661 Oil Test 32:1 vs 40:1 vs 50:1 ?

[redbull660]

Right on dude.

So far you information has only confirmed what I've been saying all along more oil, the vast majority of the time, is better. Myself and others were right. Remember not long ago you were betting running 50:1 in a stock saw would give it enough added power it could cut with a ported saw running 32:1. Which was absurd, and showed how little you know. Mentioning what others say about myself in pm's is pretty childish. People who can't take constructive criticism never learn.

Your test proved all the oils work fine, nothing more. Your test isn't scientific data, it is what it is. Be happy with that and move on.

Say hello to John for me in you next pm.[emoji8]

ah come on man. Play fair. At least tell the truth. Don't leave out all the good stuff. Like you and your buddy blsnelling acting like 12 yr olds calling me all sorts of names. retard moron forest gump slow etc etc etc.

and uhh if I recall my stocker running 50:1 h1r was on avg only .4 seconds (in a 25sec cut) behind the ported 661 running 32:1 h1r. I did my homework on h1r. and proved ya all wrong. Did I get any apologies? Nope. Your immature and so is brad. End of story there.

Man, do you even read, watch, or listen before you reply? Both you and brad seem to have this same problem. When you figure it out, you'll understand why I wrote that.

 

[bwalker]

scientific method - yeah dude whatever. I've watched your videos "testing" your 260. And you think my methods are questionable. Get a mirror. We aren't even close in our methods.

validation - nah, I don't care what you think of me. Not in the least. What I worry about Joe Public coming on here spending his time reading all this and listening to you. You have this extreme need to always be right. Your closed minded and completely biased. You have incredible debating skills and thus can easily twist things to your liking. You ignore all valid information and pick the weakest link and attack that to discredit the whole. You are highly manipulative to no end, but to serve your own interests... inner need for being right and respected. Which makes you completely unreliable source of any information.

Bottom line is - I'm trying to share data and have people be open minded and actually learn something and try stuff and provide feedback so we can all get faster saws....ultimately I learn more and get a faster saw win win...because two heads is better than one, 3 or 4...etc. All your doing is using your debating skills to manipulate the thread for your own entertainment.

and nah I am not a conspiracy guy. See it's not just me...I get Pm's from guys all the time saying their experience agrees with what I'm showing. But they don't post because, no one seems to have the balls to stand up to you. Or the common one is it's like talking to a brick wall.

BTW - I was actually hoping 2r would come out on top on this test (why I included it over 710 or si-7 or schaeffers (all very low about equal viscosity to 2R) Because it would of made life a lot easier. You'd be right...granted we would have probably never heard the end of it. But at least we would have a fast oil. But it didn't work out that way and here we are.



and uhh so where is the data? Do something now. Help out. sheesh.

Nah dude I'm dead on.

I'm farting around in the yard with my 260, not making broad, unsubstantiated conclusions based on poorly thought out testing with a very minimal understanding of what it is your looking at.
Then you have all the conclusions, mostly false, that you arrive at..
The fact you have bootlickers pm'ing you in private is also telling. At least they are smart enough to not reveal their lack of knowledge.

 

[bwalker]

Correct, higher octane fuels have a multitude of solvents which raises octane but lowers the burn rate, which means less energy. Sorry it's been awhile sense I was on top of this particular subject, so bare with me.

Its just not the case, although millions of people seem to think so on the internet.

 

[bwalker]

man you forgot to use your favorite word ... we're all "culls" right?

I think crazy and extreme need for validation are better labels.. the culls are those that can't see that your tests although fun and interesting are not scientific, nor valid.

 

[Andyshine77]

Its just not the case, although millions of people seem to think so on the internet.

What about all the solvents or alcohol? Which we know has less energy, but raises octane.

 

[bwalker]

scientific method - yeah dude whatever. I've watched your videos "testing" your 260. And you think my methods are questionable. Get a mirror. We aren't even close in our methods.

validation - nah, I don't care what you think of me. Not in the least. What I worry about Joe Public coming on here spending his time reading all this and listening to you. You have this extreme need to always be right. Your closed minded and completely biased. You have incredible debating skills and thus can easily twist things to your liking. You ignore all valid information and pick the weakest link and attack that to discredit the whole. You are highly manipulative to no end, but to serve your own interests... inner need for being right and respected. Which makes you completely unreliable source of any information.

Bottom line is - I'm trying to share data and have people be open minded and actually learn something and try stuff and provide feedback so we can all get faster saws....ultimately I learn more and get a faster saw win win...because two heads is better than one, 3 or 4...etc. All your doing is using your debating skills to manipulate the thread for your own entertainment.

and nah I am not a conspiracy guy. See it's not just me...I get Pm's from guys all the time saying their experience agrees with what I'm showing. But they don't post because, no one seems to have the balls to stand up to you. Or the common one is it's like talking to a brick wall.

BTW - I was actually hoping 2r would come out on top on this test (why I included it over 710 or si-7 or schaeffers (all very low about equal viscosity to 2R) Because it would of made life a lot easier. You'd be right...granted we would have probably never heard the end of it. But at least we would have a fast oil. But it didn't work out that way and here we are.



and uhh so where is the data? Do something now. Help out. sheesh.

Nah dude I'm dead on.

One other thing, being right is a good thing, you might try it. And you have no data. What you have is an expensive waste of time that didn't prove anything.

 

[bwalker]

What about all the solvents or alcohol? Which we know has less energy, but raises octane.

Gasoline is all solvent of one kind or another. And my comments assume apples to apples when it pertains to ethanol content. An ethanol doped fuel will have less btu than an ethanol free fuel, which is one of the reasons ethanol is a scam.

 

[redbull660]

I'm farting around in the yard with my 260, not making broad, unsubstantiated conclusions based poorly thought out testing with a very minimal understanding of what it is your looking at.
Then you have all the conclusions, mostly false, that you arrive at..
The fact you have bootlickers pm'ing you in private is also telling. At least they are smart enough to not reveal their lack of knowledge.

man you forgot to use your favorite word ... we're all "culls" right?

poorly thought out. yeah like how you opened up that muffler on the 260.

One other thing, being right is a good thing, you might try it. And you have no data. What you have is an expensive waste of time that didn't prove anything.

I proved quite a bit. Your just butt hurt about it. Had 2r won, my test would of totally been valid. JUST like the one that showed 32:1 was best out of the ratios. See, you said that was valid. BUT this one that didn't fit what you wanted, is not.

 

[big t double]

Can any one tell me what is a good oil to fry a turkey in?

 

[bwalker]

It may be what the autotune can compensatr for or it could be the way the oil combusts , without testing a few other saws on the same day same logs etc hard to prove anything ,but in that 661 the r50 seemed to sound better to me.

man you forgot to use your favorite word ... we're all "culls" right?

poorly thought out. yeah like how you opened up that muffler on the 260.



I proved quite a bit. Your just butt hurt about it. Had 2r won, my test would of totally been valid. JUST like the one that showed 32:1 was best out of the ratios. See you said that was valid. But this one that didn't fit what you wanted is not.



well dudes you have fun speculating about what is what. I'll be back in 5 months to actually DO something again. Don't wear out your keyboards! Happy holidays

I got pretty decent gains with that muffler mod. I based my mod on the work of TW, who tested the same saw. And tested in a scientific manner, unlike your pseudo tests.
And again, I could care less about the results of your test, or if 2R won.. I haven't ran the stuff in months.
I didn't say your conclusions on ratio were valid at all. What I said is that your results jives with previous testing which was done right and it's what I expected. It also shot holes in your insane theory of minute changes in oil ratio causing large gains in power, but I digress.
If anyone is clouded by bias it woukd be you and your insane insistence on using that crap h1r. At least you have seen the light there. How long will it take you to do the same with that crappy boat oil your running in that 880?

 

[RedFir Down]

Can any one tell me what is a good oil to fry a turkey in?

That is a good question.
I would recommend you check with Redbull to find out.

 

[KenJax Tree]

Can any one tell me what is a good oil to fry a turkey in?

If i read this right, HP2 should cook the fastest at 32:1.

 

[bwalker]

I am thinking a 550 should out cut a 661 if I use RB'S preferred oil, bar and muffler mod! LMFAO!
Wonder if he has a prefered turkey fryer?
How about a shaving cream test next?

 

[bwalker]

That is a good question.
I would recommend you check with Redbull to find out.

His wife's going to be pissed when he mortgages the house to test fry oils...

 

[KG441c]

If i read this right, HP2 should cook the fastest at 32:1.

Only if mixed with 110 octane

 

[Big_Wood]

i ran 500 tanks of stihl regular 50:1 87 through my 576. that's likely more then most here will run in 20 years lol. that 576 still runs great. piston and cylinder are mint. of course, if you guys run a tank of 50:1 your saws will score so best stay with your saws tuned way to fat running 32:1 lol

 

[KenJax Tree]

Only if mixed with 110 octane

You go ahead and mix fuel in the fryer and let us know how that works out, if we don't hear back from you we'll know.

 

[big t double]

Only if mixed with 110 octane

I dynoed my fryer on a few different octanes...you'd be surprised how similar the cook rate curves were between the different octanes.

 

[RedFir Down]

I am thinking a 550 should out cut a 661 if I use RB'S preferred oil, bar and muffler mod! LMFAO!
Wonder if he has a prefered turkey fryer?
How about a shaving cream test next?

The wife just asked what I was laughing at. Good times.

 

[KenJax Tree]

I dynoed my fryer on a few different octanes...you'd be surprised how similar the cook rate curves were between the different octanes.

I'm betting they all shot flames pretty much the same?