Old saws: heavier, but not that much heavier

[MOE]

I finally got a haning scale and decided to wiegh my saws. I was a bit surprised at how close the wieght of older saws is to newer ones. This is by no means scientific as The fuel and oil tanks had various levels in them,(I wasn't about to drain them all for this). because of this, I rounded the larger saws to the nearest pound. Here are the results:

Husky 246, 18" 13lb 8 oz
Shindaiwa 488, 18" 14 lb
Dolmar 7900, 20" 18 lbs
Mcculloch pro mac 10-10 16" 19 lbs
stihl 064, 24" 22 lbs
Homelite C-9 20" 24 lbs
stihl 051, 20" 28 lbs
husky 2100, 42" bar 28lbs
Mall 2mg 25" bar, 37 lbs,(clearly the winner).

What surprised me was the homelite c-9 compared to the 051. both the same bar, same cc but the 051 4lbs heavier.

 

[Highclimber OR]

Yes some are comparative. The reason people say that saws were heavier in the old days is because the trimming saws were bigger and heavier. In the 60's the "new lightweight trim saw" was the c-5. Personally I would not like to limb with a saw of that size, it's a clunker. The new saws also got a bit more punch for the pound and are often not as loud, and the anti-vibe is an issue too. Well I guess I might be getting a little off-topic here.

 

[stihl 440]

44 a

My muccllough super 44 A is close 30 lbs, with 22in bar. It is a 87cc, around 4.4hp clunker. Talk about slowwww.... I even cut the rakers a little bit to about 20 thousandths instead of 25, and it's still slowwwww..... It's a torqey monster though. Compare that to my 440 at 19lb full of oil and fuel and which one do you think i'd rather take into the woods.......you better believe it, my 440.:hmm3grin2orange: :biggrinbounce2:

 

[Fiore Indiana]

My muccllough super 44 A is close 30 lbs, with 22in bar. It is a 87cc, around 4.4hp clunker. Talk about slowwww.... I even cut the rakers a little bit to about 20 thousandths instead of 25, and it's still slowwwww..... It's a torqey monster though. Compare that to my 440 at 19lb full of oil and fuel and which one do you think i'd rather take into the woods.......you better believe it, my 440.:hmm3grin2orange: :biggrinbounce2:

I agree with you there. If someone gave me a old heavy monster I would never want to use it. That difference in weight would make me tired if I use it for a long time.

 

[stihl 440]

10 bucks

I agree with you there. If someone gave me a old heavy monster I would never want to use it. That difference in weight would make me tired if I use it for a long time.

One of my old buddies had it and it was hanging on a rack in a old shed and I seen it. And I said,"How much do you want for that old saw?" He said 10 bucks and you can have it. I said okay and took it. My buddy said it hadn't run in 5 years and he didn't know if it would run. I said I'll get it running. So one day It was snowing out real bad I mixed up some 20:1 and poured it in the tank. And I put bar oil in the bar oil tank, and I started cranking on it. I soon found out that it wasn't that easy, on this saw you have to hold the throttle open and hold the choke down because there in no choke holder on this saw, and put your knee on the air filter cover to keep it from bouncing around. Well after literally 2 hrs later of all crancking on it, I finally got a putt out of it, about 15 pulls later it started. I slept well that night, I was.:greenchainsaw:

 

[stonykill]

One of my old buddies had it and it was hanging on a rack in a old shed and I seen it. And I said,"How much do you want for that old saw?" He said 10 bucks and you can have it. I said okay and took it. My buddy said it hadn't run in 5 years and he didn't know if it would run. I said I'll get it running. So one day It was snowing out real bad I mixed up some 20:1 and poured it in the tank. And I put bar oil in the bar oil tank, and I started cranking on it. I soon found out that it wasn't that easy, on this saw you have to hold the throttle open and hold the choke down because there in no choke holder on this saw, and put your knee on the air filter cover to keep it from bouncing around. Well after literally 2 hrs later of all crancking on it, I finally got a putt out of it, about 15 pulls later it started. I slept well that night, I was.:greenchainsaw:

the trick with my old macs with that type of choke, is to depress the choke button, no throttle, pull it a few times and it is either running or pops and runs on the next pull. If I try what you described, throttle open and holding in the choke, I could pull all day, won't start. :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[stihl 440]

instructions

the trick with my old macs with that type of choke, is to depress the choke button, no throttle, pull it a few times and it is either running or pops and runs on the next pull. If I try what you described, throttle open and holding in the choke, I could pull all day, won't start. :hmm3grin2orange:

I don't think that mac had very good instructions on how to start their saws. I just did what it said on the filter cover.

 

[Al Smith]

My muccllough super 44 A is close 30 lbs, with 22in bar. It is a 87cc, around 4.4hp clunker. Talk about slowwww.... I even cut the rakers a little bit to about 20 thousandths instead of 25, and it's still slowwwww..... It's a torqey monster though. Compare that to my 440 at 19lb full of oil and fuel and which one do you think i'd rather take into the woods.......you better believe it, my 440.:hmm3grin2orange: :biggrinbounce2:

Try for 6.5 HP.Most likely the reason it cuts so slow is probabley due to the fact the air vane governer is still operational.Bypass that governer and watch what happens.It won't get any lighter though.

 

[RaisedByWolves]

Do that and take your rakers down to .035-.040 and it will be a beast.

 

[Bill G]

Some old saws are heavy some are not. With hundres to pick from I pulled a couple tonight to check

Stihl 090G 35lbs 12 oz with 25"
Homelite 3100G 33lbs 10.6oz with 24"
Merc-Disston DH120 95lbs or more

Bill

 

[rxe]

I used a Stihl 0-7S for an hour yesterday afternoon. It is a 1960s saw, 70cc. It is a lot heavier than a modern comparable saw - say an 046. However the weight isn't the problem, the lack of power is more exhausting. Every cut took about a third as long as the 046 - which is why I was knackered at the end of the work.

It is in good order, but I don't think it was cutting softwood a lot faster than my 024, which is a lot lighter!

 

[SawTroll]

Larger sprockets may be a way to get the chainspeed up, on those slow-reving, but torqey old saws.

My Jonsereds 621 has a pretty good chain-speed with a 3/8"x8 (which was standard btw), even though max rpms is only 10200......

That old 56cc saw (1970) weights about the same as the Husky 372xp.

 

[Al Smith]

Larger sprockets may be a way to get the chainspeed up, on those slow-reving, but torqey old saws.

Yes,that is one trick to pep up the old Macs.That super 44A will easily pull an 8 tooth .404,with little sacrifice in grunt.Perhaps even better is to change to 3/8" with an 8 tooth.

That big yellow saw,made in 1958 or '59 came originally equipted with a .404 chipper chain.Changing to chisel chain in either .404 or 3/8" is another way to teach an old dog a new trick.

 

[stihl 440]

44 A

Try for 6.5 HP.Most likely the reason it cuts so slow is probabley due to the fact the air vane governer is still operational.Bypass that governer and watch what happens.It won't get any lighter though.

Is that how much horsepower it has? I asked somebody on here and they said it only had about 4.4 hp. Because I know the old saws had a lot of cc's and no horsepower, compared to today's saws. I was thinking on bypassing the govenor and seeing what happens, maybe I will now. That is the thing, It has full chisel on it now, it is the same chain it had on it when I got it and I sharpened it RAZOR sharp as usual. I'm going to get a new 3/8 chain and bar for it soon, I mid as well put an 8 tooth, 3/8 on it. And see what she does. I don't have to worry about porting the muffler though, at being a triple port and all. It's got a fuel leak by the carb, so I quit on it for a little while. :rockn:

 

[stihl 440]

6000

Larger sprockets may be a way to get the chainspeed up, on those slow-reving, but torqey old saws.

My Jonsereds 621 has a pretty good chain-speed with a 3/8"x8 (which was standard btw), even though max rpms is only 10200......

That old 56cc saw (1970) weights about the same as the Husky 372xp.

That is the thing this saw only revs to 6,000 with govenor. Who knows maybe it'll rev to 10,000 without govenor.:hmm3grin2orange: :biggrinbounce2:

 

[Al Smith]

Is that how much horsepower it has? I asked somebody on here and they said it only had about 4.4 hp. muffler though, QUOTE] Here is an old Mac ad.The HP figure was as given,perhaps not accurate but most likely pretty close.I think the ad is for a super-44 which is a tad smaller than a super 44A.This engine,or a close relative was one of the most winning Kart engines of all times.

I don't know the specifics regarding porting,etc. but the Mc 10 was capable of generating in the area of 10 to 12 HP at speeds between 12 and 14 thousand rpm.

 

[thomas72]

For an older saw I like to run my SP125, Poulan 5200, and Poulan 71A. They are not much heavier than the new saws with the same displacement. I just like the way they are built. They are all aluminum or magnesium and all parts are machined to fit. Even thought these saws are old they still have good cutting speed.

 

[SawTroll]

What really makes the saws cut fast, is chain speed (and chain design), but you need torque to keep it up, hp is just a function of rpms and torque.......:biggrinbounce2: