Husqvarna 350 comparison video with cut times!

[Mattyo]

It didn't outcut the ported 350's, but really hung well with them, so much so that I'm really questions why bother with the porting. The question is why, especially with such a low comp #. I don't really know if we will be able to detangle the mystery.

 

[mdavlee]

Flow trumps compression

 

[beaglebriar]

I have a bone stock 2150 that runs pretty strong. I should compare it to my 353 just for the heck of it.

 

[Definitive Dave]

Flow trumps compression

lets leave politics out of this gentlemen

 

[wigglesworth]

 

[paragonbuilder]

Lol!
We will find out, unless you are a wizard and hid it...

 

[Landmark]

Waiting for the update, and special what is so special with the mm 350 who was equal or out cut ported 350's..........

Me too Tor. I would like to know what Paul Harvey says is "the rest of the story".

 

[Mattyo]

350 dyno runs

 

[Mattyo]

Welp, here's my vid dismantling the Brad Snelling saw!

 

[Mattyo]

 

[Mattyo]

OK..... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me I get a prize for this....

this took about 3 hours to make.... some of this data is INTERPOLATED BY ME... not necessarily RAW. Excel will not plot overlays like this, so I had to import RAW data into excel, create data points where they didn't exist (for instance, HP/torque is not necessarily measured at every 250 rpm interval) so I had to complete the data so it ended up not just being correct looking, but also had an appropriate RPM range for all 7 saws. ie, some saws went from 12.5k to 500rpm wheras some only had data from 13.5 to 5000 rpm or so.... you get the idea. anywho... I took the RAW DATA in excel, plotted a 2nd or 3rd order polynomial trendline on it, whichever seemed to match better, then when I added data point I made sure it didn't mess with the trendline too much....ie...I'm not adding data on a COMPLETELY random basis...its at least slightly objective data even if it is interpolated. the really cruddy thing is that I CANNOT export the 2nd order poly data from excel. I can photograph my work in excel, by taking screenshots, but there is no "raw data" from a trendline available. sorry.

anyway, without further adieu....



@wcorey
@malk315

 

[paragonbuilder]

OK..... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me I get a prize for this....

this took about 3 hours to make.... some of this data is INTERPOLATED BY ME... not necessarily RAW. Excel will not plot overlays like this, so I had to import RAW data into excel, create data points where they didn't exist (for instance, HP/torque is not necessarily measured at every 250 rpm interval) so I had to complete the data so it ended up not just being correct looking, but also had an appropriate RPM range for all 7 saws. ie, some saws went from 12.5k to 500rpm wheras some only had data from 13.5 to 5000 rpm or so.... you get the idea. anywho... I took the RAW DATA in excel, plotted a 2nd or 3rd order polynomial trendline on it, whichever seemed to match better, then when I added data point I made sure it didn't mess with the trendline too much....ie...I'm not adding data on a COMPLETELY random basis...its at least slightly objective data even if it is interpolated. the really cruddy thing is that I CANNOT export the 2nd order poly data from excel. I can photograph my work in excel, by taking screenshots, but there is no "raw data" from a trendline available. sorry.

anyway, without further adieu....
View attachment 21833


@wcorey
@malk315

Wow! Matt that was a lot of work!

 

[drf256]

Your Blue saw needs more timing advance, more muffler opening, higher uppers, a more open air filter, or a combo thereof.

With more rpm, it would be neck and neck with Brad's IMHO.

 

[Mattyo]

Maybe one day....one day

 

[Tor R]

anyway, without further adieu....

nice work Matt.
This is how I would like to see the dyno result, even fools like me can understand it

 

[malk315]

OK..... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me I get a prize for this....

this took about 3 hours to make.... some of this data is INTERPOLATED BY ME... not necessarily RAW. Excel will not plot overlays like this, so I had to import RAW data into excel, create data points where they didn't exist (for instance, HP/torque is not necessarily measured at every 250 rpm interval) so I had to complete the data so it ended up not just being correct looking, but also had an appropriate RPM range for all 7 saws. ie, some saws went from 12.5k to 500rpm wheras some only had data from 13.5 to 5000 rpm or so.... you get the idea. anywho... I took the RAW DATA in excel, plotted a 2nd or 3rd order polynomial trendline on it, whichever seemed to match better, then when I added data point I made sure it didn't mess with the trendline too much....ie...I'm not adding data on a COMPLETELY random basis...its at least slightly objective data even if it is interpolated. the really cruddy thing is that I CANNOT export the 2nd order poly data from excel. I can photograph my work in excel, by taking screenshots, but there is no "raw data" from a trendline available. sorry.

anyway, without further adieu....
View attachment 21833


@wcorey
@malk315

As I said in the PM Matt this is awesome. IMHO your 2 saws are right there with the Brad saw and yours smoked the murder 346 in wood test you and I did. Well done and I'm psyched you got it done ... I was gonna dig in tonight but you need no help from me!

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[Mattyo]

 

[Mattyo]

 

[Mattyo]

 

[Mattyo]