Another chainsaw dyno...

[Stump Shot]

In general published horse power numbers have been the lowest possible denominator to CYA for a long time. More specifically a prime example is when you hear of certain builders looking for one in a thousand 064 jugs. Some just came out extra special and that is why. Anecdotally we’ve all heard the joke that a certain piece of equipment must have been a Friday afternoon or Monday morning saw when it is kind of a piece of junk. It’s silly to be doubting on Joe’s dyno. True there will be variability from different dynos but the variability from the same machine is negligible.

Randy likes turtles.

 

[Mastermind]

Randy likes turtles.

I like turtles, and hate drama.

It's best to keep that in mind.

 

[srcarr52]

There were two main reasons why I even posted the results from that 064. One was to give Shaun props for a job well done, and two, to demonstrate that displacement isnt' everything. Stihl obviously had something good going with the port configuration on many of the 064's. I feel bad that posting the results led to people casting shade on both Joe's dyno and Shaun's work with no basis. Nobody bothered to question other results I have posted, and one of them had an even higher hp/cubic inch than this 064.

Seems the "stock" graph got people confused but it brought up some decent discussion and got this old thread rolling again.

Randy likes turtles.

Today seems like a good day for some turtle stew, it's pretty gloomy out.

 

[Red97]

Something about those 064s... This was the last 064, and the last 660 I built.

 

[farminkarman]

Something about those 064s... This was the last 064, and the last 660 I built.
View attachment 361209

Perhaps the shape of the upper transfers... I recall @drf256 posting some pictures of an 064 vs. a 660 showing the difference.

 

[Woodpecker]

Randy likes turtles.

I think I heard he was part turtle

 

[Maintenance Chief]

Something about those 064s... This was the last 064, and the last 660 I built.
View attachment 361209

Must be something to it considering the 64 came out in 1986 and the 066 didn't appear till 99' ?
What's your take on it Joe?

 

[Red97]

Must be something to it considering the 64 came out in 1986 and the 066 didn't appear till 99' ?
What's your take on it Joe?

I'm not sure, have only been In the 1 64, and it was cherry picked with all the best parts. The couple 660s i have done have all been late model versions.

Just seems the 660s have lazy massive uppers and unless really spinning just don't seem to have the snap as the 64.
Which can be seen in my graph. The 660 wants to make power st a higher rpm.

 

[drf256]

I'm not sure, have only been In the 1 64, and it was cherry picked with all the best parts. The couple 660s i have done have all been late model versions.

Just seems the 660s have lazy massive uppers and unless really spinning just don't seem to have the snap as the 64.
Which can be seen in my graph. The 660 wants to make power st a higher rpm.

This is what I’ve been told by some excellent builders of 1122’s. Many have told me that they can make more power with the 52mm jug than the 54.

The 64 jugs are generally cast by K$ and have tight rectangular uppers. The 66 jugs typically have these big oval lazy uppers that open on the intake side first.

Unsure why they changed it up. It’s that way in every 54mm 1122 jug I have ever held in my hands. I have a kind rare 54mm early Mahle non decomp here that I ported with the same lazy uppers. I figured the early jugs woulda been better.

 

[Woodpecker]

‘66’s can make power too though

 

[srcarr52]

This is what I’ve been told by some excellent builders of 1122’s. Many have told me that they can make more power with the 52mm jug than the 54.

The 64 jugs are generally cast by K$ and have tight rectangular uppers. The 66 jugs typically have these big oval lazy uppers that open on the intake side first.

Unsure why they changed it up. It’s that way in every 54mm 1122 jug I have ever held in my hands. I have a kind rare 54mm early Mahle non decomp here that I ported with the same lazy uppers. I figured the early jugs woulda been better.

I've had a few early flat top 066 cylinders that were really good, I think they were all Mahle. Some decomp, some not. Mostly I'm looking at the split between the exhaust and intake so I can get the exhaust down to a normal duration without having to epoxy the intake. After machine work it seems I'm always raising the uppers enough to straighten them out, but sometimes I'm only skimming the intake side of the upper transfers.

I actually hog the transfers out on the old 066's and on the 064. I haven't looked at OEM 660 cylinders lately but I would probably end up doing it there as well.

At the same time I did the 064 here I built an AM Dukes reserve 660 cylinder on an 064 case. It beat this 064 in the cut by a little bit, 3-5% depending on which cuts you compare. She's got big transfers!

 

[pbillyi69]

Oh Man, Bret broke our toy!!!

(And yes, he does spell it with one T, w/o any duct tape!).

FYI, the first ported saw I ever ran was Bret's over bore 660, and my fist ported saw was ported by Bret (an 046). That was my "monster saw" for a long time!

one t is the correct way.... that's how my name is spelled too.

 

[MikeFries]

Yeh, first press had it .005-7" ok,ok, but dyno wants .003 or less...

So I kept going and going....

Yeh. I ordered a new shaft with a spec card. And it is long enough for 2 shafts.

who did you order the shaft from? thanks

 

[J.Noss]

Here's my 572xp dyno sheet, porting was done by Joe at HMWF (great guy) I think it'd be really cool if we could make a page or portion of this forum where people post the dyno results for their saws and/or all the stock saw dyno numbers from Joe's dyno.. thinking this might be a sorta like that thread so here's mine

 

[farminkarman]

Here's my 572xp dyno sheet, porting was done by Joe at HMWF (great guy) I think it'd be really cool if we could make a page or portion of this forum where people post the dyno results for their saws and/or all the stock saw dyno numbers from Joe's dyno.. thinking this might be a sorta like that thread so here's mine

There is a numbers only dyno thread that folks have put a lot of dyno runs in. I usually post dyno results on that thread as well as this one.

 

[J.Noss]

There is a numbers only dyno thread that folks have put a lot of dyno runs in. I usually post dyno results on that thread as well as this one.

Oh thanks, I didn't see that and wasn't able to find anything like that until you mentioned it, still figuring out the search terms to enter.

 

[J.Noss]

I'd love to revive this thread and see more dyno results, would love to see more graph examples of ported saws.. here's a graph of my 550xp mark2 that Joe ported for me. Ran that saw today and am blown away by how much more powerful it became

 

[Czed]

Something about those 064s... This was the last 064, and the last 660 I built.
View attachment 361209

If you ever get bored would you run a oem coil against a am coil
In any saw
Just to see if there's a performance difference.

 

[Bjorn]

If you ever get bored would you run a oem coil against a am coil
In any saw
Just to see if there's a performance difference.

I would also like to see if there is a differens.
A test of aspen fuel and regular fuel would also bee an interesting test.

 

[nbbt]

Here's my 572xp dyno sheet, porting was done by Joe at HMWF (great guy) I think it'd be really cool if we could make a page or portion of this forum where people post the dyno results for their saws and/or all the stock saw dyno numbers from Joe's dyno.. thinking this might be a sorta like that thread so here's mine

Has there been a comparison of immediately after porting and then after that 10 tank or so break-in. I keep hearing that these are held back a bit in software. But IDK, trying to get more informed.