# Stihl 064 ... highest power to weight of any big saw?



## 046 (Feb 3, 2011)

We've been hearing for years about how Stihl 064 is barely heavier than a MS460, 
but nearly powerfully as MS660 and tough as nails .... Well it's true!

now that I've got all at the same time. Stihl 064, 066, MS660 and 046. 
IMHO Stihl 064 has the highest power to weight ratio of any big saw? 

some folks call 064 an in between saw. might as well step up to 066.
well I disagree, Stihl 064 is considerably lighter and is closer to MS460. 

if you've got to block down a large trunk up high and need raw HP.... 
064 may have the highest power to weight available for any big saw. 

does anyone know of any big chainsaw with a higher power to weight ratio?


----------



## redoakneck (Feb 3, 2011)

A scale and a dyno, all else is just speculation!!!


----------



## nmurph (Feb 3, 2011)

well, going by mfg hp specs and actual weights of both an 064 and a 7900, the 7900 is slightly more powerful per lb of weight. .462hp/lb vs .431hp/lb


----------



## adam32 (Feb 3, 2011)

046 said:


> does anyone know of any big chainsaw with a higher power to weight ratio?



Yup...a big bore 064...


----------



## WACutter (Feb 3, 2011)

*The 064 is a Classic*

I'm not sure about the highest power to weight, but it has to have one of the best. Count me in at the 064 Fan Club.

I don't use it too much anymore, but I love mine. It's been bumped around a lot, but it's pretty low mileage. This saw is like the 260 for me in that it is dead reliable....it ALWAYS starts in 3 pulls. 
Of course, it pulls waaaaay better :good:


----------



## nmurph (Feb 3, 2011)

stock saw the 7900 is tops (not sure if the 681 weighs the same as the 7900). non-stock, it just a matter of how much do you want to spend.


----------



## 046 (Feb 3, 2011)

Domar 7900 is listed as 13.6lb, an 78.5 cc saw ... has anyone actually put one on a scale to confirm? PS-7900

we all know how reliable factory figures can be...




nmurph said:


> well, going by mfg hp specs and actual weights of both an 064 and a 7900, the 7900 is slightly more powerful per lb of weight. .462hp/lb vs .431hp/lb


----------



## nmurph (Feb 3, 2011)

both saws were cleaned and emptied. scales have been checked against the PB postal scales at work. they are within a couple tenths of an ounce.


----------



## WACutter (Feb 3, 2011)

*7900 and 064*

7900 @6.3hp and 6.4 Kg (14.1) lbs - From KWF Online. .447HP/lb. I think this is pretty close to what mine weighed when I got it, a little over 14 lbs.


064 @ 6.5hp and 7.1 Kg (15.6 lbs) from Stihl. .417HP/lb. Mine is the wrap model, so it is probably a bit heavier than this. I am too lazy to weigh it.....


Even in the best case, the 7900 has the 064 beat for hp to weight....torque is probably a different story given the displacement difference.


----------



## johnnylabguy (Feb 3, 2011)

I was waiting to read how many posts it would take for someone to chime in with the 7900. Also the best bang for the buck too. Got mine brand spankin' new for $680 out the door. Not going to find that with any big stihls. The 064 is a better looker in my mind though. But my wallet and my grin sure love the Dolmar!


----------



## nmurph (Feb 3, 2011)

WACutter said:


> 7900 @6.3hp and 6.4 Kg (14.1) lbs - From KWF Online. .447HP/lb. I think this is pretty close to what mine weighed when I got it, a little over 14 lbs.
> 
> 
> 064 @ 6.5hp and 7.1 Kg (15.6 lbs) from Stihl. .417HP/lb. Mine is the wrap model, so it is probably a bit heavier than this. I am too lazy to weigh it.....
> ...


 
that KWF weight must be without the clutch cover. i have four 7900's and they all weigh the same.


----------



## Brian VT (Feb 3, 2011)

I want a 7900 really bad, and my dealer has one he would give me a deal on, but I just can't justify it for firewood. 
Anything that I'd need the 7900 for would be too much work to move and split.  
I pass when I'm offered those big stems any more, unless I can just have some fun cutting it up and leave it there. lol


----------



## 046 (Feb 3, 2011)

thanks for the actual weights nmurph!!!! 

7900 14lb 10oz actual vs factory spec's are subject to fudge factor. 

did anyone else notice the number times Stihl 064 got mentioned in the most durable saw thread? http://www.arboristsite.com/chainsaw/162228.htm



nmurph said:


> that KWF weight must be without the clutch cover. i have four 7900's and they all weigh the same.


----------



## nmurph (Feb 3, 2011)

check those scales again; the 7900 is 14lb 10oz, the 064 is 15lb 4oz., and no, the 7900 noses the 064 out for P2W.


----------



## SkippyKtm (Feb 3, 2011)

Brian VT said:


> I want a 7900 really bad, and my dealer has one he would give me a deal on, but I just can't justify it for firewood.
> Anything that I'd need the 7900 for would be too much work to move and split.
> I pass when I'm offered those big stems any more, unless I can just have some fun cutting it up and leave it there. lol


 
I don't mind the big stuff, any of the decent logs go to my mill, and the low quality, big stuff i cut into stove lengths then "noodle" it into small enough chunks to lift. I usually bring 2 saws anyway, a little limber- say my trusty 346, and grab a big boy like an 066 or 394.


----------



## WACutter (Feb 3, 2011)

nmurph said:


> check those scales again; the 7900 is 14lb 10oz, the 064 is 15lb 4oz., and no, the 7900 noses the 064 out for P2W.


 
I'm going to have to measure my 7900 again. I didn't think it came out to 14 lbs 10. Could the BB weigh a bit more? My scale is older and probably less accurate than yours!

Both saws are awesome. The 064 is a classic, and the 7900 is certain to be.....


----------



## 046 (Feb 3, 2011)

oppsss... give me a bit... will be pulling out my scales soon. 

here's a few listed spec's

038 044 046 064 ms440 ms441 ms460 specs facts

Trying to get the specs together on the most popular saws:
if you have anything to add you can post, relevant information only.


Stihl 038 s 3.4 kw 4.557 hp 66.8cm Bore 50 Stroke 34 Max rpm 13,500
Stihl 038 Mag 3.6 kw 4.825 hp 72.2cm Bore 52 Stroke 34 Max rpm 13,500 14.6lb
Stihl 044 (pre 2000 yr) 5.1 hp 13,500 rpm 50mm piston 10mm wrist pin
upgrade big bore kit not available due to 10mm wrist pin. (saws w 12mm wrist pin are upgradeable) 13 lbs wow!
Stihl 044 magnum 5.4 hp 13,500 rpm 50mm pn. Upgradeable 12mm wrist pin
stihl 046 magnum 6.1 hp 13,500 rpm 52mm pn. 14.3 lbs
Stihl 064 4.8kw 6.5hp 85cm Bore 52 Stroke 40 Max rpm 13,000 15.7lbs
stihl ms440 5.4 hp 13,500 rpm 50mm pn. 12mm wrist pin 13lb
stihl ms441 5.5 hp 13,500 rpm 14.8 lbs
stihl ms460 6.0 hp 13,500 rpm 52mm pn. 14.6 lbs
if you want to add anything to this post that would be helpful. thanx 

http://www.arboristsite.com/chainsaw/150936.htm

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

someone weight 064 and 046

14.6 vs. 14.9 pds. ca. 78 vs 85 cc

And you can put a 066 top end on the 064, or a less quality 066 BB......to get into the 90cc range

P.S. my 60cc 036 is lighter than my 51cc 028S, and that super is 11.8 pds, what 60cc boat anchor are you running?

P.P.S. I still like my old Homie Super XL it's a heavy but torquey 60cc beast with no AV, but will stump a 24" bar that the new revvers can't handle 

http://www.arboristsite.com/chainsaw/150936.htm#post2502312



nmurph said:


> check those scales again; the 7900 is 14lb 10oz, the 064 is 15lb 4oz., and no, the 7900 noses the 064 out for P2W.


----------



## johnnylabguy (Feb 3, 2011)

BrianVT, that's how you justify a 7900! You can buck them and then noodle them into smaller chunks in short order with a big saw! My 75 year old Dad was sweating how he was going to split some 34+ inch rounds of pin oak he dropped on his property when I pulled out the Dolmar and sliced 'em up in short order into easy to handle chunks. I think he was impressed(you can't do that easily with a smaller saw like his 025).
He still asked me to try to noodle a little staighter as the splits were coming out a little too angled for his liking for stacking. (These retirees can get a wee bit anal ya know!)


----------



## 046 (Feb 3, 2011)

blsnelling says 064 is only 5oz more than 046 ... that sounds about right last time I weight the saws. 



blsnelling said:


> They only weigh 5 oz more than a 046. Hard to beat that.


 http://www.arboristsite.com/chainsaw/142409-2.htm#post2336073


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 3, 2011)

An 064 only weighs 5 oz more than a 046. As far as the 7900 is concerned, can you bolt a 93 or 99cc topend on it? Didn't think so Is there a factory bolt on unlimited coil available for your saw? Nope? Are dealers around the corner anywhere in America? Nope again. I'll take the 064. 99cc right here, baby!


----------



## tallfarmboy (Feb 3, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> An 064 only weighs 5 oz more than a 046. As far as the 7900 is concerned, can you bolt a 93 or 99cc topend on it? Didn't think so Is there a factory bolt on unlimited coil available for your saw? Nope? Are dealers around the corner anywhere in America? Nope again. I'll take the 064. 99cc right here, baby!


 
That is a nice looking 064BB there Brad... Thinking about doing a little porting on mine... and MAYBE screwing it up and having to put on a BB kit... <evil laugh>


----------



## WACutter (Feb 4, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> An 064 only weighs 5 oz more than a 046. As far as the 7900 is concerned, can you bolt a 93 or 99cc topend on it? Didn't think so Is there a factory bolt on unlimited coil available for your saw? Nope? Are dealers around the corner anywhere in America? Nope again. I'll take the 064. 99cc right here, baby!
> 
> That saw looks brand new. Nice work.......


----------



## RandyMac (Feb 4, 2011)

99cc, now we are talking. Funny that a sub 90cc saw is now "big".
Oh yeah, we are in the 21st century, everything is watered down.


----------



## 2dogs (Feb 4, 2011)

RandyMac said:


> 99cc, now we are talking. Funny that a sub 90cc saw is now "big".
> Oh yeah, we are in the 21st century, everything is watered down.


 
You're back!?


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

My understanding is the 064's were unreliable due to the cranks snapping off on the flywheel side. The early 066 also had similar issues, it had to do with the heavy flywheel and too small of a crank, that's one of the reasons they went to a lightweight plastic flywheel.

I ran a strong 064 for quite a bit and I liked it, but I'd never trade it for a 7900, it's just not a modern or refined saw.


----------



## RandyMac (Feb 4, 2011)

2dogs said:


> You're back!?


 
For the time being.
A little bird told me that I was unbanned for life.
Last night was the first time I had real access in nearly a month.
I seem to have been given limited functions, be nice to be able to edit my posts, fix my sigline.


----------



## olyeller (Feb 4, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> An 064 only weighs 5 oz more than a 046. As far as the 7900 is concerned, can you bolt a 93 or 99cc topend on it? Didn't think so Is there a factory bolt on unlimited coil available for your saw? Nope? Are dealers around the corner anywhere in America? Nope again. I'll take the 064. 99cc right here, baby!


 


Brad: What setup do you have for the muffler on your BB 064? How can I best increase breathing on the exhaust side of the 064 BB when going from 85cc to 99cc? Will the 066/660 dual-port cover bolt on to the 064 muffler?

Thanks,

Olyeller


----------



## 046 (Feb 4, 2011)

it's easy to weight ... but but but ... hard to get access to a calibrated known to be accurate scales. then factor pita of getting ALL fluids out of chainsaw to get an accurate reading. 

weighting 064 and 046 side by side with the same scale produces believable weight differences. 064 being 5oz heavier than 046 is very believable. besides what scales says... have ran 046 and 064 side by side for a number of years. 

factory spec's listed in promo's are notorious for fudge factor. but weights listed in model specific owners manual tend to be more believable. 

did a bit more digging and found an original Stihl 046 owners manual which list weight of 046 at 6.5Kg or 14.3lbs (14lb 5oz) 

so 064 should weight 14lb 10oz ... where's sawtroll when you need em?
he's the acknowledged keeper of data like this....


----------



## Trigger-Time (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> My understanding is the 064's were unreliable due to the cranks snapping off on the flywheel side. The early 066 also had similar issues, it had to do with the heavy flywheel and too small of a crank, that's one of the reasons they went to a lightweight plastic flywheel.
> 
> I ran a strong 064 for quite a bit and I liked it, but I'd never trade it for a 7900, it's just not a modern or refined saw.



Never heard of 064's snapping off cranks, it was the 066 as when 066
came out the fly wheel was made wider for better cooling. Out of the
2 dozen or so early 066's I have had my hands on I have yet to find one
with the crank broken off. I know it did happen, I just have never seen
one in person.


TT


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> My understanding is the 064's were unreliable due to the cranks snapping off on the flywheel side. The early 066 also had similar issues, it had to do with the heavy flywheel and too small of a crank, that's one of the reasons they went to a lightweight plastic flywheel.
> 
> I ran a strong 064 for quite a bit and I liked it, but I'd never trade it for a 7900, it's just not a modern or refined saw.


 


Trigger-Time said:


> Never heard of 064's snapping off cranks, it was the 066 as when 066
> came out the fly wheel was made wider for better cooling. Out of the
> 2 dozen or so early 066's I have had my hands on I have yet to find one
> with the crank broken off. I know it did happen, I just have never seen
> one in person.


 
The 064 flywheel is significantly smaller and lighter than an 066 flywheel. I see that as a good thing, and am not too concerned about it. Also, it's just as modern as the current MS660 and MS460, two of the most loved saws in the Stihl lineup.


----------



## paladin (Feb 4, 2011)

Alot of the 064's are 15-20+ years old I will like to see if the 7900's hold up that long. I have run a 7900 a little, but I prefer my 064 or 046.


----------



## 046 (Feb 4, 2011)

true enough ... that's why the remaining super clean Stihl 064's are so desirable. mine is low hours and dead stock. 

sure it's tempting to do a big bore 99cc kit. but lack of power has never been an issue. leaving my low hours 064 alone. saving BB kit for next 064 that comes my way. 

seems Dolmar 7900 is main contender to 064 in PW ratio. not bad for a 15+ year old saw. 

ergonomics decides who like which saw anyways. my preference is Stihl vs all others I've tried so far. 064 feels/operates just like any current pro model Stihl. 

since 064 came before 066 ... 064, 024, etc were the front runners for the modern Stihl ergonomics. does anyone know which model came out first? 064, 024 of the 0 series? 

sure glad marketing folks has not managed to screw up a good thing.. yet... 



paladin said:


> Alot of the 064's are 15-20+ years old I will like to see if the 7900's hold up that long. I have run a 7900 a little, but I prefer my 064 or 046.


----------



## nmurph (Feb 4, 2011)

my 064BB is definitely not as smooth as a 7900.


----------



## watsonr (Feb 4, 2011)

I have one of each, the 064 is stock and the 7900 was until last night when forced to put the Bailey's kit on it. The 7900 will get tested this weekend...but I can say that the 7900 is smooth, but the 064 is too! I like them both, been picking one of them over 044 lately. The 7900 with 20" is like a light saber!


----------



## fields_mj (Feb 4, 2011)

I bought my 064 last spring because I had a large ash that I needed to cut, and I have a large oak in the yard that is going to need to come down. I was looking for an 046 at the time, and only because I didn't have the $$ for an 066. I stumbled across the 064 without knowing much about it. The guy selling it was the same that I bought my 036 from. I had asked about the saw on here, and didn't get much for replies. I did a quick search which came up rather empty. The saw was $375 with a 28" bar and a full comp 404 chain. I figured for my limited usage, even if it wasn't the best saw, it would do the job for that price. MAN am I glad that I bought it! Turns out that the guy had built it and went ahead and put an 066 top end on it (wish it had actually be a big bore, but thats okay). It is now working very well as my highly portable log splitter, and I get a warm fuzzy feeling inside every time I read a post like this. Makes me wonder why Stihl ever bothered making an 066 instead of just increasing the bore on the 064. 

Thanks for the smile,
Mark


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drank.

From the research I've done on this and other sites, it's pretty common knowledge the 064's had weak cranks, bearings, and cases. That's why they were so light, and why the 066/660 weighs more.


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drank.
> 
> From the research I've done on this and other sites, it's pretty common knowledge the 064's had weak cranks, bearings, and cases. That's why they were so light, and why the 066/660 weighs more.


 
They increased the big end rod bearing from 12 to 13 rollers in the 066. That change was made while the metal flywheel was being used. If concerned, this crank can be used in the 064. That eliminates any crank concerns. The other bearings and cases were never an issue that I'm aware of. They increased the size of the flywheel side crank bearing to accomodate the larger stub needed for the larger and heavier 066 flywheel. Again, this should not be a concern with the smaller and lighter 064 flywheel. If still concerned, then simply use a later 066 metal flywheel case and crank and use the 064 flywheel and starter housing.


----------



## procarbine2k1 (Feb 4, 2011)

064, one of the best saws ever built- period. Not saying that it is better than this, that, or the other. But compare the weight, power, and longevity of this saw to any other and the 064 will still shine through. Ive had a few of them, I only have one left and it will never leave.


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> They increased the big end rod bearing from 12 to 13 rollers in the 066. That change was made while the metal flywheel was being used. If concerned, this crank can be used in the 064. That eliminates any crank concerns. The other bearings and cases were never an issue that I'm aware of. They increased the size of the flywheel side crank bearing to accomodate the larger stub needed for the larger and heavier 066 flywheel. Again, this should not be a concern with the smaller and lighter 064 flywheel. If still concerned, then simply use a later 066 metal flywheel case and crank and use the 064 flywheel and starter housing.


 
If you have to do all that I think it would just be easier to get a 660. That way everything is stock and you don't have to worry about any issues down the line.  The 064 and 066/660 are pretty much the same saws correct? if so the 066/660 is simply an improved 064. Am I correct in assuming this?

BTW Hi Brad!


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

procarbine2k1 said:


> 064, one of the best saws ever built- period. Not saying that it is better than this, that, or the other. But compare the weight, power, and longevity of this saw to any other and the 064 will still shine through. Ive had a few of them, I only have one left and it will never leave.


 
No saw is the best saw ever built period.

You guys sure have your Stihl goggles on in this thread.:hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> If you have to do all that I think it would just be easier to get a 660. That way everything is stock and you don't have to worry about any issues down the line.  The 064 and 066/660 are pretty much the same saws correct? if so the 066/660 is simply an improved 064. Am I correct in assuming this?
> 
> BTW Hi Brad!


 
Hi Andre Playing with the 064 is fun simply due to the reduced weight. If all you want is the power, then sure, buy a 066/660. I just think its fun to have 99cc of power in a power head that only weighs a few ounces more than a 046. That's all.


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> Hi Andre Playing with the 064 is fun simply due to the reduced weight. If all you want is the power, then sure, buy a 066/660. I just think its fun to have 99cc of power in a power head that only weighs a few ounces more than a 046. That's all.


 
No doubt that, and they do look nice.


----------



## procarbine2k1 (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> If you have to do all that I think it would just be easier to get a 660. That way everything is stock and you don't have to worry about any issues down the line.  The 064 and 066/660 are pretty much the same saws correct? if so the 066/660 is simply an improved 064. Am I correct in assuming this?
> 
> BTW Hi Brad!


 
066/660 new, but not improved haha. 064 doesnt carry much weight difference, but does feel smaller, more nimble. I think mostly because of the thin recoil cover. Wasnt it you that had that screaming 064 a while back? I thought it was, whoever it was that had it... it sure was a good sounding/ running saw!


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

procarbine2k1 said:


> Wasnt it you that had that screaming 064 a while back? I thought it was, whoever it was that had it... it sure was a good sounding/ running saw!


 
That was my previous 064 that I sold to OutdoorLiving. I missed it, and have now ended up building myself another.


----------



## Meadow Beaver (Feb 4, 2011)

paladin said:


> Alot of the 064's are 15-20+ years old I will like to see if the 7900's hold up that long. I have run a 7900 a little, but I prefer my 064 or 046.


 
Closer to 30 years, the 064 was first released in late '85.


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

In my search for another 064 to build myself, I ended up with two. The one being sold I just listed on eBay, LINK. If interested, PM me and maybe we can work a deal for you.


----------



## procarbine2k1 (Feb 4, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> That was my previous 064 that I sold to OutdoorLiving. I missed it, and have now ended up building myself another.


 
Well if you dont mind me saying, that was quite an impressive saw!


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

procarbine2k1 said:


> Well if you dont mind me saying, that was quite an impressive saw!


 
Especially after we put the popup in it. That's when we couldn't hardly get it away from Andre He's just a Dolmar snob and won't admit it now:hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## procarbine2k1 (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> No saw is the best saw ever built period.
> 
> You guys sure have your Stihl goggles on in this thread.:hmm3grin2orange:


 
Haha, w/e you say Andre!


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

It was my vid but not my saw. It was a great running saw, just not my style.:cool2:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/gW3pKVAMfRA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## procarbine2k1 (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> It was my vid but not my saw. It was a great running saw, but not my style.:cool2:


 
Thats the one... Style my butt, I can tell you are are smiles running that thing without ever seeing your face! Closet Stihl lover hahaha


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> That's when we couldn't hardly get it away from Andre He's just a Dolmar snob and won't admit it now:hmm3grin2orange:





procarbine2k1 said:


> Thats the one... Style my butt, I can tell you are are smiles running that thing without ever seeing your face! Closet Stihl lover hahaha



I know nothing.:msp_rolleyes:


----------



## Locust Cutter (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> It was my vid but not my saw. It was a great running saw, just not my style.:cool2:
> 
> <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/gW3pKVAMfRA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


 
Wow, that thing's a beast w/that short bar!


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 4, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> I know nothing.:msp_rolleyes:


----------



## Meadow Beaver (Feb 4, 2011)

procarbine2k1 said:


> 066/660 new, but not improved haha. 064 doesnt carry much weight difference, *but does feel smaller*, more nimble. I think mostly because of the thin recoil cover. Wasnt it you that had that screaming 064 a while back? I thought it was, whoever it was that had it... it sure was a good sounding/ running saw!


 
Funny you say that, I put an 064 and MS440 crankcases next to one another. The length and width were close to the same. But the 064 crankcase is a bit taller.


----------



## greg986547 (Feb 4, 2011)

Have any of you guys had trouble with the BB rings or pistons from Baileys? I'm looking to do a BB on my 064 and was wondering about ring/piston options ... I'd heard the rings weren't great, but that was some time ago...


----------



## Andyshine77 (Feb 4, 2011)

The newer ones I know running seem to be doing OK. Some of the early ring issues probably had a lot to do with the port shapes, that and they weren't the best rings.


----------



## 046 (Feb 4, 2011)

nice video, nice job Brad ... man that 064 was flying!!!!


----------



## fields_mj (Feb 5, 2011)

Andyshine77 said:


> No saw is the best saw ever built period.
> 
> You guys sure have your Stihl goggles on in this thread.:hmm3grin2orange:


 
Yup, I like my Stihl goggles (actually it's a face shield). Since I buy and use older saws, it's just a matter of availablity. I can't seem to find any other brand of saw that runs as long and hard as my old Stihls. :hmm3grin2orange: 

I could never afford the sticker shock for a new Stihl saw, but I only have about $725 wrapped up in all three of mine total, and I paid too much for the 024 because it came with 4 new 18" RSC chains.


----------



## mdavlee (Feb 5, 2011)

I had an 064 several years ago. It didn't seem like it was doing anything the 460 couldn't do as fast or better except run a 36" bar. It was kinda slow at that in hardwood. It was bone stock and ran good. I sold it off to a friend and he has run it maybe 3 times in 5 years. They do have good power to weight but stock for stock I would say a 7900 is right with it in the power department and a bit lighter.


----------



## JJay03 (Feb 5, 2011)

blsnelling said:


> An 064 only weighs 5 oz more than a 046. As far as the 7900 is concerned, can you bolt a 93 or 99cc topend on it? Didn't think so Is there a factory bolt on unlimited coil available for your saw? Nope? Are dealers around the corner anywhere in America? Nope again. I'll take the 064. 99cc right here, baby!


 

 I would love to try that thing out.


----------



## jonbuilder (Feb 7, 2011)

*brouht your saw*



blsnelling said:


> In my search for another 064 to build myself, I ended up with two. The one being sold I just listed on eBay, LINK. If interested, PM me and maybe we can work a deal for you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## tallfarmboy (Feb 7, 2011)

Ahhh, the circle of life continues... Welcome to the forum!


----------



## blsnelling (Feb 7, 2011)

jonbuilder said:


> I brought your saw on ebay, mostly as a toy. I just got burned buying a 390 in a parking lot off craightslist “3 year old saw work great” any way a brought a service and owner’s manual and short story the saw was old had no clutch hub bearing or retainer and the oil gear was broken and spark sleeve threads striped. I replace all the above with a new clutch, clutch hub sprocket, air cleaner, and spark plug. I rushed into buying a saw because a 48” oak came down at my town center and free for fire wood just need to cut it up. Once I got the 390 working, I got about 5 cord which will last three years. I got almost as much into my 390 as I just paid for your saw and now that it working will resell
> jon



Hey Jon. Welcome to the forum. Your saw will be shipped out tomorrow. Hope you enjoy it.


----------



## nmurph (Feb 7, 2011)

jon, you got a great saw from a good guy. you can be assured the saw is top-notch. i have an 064BB and i can tell you it is an absolute hoss. with brad's extra work, trees will lose their leaves bf you get there!!


----------



## 046 (Feb 7, 2011)

welcome to AS... and congrats on a fine 064!!!
unlike some questionable deals on ebay... you have just purchased a saw from a very reputable saw builder. 



jonbuilder said:


> blsnelling said:
> 
> 
> > I brought your saw on ebay, mostly as a toy. I just got burned buying a 390 in a parking lot off craightslist “3 year old saw work great” any way a brought a service and owner’s manual and short story the saw was old had no clutch hub bearing or retainer and the oil gear was broken and spark sleeve threads striped. I replace all the above with a new clutch, clutch hub sprocket, air cleaner, and spark plug. I rushed into buying a saw because a 48” oak came down at my town center and free for fire wood just need to cut it up. Once I got the 390 working, I got about 5 cord which will last three years. I got almost as much into my 390 as I just paid for your saw and now that it working will resell
> > jon


----------



## 046 (Jan 8, 2020)

another blast from the past ...064 is still running strong!


----------



## Stihl Game (Apr 17, 2021)

046 said:


> another blast from the past ...064 is still running strong!


Absolutely! I still use a 064 though I have had the odd small issue with it, never anything I couldn’t fix myself.
The last one I bought had a misdiagnosed ‘failed crank bearing’
The actual problem was the flywheel had popped loose and needed Re-keyed!

a 20 minute repair and a saw for half its value!

mine is I believe one of the early ones in that it has the opaque fuel tank whereas my previous one I sold on had the more translucent tank.
Great and capable saws although I’ve bow got a 661 for extra reliability/backup on large clearfells after my 064 shook its exhaust (muffler to you Americans who mess with the English language )
Apart recently (metal fatigue) it was the original OEM one from new!

keep well folks
SG in Bonny Scotland


----------

