Absolutely. They could spin it as, ‘ it was an engineering design improvement to strengthen the pistons‘ without going into detail about past failures.They absolutely do not want to admit that the change was because of piston breakage. Can you blame them?
If they are evasive about this, what else are they evasive about?
Why didn't they discover this when they were being tested ???
Just curious. Do you have pics about broken pistons? Never seen a pics on the interweb.
I’ve seen pictures of a few, along with the 461 and 661. That flange is the common denominator between the 3I had a customer send a picture of one. I've tried to find it....but no luck.
I have a 1st gen 462 RCM, with 28" light bar, reading this thread gives me the sad's now............
Should of know better and just bought me another 461 :/
You doin ok Jeffus?
Doing fine sir. Laying low.
Ask a Hooskie Rep a question about a 592. They look at you like you have 3 heads. They are all alike. Evasive.
Buy and use Stihl with confidence. We got guys here that make'em run better than new!
How you doing on the plateau sir?