Back to your corners boys.
661 Oil Test 32:1 vs 40:1 vs 50:1 ?
- Thread starter redbull660
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
porsche965
Addicted to ArboristSite
I haven't left mine yet (corner, nor will I) lol. But will tone things down. Guys bring claims and then don't or can't back it up. Don't own the saws in question, I do and can 
Thanks for the post SVK.
So, just why should Red Bull even continue with this "test" that at least Bwalker, or suspecting many others, will not consider? He should save his money and time IMO. OR.....OR.....charge for viewing the results!
Like Pay Per View! I'm in! $20 ?? Sounds fair to me. Wallets boys?
Thanks for the post SVK.
So, just why should Red Bull even continue with this "test" that at least Bwalker, or suspecting many others, will not consider? He should save his money and time IMO. OR.....OR.....charge for viewing the results!
Like Pay Per View! I'm in! $20 ?? Sounds fair to me. Wallets boys?
Redbull, can do as he wishes, free country and all.
And I never said I wouldn't consider the results, just that they are not applicable to anything I own.
And I never said I wouldn't consider the results, just that they are not applicable to anything I own.
porsche965
Addicted to ArboristSite
What about AS site being in charge of the viewing results of a Pay per View for expensive testing like this?
Great income for the Arborist Site and the disclosure of the results. It isn't fair that ONE guy should take on the amount of expense for many others for many years to come, all alone. Those that benefit should pay.
I for one, have always been in agreement that Arboristsite should charge for membership. The Advertisers don't pay in enough for the hard work that goes on behind the scenes on a site like this.
Great income for the Arborist Site and the disclosure of the results. It isn't fair that ONE guy should take on the amount of expense for many others for many years to come, all alone. Those that benefit should pay.
I for one, have always been in agreement that Arboristsite should charge for membership. The Advertisers don't pay in enough for the hard work that goes on behind the scenes on a site like this.
I wouldn't pay a dime for this test as it just doesn't matter to me.
If Redbull wants to seek out investors for a private test have at it. I would not be one.
I think these tests are cool/insane..i wouldnt pay a dime to find out the results thats for sure 
porsche965
Addicted to ArboristSite
I think that would be the majority. As expected
I have zero issue with RB or his test, I merely made suggestions, he is free to ignore them and do as he wishes. Now that he seems to be running saws better making timed cuts, I simply suggest a non Mtronic saw may be a better idea if possible.
Now lately I've found some issues with Stihl chain, the tooth lengths have been all over the place, which whiten reason isn't a big deal and is pretty normal for stock chain. What does make a big difference is depth gauge height. I have some fresh 3/8 RS chain with around .015" of clearance, needles to say the chain didn't cut very well without setting the depth gauges to the right height.
Now lately I've found some issues with Stihl chain, the tooth lengths have been all over the place, which whiten reason isn't a big deal and is pretty normal for stock chain. What does make a big difference is depth gauge height. I have some fresh 3/8 RS chain with around .015" of clearance, needles to say the chain didn't cut very well without setting the depth gauges to the right height.
porsche965
Addicted to ArboristSite
When I've encountered depth inconsistencies in chain I strap it on the strongest saw I have and the HP usually makes it disappear. The smaller cc saws, it really shows up. Agree with the inconsistencies in chain as of late.
Chain is but one of the variables present. Human operator, tuning/Mtronic, material being cut that variable density and size. And these are just for the low hanging fruits.
Agreed. With that said baby steps are better than non at all.
This is why I would eliminate all but 32:1, 40:1, and 50:1. Going any closer than that is definitely beyond the percentage of error.
redbull660
Addicted to ArboristSite
final list -
1. stihl ultra 8.5 viscosity 432F flash to see what the saw "should do"
2. R50 19.1 visc 550F flash -
so you have high flash points and opposite viscosity
3. Hp2 17.8 visc 221F flash
4. k2 13.5 visc 240F flash
5. 2r 8.5 visc 255 F flash
so here you have declining visc with the nearly same flash #s.
I don't know if the visc or flash will play a part in results. But I guess I figured I'd try to at least use some method in picking the oils for this first test.
predictions... I'm going to go with the low viscosity... I think it'll come down to stihl 50:1 or 2r at say 40:1 but kinda hoping hp2 takes the cake. I like honda. But mainly I just hope there is a clear winner in all of this.
1. stihl ultra 8.5 viscosity 432F flash to see what the saw "should do"
2. R50 19.1 visc 550F flash -
so you have high flash points and opposite viscosity
3. Hp2 17.8 visc 221F flash
4. k2 13.5 visc 240F flash
5. 2r 8.5 visc 255 F flash
so here you have declining visc with the nearly same flash #s.
I don't know if the visc or flash will play a part in results. But I guess I figured I'd try to at least use some method in picking the oils for this first test.
predictions... I'm going to go with the low viscosity... I think it'll come down to stihl 50:1 or 2r at say 40:1 but kinda hoping hp2 takes the cake. I like honda. But mainly I just hope there is a clear winner in all of this.
KG441c
Keith
Ill pick k2. It has been serving me well lately
K2 is decent but seriously over priced IMO.
Trx250r180
Saw polisher
Dumonde has the quickest response of the ones i have tried ,and ran best in a wider range of tuning.
I sure haven't noticed any differance with it.
Tuning is what mostly effects response.
Trx250r180
Saw polisher
In my stock saw was not as noticable but my hybrid was
My plug was also the cleanest of all i have tried,piston top of what i could see through the mufflet was also
