Stihl 661's

[Rich Fife]

What are your thoughts on these saws ? I'm thinking of buying a 2nd hand saw online and fixing it up myself

I'd much rather purchase and run a 660... maybe the 661s are better with a standard carb? But, regardless.... I'm not impressed with the 661s by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[huskihl]

Personally, I like the 661 over the 660.

 

[Redfin]

This^ way out perform a 660 when built.

 

[Rich Fife]

Yep, to each their own. I dont care for the Stihl 441s, 462s or the 661s...
I dislike stock stihl 400s and 500s.

I'd much rather run a Husky 365 over a 441
371 over a 462
And a 660 over a 661...

My saw of choice doesn't matter what I'm doing is a 461, Followed by a 371xp.

Just preference. I feel the 661s should have way more than what they do.

 

[Gearshifter]

Personally, I like the 661 over the 660.

I've been offered a 661 for $500 nz. Apparently needs a new top end and possibly bearings. I don't know much about them and/or if it's worth it ?

It's only a few years old too , plastics look in really good shape

 

[huskihl]

I've been offered a 661 for $500 nz. Apparently needs a new top end and possibly bearings. I don't know much about them and/or if it's worth it ?

It's only a few years old too , plastics look in really good shape

Mark may be able to help with pricing

@markds2

 

[markds2]

I've been offered a 661 for $500 nz. Apparently needs a new top end and possibly bearings. I don't know much about them and/or if it's worth it ?

It's only a few years old too , plastics look in really good shape

I've just picked one up in similar condition, in fact I sold it to the guy 3 years ago. Kevin @huskihl and I have been discussing it - it looks like the guy over-revved it causing ring flutter, which lead to the top piston ring locating pin breaking off, the ring then rotated and caught in the exhaust port:


I paid $300 for it, and cannot at present find a good secondhand OEM cylinder for it...

 

[MemphisMechanic]

Just preference. I feel the 661s should have way more than what they do.

Preferring an MS461 over almost any other 70-80 cc saw just shows you have good taste.

The 661 is an utter dog in stock form… but this saw picks up crazy power just like the 372 and 395 Huskys do.

I much prefer an 066 to a 661 in stock form, but if you gut the modern emissions-mandated lameness out of a 661 it walks away from it’s older brothers.

 

[Dolkitafreak]

An all out go fast build a 660 is superior imo, but for work I’ll absolutely take a 661 every single time. Ported well they’re very stout.

 

[Redfin]

I feel the 661s should have way more than what they do.

Define this.

 

[MemphisMechanic]

An all out go fast build a 660 is superior imo, but for work I’ll absolutely take a 661 every single time. Ported well they’re very stout.

Okay, yes. Agree. I’m talking about work saw builds meant to run hard daily for several years, not racing saws.

I really like the weight/balance/feel/power of a ported 661 a lot.

 

[Dolkitafreak]

Okay, yes. Agree. I’m talking about work saw builds meant to run hard daily for several years, not racing saws.

I really like the weight/balance/feel/power of a ported 661 a lot.

Yep, work saw no comparison. 661 is so much smoother and I like the behavior of them ported. Die hard husky guy but if I were running saws daily my 90 would be a 661

 

[Rich Fife]

Define this.

Free cutting the 661 is awesome... dogged in and leaning on it, it feels a bit weak for the cc... I feel as I can lean on my 461 harder than the 661, both having a 25" bar. Port locations... meh. Seems as if Stihl is designing their newer saws to limit what saw builders can do... machining the base and squish. I've noticed a lot of the numbers are solid from the get go besides the squish. Seems like piston swaps are more limited... if one could fill-in and reshape the combustion chamber a stock numbered 661 should be a beast.

 

[Ketchup]

Free cutting the 661 is awesome... dogged in and leaning on it, it feels a bit weak for the cc... I feel as I can lean on my 461 harder than the 661, both having a 25" bar. Port locations... meh. Seems as if Stihl is designing their newer saws to limit what saw builders can do... machining the base and squish. I've noticed a lot of the numbers are solid from the get go besides the squish. Seems like piston swaps are more limited... if one could fill-in and reshape the combustion chamber a stock numbered 661 should be a beast.

How consistent are stock 661 numbers? What are the stock numbers you’re seeing?

 

[Loony661]

Seems as if Stihl is designing their newer saws to limit what saw builders can do... machining the base and squish.

This reads to me that they are paying attention to what the porters are doing, and they are designing, and manufacturing, more efficient and powerful saws right off the assembly line.

 

[Rich Fife]

This reads to me that they are paying attention to what the porters are doing, and they are designing, and manufacturing, more efficient and powerful saws right off the assembly line.

I don't disagree for the most part... but, they still have to comply with emissions etc... an already low intake with a large squish matched to port width limitations due to port/piston design kinda sucks IMO. Had they raised the Intake floor 5* on the 661 man those saws would be crazy strong and optimal for porting and heavy machine work. Again, just my opinion. So, it seems less is more on these newer saws.

 

[Rich Fife]

How consistent are stock 661 numbers? What are the stock numbers you’re seeing?

I'd have to go to the garage and check...

 

[Tim N]

I had a stock 661 for a whole. I also have a non decomp 066. The 661 is gone now. Maybe something was wrong with it. I don't know but it wouldn't stay with the 066 in the wood

 

[Rich Fife]

These are stock numbers for a New 661.

 

[Ketchup]

I don't disagree for the most part... but, they still have to comply with emissions etc... an already low intake with a large squish matched to port width limitations due to port/piston design kinda sucks IMO. Had they raised the Intake floor 5* on the 661 man those saws would be crazy strong and optimal for porting and heavy machine work. Again, just my opinion. So, it seems less is more on these newer saws.

I think that’s a good example of how the manufacturers aren’t just leaving less on the table. They’re also doing a lot of things that are a challenge to correct. Add that to increasingly proprietary components that don’t cross between models and designed obsolescence. EPA restrictions and ultra-light designs further muddy the water.
For me, the new stuff is irritating. It costs a fortune and isn’t very durable.
But there is power in there. Sometimes with different strategies, but it’s in there.