My Tractor Forum banner
5221 - 5240 of 5295 Posts

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,072 Posts
The cool thing is that it doesn’t really weigh any more. All the parts other than the piston and the cylinder are the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not on their website right now. What does the saw weigh initially? My powerhead weighs 13.2lbs. Which they market as "lightweight". I'm curious to know what the 7300 powerhead weighs.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
Another bit on the weight topic, just for giggles I weighed my MS362 with the 20” ES bar(Stihl’s light weight bar) and my PS7900 with the basic Oregon bar. The Stihl weighed 17.8# and the Dolmar weighed 19.0#. I bet a light weight bar would bring the difference down to under 1 pound. To have +20cc and 1 1/2 hp more, the Dolmar is SWEET!

Your MS462 is right there on power and it weighs the same as my 362. That’s the modern pick in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Just Jeff

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,072 Posts
Another bit on the weight topic, just for giggles I weighed my MS362 with the 20” ES bar(Stihl’s light weight bar) and my PS7900 with the basic Oregon bar. The Stihl weighed 17.8# and the Dolmar weighed 19.0#. I bet a light weight bar would bring the difference down to under 1 pound. To have +20cc and 1 1/2 hp more, the Dolmar is SWEET!

Your MS462 is right there on power and it weighs the same as my 362. That’s the modern pick in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Both, the 362 and 462 are very similar. I'm sure I could have just as easily gone with the 362. The reason I got the 462 is because I already have a 260 Pro and a 261, and wanted another saw for larger stuff, so I jumped a couple of sizes up from the 50cc size that I already had.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
The PS7900 was advertised at 6.3hp and 13.9# powerhead weight. I’ll weigh mine when I put it back together without the bar. I suspect that was a bit optimistic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
16,699 Posts
85cc????? I can't even imagine carrying that saw around. My Stihl 462 is 72cc, and they advertise it as their 2nd best power to weight ratio offering, and it's still heavy to me.
Power to weight ratio has nothing to do with it being light overall. It can still be heavy, but produce more power than other saws it's size (weight), but that won't make it feel lighter.


The cool thing is that it doesn’t really weigh any more. All the parts other than the piston and the cylinder are the same.
Wow, that's impressive.


Mike
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,072 Posts
Power to weight ratio has nothing to do with it being light overall. It can still be heavy, but produce more power than other saws it's size (weight), but that won't make it feel lighter.




Wow, that's impressive.


Mike
I realize that. My point was that even though they claim that one of my saws has great power to weight ratio, it's still HEAVY to me! And if another brand of saw is selling a larger displacement saw than the one that already feels heavy to me (but supposedly isn't that heavy comparatively), than I'm sure to me, that saw will be a whopper.
 

· Parts collector
88 Dodge Snowfiter, 93 Dodge diesel, 02 Durango, 01 Electra, 02 Sportster, 2000 Dodge diesel 5 speed
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
Power to weight ratio has nothing to do with it being light overall. It can still be heavy, but produce more power than other saws it's size (weight), but that won't make it feel lighter.


Mike
Personally if you are bucking big stuff, I'll take a heavy saw for that. You let the saw weight do the work like a heavy hammer drill.
light weight stuff is for limbing and sometimes felling.
I guess what I'm saying is you need 3-4 saws so you can do what you need without breaking your back. ;)

It's kinda like having 4 or 7 JD tractors for different needs. LOL................ 🤣
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,187 Posts
The Dolmar/Makita aka Dolkita had 3 models all on the same chassis, The 6400, 7300 and 7900. I had a Makita 6401 which was the first saw I bought other than my old 028 Super. The 6400 was a heavy cumbersome saw for 64cc, I got rid of it but it had ample torque and pulled a 30" skip chain in hardwood OK. I picked up a 7900 which is a pretty strong saw compared to the 6400 and they weight is pretty decent for a much bigger saw.

I am haven't used it for a couple years but did use it this season. Seriously considering switching it to 404 chain and putting a 20" hard nosed bar on it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
The new, fuel injected MS500i is Stihl's advertised champ in that category with 6.7 hp and the same weight 13.9#. I'm sure Husky has a horse in this race, but I don't follow their line.
Bottom line, a medium weight saw with nice power is fun to run. They aren't like driving a super car or nasty drag car, just fun. Like a modern sports car. The MS206/261 that Jeff and I have are more like an older sports car. Handle well, light and fun, but not enough power to get too excited about. I still want a 100cc saw, the equivalent of a big block hot rod..
 

· Parts collector
88 Dodge Snowfiter, 93 Dodge diesel, 02 Durango, 01 Electra, 02 Sportster, 2000 Dodge diesel 5 speed
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
100 CC's!
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,591 Posts
What size bar would you put on that ...24"?
MARK (LI),

A 24" bar would work great, I ran a 20" bar on my Stihl 038 Magnum, less access to saw parts then and it covered most of the cuts I was going to make. I did have access to a big Stihl back then, not sure of the model but it had a compression release, 32 or 36 inch bar with 1/2" teeth on it, it was very impressive.

85cc????? I can't even imagine carrying that saw around. My Stihl 462 is 72cc, and they advertise it as their 2nd best power to weight ratio offering, and it's still heavy to me.

Also, you posted about the Stihl 72cc saw costing around 600.00 "back in the day". My 72cc 462 cost me right at a grand two years ago. So I thought, the prices haven't gone up terribly in the last 30 years then. At least that's my take on it.
JJ,

That's why I thought the Makita/Dolmar was a pretty good deal at $799.00, no bar or chain.

Anyone using Carlton brand of saw chain, I have several, yet to use them. Rotator Cuff surgery has slowed down some of these activities.

CCMoe
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
16,699 Posts
I realize that. My point was that even though they claim that one of my saws has great power to weight ratio, it's still HEAVY to me! And if another brand of saw is selling a larger displacement saw than the one that already feels heavy to me (but supposedly isn't that heavy comparatively), than I'm sure to me, that saw will be a whopper.
I figured. And, I'm with you, lighter is better!


Personally if you are bucking big stuff, I'll take a heavy saw for that.
Not me. I noodle big stuff. Yes, takes more time (and maneuvering), but that's OK, I'm not doing this for a living, and generally avoid big stuff.

Although, I've seen some crazy videos from Europe, with guys running huge bars on (relatively) tiny engines, using chains with very low tooth ratios.


It's kinda like having 4 or 7 JD tractors for TWO different needs. LOL................ 🤣
There, fixed it for you... just don't let the wives see this!!!


Mike
 

· Parts collector
88 Dodge Snowfiter, 93 Dodge diesel, 02 Durango, 01 Electra, 02 Sportster, 2000 Dodge diesel 5 speed
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
There, fixed it for you... just don't let the wives see this!!!


Mike
Oh I have more than two needs. (OH don't even go there with those goofy thoughts)
I need, mowing, tilling, plowing, disking, snow blowing, snow plowing, dethatching, HAULING FIREWOOD, and not one tractor will do all that without a LOT of work of changin' parts, so PPPPFFFTTTT.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
16,699 Posts
I hear you... I have 3 GTs and a Terramite backhoe. Sadly, only one of those machines is running at the moment, but I can put them all to work (especially in the winter) if I get them all running...

One of the GTs is not worth the money, so that doesn't count.

One of the GTs was in perfect shape with a recent repower, then just stopped running. Pretty sure it's an undiagnosed fuel delivery problem. Would love to fix it and get the snowblower attachment and cab on there.

One of the GTs does everything else (mowing, towing, and lifting with a JB Jr.). Has a sleeve hitch and box blade, haven't used the box blade. The sleeve hitch has a tow bar adapter and gets used as a glorified tow bar (for the carts, dethatcher, aerator, Trac Vacs, trailers, etc.). I love that tractor because it has a foot-controlled hydro that makes it easier with the JB Jr., and my kids can drive it. Of course, the front end really isn't beefy enough for the JB Jr...

The Terramite has a couple of hydraulic leaks (easy, but time-consuming fixes) and what appears to be an undiagnosed fuel delivery problem.

Mike
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,072 Posts
Okay guys, FIREWOOD MATH QUESTION.....

I've seen a lot of people store their firewood in IBC totes. I like this idea, as I'd be able to process the firewood pretty far away from my house to keep the debris off of my front lawn etc., and then pack the firewood in the totes down by the barn and let it dry for a few seasons. Once dry, I could pick it up with the tractor and forks (when I get the new tractor this Spring), and move it up by the house as needed.

From what I've seen on YouTube videos, people state that you can store approximately a face-cord in an IBC tote when it's relatively neatly stacked. So, I went to marketplace and searched "IBC totes for sale". And there are two very common sizes. The most common sizes that I've seen are 275 gallon, dimensions 40" X 48" X 46". This equates to roughly 51 cubic feet. And the other common size is 330 gallon, dimensions 40" X 48" X 54". This comes out to about 60 cubic feet.

A cord of wood is 128 cubic feet. So, I can't tell which tote people are saying stores roughly a face-cord, the 275 gallon one, or the 330 gallon one. How would one that is 51 cubic feet or one that is 60 cubic feet store approximately 1/3 of 128 (actual cubic feet in a cord of split firewood) cubic feet? I would want to get whichever ones more accurately hold a face-cord, so that doing the math on how much firewood I have on hand would be relatively easy when counting how many full totes that I'd have.
 

· Likes Vintage JDs
Joined
·
13,049 Posts
Okay guys, FIREWOOD MATH QUESTION.....

I've seen a lot of people store their firewood in IBC totes. I like this idea, as I'd be able to process the firewood pretty far away from my house to keep the debris off of my front lawn etc., and then pack the firewood in the totes down by the barn and let it dry for a few seasons. Once dry, I could pick it up with the tractor and forks (when I get the new tractor this Spring), and move it up by the house as needed.

From what I've seen on YouTube videos, people state that you can store approximately a face-cord in an IBC tote when it's relatively neatly stacked. So, I went to marketplace and searched "IBC totes for sale". And there are two very common sizes. The most common sizes that I've seen are 275 gallon, dimensions 40" X 48" X 46". This equates to roughly 51 cubic feet. And the other common size is 330 gallon, dimensions 40" X 48" X 54". This comes out to about 60 cubic feet.

A cord of wood is 128 cubic feet. So, I can't tell which tote people are saying stores roughly a face-cord, the 275 gallon one, or the 330 gallon one. How would one that is 51 cubic feet or one that is 60 cubic feet store approximately 1/3 of 128 (actual cubic feet in a cord of split firewood) cubic feet? I would want to get whichever ones more accurately hold a face-cord, so that doing the math on how much firewood I have on hand would be relatively easy when counting how many full totes that I'd have.
I don’t have a definite answer for you on the calculations, but I would assume the wood does not get neatly stacked in the tote and therefore takes up more volume.

I see these totes advertised around here on craigslist. When I study them, it looks like you could only toss wood into them, there doesn’t seem to be a way to neatly stack the wood. Likewise, I wonder about getting the wood out without picking up the tote and dumping it.

Maybe I’m missing something, but It seems to me these totes are more practical for commercial operators, who are moving, storing, dumping many loads of wood/day. I don’t see how they are very practical for a homeowner. But again I may be missing something.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
16,699 Posts
I've been looking at those as well, on and off over the past few years. The prices seem to have gone up quite a bit (what hasn't?).

I have seen some with wood stacked neatly inside, but most seem to just have them tossed in.

If the wood is neatly stacked, you can cut an access opening (take out the steel to about halfway down, across most of the front). Here are some pics from CL:

Automotive tire Logging Wood Tree Trunk
Tire Wheel Vehicle Automotive tire Car


For me, these would be enough of a game-changer that I'd be willing to make all the room necessary outside to use them.

For at least the next few years, I have "free" labor (two young boys) to help with stacking and moving wood around, so it'd be hard to justify the expense, unless I find a killer deal.

Mike
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
16,699 Posts
Back to the math question, according to Wikipedia, it depends on your definition of "is" (LOL)...

Font Screenshot Number Parallel Circle



So, you're going to need to know how long you want your pieces, and the depth (front-back) of the inside of the tote (plus air space between firewood rows, ideally).

Mike
 
5221 - 5240 of 5295 Posts
Top