What should be the next AM kit saw?

[stihl_head1982]

As I have said before, 070 is being sold by stihl as an ms model in Africa (maybe other countries or continents).

Sold as a ms-720, fully legit stihl saw.

I may have missed this (not sure I've read the whole thread -- probably my fault). Is there a chinese clone at the moment of the 070?
If so could you post a link to the source or supplier?

 

[wcorey]

Thanks Bill, indeed I thought it had a different stroke... guess different crank doesn't = different stroke ...

shorter rod would make things slightly more compact. interesting... thanks

Actually the 254 has the longer rod, go figure...

 

[Czed]

I may have missed this (not sure I've read the whole thread -- probably my fault). Is there a chinese clone at the moment of the 070?
If so could you post a link to the source or supplier?

435.00 ebay shipped

 

[Czed]

Type in ms070 on ebay.

 

[Czed]

This phone won't linky for some reason.

 

[Mattyo]

Actually the 254 has the longer rod, go figure...

now I'm really confused, but thats OK .. i'll live, carry on gents

 

[afleetcommand]

now I'm really confused, but thats OK .. i'll live, carry on gents

And the theory of long rod vs. short rod designs......Bottom line Matt is the long rod is...better for you using linear logic. For a few reasons. You can research the concept as there is a ton of data on the subject. Even in the Automotive world....long vs. short rod SBC builds The motorcycle company I worked for had a long rod 503 single that was a rocket ship....would spin to 12500 all day long. Didn't vibrate as much as the "other" designs at those RPM. Had a wider power band as well.. (Rod / Crank Angles) Has to do with Geometry & Physics.( They made their mark, won two ISDE's back to back; and then one of the principles died of cancer. Took the company with him. ) There are always those who dive in and understand theory, over analyzing everything & those who prefer a cook book. SO if you are really interested...... Always the GTG at Greenwich to learn about a little theory as there are lot of really knowledgeable folks who will be there. ( I had to edit this.....a lot Didn't want to talk about compromises due to the over size of the package, because you KNOW grief would come my way because I like those 254's...)

 

[Mattyo]

I don't pretend to understand the theory...just confused as to why the 254....would have a longer rod than a 262. That just doesn't make much sense....but not the point of your thread. ...like I said...carry on

 

[afleetcommand]

I don't pretend to understand the theory...just confused as to why the 254....would have a longer rod than a 262. That just doesn't make much sense....but not the point of your thread. ...like I said...carry on

I know you don't. Actually the 262 has a longer rod. The entire design of the cylinder, intake block and plastic accommodated the taller design. The 254 might have a little less of a lot of things but what counts is the size and weight relative to the way it performs. A snappy little saw. Very compact but also so so simple. Its that blend I like vs the larger, slightly more powerful and fancier 262. A great saw in its own right. Simple things for simple minds I guess.

 

[Mattyo]

Ok... bill says longer rod in 254

Walt says 262 longer rod...

?

 

[afleetcommand]

Ok... bill says longer rod in 254

Walt says 262 longer rod...

?

I can send you a 254 crank & you can measure & report? You have the 262's right? I may have one buried somewhere too. what ever it is....it is..

 

[wcorey]

I defer to Walt, I'm sure he's correct here.
my bad...

 

[afleetcommand]

I was going to say I defer to you!u beat me to it...ill just have to send a couple of cranks to Matt

 

[Mattyo]

no no no.... thats not the point of this thread ... oh dear...what did I start. I was just confused why 254 would have a longer rod than a 262...assuming 254 is more compact. it would make more sense that the 262 has a longer rod...which is why Bill's statement was a head scratcher.

ok ok.... according to acres internet they both have 34mm stroke. same stroke. one of them has a longer rod then? i was pretty sure they had different strokes... so I'm definitely wrong on that one... i was also pretty sure they had different cranks (or at least SOMETHING was different about the cranks). 261 and 262 cranks are identical... i'm never sure about 257 .... and I assumed 254 is different somehow. it'd make sense the 254 (and maybe 257) have shorter con rods. ...

i don't know if I have a 262 crank sitting around... so sending this stuff to me wouldn't help ... though I'm not opposed to goodies

again, not trying to threadjack, just got confused.


I think this threads premise is very very interesting.

 

[afleetcommand]

257 and 262 should use the same crank right? 254 has its own. Couple of differences.

 

[1990Husky262]

yes 257 and 262 same crank.

 

[David Young]

I believe i have both cranks, if there is a request to go home and measure my crank I can do that and post up pictures if needed.

You fellas need picture of my crank or just measurements?

 

[Mattyo]

is the 254 a different clutch as well... maybe different threads on the clutch side?

 

[srcarr52]

It would be nice to see a Husky 2100 AM cylinder with the last generation design of the 2100 piston. Not the goofy top window, full circle piston. Something like a 395 piston with the correct length skirt and wrist pin placement.

 

[Mattyo]

Now we r back on track