Actually a generator is a great way to test an oil because the load can be varied easily through voltage draw.
The generator IIRC was only used for the smoke test.
Help Support Arborist Forum:
The generator IIRC was only used for the smoke test.
I brang this up when stratos first came out and people thought I was crazy. Then the bearing failures started...
The fact of the matter is strato engines have about 20-25% better fuel consumption. As a result the motor has 20-25% less oil going through it.
Just stating what he told me. Made it pretty clear that there were no tests actually done, and that the oil producer was on the honor system given the ingredients
Exactly.
And the manufacturers never recommended 20–25% more oil in the mix like they should have. And that’s just for the added efficiency, let alone the heavier piston hammering on the bearings all day
This reduced fuel consumption is often not confirmed by measurements taken at serious independent test sites. Many non-strato machines have better results than stratocharged ones. Although, considering the whole range of products, the introduction of stratified scavenging probably reduced average fuel consumption.
Piston weight, on the other hand, has certainly increased, which may be more decisive.
I have owned 8 pieces of strato charged equipment thus far and all have amazing fuel efficiency gains. Maybe less so with chainsaws, but the economy with strato trimmers is amazing.
I have never seen a traditional two stroke achieve the same or better fuel economy than a strato charged one. Using fresh charge to scavenge the cylinder is just inherently wasteful. The numbers your gathering come from German enthusiast publications vs emmissions testing data from the OEM? If so, you're not comparing apples to apples.
The 20-24% is probably pretty close with chainsaws.
A cursory look at JASO's website revails what the test procedures are, what test engines shall be used and what the performance metrics are.
While it's true JASO doesn't do the actual testing and self testing is possible, the majority of the testing is going to be done by third party testing companies.
The API standards for automotive oils functions in much the same way I believe.
One other thing JASO reserves the right to "market survey", which is another way of saying they test oils that are certified to keep the oil companies honest.
Not too certain about the efficiency comment when it comes to chainsaws. Traditional 2 strokes purge spent exhaust with a portion of the incoming fresh charge. Stratos purge exhaust with fresh air.
It would make more sense if you were referring to 2 strokes with an expansion chamber for an exhaust as opposed to a can
That would make sense, particularly if the oil producer had their own test engines
Of course, stratified scavenging has the potential to achieve lower fuel consumption than a traditional engine, and on average designs, especially the newer ones, achieve such lower fuel consumption. For me, the leader here is Stihl.
But fuel consumption depends on many more factors than just the type of scavenging.
Using a real expansion chamber in a chainsaw (for example) is out of the question because of the size...
An example:
Stihl MS 260 (non-strato): SFC @Max power 426 g/kWh, @Max torque 412 g/kWh
Husqvarna 550 XP (strato): SFC @Max power 420 g/kWh, @Max torque 477 g/kWh
Stihl isn't the leader. They were only allowed to get into the strato charging, electric controlled carb thing by a Euro court forcing a tech share agreement between Husky and Stihl. In addition many of the attributes of Modern Stihl saws have been conveniently borrow from Husky.
BTW Husky got the technology by buying Redmax, who was the industry leader in clean two stroke tech.
I would also be curious where you got your numbers from.
I have alot of expiereance with Stihl Ms260's. In stock form they are very choked up at the muffler and often have fixed jet carbs that does not allow them to run right. Fix those two things so you have a workable saw and they drink fuel like a drunken sailor as compared to a 550XpM2.
I don't know for certain, but I would bet most do not have their own test engines for two cycle oils. Not a big enough market to justify the investment. Easier just to use a 3rd party and the optics are better too.
Be cool to see someone on here do a test.
By leader, I mean my experience of using different chainsaws. And in general, using Stihls with 2-Mix engines, I observe the lowest fuel consumption in my practice. This is confirmed by data from test stands.
Can you provide a link to a source document that would support your claim about sharing technology?
Husqvarna Japan bought and merged with Komatsu Zenoah in 2007 to form Husqvarna Zenoah. Redmax is just a more convenient brand name for Americans used in America.
Komatsu Zenoah created a modern version of stratified scavenging two-stroke engine in the late 1990s.
I am a well aware that the parent company for Redmax was Komatsu Zenoah....
In regards to the court case I referenced. That information is on this site somewhere and through Google although last time I looked it was hard to find. I believe the case centered on anti trust issues, but don't hold me to that.
No, it wouldnt...
Your reply about Husqvarna buying Zenoah//Redmax/Komatsu is spot on. They were planning on buying up the technology, but European fair trade laws forced them to share the tech with Stihl
The 260 and 261 are both turds, but especially the 260..
I remember picking up a 346xp after guys where bragging them up on this site. What I found was the stihl was a TURD in comparison and this was after a muffler mod, choke tweak, ti.ing advance and a WT194 carb. Latter I got both saws ported and the 346 pulled away even farther.
At the time I also had a ms440 that I just started logging with. I bought a 372xp as a companion and never really ran the 440 again.
There is no dispute Husky flat out spanked Stihl in those years with the exception of the top handle saws, which for some reason where never a strong suit for Husky. Maybe @lone wolf can comment.
