FarmerTec 660 "Kit" - What's the latest on quality?

[afleetcommand]

So no 288 clone for you?
I have 3 288s already but they just sit mostly I run 266s anymore.

yeah I had to do R&D for two, almost 3 years to get the 660's where I liked , not sure I have the energy or desire to do that again. The 372's were a bit of a disappointment, especially those g372xp, and xt's. Fun for light use but I had hoped they actually might be able to handle real work and therefore be a low cost option to a light 372 class pro felling saw when blended and built. Nope. If those AM 372 style cases would hold up I would have continued. After a trend of 372 style AM crank failures and 372 based AM cases with their bearing pocket opening up, prolly because the metal is either too soft or too porous, I had to move on. Back to OEM Husqvarna 562 HTSS's for that role. Having Said that, I love the OEM and therefore the FT 660 as a platform and the results with the Farmertec clones were worth the efforts. If I add to the "AM" saw time it will be with the 880. Kind of like that big thing. Real focus now is getting wood out before winter sets in so I just have very little shop time.

Note: the edits to add more info to the different saws, saw parts etc.

 

[MustangMike]

More on failures:

Two of the big bore Asian 440s I built failed in the hands of a friend of mine. He was running Stihl oil at 50:1. I built him a 3rd and told him to only run it on Amsoil Saber at 40:1. He has run the 3rd saw far more than he had run the other 2 and it is still going fine. (Note: I had run both saws quite a bit w/o any problems before my friend got them to fail)

My thoughts (which may or may not be correct):

1) A big bore puts more stress on the bottom end than a regular bore as the piston is heavier.

2) The aftermarket bearings are not quite as hard as OEM, but with proper lubrication they will do just fine.

I cannot prove that my conclusions are correct, but they make sense to me, and if my solutions work, I don't really care!

 

[Wanab]

Wrist pins are different lengths from different manufacturers and designed to fit the piston they came with only

I am not going to say you are wrong but in this case I will let the pictures do the talking.

First pic is Huztl piston and pin = No go

Second pic is Huztl piston and Hyway pin = Go





Now I am not opposed to grinding pins down but as previously stated the material does not have a high enough carbon content for my liking. I have seen softer pins like these wear prematurely in the past.

I opened another kit and these pins will not work without being ground down. The part most interesting to me was the cylinder is as good as any OEM 2 stroke I have seen. No chamfer issues, minimal flashing, no mismatch and no mis-shapen ports. TBH it looks better than the OEM 7900 kit I put on Papa Smurf. I think what I am going to do being it's a fine example of a Huztl jug is leave it untouched and test it against my portwork.

Thank you AFC and MM for doing the testing to prove these are worth the effort and viable work saws.

 

[huskihl]

I am not going to say you are wrong but in this case I will let the pictures do the talking.

First pic is Huztl piston and pin = No go

Second pic is Huztl piston and Hyway pin = Go

View attachment 317659

View attachment 317660

Now I am not opposed to grinding pins down but as previously stated the material does not have a high enough carbon content for my liking. I have seen softer pins like these wear prematurely in the past.

I opened another kit and these pins will not work without being ground down. The part most interesting to me was the cylinder is as good as any OEM 2 stroke I have seen. No chamfer issues, minimal flashing, no mismatch and no mis-shapen ports. TBH it looks better than the OEM 7900 kit I put on Papa Smurf. I think what I am going to do being it's a fine example of a Huztl jug is leave it untouched and test it against my portwork.

Thank you AFC and MM for doing the testing to prove these are worth the effort and viable work saws.

My point was that each piston comes with its own pin that’s “supposed “ to be used with it. I’ve seen 1/4” difference in the pin length from 2 different manufacturers. Probably wouldn’t be a great idea using a pin in a piston that was 1/4” too short.

It’s a shame that a company cloning an entire saw that’s supposed to last for years can’t get the wrist pin the correct length

 

[MustangMike]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I think often these FT (etc) will buy parts, in batches, from the lowest bidder, and they are not always exactly the same and they sometimes have fitment issues.

Quality control is not their strongsuit. After ordering several batches of air filters that fit perfectly, I got an order of 10 that would not fit under a 044/440 cover. Because I did not realize it right away, they refused to take them back. Always check things when you get them so you can cancel your charge (through the charge card if necessary) if you need to.

When I got 2 460 tank holders instead of 440 tank holders, they let me keep them and re sent the correct 440 tank holders because they can purchase replacements for less than the return shipping (which I demanded for the return). Don't let them stick you with that if it is their fault.

 

[Larry B]

I don't know the make of the 660 BB kit that I have, the customer got it, so no I have not.

I do not like the numbers on this one (except the Ex) ... Ex 97, Tr 132, In 92.

I think the intake is so bad because the BB piston skirts are shorter so they don't hit the case, and I think they adjusted the Tr accordingly, but I could be dead wrong.

The only thing I did to it was widen the Ex and bevel the edges, so we will see how it runs. The transfer ports look good to me.

I have the HyWay 660 BB kit. I don't know what the numbers are but it has a lot of freeporting and it drank fuel like crazy. It made good power but i couldn't put up with the fuel consumption. Now running a Cross MMWS P&C with gasket delete. Still uses a lot of fuel but less than the BB kit.

 

[MustangMike]

Excessive fuel consumption (on non ported saws) can sometimes be the result of too much muffler opening.

I've had some 660s run better (and drink less) with a 1/2" hole through the baffle (instead of removing the baffle).

The saw with too much muffler opening can drink too much fuel and loose torque (even if it sounds better when just piss revving it).

My ported saws all prefer the baffle to be completely removed.

 

[Wanab]

If all I have to do is buy a wrist pin and bearing/Caber rings along with a pair of bar studs to bring the saw up to snuff I am ok with it. The Kit is not marketed as a complete saw build so making that assumption is a mistake.

 

[MustangMike]

I ALWAYS replace the pull cord with OEM Elastostart, and if you are not going to replace the decomp valve, pull the plastic off and sand the metal a bit and glue it back down to preclude the saw from eating it. (I use Loctite PL Premium).

I also spray the recoil parts with silicon lubricant (does not attract dirt).

 

[Larry B]

"The saw with too much muffler opening can drink too much fuel and loose torque (even if it sounds better when just piss revving it)."

It's all about the piss rev baby!
It has the HyWay dual port muffler with a few extra holes in the baffle.

 

[StihlMagnum440]

If all I have to do is buy a wrist pin and bearing/Caber rings along with a pair of bar studs to bring the saw up to snuff I am ok with it. The Kit is not marketed as a complete saw build so making that assumption is a mistake.

The kit is absolutely working good for me because I have a good running Stihl 440 that just got dinged up real good but managed not to hurt the actual bottom end it too end or carb etc. I used a FT puller and swapped out the stock flywheel with no problems. The starter cover had crushed into stock flywheel and took out some fins. I have the Stihl Service and Parts manuals and follow their specs and ways of doing things.....torqued OEM Stihl flywheel nut and loctited it . Checked spark all good. I have read on here what to not use so have OEM fuel, impulse, and waiting on new intake boot. Anyhow I am replacing all the plastics, handle, clutch cover and starter and the FT kit is saving me $$$. Stihl wants around $120 flywheel, $140 handle, $85 top cover etc. Stihl is crazy expensive on these non mechanical parts. On the mechanical parts I have all good working Stihl. Now I have a leftover FT carb, case, crankshaft etc. I think there is risk in putting much $$ into a top end, porting,plus it sounds like a lot of times OEM carb, PC kit ect on the FT bottom end and glad I do not have too because any saw I have better be durable and that is why I bought Stihl saws new. These kits have their different uses for each of us. I do wonder how a FT 440 bottom end would be for longevity following MM's WD40 flush and clean and running his oil mixture with a higher quality PC kit that keeps the power level near stock. Most of these builds try modding the saws with porting, muffler mods, timing, clutch count, ext...I wonder how a 440 FT kit would do just stock but with the known parts upgraded for longevity. Be nice to see someone build on the 440 kit bottom end with durability instead of performance because in most cases you sacrifice one over the other (not all cases). I guess we all can not help ourselves and are addicted to power.

 

[MustangMike]

Since the Farmer Tech bottom ends can stand up to ported 460 top ends (which have heavier pistons) I'm sure they could stand up to a ported 440 cylinder.

Also, if you want to spend the money, a Stihl 440 piston is usually a little lighter than the AM ones (both the piston itself and the tapered pin), which should both reduce vibrations and increase longevity. The Stihl rubber dampeners will also help.

Only fly in the ointment is Stihl pistons are about $100 a pop, whereas a perfectly good Meteor can be had for about $40.

 

[StihlMagnum440]

Since the Farmer Tech bottom ends can stand up to ported 460 top ends (which have heavier pistons) I'm sure they could stand up to a ported 440 cylinder.

Also, if you want to spend the money, a Stihl 440 piston is usually a little lighter than the AM ones (both the piston itself and the tapered pin), which should both reduce vibrations and increase longevity. The Stihl rubber dampeners will also help.

Only fly in the ointment is Stihl pistons are about $100 a pop, whereas a perfectly good Meteor can be had for about $40.

. This responds to some of your other post.
Muffler mods cool the head and adds longevity while increasing power but now the increased power goes through crank and bearings shortening longevity theoretically. So there is controversy there. As far as a 462 computerized saw, I like to be able to fix things myself so ,even though I know computerized saws are the future and are here now and boost performance I prefer carb saws. For example my F150 ECU went out and it is just for that specific model, year, option and even location made truck and it was $800 for a new one (I pulled mine and soldered in $1 worth of capacitors). Stihl and the others are doing the same thing in electronics...when they run great but in the rare event they do not you are screwed (and it is not like all shops have the techs that can figure out what parts of the computerization is messed up). So, for me, in the future (but I do not need it) non computerized 462 like you reviewed would be the best in performance and durability. The FT kit has a 440 DP muffler kit with the size openings my 440 came stock with outside the US and my saw has the single opening the size of a pencil (sickening) and the only reason I do not switch it is because my neighbors in the valley would not like the noise. Myself, that is a performance upgrade in the kit I would grab and take off the carb limiter and richen her up. In Stihls defense they put on a lighter flywheel with more air flow and larger fin head to make up for the heat from the pencil hole muffler ( yep so with a DP muffler mod it would be cooler haha). (you know all this stuff just giving my view of it). I have a bunch of projects/work to do and more than likely the rest of my FT kit will sit in the box for a while. My new intake boot should be here tomorrow and I should have the 440 together this week unless I get doing something else.

 

[MustangMike]

Agree with all you say, and also that metal heat shield they have between the muffler and cylinder is not on the older 044s with the larger muffler openings, they didn't need it!

My newer M Tronic saws have been so reliable I'm not worried about them (261, 2-462s and a 661).

 

[Larry B]

I ALWAYS replace the pull cord with OEM Elastostart, and if you are not going to replace the decomp valve, pull the plastic off and sand the metal a bit and glue it back down to preclude the saw from eating it. (I use Loctite PL Premium).

I also spray the recoil parts with silicon lubricant (does not attract dirt).

I have put 3 elastostarts on my 660. On both my 660 and 361 kits no matter what i have done the plastic caps on the decomps won't stay on. I have even drilled them out. They both tun about 200psi. I just use the decomps without the caps.

 

[StihlMagnum440]

Agree with all you say, and also that metal heat shield they have between the muffler and cylinder is not on the older 044s with the larger muffler openings, they didn't need it!

My newer M Tronic saws have been so reliable I'm not worried about them (261, 2-462s and a 661).

Like I said in the rare event the electronics mess up. I think if the bearings with the FT kit were replaced with OEM seals and bearings ($80 or so) then build from there to your liking. Probably up to a $600-$700 budget, then I would have a saw with the longevity of a new Stihl or pretty close to it. Not a bad deal..used Stihls are going in that neighborhood with bearings with a million miles on them. The failures you guys listed on here seem to be from bearings giving out. I am 99.9% sure you will have no problems with your saws but there have been horror stories even on this forum. What are you going to do with the 440s you had the bottom ends give out? I have the rest of that kit here and as much as I try to ignore it ... Haha. If I lucked out and got a good carb with the kit, the budget may even lower into the $500-600 range. Hmmmm. Snowing here again..thanks for your good perspective and advice MM, really appreciate it. I got to get the snow plow set up and see how my new truck tires grip, sell some tire chains, do this and that ...it never ends. The FT crank bearings seem to be good but need to be better it seems on the 440 kit. I would need Stihl OEM one side and name brand the other is what I learned...that can be done.

 

[StihlMagnum440]

yeah I had to do R&D for two, almost 3 years to get the 660's where I liked , not sure I have the energy or desire to do that again. The 372's were a bit of a disappointment, especially those g372xp, and xt's. Fun for light use but I had hoped they actually might be able to handle real work and therefore be a low cost option to a light 372 class pro felling saw when blended and built. Nope. If the cases would hold up I would have continued. After a trend of AM crank failures and AM cases with their bearing pocket opening up, prolly because the metal is either too soft or too porous, I had to move on. Back to 562 HTSS's for that role. Love the 660 as a platform and the results were worth the efforts. If I add to the "AM" saw time it will be with the 880. Kind of like that big thing. Real focus now is getting wood out before winter sets in so I just have very little shop time.

I have the 440 kit and used the plastics on my dinged up Stihl 440. Do you think having OEM bearings would have prevented the failures? Is it the crank, bearings or case that failed? We all know the bottom end is the building block so if those can not be made dependable than it is a lost cause. I know different kits have different quality and even in kits of the same model there can be different quality so it seems like it is a gamble. The 660s sound like the most dependable. Has anyone put OEM bearings and seals on one of their kits? Thanks for your honest and objective assessment. I goty.$ worth at any rate.

 

[afleetcommand]

I have the 440 kit and used the plastics on my dinged up Stihl 440. Do you think having OEM bearings would have prevented the failures? Is it the crank, bearings or case that failed? We all know the bottom end is the building block so if those can not be made dependable than it is a lost cause. I know different kits have different quality and even in kits of the same model there can be different quality so it seems like it is a gamble. The 660s sound like the most dependable. Has anyone put OEM bearings and seals on one of their kits? Thanks for your honest and objective assessment. I goty.$ worth at any rate.

On the 660's the as delivered bearing and seals held up fine. I had a crank failure but really not sure if it was the crank or another victim of another brand of Aftermarket cylinders, not FT's btw. And the only failure of the 660cases came from accelerated corrosion, not a running , material, or geometry related issue. So a lot of money is spent on those Farmertec 660's that really doesn't have to happen for the 13,000 rpm "no load" work saw builds in my humble opinion. Add RPM's... Most of my builds like to sit "no load" ( for reference tuning , not in the cut ) around 13500 and I still am comfortably in their reliability zone apparently as none have failed. Typically massaged intake filter holder (radius all sharp edges), muffler mods, massaged lower transfers, compression around 180-185 (decked on a Lathe) and some with finger ports, all survived so far. Go further than that type of build, a better crank would make sense possibly. The one I built with a NWP crank still runs fine. Nicer looking than the FT's.

(AM= Aftermarket = n this thread= Chicom= Chinese Aftermarket)
(FT=Farmertec)
(OEM=Original Equipment Manufacture )

On the 372's. I rattled one apart built with AM cases with an OEM crank as well. It has nothing to do with the AM bearings. The AM cranks with that "slot" in the connecting rod are simply not up to the task of a leaned on 372 build. Especially ones with heavier than 50mm OE pistons. So Xt's builds on those are hand grenades in my opinion for real work. Cases too are not up to the task but the bearings are surprisingly tough, in fact I have never seen a Farmertec bearing fail in any build from 2014 to now. As I said, every leaned on 372 class build I did on the Aftermarket cases, every one had the pto bearing pocket open up. Again that's not a bearing failure in fact in one instance I pulled the bearings out and reused them for kicks in a saw build on OEM cases.....its still out there making chips. So in my most humble opinion for most hobby even work saw builds, expensive bearing and seal options on Farmertec 660 or 372 builds are a waste of money unless other factors intrude like high RPM's. Subbing in a better crank makes sense on 660's if your build is going to be a higher RPM than the 13K "test no load" setup. Twist them past 13500 and a better crank probably is required. AND leaned on 372 build starting from and AM source, and a better set of cases and crank is almost mandatory. Used OEM is way better than a new Chicom 372 bottom end anything. I don't have any experience on the 440's and limited on 361 & 360's.

 

[MustangMike]

The two big bore 440s that failed ... it was the lower rod bearing both times, so unless you are prepared to spring for a new crank you will not resolve the issue. I don't have any cases of the main bearings failing! (and I use the seals provided w/o issue)

I'll stick with flushing the bearings and using good oil. It works!

 

[MustangMike]

I have put 3 elastostarts on my 660. On both my 660 and 361 kits no matter what i have done the plastic caps on the decomps won't stay on. I have even drilled them out. They both tun about 200psi. I just use the decomps without the caps.

Replace the decomp with Stihl or Husky, do NOT let the saw eat the decomp, you will regret it!

I sand the metal slightly, then dampen it (slightly) and use Loctite PL Premium to glue it down. I think only one of them came undone on me.

I will NOT run a saw that does not have the plastic cap attached. You are flirting with danger!