anyone running a 355t echo?

[RI Chevy]

People would be cutting their hands off. Liability issues.

 

[FergusonTO35]

Funny how top handle saws were marketed as light duty homeowner machines for most of history, and rear handle saws tended to be larger proline units. When I was a kid it was pretty rare to see a rear handle saw under 50cc and absolutely none under 40cc.

 

[Nutball]

Especially as bouncy and now light (2511t) as Echo top handles are, huge risk. Mine is a hand full at times. I'm sure to keep the other hand well distanced when one handing it. It can too easily bounce and slide across hard wood. The there's just holding it by your side with the trigger on the carry handle, a dummy could easily cut their leg.

The X lineup is a recent marketing thing to look more in line with compettitors: how they have their pro and non pro saws, and echo begins to look all non pro till the put the X on there. Maybe Echos the best ALWAYS having had a pro lineup not needing to distinguish their quality lacking models.

Just be sure they arent too lean from the dealer, a common problem.

 

[RI Chevy]

We need someone to develop a chaps glove. Have it go from fingertip to elbow. Save hands and arms from the above mentioned issues.

 

[Piston Skirt]

Yeah this is what I have heard.....but I've also heard the sentiment of "it doesn't frickin' matter"....so, as someone who couldn't have told you beforehand whether clamshell, or 3-piece, was superior, could someone explain to me why I'd prefer my 355 to be 3-piece? Is it so I could do porting work, and the 3-piece is synonymous with "long block" so it eliminates changing compression? If so then that'd be of zero significance/consequence to me, if I personally knew someone who did porting then sure maybe I'd get work done but I, like almost anyone buying these saws, am not going to be getting porting work done....there's gotta be more to the superiority of 3-pieces than "can modify them further", right?
(*will say I've read comments of people seemingly-surprised the 355 has a chrome, domed piston...is that not always a thing? But have also heard hesitant "it's probably fine" comments Re the single-ring on the piston..)

As for 2vs3 piece engine - in case of 355 it doesn’t really matter.
Engineering-wise 2 piece engine needs only 2 pieces to be manufactured while 3 piece engine takes extra parts and procedures to make - aligning pins, inserting them, precisely machining coaxial crank bearing openings, cylinder mating plane etc. This is more expensive process with some precision benefits.
However, in case of 355 (or any other ECHO engine, actually) this doesn’t matter too much for the enduser and if it is serviced properly there is barelly any chance of it’s earlier death than a 3 piece.
I just deleted a very long version of this post but at least I will repeat myself - All X units are built for professional use but not all professional units are X (355 being one of the examples).
So, no worries, generally 355 is a unit that from the very drawing board was designed as professional climber saw which also has some benefits of not being too expensive.

 

[Cerberus]

Especially as bouncy and now light (2511t) as Echo top handles are, huge risk. Mine is a hand full at times. I'm sure to keep the other hand well distanced when one handing it. It can too easily bounce and slide across hard wood. The there's just holding it by your side with the trigger on the carry handle, a dummy could easily cut their leg.

The X lineup is a recent marketing thing to look more in line with compettitors: how they have their pro and non pro saws, and echo begins to look all non pro till the put the X on there. Maybe Echos the best ALWAYS having had a pro lineup not needing to distinguish their quality lacking models.

Just be sure they arent too lean from the dealer, a common problem.

I'd always worrried about this (too lean) but recently was reading a thread where someone basically says "In dirtbike racing we are intentionally keeping it running as lean as it can take during a race, seizing is a real danger but when it comes to chainsaw-tuning people *significantly* over-hype 'running lean' and conflate a slight leanness with a dangerous leanness", would love to hear people's thoughts on this I mean is a unit lean-seizing something you guys have seen(or done!) yourselves? I run all my gear a bit fat, because I like my gear and wanna protect it, but can see that logic just-as-easily being "old wives' tale" material IE finding that most are well-meaning, but incorrect, in advocating "run your saw a bit rich" (would probably be better asking that in a Hot Saws forum but wanted real-world guys answering, not interested in whether I can run my 355t lean for 1 run, am interested in, say, finding that running a lil lean gives 15% more power at a cost of 10% loss-of-longevity (heck I'd probably take a 20% loss for a 15% gain )

And yeah I think the liability department must be on-edge w/ the 2511 lol, but at the same time it's a frickin professional chainsaw they can't really be in that much trouble when users mess-up can they? Would imagine this is an A/B thing, not a spectrum (ie that echo is no more liable for injuries from the 2511 than from a polesaw of theirs)

We need someone to develop a chaps glove. Have it go from fingertip to elbow. Save hands and arms from the above mentioned issues.

LOL love it!! Here in FL you'd never see them catching-on but that is a solid lil idea (even just left-arm glove as that's predominately where the bar strikes!)

As for 2vs3 piece engine - in case of 355 it doesn’t really matter.
Engineering-wise 2 piece engine needs only 2 pieces to be manufactured while 3 piece engine takes extra parts and procedures to make - aligning pins, inserting them, precisely machining coaxial crank bearing openings, cylinder mating plane etc. This is more expensive process with some precision benefits.
However, in case of 355 (or any other ECHO engine, actually) this doesn’t matter too much for the enduser and if it is serviced properly there is barelly any chance of it’s earlier death than a 3 piece.
I just deleted a very long version of this post but at least I will repeat myself - All X units are built for professional use but not all professional units are X (355 being one of the examples).
So, no worries, generally 355 is a unit that from the very drawing board was designed as professional climber saw which also has some benefits of not being too expensive.

Very cool, thanks!! And not 'too' expensive? Woulda paid $500 for my 355t and *still* be talking about what a steal it was when the alternative is an inferior(out-of-box, at least) 201t for near $600!
"From the drawing board" -- one thing though, didn't they have bad pistons on earlier models, which is what prompted them to begin chrome-plating the pistons on this saw? Also I believe the 'domed' top of the piston may not be from the 1st gen 355t's either but can't recall on that one..

When it comes to clamshell v 3-piece, is this synonymous with "long block" v non-long block? Also, as you say there's no end-user significance, you mean in terms of out-of-the-box performance, right? My understanding was that you need long-block to be able to increase compression (without which it becomes nearly pointless to do any porting), would be curious if you knew more on this! I like the idea of porting my 25cc and probably will at some point but have to imagine 99% of "in-production usage" saws are run stock, meaning "long block" should be almost of no consideration whatsoever (like, I've literally heard this line when someone's trying to defend Stihl in the 20*t V 355t paradigm, "but you can't modify that 355t as far as a 20*t!", which would of course be a pointless argument to 99% of sawyers unless most dealers are offering porting work and the phenomena is like 10X more popular than I'd presumed it was, hell most guys I see don't even do muff mods/air mods and that combo is like a guaranteed 10-20% bump on most saws that can be conducted in under an hour!)

 

[Nutball]

Key word is "racing". For a race you don't care about longevity. Chainsaws under normal working conditions are already stressed by a lot of heat, probably less cooling than a race bike. I've seen many saws that won't run in a mild winter (40-50deg) because of the out of the box tune being too lean to the point of an extreme lack of power if it ran at all. One was a 291 I could not richen any more.

 

[Piston Skirt]

Very cool, thanks!! And not 'too' expensive? Woulda paid $500 for my 355t and *still* be talking about what a steal it was when the alternative is an inferior(out-of-box, at least) 201t for near $600!
"From the drawing board" -- one thing though, didn't they have bad pistons on earlier models, which is what prompted them to begin chrome-plating the pistons on this saw? Also I believe the 'domed' top of the piston may not be from the 1st gen 355t's either but can't recall on that one.

No, they did not have bad pistons. Originally until last year entire series came with Yamabiko patented iron _cylinder_ plating which has plenty positive features over chrome plating. However it was changed for chrome for better durability in "sandy" markets where chrome has some advantages. Still, many models use iron plating and i'm sure nobody would be able to identify them as their service life is no shorter under normal circumstances. European 360/361 now became 362 basically just because of plating

When it comes to clamshell v 3-piece, is this synonymous with "long block" v non-long block? Also, as you say there's no end-user significance, you mean in terms of out-of-the-box performance, right?

As i've mentioned- 2 piece engine is cheaper to produce because of lower number of parts. Also, "clamshell" engine unevenly compresses main crankshaft bearings which creates small deformation of external bearing race and thus some additional friction. However if it's made with sufficient precision and repeatable high quality there is not much problem with that.
As for porting guys - it's basically easier to play with squish and other things on 3 piece engines while in "clamshells" they are forced to fiddle with adjusting crankshaft position itself.

 

[Wood Doctor]

Biggest design problem I see with he Echo 355T is the flimsy snap-in plastic top cover below the top handle that hides the fuel lines from the tank to the carb. That loves to pop off and eventually get lost. It also can crimp the fuel lines when knocked back into place. No doubt, it's this saw's Achilles heel.

 

[Kerfed]

100%! I’ve jb-welded mine at least three times over the past 6(?) yrs. Wicked numb design.

 

[Wood Doctor]

Kerfed, it's hard to believc that even JB-Weld held it together. You have to wonder how this design was approved by Echo's engineering staff. It's as if all they wanted was to mimic Stihl with a clone that cost less.

 

[Piston Skirt]

Kerfed, it's hard to believc that even JB-Weld held it together. You have to wonder how this design was approved by Echo's engineering staff. It's as if all they wanted was to mimic Stihl with a clone that cost less.

How does it cost less and how does it mimic Stihl if it actually mimics old cs-350 minus the screw?
Surely, I've seen two of those broken, but both had fuel hoses re-routed under it and then the cover forced into crack.
No doubt it has to be redesigned.