w/gutted strato, MS461, 346XP, 372XP, 390XP.....


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 6, 2014)

Chad, I think you could have a new business, I think the porters are ready to start renting dyno time! And then you could charge a fee for each view each ported saw receives ... Just kidding ... making light of the internet world we now live in.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 6, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> Chad, I think you could have a new business, I think the porters are ready to start renting dyno time! And then you could charge a fee for each view each ported saw receives ... Just kidding ... making light of the internet world we now live in.



No joke......I would buy a dyno run or 10.


----------



## wyk (Jun 6, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> No joke......I would buy a dyno run or 10.



It would make before and after's very interesting...


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> No joke......I would buy a dyno run or 10.


I thought I heard you say you had a 261cm of your own. Send it to me and I'll test it against my stock 261 cm


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 6, 2014)

I'll do it. 

I'll be shipping a couple of saws Monday.


----------



## redfin (Jun 6, 2014)

Oh good times.


----------



## cgraham1 (Jun 6, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I'll do it.
> 
> I'll be shipping a couple of saws Monday.


 I like where this is headed!

opcorn:


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 6, 2014)

cgraham1 said:


> I like where this is headed!
> 
> opcorn:



X2...


----------



## wyk (Jun 6, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I'll do it.



*gasp*


----------



## wyk (Jun 6, 2014)

Actually, I'd love to test my fiddled with in every which way(including a bored out carb), but not ported, 330EVL VS Moparmyway's ported 330EVL just out of curiosity. Dyno's are neat toys.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 6, 2014)

This is gonna get good unless the guy running the dyno gets burned out on it.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> This is gonna get good unless the guy running the dyno gets burned out on it.


I love running the dyno but I gots lots on my plate this time of year then I always make family time. Two young kids love to have there daddy around. 10-18 hour days leave me beat.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 6, 2014)

Family time? Pfft... those kids will be around for decades. We are old and likely to die any minute.


----------



## AuerX (Jun 6, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Family time? Pfft... those kids will be around for decades. We are old and likely to die any minute.



Thanks man, That was half a Beer thru the nose.......


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 6, 2014)

I think Randy aught to send one of his extra spicy 395's to bolt up to the dyno...
Might de-value all the 660's though...
So maybe not...


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 6, 2014)

Might kill the dyno.


----------



## Trx250r180 (Jun 6, 2014)

Meh


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 6, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Might kill the dyno.


And make the Stihl guys weep...
It may get ugly...
Just sayin...


----------



## Trx250r180 (Jun 6, 2014)

hook em face to face on a double ended bar and that will tell you which is stronger opcorn:


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 6, 2014)

Trx250r180 said:


> hook em face to face on a double ended bar and that will tell you which is stronger opcorn:


Will Stihl's run backward???


----------



## Trx250r180 (Jun 6, 2014)

HedgeAustralian 4839730 said:


> Will Stihl's run backward???


You need the austrailan version


----------



## chadihman (Jun 6, 2014)

Hedgerow said:


> And make the Stihl guys weep...
> It may get ugly...
> Just sayin...


I could fudge the #'s to keep Me and the Stihl guys happy


----------



## foggysail (Jun 6, 2014)

I scanned most of this thread and don't really know what to make of it. The opening post provided HP and torque data for two saws but I am somewhat lost with the importance of torque data other than how it applies to HP. I believe the important data is HP and remember, HP= (torque)*RPM/5252. Horsepower or just plain power is a measure of doing work and is calculated from measured torque along with RPMs and applying both to the above formula.

I only cut wood on a needs basis although as a young man I climbed trees for a living. So with that in mind if I had to select a preference between two saws with nearly identical performance I would be looking at other factors such as purchase cost, weight, fuel & oil capacity, ease along with cost of maintenance, reliability,  local parts suppliers and so forth. So my saw of choice today is what I can afford, an old heavy 056. Just my thoughts--

Foggy


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 6, 2014)

I don't fully grasp the HP/Torque relationship even though a buddy of mine that used to piddle in amateur drag cars tried his best to explain it. I just have to take for granted that high torque engines work best pulling heavy loads and high HP engines work best making speed without really understanding why. It doesn't make sense to me. Seems like a high HP engine geared correctly would do the same work as a high torque engine, but apparently it won't.


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 6, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I could fudge the #'s to keep Me and the Stihl guys happy


True...
That's what they do at the factory...
Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!!


----------



## foggysail (Jun 6, 2014)

HP is directly related to torque and RPM. One cannot have torque without HP or visa versa. Turning my above formula around, torque = HP*5252/RPMs. And that is a fact of physics regardless of what others think.

Foggy


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

You were supprized to see 17 pages, with different porters saws goin head to head and maybe a few stock ones for reference. I'm thinking about 500 pages. 
And lots of  And


----------



## redfin (Jun 6, 2014)

I'm no stihl snob but unfortuately at this point all my huskies are in pieces. I will say my monkeyed 660 is all the saw I will ever need.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

So how do low hp engines with low rpm make lots of torque. 7.3 L ford diesel 285 hp 525 torque 3000 rpm.
Ford mustang 365 hp, 315 torque, @ 5500 rpm
Diesel numbers from ford
Mustang numbers from dyno on my brothers roush.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

Just tried the formula and comes out fairly close.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 6, 2014)

http://www.howstuffworks.com/horsepower1.htm


----------



## foggysail (Jun 6, 2014)

Deets-- you have to look at the HP/torque curves. Generally, a diesel develops most HP at low RPM while a gas engine develops its most HP at high RPMs. 

What the heck are you building shown in you avatar?


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

Grapple for my 297 cat skidloader


----------



## foggysail (Jun 6, 2014)

IMPRESSIVE!!!


----------



## redfin (Jun 6, 2014)

Deets066 said:


> Grapple for my 297 cat skidloader



I can't see your avatar on my phone but I wanna build a thumb for my hoe bucket. How thick are you using for the fingers?


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

1-1/4" plate

thumb for a hoe I would use 2"


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 6, 2014)

You cut that with a torch or plasma?


----------



## foggysail (Jun 6, 2014)

That is one hell of a piece of machinery!!!


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 6, 2014)

chadihman said:


> I could fudge the #'s .........



Right.


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

Everything with a torch


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

foggysail said:


> That is one hell of a piece of machinery!!!


Thanks, spent a good piece of time makin it right. When I get some play time I'll make a vid of it in action and start a new thread.


----------



## foggysail (Jun 6, 2014)

Did you model it with wood first?


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

I used cardboard, then after I cut one tooth out of plate I used that to lay out the rest.


----------



## HuskStihl (Jun 6, 2014)

Those dynometers things are always wrong, or their operators are fudging the numbers. The other day a guy told my the new V-6 camaro made more hp than my bitchin' IROC Z!! Uh....my car has 2 more cylinders and 100 more cubes. No way it has less power.
On a more serious note, early 066's and later year 660's aren't the same thing, and don't respond the same to a DP muffler


----------



## Deets066 (Jun 6, 2014)

You talking about full dyno that you strap the car down and runs off the tires? Or something else?


----------



## DexterDay (Jun 6, 2014)

Hedgerow said:


> Will Stihl's run backward???



 

LOL...


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 6, 2014)

Peak HP & Torque will not occur at the same RPM (usually). Larger cubic inch engines with shorter duration cams will usually produce more torque (well suited for a large luxury car or truck). The max power will usually be at a lower RPM. Intake & exhaust are usually smaller in comparison to the engine size to provide good throttle response. They also usually have less timing advance. Often, a high torque engine will focus more stroke than bore.

Max HP engines have more of a focus on high RPM than on cubic inches (shorter stroke & larger bore, although with today's modern materials that is changing), have more aggressive cams (more lift & duration), larger valves, intake & exhaust (in relation to the engine size) and more aggressive timing advance.

(I'm talking old school here, a lot of the newer engines with variable cam timing, etc. seem to have power across the board).

Engines built for maximum HP often sacrifice low end power. Engines built for maximum torque often sacrifice high end power.


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 7, 2014)

The 461 doesn't look impressive at all according to the German KWF tests, that includes a dyno test. Apart from that I know nothing that is relevant to this thread.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 7, 2014)

Troll, what was the HP for the 461 according to them?

Also Troll I think I owe you a thank you. I printed something the other day that I think you posted to another website years ago regarding German tests and wt of various saws. I know the wt varied from year to year, but it did list both the wt of a 044 and 440. I was surprised the 440 was a little lighter (6.2 kg instead of 6.3). Likely that was due to the heavier flywheel that Brian had mentioned was on some 044s. According to my calculations, that puts the 044 at almost 13.9 lbs.


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 7, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> Troll, what was the HP for the 461 according to them?
> 
> .....



4.4 kW. http://www.kwf-online.de/deutsch/pruef/pruefergebnisse/aagw/motorsaegen/6391_12.pdf

I stopped trusting that test site when they started collaborating with Dolmar around 2005 though. At about the same time, it got more obvious that it was a *German* test site.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 7, 2014)

SawTroll said:


> 4.4 kW. http://www.kwf-online.de/deutsch/pruef/pruefergebnisse/aagw/motorsaegen/6391_12.pdf
> 
> I stopped trusting that test site when they started collaborating with Dolmar around 2005 though. At about the same time, it got more obvious that it was a *German* test site.


Anything you could tell us about how saws are chosen for testing, how many saws are tested, or anything else about the process would be interesting to at least myself. I've considered those to be quite independent tests - but without any real knowledge of their processes. I at least put more weight in their results than spec sheets.....
My school level German isn't sufficient to chase up any of that knowledge myself.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 7, 2014)

SawTroll said:


> I know nothing that is relevant to this thread.



I think this may be worthy of cluttering my sig for a few days. 

Seriously though, maybe you guys can clarify this for me. If 'torque' is a measurement of how much power the engine produces and HP is just an extrapolation of torque and RPM, why couldn't a diesel with gobs of torque and a variable ratio transmission that keeps the engine at peak torque rpm during acceleration stomp a peaky gas engine with much less torque but more hp? 

I guess a simpler way of saying it is.. if torque is what does the work, why does the rpm the engine has to run to produce it matter? The engine with the most torque should win if it's geared correctly.


----------



## LowVolt (Jun 7, 2014)

Wouldn't be a great AS thread without Nikko slidding in for a one sentence STIHL bashing post.

Cheers ST!


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 7, 2014)

LowVolt said:


> Wouldn't be a great AS thread without Nikko slidding in for a one sentence STIHL bashing post.
> 
> Cheers ST!


Actually ST is alluding to something very interesting. The supposedly independent test/certification mob in Germany have gotten some results on these two saws that don't add up to the experiences that USA users are reporting. 
Although they are similar to what Aussie users are reporting. 

Now, I think it's time for me to hunt up the bits and build an 064, with a good 066 top end.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 7, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> I guess a simpler way of saying it is.. if torque is what does the work, why does the rpm the engine has to run to produce it matter? The engine with the most torque should win if it's geared correctly.



I build saws that make torque. I don't look for additional unloaded RPM at all. 

My reasoning is that by making more power.....the engine will hold more RPM in the cut. At about 10,500 - 11,000 RPM. 

Now, here's the thing. My engines don't do well in cant races....even with taller gearing. 

Discuss? 






weedkilla said:


> Actually ST is alluding to something very interesting. The supposedly independent test/certification mob in Germany have gotten some results on these two saws that don't add up to the experiences that USA users are reporting.
> Although they are similar to what Aussie users are reporting.
> 
> Now, I think it's time for me to hunt up the bits and build an 064, with a good 066 top end.



Tough to find the KS 066 top ends these days.....just stick with the 064 top end if you wanna really fun saw.


----------



## KG441c (Jun 7, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I build saws that make torque. I don't look for additional unloaded RPM at all.
> 
> My reasoning is that by making more power.....the engine will hold more RPM in the cut. At about 10,500 - 11,000 RPM.
> uld u
> ...


I would be interested in hearing in what part of the porting process makes the most torque?


----------



## one.man.band (Jun 7, 2014)

SawTroll said:


> The 461 doesn't look impressive at all according to the German KWF tests, that includes a dyno test. Apart from that I know nothing that is relevant to this thread.



suggest you look at the data for the MS461 again.

in fact, for saw offerings in the 74cc through 76.5cc ........including: dolmar, husqvarna, solo and stihl...

the MS461 is at the top of the heap in the following: BMEP; Specific Power; Power to Weight Ratio; Torque to Weight Ratio; Thermal Efficiency @ Peak Power and Torque; and lastly tied for first in Peak Torque.

the MS461 is in second place to the Solo, in Peak Power.


-omb


-interesting that statistics can be discounted for some brands as inaccurate when tested by the same facility. in addition, that manufacturer's who do not use statistics for advertising, can be discounted as inferior.


-they are are just motor's with chains to me, irregardless of who manufactures them.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 7, 2014)

KG441c said:


> I would be interested in hearing in what part of the porting process makes the most torque?



Most of the time I see that a modern saw engine will run at plenty of RPM just because of the design. (Transfer design, tight case capacity, etc)

Because the RPM is there already, I look for ways to improve the power in the working range. 

I've come up with a exhaust height to displacement rule that I adhere to. It seems to be working very well. I believe that if the exhaust is too high (and of course there are gonna be exceptions) the engine will make peak power at an RPM that is unattainable in the cut. So I shoot for maximum power at working RPM. 

I realize that is a quick and dirty answer, but you'd have to see the advances in design compared to less modern designs that have been made in the last couple of decades to get what I'm talking about.


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 7, 2014)

one.man.band said:


> -they are are just motor's with chains to me,.............



To me, they are what put and keeps man on top the food chain.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 7, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> To me, they are what put and keeps man on top the food chain.


Tool making was an important step - but I think most anthropologists would consider the written language the critical step. 
The printing press probably accounts for more of man's advances than any other tool.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 7, 2014)

Troll, thanks for the info, your post was from 2005. That HP # is the same as what they came up with for the 460. However, with rounding to the nearest tenth in both kw and kg, it is tough to compute accurate #s.

HH, I think I can answer your question in part. Often high torque diesel engines have a limited RPM range. For max performance on a high power gas engine, the shift points will keep the engine between max torque and max HP, and max HP will be in a much higher range. The design of the diesel is more intended the reach and hold a certain RPM, not provide rapid acceleration. Conversely, the high performance gas engine rapidly builds power approaching max Hp, launching you like a slingshot.

MM, no wonder you are so successful. Similar to above, for chainsaws the important thing is to maintain max power in the cut, not provide rapid acceleration or power in an RPM range that will not be used (high or low). When your saws provide more power at a slightly higher RPM range than a stock saw, cut times will increase dramatically and it will be easier to maintain that RPM range under various conditions (the additional power will better resist slowing).


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 7, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Tool making was an important step - but I think most anthropologists would consider the written language the critical step.
> The printing press probably accounts for more of man's advances than any other tool.



The more sophisticated we get, the more you are correct, but if early man did not develop weapons to protect himself from dangerous beasts and harvest food, we would likely not need the printing press today. Some studies also indicate that Man's relationship with the dog may go back a long way. That would give them a big leg up in identifying potential threats and finding / catching game.


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 7, 2014)

Yes, the inconsistencies are huge, but it still makes me giggle.


----------



## KG441c (Jun 7, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Most of the time I see that a modern saw engine will run at plenty of RPM just because of the design. (Transfer design, tight case capacity, etc)
> 
> Because the RPM is there already, I look for ways to improve the power in the working range.
> I've come up with a exhaust height to displacement rule that I adhere to. It seems to be working very well. I believe that if the exhaust is too high (and of course there are gonna be exceptions) the engine will make peak power at an RPM that is unattainable in the cut. So I shoot for maximum power at working RPM.
> ...


Is the displacement rule in relation to the exhaust outlet, crankcase displacement? Sorry for picking the mind but ive been dabbling with mild porting and interested


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 7, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> That HP # is the same as what they came up with for the 460. However, with rounding to the nearest tenth in both kw and kg, it is tough to compute accurate #s.



True enough, calculations made on rounded off numbers may lead to "funny" results - but does that slight inaccuracy really matter?


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 7, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Tool making was an important step - but I think most anthropologists would consider the written language the critical step.
> The printing press probably accounts for more of man's advances than any other tool.



It's true wherein we discuss advancements made as a civilization; as printing is what enabled us to make contracts and laws. The law of the jungle will ultimately trump that. Chainsaws and gunpowder are a pretty good buffer.


----------



## foggysail (Jun 7, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> I think this may be worthy of cluttering my sig for a few days.
> 
> Seriously though, maybe you guys can clarify this for me. If 'torque' is a measurement of how much power the engine produces and HP is just an extrapolation of torque and RPM, why couldn't a diesel with gobs of torque and a variable ratio transmission that keeps the engine at peak torque rpm during acceleration stomp a peaky gas engine with much less torque but more hp?
> 
> I guess a simpler way of saying it is.. if torque is what does the work, why does the rpm the engine has to run to produce it matter? The engine with the most torque should win if it's geared correctly.




Sure, I can at least try to help you.

First, torque by itself means NOTHING! For example, consider a torque wrench 1 foot long mounted horizontally where you hang a 10# weight at the end of the bar. The other end of the bar is fixed and cannot move! At the point where the bar is fixed, there will be a force (TORQUE) of 10 pound foot.

Increase the bar length to 5 feet with the same 10# pounds mounted on the extended end and there will be 50 pound foot of force at the secured end or a TORQUE of 50 pound foot. Notice that TORQUE by itself means NOTHING!

Now consider HP which whose name was adopted by James Watt when he attempted to show how powerful his steam engine was by relating it to horses. He said 1 horse can raise 33000 pounds 1 foot in 1 minute or 550 pounds foot in 1 second. Now people could understand how horsepower could related to doing work.

Foggy


----------



## Trx250r180 (Jun 7, 2014)

I like slow saws ......


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 7, 2014)

Trx250r180 said:


> I like slow saws ......



...........and fast women, owwww Owww OWWW OWWWWWWoooo!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 7, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I build saws that make torque. I don't look for additional unloaded RPM at all.
> 
> My reasoning is that by making more power.....the engine will hold more RPM in the cut. At about 10,500 - 11,000 RPM.
> 
> ...


from what i have seen, there is a big difference between a work saw that i would use as compared to a dedicated cookie cutter. they never are dogged in for one thing.
when guys say don't use the dogs, i get tickled.............hold back a large saw in the back cut all day and see how that works lol.
i love torque in a saw. any who has used big saws years ago to fall will tell you the same.


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 7, 2014)

weedkilla said:


> Anything you could tell us about how saws are chosen for testing, how many saws are tested, or anything else about the process would be interesting to at least myself. I've considered those to be quite independent tests - but without any real knowledge of their processes. I at least put more weight in their results than spec sheets.....
> .



Yes, all that would be interesting to know - and the info is conspicuously abcent.....


----------



## Brush Ape (Jun 7, 2014)

The US delivered saws are definitely Dyno'd in Germany. That's where the in-house testing is done. The Virginia Beach facility doesn't have that type of equipment nor do they need it. So that all means that the saw specs advertised in the US literature may/may not be from units tested which are equipped with the US specified performance bottlenecks. If I was the Germans, I'd keep the best ones and tell us to make our own. It's what we should do anyway. We could call them, "Poulan" or sumthin'.


----------



## zogger (Jun 7, 2014)

Brush Ape said:


> The US delivered saws are definitely Dyno'd in Germany. That's where the in-house testing is done. The Virginia Beach facility doesn't have that type of equipment nor do they need it. So that all means that the saw specs advertised in the US literature may/may not be from units tested which are equipped with the US specified performance bottlenecks. If I was the Germans, I'd keep the best ones and tell us to make our own. It's what we should do anyway. We could call them, "Poulan" or sumthin'.



That's on my bucket list when I hit the lottery, see if I can hostile takeover poulan back from husky.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 7, 2014)

treeslayer2003 said:


> from what i have seen, there is a big difference between a work saw that i would use as compared to a dedicated cookie cutter. they never are dogged in for one thing.
> when guys say don't use the dogs, i get tickled.............hold back a large saw in the back cut all day and see how that works lol.
> i love torque in a saw. any who has used big saws years ago to fall will tell you the same.



If I had to hold the dogs off the log all day after having my saw ported........someone would be in trouble. 



KG441c said:


> Is the displacement rule in relation to the exhaust outlet, crankcase displacement? Sorry for picking the mind but ive been dabbling with mild porting and interested



No, it's related to cylinder displacement.

If anyone wants to try the numbers I use, just contact me. I'll gladly share what I use, but would rather not post that sort of stuff in the open forum anymore.

Too many people want to argue about that crap.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 7, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Discuss?



I was hoping that someone would be able to explain it to me. I can't wrap my mind around it. Doesn't make sense.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 7, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> I was hoping that someone would be able to explain it to me. I can't wrap my mind around it. Doesn't make sense.




There's so much I don't understand.

That's why I just do saws for work. I have a pretty good idea how to make those units perform.

Cant cutters are a whole different ball of wax.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 7, 2014)

Still working. This sucks. I should be dyno testing. Holy cow you guys filled two pages without me. It'll probably be dark till I get a chance to read through what I missed.


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 7, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> There's so much I don't understand.
> 
> That's why I just do saws for work. I have a pretty good idea how to make those units perform.
> 
> Cant cutters are a whole different ball of wax.



I like fast saws... 
My 7900 done yet???


----------



## chadihman (Jun 7, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> I build saws that make torque. I don't look for additional unloaded RPM at all.
> 
> My reasoning is that by making more power.....the engine will hold more RPM in the cut. At about 10,500 - 11,000 RPM.
> 
> Now, here's the thing. My engines don't do well in cant races....even with taller gearing. Discuss



I made a quick graph to show my opinion of a kick azz saw. Saw 1 will have its max hp at 14000 rpms and it it gains torque slowly but the torque doesn't drop off till its at 7000 rpms. Saw 2 has more torque at 8000 rpms and below but its not a good useable rpm. Saw 1 wins. Make the torque up at high rpms and make it hold onto the torque in useable rpms and it will kick azz.





Just my .02
Discuss.


----------



## redfin (Jun 7, 2014)

Its all fluff but show me a strait line across that graph. That's the saw I want. 

Oh wait they make those but then you get all tangled in cords and stuffs.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 7, 2014)

redfin said:


> Its all fluff but show me a strait line across that graph. That's the saw I want.
> 
> Oh wait they make those but then you get all tangled in cords and stuffs.



Go solar... just need a 10 gallon hat with solar panels on the brim.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 7, 2014)

foggysail said:


> Sure, I can at least try to help you.
> 
> First, torque by itself means NOTHING! For example, consider a torque wrench 1 foot long mounted horizontally where you hang a 10# weight at the end of the bar. The other end of the bar is fixed and cannot move! At the point where the bar is fixed, there will be a force (TORQUE) of 10 pound foot.
> 
> ...




In your first scenario, the power was being expended, but was not enough to overcome the load and the energy expended was absorbed by the bar. In the second example, the power applied was sufficient to overcome the load, so it moved. The only difference between the two is the power to load ratio.


----------



## hseII (Jun 7, 2014)

chadihman said:


> You didn't read my first post in thus thread did you?. Its OK I do the same thing all the time.
> I'll fill you in. The 660 is supposed to be 1 HP stronger than the 461. I broke the brand new 660 in on the dyno with a little over two tanks then tested both stock saws back to back twice on the dyno from 10,000 all the way down to 6500 rpms. I recorded #s every 500 rpms. The 461 was 2-3% stronger at 10,000, 9500, 9000, 8500, and 8000 rpms. Then at 7500 they were tied. Then the 660 was 3% stronger from 7000-6500 rpms.



I don't have no horse in this race, however, a 660 is not "broke in" until 10-15 tanks of fuel.
I did not just read this in a book or on the intertube; I know this first hand.

I would hope by now Everyone here agrees the 660 is a dog in new, not broken in, stock muffler form. That is a fact of life. Just like many other new saws from a lot of manufacturers. 

However, a 660 is indeed a "stronger" saw when broken in and muffler modded; 
I will personally know sometime mid August just how much "Stronger" a Monkey can make my low hour 660; 

Both Saws are good Options within their respected purposes. 
Will a 461 or 660 pull a 32-36" bar? Of Course.
The 660 will just do it better and longer because that is the intended purpose of a 90cc class saw. 

Will the 461 or 660 pull a 25-28" bar? Of Course. 
The 461 will do it better as it weighs less, and burns less fuel, as most 70cc class saws would.

the numbers are nice, but the story is told when the longer bar is buried to the dawgs.

That's where a 660 will continue to out perform day in and day out. 

Thank You OP and Good Day.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 7, 2014)

No testing today but tomorrow is going to be the last stock testing of the 660 along with a dual port test then this 660 is getting torn down. I'll have a line graph up by this time tomorrow. I'll run two or three more tanks through the 660 to be sure it's broken in. I'm rooting for the 660. It might just beat the 461 this time as the last test was close.


----------



## treeslayer2003 (Jun 7, 2014)

i have no doubt.........however, it does show how good the 461 is for its size. i stiil say the 660 should have been much better, after all it is a 90 cc saw.


----------



## foggysail (Jun 7, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> In your first scenario, the power was being expended, but was not enough to overcome the load and the energy expended was absorbed by the bar. In the second example, the power applied was sufficient to overcome the load, so it moved. The only difference between the two is the power to load ratio.




OH really??? Torque is a force and thats it! By itself no work is done period! Believe whatever you want, nobody is telling you to "get smart!"


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 7, 2014)

foggysail said:


> OH really??? Torque is a force and thats it! By itself no work is done period! Believe whatever you want, nobody is telling you to "get smart!"


Get over yourself ...

Carry on...


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 8, 2014)

His definition of 'work' is correct though. I remembered the phrase 'force over distance' from high school science class and googled it. 

Doesn't help me understand my original question though.

Why does the rpm the engine turns when it makes peak torque affect anything? 

Momentum of the spinning mass maybe?


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 8, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Why does the rpm the engine turns when it makes peak torque affect anything?
> 
> Momentum of the spinning mass maybe?




It's a common and simplified way of showing the effective power band.
If max torque is at 7500rpm, and max power is at 9000rpm then you can consider the saw has an effective power band of 1500rpm.
It's often less important exactly what revs the saw turns at max torque - but more important what the gap is between max torque and max power. 

There is more, but that's a pretty good start.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 8, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Why does the rpm the engine turns when it makes peak torque affect anything?
> 
> Momentum of the spinning mass maybe?


Look at it this way. Let's say you're cranking a winch with a one foot handle. If your pushing five pounds your torque is five ft-lb. It takes more energy to crank the weight in at twenty five cranks per min than it does at five cranks per min. The work done shows. Twenty five cranks a min moved the load five times further than the five cranks per min job did.


----------



## foggysail (Jun 8, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Look at it this way. Let's say you're cranking a winch with a one foot handle. If your pushing five pounds your torque is five ft-lb. It takes more energy to crank the weight in at twenty five cranks per min than it does at five cranks per min. The work done shows. Twenty five cranks a min moved the load five times further than the five cranks per min job did.




Yes, and in both cases the torque remains 5ft-lb or 5 lb-ft. The HP can be calculated for these both conditions as HP= torque*RPM/5252. The second case...25 cranks per minute requires 25 times the HP of the first case. In both cases work is being done.


----------



## Mastermind (Jun 8, 2014)

Y'all make my head hurt. 

I'll just hog everything out and hope for the best.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 8, 2014)

foggysail said:


> Yes, and in both cases the torque remains 5ft-lb or 5 lb-ft. The HP can be calculated for these both conditions as HP= torque*RPM/5252. The second case...25 cranks per minute requires 25 times the HP of the first case. In both cases work is being done.


Exactly


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 8, 2014)

Expanding on what Chad said ... RPM is speed ...

Pretend you can move 10 lbs at 10 MPH, the 10 lbs is like torque and the MHP is like RPM.

If someone else can only move 8 lbs, but can move it a to 30 MPH, they can move 24 lbs in the same amount of time you can move 10 lbs, so they generate more HP even though the torque is lower. HP represents a level of torque at a level of speed.

Hope this helps.


----------



## redfin (Jun 8, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Exactly


Shouldn't you be dynoing and stuff? Class is over for the book nerds bring on da videos!


----------



## chadihman (Jun 8, 2014)

redfin said:


> Shouldn't you be dynoing and stuff? Class is over for the book nerds bring on da videos!


Hold your britches on! Gotta mow grass and help my bro fix his tiller then dyno time


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 8, 2014)

Work comes first, but we so love the Fun!!!

Don't feel bad, I'm staining the Deck today, I'll trade ya!


----------



## redfin (Jun 8, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Hold your britches on! Gotta mow grass and help my bro fix his tiller then dyno time


Sorry, ill go back to splitting wood now.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 8, 2014)

You need to put one like this on the dyno First tank of fuel too.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 8, 2014)

Is that a genuine Bjorn Borg commemorative sweat band?


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 8, 2014)

Haywire Haywood said:


> Is that a genuine Bjorn Borg commemorative sweat band?


That's an "I sweat like a pig" king of sweat band


----------



## chadihman (Jun 11, 2014)

Got another test of the Stock 461 vs stock 660 and i'm calling the 660 broken in. 461 still looks better most of the rpms


----------



## chadihman (Jun 11, 2014)

This makes a difference. Here's the stock 461 vs the 660 with a dual port muffler. Dp makes the 660 king again.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 11, 2014)

Here's the 660 vs 660 DP. Some really nice gains with a dual port. This DP was a complete Hyway dual port muffler with the screens removed from both ports and the stupid baffle thing removed from the inside.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 11, 2014)

Looks like the DP smoothed the curve in addition to the bump in power.


----------



## Ron660 (Jun 11, 2014)

chadihman said:


> This makes a difference. Here's the stock 461 vs the 660 with a dual port muffler. Dp makes the 660 king again.
> 
> I'd like to see the results if both saws were ported.


----------



## Terry Syd (Jun 11, 2014)

Great thing about the dyno is it lets you see what is happening along the curve. Take a look at the dip in power of the 461 at 8,000 rpm. What's causing that? With the dyno, someone could try a few things and find out why that dip is occurring - and fix it.

Cutting cookies off a log isn't going to give you the same insight that the dyno will.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 11, 2014)

WOW, almost 1.2 HP at 10,000 RPM, that is a lot! Any idea how much difference removing the baffle made?

I was not going to remove that on the 046, but now ..... I don't know.

Do replacement 044/440 mufflers have the baffle? If they don't I could just get one of them and put the dual port cover on it.


----------



## Terry Syd (Jun 11, 2014)

In regards to the dip in power at 8,000 on the 461, here's the first test I would do to see if it was a carburetion problem.

In the past I have found that the low speed circuits have been set lean to get around EPA limits. I don't know when the situation started, probably some of the old hands will remember when the 'emission' carbs came in. The difference in carbs is quite significant, the low speed circuits were set lean and the high speed circuit was required to do most of the fuel flow in the carb.

That 'dip' could well be a result of the low speed circuit fuel flow flattening out and then the high speed circuit coming in and bringing the power back up.

So you get the 461 on the dyno, get the rpm at 8,000 and then start increasing the fuel flow on the high speed circuit. If the power comes up at 8,000, then you got a fuel flow problem - and the problem is probably a lean low speed circuit.

Of course, increasing the high speed circuit will kill the power up higher in the powerband, but you don't care, you are trying to find out why the dip is happening. Now you know and you can start modding the carb to get more flow in the low speed circuit to bring the two fuel curves together at 8,000.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 11, 2014)

I can tell you how to get rid of that dip. PORT IT!!!


----------



## KG441c (Jun 11, 2014)

blsnelling said:


> I can tell you how to get rid of that dip. PORT IT!!!


I like that idea better!! lol


----------



## CapitaineHaddoc (Jun 12, 2014)

Thank's for your work, Chad, your graph is awesome. I think i'll gring the baffle inside my 064's dual port muffler!

What about the torque with the DP muffler? I feel that my 562 gains a lot of torque with a muffler mod...


----------



## weedkilla (Jun 12, 2014)

What is commonly described as "torque" is power lower in the rev range, or how low in the rev range a saw can go before the power drops off.
It's shown in these power graphs as well as if he had graphed raw torque figures.

See how the 660 dp is still making as much power at 7000rpm as the standard one does at max? That's what you feel as "torquey".
Although, looking at the graph for the 660 I think you'd just feel like it gained everywhere. Because it would achieve higher revs in the cut, as well as hold on lower without bogging it would feel like a much bigger gain than the 10% increase in max power. 
Sorry for the "" rubbish, it's just that I don't want to confuse the way these terms are used with their correct meaning, even when that only varies slightly.


----------



## MCW (Jun 12, 2014)

Awesome graphs. Goes to show why guys in Australia have been somewhat disappointed with their MS461's against their dual port MS660's.
The single port cover really does choke it up - more than I thought it would actually.


----------



## wyk (Jun 12, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Here's the 660 vs 660 DP. Some really nice gains with a dual port. This DP was a complete Hyway dual port muffler with the screens removed from both ports and the stupid baffle thing removed from the inside.




23% more power at 10,000 rpm. Not too shabby for a bolt on.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 12, 2014)

I wonder if muffler mods will have a similar effect on the 461. Something tells me we are going to find out.

I also wonder how much difference removing the baffle makes.

The muffler mod made as much difference as going to a larger saw!


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 12, 2014)

I am surprised that peak HP for both 660s remained at 9,000, I would have thought the dual port would have moved it higher.

That said, it is very impressive that the dual port has more power than the "Stock peak HP" from 7,000 - 10,500 RPM.


----------



## mdavlee (Jun 12, 2014)

I wish I still had the ported 660 to send to run against this one.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 12, 2014)

I ran two ported Smittybuilt 660s at the Upstate NY GTG (one was also over bore). They were throwing chips 25' and going through Black Locust like it was cotton candy.

And those guys are Western Tier NY, they could drop right down into PA!


----------



## chadihman (Jun 13, 2014)

Sorry no more testing this week. 19 hr day yesterday and I 'm taking a break and going camping with the Family. Got Randy's 261 cm yesterday so I'll have some results next week.


----------



## DMZ (Jun 13, 2014)

Any chance you could test 1 ring vs 2 rings on the piston?


----------



## chadihman (Jun 13, 2014)

DMZ said:


> Any chance you could test 1 ring vs 2 rings on the piston?


Might be able to get that.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 13, 2014)

Chad, Thanks for all of the wonderful information, and enjoy your break.

Next Step: My 2 Cents

The 660 obviously benefited enormously from your dual port muffler mod, with power increases across the usable range. However, peak Hp is still at a rather anemic 9,000 RPM. Based on this information, I believe an increase in timing would be the best "next step". It only makes sense to increase timing after you increase the flow of air/fuel. As I recall, we always used to advance the timing a good bit when we opened the headers on our cars (22 of us did it on the Bicentennial 4th of July, and yea, we got law enforcement awards!). The WW II Marine who lived across the street said we sounded like a Battleship coming down the road! He heard us before he could see us and could not figure out what it was.

Also, just for my information, is that 660 running a HD-2 filter? 

Thanks again.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 13, 2014)

Isn't 9,000 RPMs where the factory rates max HP? Pretty cool matchup there.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 13, 2014)

I'm not sure Brad, i can't seem to find that info, but I do think a timing advance would help, just makes sense to me. If you can move peak HP up and increase it, cut speed will increase. Obviously, the saw can breath much better now and should benefit from an increase in timing.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 13, 2014)

Timing advance WILL help on that model.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 13, 2014)

Just removed the baffle from my 046, and if it ever stops raining I may even see how it runs.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 13, 2014)

You should advance the ignition on your 046 as well.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 13, 2014)

How much would you recommend on a stock saw with HD-2 filter and dual port (& baffle removed)? Would removing the base gasket also be a good idea? I was thinking of doing that to the 044, but it does not have C/R and I did not want to make it any harder to start when hot on hot days (the cord just pulls through my hands).


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 13, 2014)

Go 6°. That's probably close to 1/3 the width of the key.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 13, 2014)

Thanks.


----------



## CTYank (Jun 13, 2014)

Not meaning to cast any dispersions or anything, but it seems that a reasonable prerequisite for this course would be Physics 101. Seriously, a common understanding of the rotarional stuff could really simplify discussions. 
Stuff like torque, angle, rotational speed, work, power, force, energy. "Horsepower" is just another unit. Calculus later.
With the basics in place, we could readily digest the importance of the curves, where & how the "rubber meets the road"; and how peak readings can be totally misleading.
Thanks, Chad, for all the discovery and demystification you've done and will do. Marketeers must hate you. 
With your texts open, discuss.


----------



## Dieselshawn (Jun 14, 2014)

How about opening the single port 660 muffler to a 1" square hole? Mine has one and it's quieter than the dual port while making same power.


----------



## Hedgerow (Jun 15, 2014)

Dieselshawn said:


> How about opening the single port 660 muffler to a 1" square hole? Mine has one and it's quieter than the dual port while making same power.


That works fine too...
The muffler mod is an expression of individuality... 
Just open that dude up...


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jun 15, 2014)

Might just direct the sound differently so it appears to be quieter to the operator.


----------



## chadihman (Jun 17, 2014)

I still have to test a variable opening muffler.


----------



## MustangMike (Jun 17, 2014)

And Timing, only makes sense to increase timing after you increase the flow.

Back in the day, we would not think of opening the headers w/o increasing the timing. I had the distributor positions memorized, I did'n bother using a light.


----------



## wyk (Jun 24, 2014)

A bud of mine in the UK hasn't muff modded his 550xp. I wonder how well that responds to the MM, and if timing advance helps any.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 24, 2014)

MM, yes.


----------



## chadihman (Aug 13, 2014)

rogue60 said:


> I myself was all for this dyno stuff....But then this joke pops up....
> Well Im not saying the dyno is wrong but man in our hardwood and hands on use of said saw's this is so not true IMO.....
> I kind of get now why the porters shy away from dyno's and say yeah good and all but ya can keep it!.......(oops edit) if it's a USA EPA 660 I get it? that thing is a dog......


My 461 is still kicking stock 660's azz's. Maybe my 461 is a special one. Porters dont shy away from dyno's. They cant get there hands on them. I take my testing seriously. A muffler modded 660 will for sure outrun a 461.


----------



## Ron660 (Aug 14, 2014)

chadihman said:


> My 461 is still kicking stock 660's azz's. Maybe my 461 is a special one. Porters dont shy away from dyno's. They cant get there hands on them. I take my testing seriously. A muffler modded 660 will for sure outrun a 461.


Chad, I have a recently ported 660 if you're still interested in testing.


----------



## wigglesworth (Aug 14, 2014)

Stock 660's are turds. Stihl really went backwards when they changed from the "0" series. The original 044, 046 and 066 will walk all over their down tuned later models....

They all had different cylinders, different ignitions, different mufflers and carburetors. Not real sure what the engineers were thinking...


----------



## Dieselshawn (Aug 14, 2014)

I'm sure the reason for the lower power numbers is money driven besides EPA for the stock 660. 

2 stroke technology is running out of ways to make better power until someone comes up with a combo that makes a difference. Like possibly direct fuel injection. 

We all expect the next new model to have more power and be better than the previous model.

So manufacturers came out with saws of slightly less power knowing full well the logging industry will complain about them. But the loggers continue to buy the derated saws until they reach the point that they've had enough. Either stihl makes more power or a better saw, or go to a different brand.

But after a period of time, many products sold, they're probably figuring its time to up the power a bit. 

Then the customer is pleased with the added power over the older model without realizing the model that originally came out in the first place already had that power.

Just my thought.


----------



## MustangMike (Aug 14, 2014)

wigglesworth said:


> Stock 660's are turds. Stihl really went backwards when they changed from the "0" series. The original 044, 046 and 066 will walk all over their down tuned later models....
> 
> They all had different cylinders, different ignitions, different mufflers and carburetors. Not real sure what the engineers were thinking...



Even the 0 series had their differences, like the 10 mm 044s and D chamber 046s, and some of the MS models will run right with them. I think some of it was "luck of the draw" on the cylinder. It was hard to distinguish the performance of my 046, my brother's 460, and my 044 until I got the 046 ported, and that saw had 175 psi before it was ported. When I use it now I smile, and it is worth the wt difference.

My 044 also easily out ran an 066 (both with 24" bar), so the 0 did not ensure performance either. (I'm sure the bigger saw had more torque for a longer bar)

We also know that dual port muffs went away due to the EPA, not because Stihl wanted to produce a more anemic saw. Ditto carb limiters.


----------



## chadihman (Aug 14, 2014)

Youtube has tons of videos of chainsaw cookie cutting but I haven't found one with the 461 vs the 660


----------



## mdavlee (Aug 14, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Youtube has tons of videos of chainsaw cookie cutting but I haven't found one with the 461 vs the 660



Randy has some on his channel. Probably from last summer or so.


----------



## Stihlman441 (Aug 14, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Youtube has tons of videos of chainsaw cookie cutting but I haven't found one with the 461 vs the 660


 
Ported 660 V ported 461 both same 25'' chain,bar,wood 8 pins.
Both low hrs saws and a tad fat.


----------



## MustangMike (Aug 14, 2014)

And that is why I am not a fan of the 8 pin, it can cut fast, but it is too easy to stop, even in a ported 77 cc saw!


----------



## Mastermind (Aug 14, 2014)

reindeer said:


> A bud of mine in the UK hasn't muff modded his 550xp. I wonder how well that responds to the MM, and if timing advance helps any.



Skip the timing advance.


----------



## Husqavarna Guy (Aug 14, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Here's the 660 vs 660 DP. Some really nice gains with a dual port. This DP was a complete Hyway dual port muffler with the screens removed from both ports and the stupid baffle thing removed from the inside.


The 660 still isn't putting out the power that stihl has it rated at?


----------



## CapitaineHaddoc (Aug 14, 2014)

Husqavarna Guy said:


> The 660 still isn't putting out the power that stihl has it rated at?



You're absolutely right yes. And it's not something wrong with the dyno, on the other thread about the masterminded 261cm vs the stock one, the stock 261 produce 3.899hp, and Stihl sai 3.9hp (which show how Chad's dyno is accurate!)


----------



## Ron660 (Aug 14, 2014)

Stihlman441 said:


> Ported 660 V ported 461 both same 25'' chain,bar,wood 8 pins.
> Both low hrs saws and a tad fat.



That was close. I calculated the 660 only 5.8% faster. Might be a bigger difference in larger wood with a longer bar. Nice video.


----------



## wigglesworth (Aug 14, 2014)

MustangMike said:


> Even the 0 series had their differences, like the 10 mm 044s and D chamber 046s, and some of the MS models will run right with them. I think some of it was "luck of the draw" on the cylinder. It was hard to distinguish the performance of my 046, my brother's 460, and my 044 until I got the 046 ported, and that saw had 175 psi before it was ported. When I use it now I smile, and it is worth the wt difference.
> 
> My 044 also easily out ran an 066 (both with 24" bar), so the 0 did not ensure performance either. (I'm sure the bigger saw had more torque for a longer bar)
> 
> We also know that dual port muffs went away due to the EPA, not because Stihl wanted to produce a more anemic saw. Ditto carb limiters.



In just the 046 alone, the amount of cylinder changes were staggering. Port timing, shapes, transfer shapes and sizes, combustion chamber shapes and sizes all changed during the years, and not just from manufacturing variance. But in my findings, the earliest 046 cylinders had all the right stuff and were head and shoulders above the rest. But u gotta know what to look for. 

The 066 differences are even more nutz. I'd go into detail here, but I'd need a page or so for just the flywheel/coil combinations. The cylinders on em now are just a shadow of what they used to be. Way, way, way different. Again, the stock redlight 066 will absolutely dog walk a stock 660. Ask Randy about the one I built him back in the day.... 

The 044 secrets I'm keeping to myself. 

The muffler covers, I agree. EPA all the way. Carb limiters too, but they didn't just slap limiters on em, lots of internal changes too....


----------



## Hedgerow (Aug 14, 2014)

Hooray 064!!!!!


----------



## wigglesworth (Aug 14, 2014)

Hedgerow said:


> Hooray 064!!!!!



Don't even get me started on those... 


I'm just ecstatic this thread isn't about a 562...


----------



## mdavlee (Aug 14, 2014)

wigglesworth said:


> In just the 046 alone, the amount of cylinder changes were staggering. Port timing, shapes, transfer shapes and sizes, combustion chamber shapes and sizes all changed during the years, and not just from manufacturing variance. But in my findings, the earliest 046 cylinders had all the right stuff and were head and shoulders above the rest. But u gotta know what to look for.
> 
> The 066 differences are even more nutz. I'd go into detail here, but I'd need a page or so for just the flywheel/coil combinations. The cylinders on em now are just a shadow of what they used to be. Way, way, way different. Again, the stock redlight 066 will absolutely dog walk a stock 660. Ask Randy about the one I built him back in the day....
> 
> ...



I've got a D shaped 046 jug with long blowdown. I was hoping it was the early one. I've had several 066 jugs and all of them had different port timing.


----------



## Mastermind (Aug 14, 2014)

wigglesworth said:


> In just the 046 alone, the amount of cylinder changes were staggering. Port timing, shapes, transfer shapes and sizes, combustion chamber shapes and sizes all changed during the years, and not just from manufacturing variance. But in my findings, the earliest 046 cylinders had all the right stuff and were head and shoulders above the rest. But u gotta know what to look for.
> 
> The 066 differences are even more nutz. I'd go into detail here, but I'd need a page or so for just the flywheel/coil combinations. The cylinders on em now are just a shadow of what they used to be. Way, way, way different. Again, the stock redlight 066 will absolutely dog walk a stock 660. Ask Randy about the one I built him back in the day....
> 
> ...



Who are you, and what do you know about saws?


----------



## blsnelling (Aug 14, 2014)

mdavlee said:


> I've got a D shaped 046 jug with long blowdown. I was hoping it was the early one. I've had several 066 jugs and all of them had different port timing.


Short blowdown is the secret to a great running 046/460.


----------



## MustangMike (Aug 14, 2014)

wigglesworth said:


> In just the 046 alone, the amount of cylinder changes were staggering. Port timing, shapes, transfer shapes and sizes, combustion chamber shapes and sizes all changed during the years, and not just from manufacturing variance. But in my findings, the earliest 046 cylinders had all the right stuff and were head and shoulders above the rest. But u gotta know what to look for.
> 
> The 066 differences are even more nutz. I'd go into detail here, but I'd need a page or so for just the flywheel/coil combinations. The cylinders on em now are just a shadow of what they used to be. Way, way, way different. Again, the stock redlight 066 will absolutely dog walk a stock 660. Ask Randy about the one I built him back in the day....
> 
> ...



Finding a 10mm 044 is always a good start .... especially since I don't have the depth of knowledge you have regarding them! With a dp and HD-2 filter, they almost run like a ported saw. Just today I let a local pro who was doing work w/a 460 2 houses down try my 044, and he said it was stronger than his 460. Then I let him try my ported 046 ... he was impressed!

The difference is, the 044 impresses w/o being ported!


----------



## chadihman (Aug 14, 2014)

Ron660 said:


> Chad, I have a recently ported 660 if you're still interested in testing.


Yes if you are. Maybe get it good and broken in first.


----------



## chadihman (Aug 14, 2014)

Stihlman441 said:


> Ported 660 V ported 461 both same 25'' chain,bar,wood 8 pins.
> Both low hrs saws and a tad fat.



Thanks but I'd really like to see stock vs stock.


----------



## wigglesworth (Aug 14, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Who are you, and what do you know about saws?



Just a nobody....


----------



## Mastermind (Aug 14, 2014)

Figures. opcorn:


----------



## SquareFile (Aug 14, 2014)

wigglesworth said:


> In just the 046 alone, the amount of cylinder changes were staggering. Port timing, shapes, transfer shapes and sizes, combustion chamber shapes and sizes all changed during the years, and not just from manufacturing variance. But in my findings, the earliest 046 cylinders had all the right stuff and were head and shoulders above the rest. But u gotta know what to look for.
> 
> The 066 differences are even more nutz. I'd go into detail here, but I'd need a page or so for just the flywheel/coil combinations. The cylinders on em now are just a shadow of what they used to be. Way, way, way different. Again, the stock redlight 066 will absolutely dog walk a stock 660. Ask Randy about the one I built him back in the day....
> 
> ...


 

I vote sticky


Tired of 10mm,HD-2,DP cover


Educate me on 064 diff


----------



## chadihman (Aug 14, 2014)

Ran four saws on the dyno this evening. I did the banana stuffed 261 cm again against my bananaless 261cm up to 13k this time. I smell like a chainsaw and I'm Tuckered out so the calculations and line graph will have to wait till tomorrow.


----------



## Hedgerow (Aug 14, 2014)

shawn nolder said:


> I vote sticky
> 
> 
> Tired of 10mm,HD-2,DP cover
> ...


064 = what all 066 and 660's wish they were..
064 with kolbenschmidt cylinder = best of the best...


----------



## MustangMike (Aug 15, 2014)

chadihman said:


> Ran four saws on the dyno this evening. I did the banana stuffed 261 cm again against my bananaless 261cm up to 13k this time. I smell like a chainsaw and I'm Tuckered out so the calculations and line graph will have to wait till tomorrow.



Please let us know if you start a new thread, I don't like to miss your posts. And thanks for all the good work, we appreciate it. (U R like a Chainsaw Rock Star, right in there w/the builders)!


----------



## cgraham1 (Aug 15, 2014)

shawn nolder said:


> Tired of 10mm,HD-2,DP cover


I know, right! 


Hedgerow said:


> 064 with kolbenschmidt cylinder = best of the best...


I agree... 

Mine's got some of those bananas everyone keeps talking about, too...


----------



## Mastermind (Aug 15, 2014)

Bananas huh? 



I wish it was that simple.


----------



## weedkilla (Aug 15, 2014)

Mastermind said:


> Bananas huh?
> 
> 
> 
> I wish it was that simple.


It works for gearboxes, why not saws?


----------

