PDA

View Full Version : How good is the 090 Stihl Really?























Karl Robbers
8th Feb 2011, 12:05 AM
Had an urge to try to obtain a Stihl 090 recently and was horrified at the prices they bring, even for saws only semi complete and well used and abused.
So, being an inquisitive sort, I thought I would do a little more research to see if they were really worth the money and also to try and decide without actually using one if they were the "GODFATHER OF MILLING SAWS" as many seem to portray them.
First of all, their horsepower seems to be overated significantly. I have seen figures anywhere from 15hp to 8.5hp, with 13hp being the most common. I don't believe the two higher figures and have settled upon 8.5hp as the most likely, (remember an Ms880 is supposed to be 8.6hp and the 090 is only around 17cc's bigger and much slower revving). Torque could possibly be the saving grace of the 090, (perhaps they are higly regarded because they show the signs of a blunt chain less than modern high revvers, thus giving a perception of power).
Given the 090's total lack of safety or comfort features I am having a hard time justifying their price, although aftermarket spare parts are dirt cheap and plentiful.
I really would like to get my hands on one for some real world comparisons but based on pure figures cannot see their advantages.
What do other people think and has anyone compared one to say a 3120 Husky or an Ms880 Stihl.
I even watched numerous Youtube movies with 090's cutting and honestly did not see any more performance than a 394 Husky or a '66 Stihl would give based on amount of sawdust produced and time taken to cut. Admittedly the 090 given it's slow revving style did appear to be very lazy while cutting with little fuss.
The yanks seem to rave about them, but I do not place much faith in this as they also deeply mistrust Anti Vibration systems, Chain Brakes and shun hearing and head protection it would seem.
To use an automotive example it seems to be comparing a Valiant Charger to a Subaru WRX, ( I like chargers, but know that all I would see of a WRX would be tail lights!)
Surely I am missing something?

BobL
8th Feb 2011, 06:56 AM
First of all, their horsepower seems to be overated significantly. I have seen figures anywhere from 15hp to 8.5hp, with 13hp being the most common. I don't believe the two higher figures and have settled upon 8.5hp as the most likely, (remember an Ms880 is supposed to be 8.6hp and the 090 is only around 17cc's bigger and much slower revving). Torque could possibly be the saving grace of the 090, (perhaps they are higly regarded because they show the signs of a blunt chain less than modern high revvers, thus giving a perception of power).

I agree, the prices do not warrant their reputation. The vibration is shocking, they chew thru petrol like there's no tomorrow, and they weigh a ton. My brief experience with them they have a awesome exhaust note and are fun to use for about 10 minutes and then it becomes HARD work. The videos I have seen of 090's on CS mills have also not been all that inspiring, certainly nowhere near inspiring enough for me to hunt one down and make it my standard milling saw.

Although the 090 has about the same HP as an 880 (see picture), it's not a perception, 090s do have 19% more torque (9.5 Nm at 5000 rpm) than modern 120 cc saws (8.0 Nm at 6000 rpm) so are potentially able to do more work. The HP or power curve calculated from direct measurements of torque but it's torque that determines the ability of an engine to perform work under load. This is why they able to continue cutting when the chain is blunt.

The reason most 090's look like they are not cutting anywhere near as fast as their reputation suggests (and in a lot of cases no faster or even slower than a 100cc saw) is that operators simply do not always know how to take advantage of all that torque.

The easiest way to do this is to increase the number of teeth on the drive sprocket. Using an 8 tooth instead of the standard 7 tooth provides a chain speed increase of 14% over a 7 tooth. Although this increases the chain speed by 14% it reduces the torque by 14% so in the end they come out only marginally above a modern saw.

The alternative way to take advantage of this torque is to substantially drop the rakers. The grandfather of CS milling, Will Malloff, recommends using a new chain raker setting of 0.045" for an 090. This will make the saw as grabby as hell but it will then pull much bigger chips at low RPM and also cut a lot faster but the cut will also be rougher. The 0.045" recommendation is almost certainly for softwoods and I doubt even an 090 would pull chips with this raker setting in Aussie hardwoods but it could probably work fine at a 0.035" setting in these woods.

Unless either of the above methods are used, in small wood, where chain speed dominates the cutting speed, the 090 will cut slower than a modern saw. Where the 090 should out perform modern saws is on really big hard logs where torque is more critical than chain speed. Just use a 7 tooth sprocket and let the extra torque do it's thing at low RPMs and it will churn it's way through the log. To compete, a modern saw would need to go to a 6 pin drive sprocket but as far as I know these are not available.

If I had one I wouldn't use it on a mill and would just keep it as a collectors item and bring it out to wake up the neighbors the morning after their all night parties. Somehow I can quite justify the $ for something that just does this.

bobsreturn2003
8th Feb 2011, 07:28 PM
To have one is to love it ,every time you pull the trigger .:2tsup: Lifting it with a 5ft bar and frame is a job for a strong man :oo:. Swapped mine on my lucas saw , and miss it every now and then . It had the anti vibe and started on half a pull . just as well or you would need a rest :D. they are old style but good with every thing flanged and bolted alloy , no plastic , try one and you will soon know :doh: the sheer power is amazing , cheers Bob

swing mill
9th Feb 2011, 10:57 AM
I have all 3 saws the 090 ,088 magnum and the 3120 husky honestly the 090 will out perform the others when set up properly by a mile the new saws are good as they are lighter but if you want raw power you can't beat the 090 used to use them with 1/2 '' chain and a 36'' bar file the rakers down about twice what they recommend and cut like bugery when I use it for slabbing I use stock404 chain with the rakers knocked down quite a bit they definatly work better than the other saws if you can get a good saw to try then do so the only way to find out is to try one

Karl Robbers
9th Feb 2011, 08:58 PM
I have all 3 saws the 090 ,088 magnum and the 3120 husky honestly the 090 will out perform the others when set up properly by a mile the new saws are good as they are lighter but if you want raw power you can't beat the 090 used to use them with 1/2 '' chain and a 36'' bar file the rakers down about twice what they recommend and cut like bugery when I use it for slabbing I use stock404 chain with the rakers knocked down quite a bit they definatly work better than the other saws if you can get a good saw to try then do so the only way to find out is to try one
You raise an interesting point. In my research thus far, I did note that 1/2" pitch chain give a speed advantage of approx 1mps.
Certainly lowering the rakers would take advantage of the extra low down torque provided by the 090.
I really would like to try one and will keep my eyes peeled for a specimen. My guess is that the 090 is not a user friendly saw but would certainly give one a buzz using it for brief periods, (particularly a non AV model:D). They do have a certain charm although I am leaning towards the viewpoint that their hype outweighs their performance based purely upon figures.
Maybe one day I will unleash the beast!:2tsup:

Travis Edwards
10th Feb 2011, 09:14 PM
I have only had the pleasure of operating 2 090s and yes I can say they are the machine!!!

One I operated was one of a few that had the big bore option (yes bigger than 131.6cc) think it was almost 150 cc and yes they are completely different to todays saws they are all about torque and nothing about revs/hp (any good engine builder will tell you that hp is not the be all, TORQUE is king,) and the 090 had it in bucket fulls max revs 10000, full load revs about 8500. the 880, peak revs about 12500, max torque revs around 9500 but max torque is much lower. Even recently there was a post I was involved in where the seller was importing the 090 from brazil, the 880 magnum was selling for 2800 roughly and the 090 (new, with chainbrake) was about a buck change out of 4000. They are like a motorbike in your hands with a big chain and bar hanging out the front. If I could get one I would for a milling saw. THEY ARE A BIG MANS SAW, they are not something a jockey could use and were built for the lumberjacks of old!!!

Oh and the 3120 is a piece of carp and like all husky saws revs its a..hole off then bogs at the slightest amount of load in comparison to the stihl equivalent, which will generally reach its torque zone and just keep on lugging. This is what I like about the stihls over the huskies. you can load them up and they say "ok now I have to work" where the huskies say "NO I can't work that hard"

if the guys at stihl are listening they need to look at building something with the capacity of the old 090 in the weight range of the 880.

Karl Robbers
10th Feb 2011, 10:08 PM
One I operated was one of a few that had the big bore option (yes bigger than 131.6cc) think it was almost 150 cc and yes they are completely different to todays saws they are all about torque and nothing about revs/hp (any good engine builder will tell you that hp is not the be all, TORQUE is king,) and the 090 had it in bucket fulls max revs 10000, full load revs about 8500. the 880, peak revs about 12500, max torque revs around 9500 but max torque is much lower.

The big bore 090 was actually 164cc and as I understand it was created as part of a chainsaw racing program - rare as hens teeth, you certainly were lucky.

Even recently there was a post I was involved in where the seller was importing the 090 from brazil, the 880 magnum was selling for 2800 roughly and the 090 (new, with chainbrake) was about a buck change out of 4000.


Seeing as new 090's are being built, why are Stihl not supplying certain parts anymore, (this I found out primarily from american web sites).
Did it actually have a chainbrake or only a spring loaded hand guard? As I understand it they are not actually fitted with chain brakes.

if the guys at stihl are listening they need to look at building something with the capacity of the old 090 in the weight range of the 880.[/QUOTE]

Can't help myself here, but if the guys at Stihl are listening, please put a decent air filtration system on your saws, ie Husky Air Injection, (yes I know that the 3120 doesn't have it).

I will try and get an 090 to play with some day, hopefully an AV model,still don't see the value in many of the beat up wrecks that are being sold at present though.

Travis Edwards
10th Feb 2011, 10:59 PM
One I operated was one of a few that had the big bore option (yes bigger than 131.6cc) think it was almost 150 cc and yes they are completely different to todays saws they are all about torque and nothing about revs/hp (any good engine builder will tell you that hp is not the be all, TORQUE is king,) and the 090 had it in bucket fulls max revs 10000, full load revs about 8500. the 880, peak revs about 12500, max torque revs around 9500 but max torque is much lower.

The big bore 090 was actually 164cc and as I understand it was created as part of a chainsaw racing program - rare as hens teeth, you certainly were lucky.

Even recently there was a post I was involved in where the seller was importing the 090 from brazil, the 880 magnum was selling for 2800 roughly and the 090 (new, with chainbrake) was about a buck change out of 4000.


Seeing as new 090's are being built, why are Stihl not supplying certain parts anymore, (this I found out primarily from american web sites).
Did it actually have a chainbrake or only a spring loaded hand guard? As I understand it they are not actually fitted with chain brakes.

if the guys at stihl are listening they need to look at building something with the capacity of the old 090 in the weight range of the 880.

Can't help myself here, but if the guys at Stihl are listening, please put a decent air filtration system on your saws, ie Husky Air Injection, (yes I know that the 3120 doesn't have it).

I will try and get an 090 to play with some day, hopefully an AV model,still don't see the value in many of the beat up wrecks that are being sold at present though.[/QUOTE]

Ok I agree that stihl need to create a better system for keeping their air filters clean!!!! this said their filtration if fitted properly does work well at blocking saw dust (nothing gets through), it just blocks quickly. (1 and a half tanks max with a 660)

The reason the spare parts are not readily available is like the volkswagons, still made in brazil just the same as 60 years ago, they are not imported by Stihl Australia (as the 381 wasn't for a while) and even though they are still made they are not able to be marketed in certain areas for a number of reasons (emissions etc.) and YES the last of the 090s had a proper chain brake mechanism as did the 076, when it was nearing the last of its lifetime.

And as for the HUSKY air injection system I must ask WHY do you think they bought out jonsered??? maybe because it was the only way they could have something over stihl!!!! the Husky air curtain/injection system is why they bought out j/red, who were the original inventors!!!

I would still cut more with a stihl even with tapping the sawdust from the filter every second tank than with a husky!!!!! and they aren't as ugly!!!!:2tsup::D:U:o

BobL
10th Feb 2011, 11:25 PM
. . . and the 090 had it in bucket fulls max revs 10000, full load revs about 8500.
Nope,

the 880, peak revs about 12500, max torque revs around 9500.
and Nope!

but max torque is much lower.
If 17% is "much lower" then yes otherwise it's not.

You obviously haven't read my post earlier on in this thread.

Here is a picture of one of the few 164cc/10ci 090s I saw in Washington last. The owner is the North American Stihl product development manager (Wayne Stanton).
http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=160958&stc=1&d=1297342376



Oh and the 3120 is a piece of carp and like all husky saws revs its a..hole off then bogs at the slightest amount of load in comparison to the stihl equivalent, which will generally reach its torque zone and just keep on lugging. This is what I like about the stihls over the huskies. you can load them up and they say "ok now I have to work" where the huskies say "NO I can't work that hard"

I disagree, the 3120 is an excellent saw. It easily keeps up with the 880 in the cut but it has the disadvantage of small things like inboard clutch, No H screw on the carby and is rev limited quite a bit lower than the 880 but it's what's happening in the cut that counts.


Ok I agree that stihl need to create a better system for keeping their air filters clean!!!! this said their filtration if fitted properly does work well at blocking saw dust (nothing gets through), it just blocks quickly. (1 and a half tanks max with a 660)
They have - the 441 has excellent filtration - they just haven't migrated it to other saws just yet. For me filtration is about a 3rd order problem, I'll worry about it when the first and second order problems evaporate.

Travis Edwards
10th Feb 2011, 11:48 PM
ok Bob you have replied Nope, nope, and,,, yes 17% is a lot and with the bigbore 090s this would be close to 25 or 30 percent. If you reply nope give some figures! explain why what I wrote is wrong. at the end of the day the reason the 090 won so many competitions is because you could load it up and make it work so much harder (TORQUE) as with the mcchullochs of the day.

I have the stihl service manuals and cd's so I know what they should be tuned to do. And yes there are things that the new saws do better but there are also things they will never do as well as the 090 did. There is also the fact of how reliable they were which also warranted the extra cost. (40 years on and they are stihl going)

Personally for me there are many reasons why I would not buy a 441 but honestly it should not even be brought into this debate as shouldn't the husky/jred air curtain setup.

The 090 was a hardcore machine!!!!

they are not made/marketed now for a number of reasons, including the fact that people are not as hard as they were, and trees are not as big as they were.

the 090 deserves its place in history as do the other big saws even the 3120!

BobL
10th Feb 2011, 11:59 PM
ok Bob you have replied Nope, nope, and,,, yes 17% is a lot and with the bigbore 090s this would be close to 25 or 30 percent. If you reply nope give some figures! explain why what I wrote is wrong. !

You must be mistaken because your quoted RPMS at max torque are way out and I do mean WAAAY out. If you can't/won't read my post then I won't rewrite it here. My specs also came from the Stihl manuals and I cross checked them with the US and european chainsaw forum data. If you don't believe me I will post pics of the PDFs from the manuals but only after you post yours.

gerhard
11th Feb 2011, 12:40 AM
Hi all,

The 090's origins date back to 1959. Andreas Stihl then designed and built the first one-man lightweight direct drive petrol saw. Practical statistics in all kinds of wood had already pointed out that you need at least 1 hp for every 10 cms of bar length (still a rule of thumb today). Decent felling saws had bars of 50 to 60 cms length, so 6 hp was required. Around that time, German industry had gained much experience with one cylinder petrol engines (eg. Fichtel & Sachs, ILO) and 6 hp could be squeezed out of 100 cc displacement in an efficient engine design. So the Stihl Contra from 1959 had 106 cc displacement and 6 hp, packed in a total weight of 12 kilograms. For export countries the type name "Lightning" was used. The design was spot-on, more than 200,000 machines were sold in the first two years after introduction. The Contra had its best torque/rpm ratio between 4,000 and 5,000 rpm and a max. rpm around 6,000. At that speed with a standard 7-teeth sprocket and 0.404 pitch chain, the chain speed is around 840 meters per minute. With a 58 mm bore and 40 mm stroke, the engine design is on the "wrong side of square" to be a really torquey engine that can stand severe rpm drop and still maintain pulling power. It's more like a racing car engine that has better efficiency at its upper rpm region. Trial bikes and ship's diesels have long strokes, Ferrari V12's have very short strokes and ice hockey puck shaped pistons to reduce friction and minimise mass inertia, needed for quick response and high rpm. A short stroke gives a squat cylinder shape already , but to keep the Contra's overall engine shape yet more compact, the cylinder head was relatively flat and had to be made out of a zinc alloy to provide sufficient cooling. The full length spark plug was screwed-in sideways flat on the left side and there was no decompression valve yet.

Requests for more power to drive longer bars resulted in the Contra Super in 1964 (abbreviated to Contra S or Lightning S). 1964 was also the year when Stihl developed the anti-vibration suspension, after health complaints of many users (wrist and hand joint injuries, numbness and "white fingers"). By enlarging the displacement to 137 cc, 8 hp could be drawn from the same engine design. This was done by enlarging the bore from 58 to 66 mm; crankcase, crank and stroke remained unchanged. To fit the enlarged cylinder, the crankcase collar opening was enlarged from 64 to 74 mm diameter. The more powerful piston knocks on the unchanged crank bearing array and the generation of more heat made the S-type prone to quicker wear and tear. Despite the powerboost to 8 hp, the bore/stroke-ratio became even worse, leading to an increase of breakdowns during heavy duty hardwood harvesting. As a result the G-models were introduced. These had an additional gearbox with 2:1 ratio, reducing chain speed by half and doubling torque, for better felling and logging results in very large hardwood trunks with very long bars (up to 100 cm!). The 106cc geared version was called Contra G, the 137 cc geared version Contra SG. These were very heavy machines to drag around all day.

The Contra range was made up to 1968 and then changed into the 070 and 090. Anti-vibration versions were called 070 AV and 090 AV. Power outputs were improved somewhat to 6.5 and 8.5 hp, due to a better piston and air filter design. The cylinder heads were also redesigned, the spark plug was now short threaded and vertically mounted on top and there was a decompression valve in the left hand corner (as seen from the operator's view). The less severely stressed 106cc engine in combination with the gear drive fared best in continuous heavy duty, so the 137cc G-version was abandoned. The remaining 106 cc gear model was called 090G instead of 070G to better express its far more torquey behaviour than that of the standard 090. For chain saw sports events, a very limited amount of gearless 090's has been souped up to 166 cc displacement. This is the one and only 12 hp version. Stihl is vague about its involvement and shows no official records nor an official type name. The 166 cc model is a very rare and sought-after collector's item. The only way to visually distinguish a 166 cc 090 from a 137 cc one is the location of the deco-valve; it is left next to the spark plug instead of in the left forward corner . Apart from the type plate lettering, there is little optical difference between the 070 and 090 anyway. The best giveaway is the starter cord section. The 090 has a larger cord pulley diameter, so the array of air inlet louvre slits around the pulley shows a bulbous positive curved shape. The slit array around the 070's smaller pulley is sleeker and shows a negative curve.

I was allowed to saw with a 090 a few years ago and it left me in awe. This machine advertises its power and sensation of inherent danger like few modern chain saws can. The ignition cut-out switch is one of the rare safety measures present on this thing. When it kicks back, you fling along with it. Just thinking about the havoc this thing can cause, sends a tingling to the hairs in your neck. The vibration and noise make you realise that this is still 1959-technology. It is the original Landrover or Jeep compared to Freelanders and Cherokees. Little creature comfort and technically superseded in many ways, but basically sound, rough and dependable. It was fun for 15 minutes or so, after that i pitied the guys who have to wield this thing for daily bread for decades until their joints give out. I've heard a few professionals prefer the 084 over the 090. The torque seems roughly compatible, partly maybe because the 084 has a 43 mm stroke instead of 40.

But the 090 is awesome to look at. No part on it needs to be ashamed for looking the way it does. The oil and fuel tank are real tanks with decent filler caps. The engine still looks the part. The oldfashioned centifugal fan housing and starter cord array hint to a sturdy old skool petrol engine. The overall design of an 090 is like an old Norton or BSA or Harley bike, whereas modern Stihl's have the same tidy boring look as BMW bikes have. You can picture those tidy German engineers wearing white laboratory coats and Rodenstock design glasses, looking for sleek integral shapes. You could even picture the users being office people with their neckties still on while at it in the garden. I can even imagine that Stihl could make a merchandise safety design trinket in housestyle orange to fold and hold the necktie out of harm's way.

Last summer i saw an 070 AV in auction on Ebay Germany. Brand new and imported from Brazil. The 070 and 090 have failed most standing emission rules in the world and the trading of new machines is forbidden in many countries, like the US and Europe. I couldn't resist and bought it for my collection, for 525 Euros, which isn't bad at all. Not only a beautiful machine to save and look at, but also one of the choice rainforest killers kept away from endangered wild teakwood. The seller knew a lot about Stihl. Apart from Waiblingen Germany, Stihl also has works in Brazil and China. Like with the VW beetle and its outdated technology, the production of the 070 and 090 was moved to regions where demand was highest and where emission rules were more relaxed. Although many parts in this new 070 AV were marked "Made in Germany", they may have been made in Brazil and stamped otherwise to boost buyer's confidence. On the other hand, visitors to the Waiblingen Factory as recenlty as 2007 and 2009, claim to have seen 070 and 090 parts, to be boxed for shipping and assembly abroad; even complete machines. I was pleased to see familiar parts inside like the original Tillotson carburettor and AET ignition components from Slovenia. The seller thought the crank castings to be Italian. There may have been Chinese parts involved, but i couldn't recognise those. Original Stihl parts carry a mark containing a square shaped S with a square outline running around it. Parts without it may be suspect, but i've seen factory new untinkered machines containing parts not carrying such mark. One thing is certain: the Chinese have seized the opportunity to cater for the demand for replacement parts for the Contra's/Lightnings and 070's/090's. Most spare parts on the internet are of such counterfit Chinese origin and not even from Stihl's Chinese works. The most dependable telltale sign of a real Germany made Stihl saw seems to be a white sticker on the crankcase, clearly stating "Made in Germany" together with production year, serial number and barcode.

You must consider yourself lucky if you run into an original 090 which has seen little use and contains more than 75% original Stihl components. The reasons for Americans being keen on this model are clear. They love all things big and powerful, especially when attitude and reputation are involved. These machines are like Harley Davidsons, with the 090 being much more sought after than the 070. They are noisy fuel guzzlers, their next generation 660 and 880 are much more efficient and economic for even a slightly better output.
Recently i took apart an electric E 220 and was disappointed by the plastics content of this machine. That thing is promoted as being pro-league, but has a plastic crown wheel driving the sprocket, like the budget MSE 140C, 160C and 180C have. The modern petrol Stihls aren't what they used to be, either. But still, they work and keep working, in spite of ever more sparing use of expensive metals.

The 090 is impressive to use and own, but is not the easiest and most comfortable saw to hande. Life can be easier, healthier and safer with modern alternatives, that needn't be less powerful or productive.

greetings

gerhard

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 12:56 AM
At that speed with a standard 7-teeth sprocket and 0.404 pitch chain, the chain speed is around 840 meters per second.

Sounds like someone else is mistaken in this thread.

840 m/s = 3024 km/hr - now I'd like to see that. Even racing chainsaws don't drive chain much beyond 150 km/hr

7 teeth and 404 chain at 6000 rpm = about 80 km/hr = 22 m/s

I'm not naturally this observant but I get plenty of practice picking up student mistakes in mechanical calculations so this one was quite easy to spot.

gerhard
11th Feb 2011, 03:46 AM
Hi Bob,

you're quite right and many thanks for the correction! It should have been 840 meters per minute instead of per second. I have edited it in the post above.

thanks and greetings

gerhard

gerhard
11th Feb 2011, 04:49 AM
For further illustration:

this is a link to an exquisite forum thread concerning the Contra range. It is a must-see, a splendid overview of used and restored machines, with lots of enlightening close-ups and nice pics of the geared types in the lower page part. Who am i to borrow pics from these members, it's better to see them in the full thread context and leave the credit where it is due:

Chainsaw Collectors.se • View topic - Stihl Contra/Lightning/G/GS (http://www.chainsawcollectors.se/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=69&start=15)

The two pics that i did add show a commemorative ceramic plate. It shows Andreas Stihl and a Contra saw, with a fragment of the success story printed on the back.

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 09:41 AM
Hi Bob,

you're quite right and many thanks for the correction! It should have been 840 meters per minute instead of per second. I have edited it in the post above.

thanks and greetings

gerhard

I recalculated mine and this time it turns out I was wrong. I now get 888 m/s so much closer to your (EDIT: Not quite right - read on!)

Here's a graph I worked out last year for different tooth count drive sprocket versus chain speed in MPH.
http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=160974&stc=1&d=1297376637

325, 367 and 404 are the different chains (367 is 3/8 chain)
7, 8, 9, 10, 11 are the tooth counts on the drive sprocket.

The red cross is 7 pin 404 and it comes out to be 32 miles per hour which = 889 m/s [edit: this is wrong - read on]
840 is close enough.

KevM
11th Feb 2011, 09:46 AM
I recalculated mine and this time it turns out I was wrong. I now get 888 m/s so much closer to your



Bob, I think there is a little slip-up there and you meant metres per minute.

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 09:52 AM
Bob, I think there is a little slip-up there and you meant metres per minute.

ROFL - hoisted by my own cockiness!!! Love it!

Good to see someone else is checking.:2tsup:
I haven't changed the post it but inserted an edit note to say it's not right.

My excuse is I have the concrete floor guys in the back yard laying the floor for my new shed and I have been diving off to check on what they are doing. The bad news is I stuffed up the floor levels, but the good news is I'm getting a 100 mm instead of a 75 mm floor (and at no extra cost!)

KevM
11th Feb 2011, 10:03 AM
My excuse is I have the concrete floor guys in the back yard laying the floor for my new shed and I have been diving off to check on what they are doing. The bad news is I stuffed up the floor levels, but the good news is I'm getting a 100 mm instead of a 75 mm floor (and at no extra cost!)

Generally only do 75mm slabs on paths around the house, you're lucky you stuffed up as I would never do less than 100mm on a shed slab.

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 10:10 AM
.
.
.
and YES the last of the 090s had a proper chain brake mechanism as did the 076, when it was nearing the last of its lifetime.

Another case of being mistaken? This has been discussed before on this forum and this time I cross checked with the 090 gurus on the arborist chainsaw site and no 090 has ever be produced with a chain brake mechanism.

But if you can post a picture of one I will change my mind.

The latter 076's do have a proper chain brake mechanism (I have one of these).

According to my Stihl dealer, the reason the 090 or 070 is no longer imported into australia has nothing to do with it being too heavy or no big trees left. These saws simply do not meet emissions or OHS (ie no chain brake) regulations.

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 10:16 AM
Generally only do 75mm slabs on paths around the house, you're lucky you stuffed up as I would never do less than 100mm on a shed slab.

I agree, but I have done a fair bit of concrete work and was using the old guide of 75 mm of concrete with steel reinforcing is nearly as effective at load bearing as 100 mm with no reinforcing.
Access to this shed is via a narrow 50 m footpath so no vehicles are able to be driven onto this shed floor.
The limited access also means the concrete has to be all wheel barrowed in and carting the extra inch of concrete in a barrow is a lot more work than carrying the reinforcing.

Anyway now its 100 mm and steel reinforced so it should be good.

Sawchain
11th Feb 2011, 10:38 AM
Here are a couple of 090's on a GB 84" mill which I came across recently, we pulled the mill out from under a bench in a shipping container where it has been stored for quite a while, fueled the saws and started both after several goes.The saws had not been started in over 10 years and to my surprise ran very nicely.

Other than the oil and dirt on them which makes them look a bit used there is hardly a mark on either, no paint off on the underside either.
I'm thinking about buying the whole setup - cheap cheap cheap.

Laurie

Sawchain
11th Feb 2011, 10:41 AM
ROFL - hoisted by my own cockiness!!! Love it!

Good to see someone else is checking.:2tsup:


Loved that Bob, outsmarted urself !!!!! picked that up straight away

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 11:04 AM
Here are a couple of 090's on a GB 84" mill which I came across recently, we pulled the mill out from under a bench in a shipping container where it has been stored for quite a while, fueled the saws and started both after several goes.The saws had not been started in over 10 years and to my surprise ran very nicely.

Other than the oil and dirt on them which makes them look a bit used there is hardly a mark on either, no paint off on the underside either.
I'm thinking about buying the whole setup - cheap cheap cheap.

Laurie

That is a pretty sexy looking set up there Laurie - what do you reckon it all weighs?

Sawchain
11th Feb 2011, 11:14 AM
Bob the whole setup would weigh somewhere around 42 ~ 45 kg , it's heavy.
Lets put it another way, if you were to try and pick it up yourself you could slice washers off your ring.

Laurie

bobsreturn2003
11th Feb 2011, 11:19 AM
Looks a good set up , new bar? Dont know how you add fuel with the saws in the cut though ???:doh::doh::doh: just envious Bob

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 12:06 PM
Bob the whole setup would weigh somewhere around 42 ~ 45 kg , it's heavy.
Lets put it another way, if you were to try and pick it up yourself you could slice washers off your ring.

Laurie

Not that much heavier than my new (38kg) mill then :2tsup:

Now to get those "slices of ring" images out of my mind is gonna take some doing

Sawchain
11th Feb 2011, 04:41 PM
Now to get those "slices of ring" images out of my mind is gonna take some doing

Sri Bob, I thought that was a nice way of putting it.

Could have said ur rsole wud b hangin out :o

swing mill
11th Feb 2011, 05:16 PM
I have only had the pleasure of operating 2 090s and yes I can say they are the machine!!!

One I operated was one of a few that had the big bore option (yes bigger than 131.6cc) think it was almost 150 cc and yes they are completely different to todays saws they are all about torque and nothing about revs/hp (any good engine builder will tell you that hp is not the be all, TORQUE is king,) and the 090 had it in bucket fulls max revs 10000, full load revs about 8500. the 880, peak revs about 12500, max torque revs around 9500 but max torque is much lower. Even recently there was a post I was involved in where the seller was importing the 090 from brazil, the 880 magnum was selling for 2800 roughly and the 090 (new, with chainbrake) was about a buck change out of 4000. They are like a motorbike in your hands with a big chain and bar hanging out the front. If I could get one I would for a milling saw. THEY ARE A BIG MANS SAW, they are not something a jockey could use and were built for the lumberjacks of old!!!

Oh and the 3120 is a piece of carp and like all husky saws revs its a..hole off then bogs at the slightest amount of load in comparison to the stihl equivalent, which will generally reach its torque zone and just keep on lugging. This is what I like about the stihls over the huskies. you can load them up and they say "ok now I have to work" where the huskies say "NO I can't work that hard"

if the guys at stihl are listening they need to look at building something with the capacity of the old 090 in the weight range of the 880.



Sorry I have to say the opposite is the case for me when I compare the 088 magnum to the 3120 the husky leaves the 088 for dead so much so that I use the 3120 as my daily felling saw and leave the 088 in the ute to use as a boat anchor or a spare but haven't needed it for a spare since I got the husky

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 05:50 PM
Sri Bob, I thought that was a nice way of putting it.

Could have said ur rsole wud b hangin out :o


Well, that's how it definitely was when I was lifting 64 of those 72 kg limestone blocks when making the retaining wall for my shed.
I got myself one of those black back braces/truss things - the same as the bunnings guys wear. Boy are they good. I'll be wearing that when I use the new mill.

Travis Edwards
11th Feb 2011, 06:23 PM
ok bob you stated the 090 had no chain brake, yet on the 15th of november 2009 At 7.00 pm YOU posted a link to hunter mcphersons website that clearly showed that they had a chain brake!!!! and it was discussed in the thread by yourself, myself and others at the time. Unfortunately hunter mac have now removed the saw from the link so there is no point putting it up.

You also had a dig at me for not reading posts, and a go at me about why they are no longer imported, If you read my first post I clearly stated that the main reason they no longer are imported is because of emissions!!! There are also OHS issues as even though the AV system was implemented on them it no longer met what worksafe etc. considered to be safe levels, the comment about the big trees etc. was clearly a bit of light humour!!!!

SO Put the nasty pills away for ten minutes, What I was saying in my first post is that yes the 090 IS a hell of a saw! Nothing more, nothing less!!!

You say that I should have looked at your chart well I did and it doesn't tell much really! it has no indication of rpm where the given values are generated. And I have seen that chart hundreds of times.

The question was asked about how good it is, my answer was that it is GOOD!!!! They work hard, and will pull well with a big bar.

Oh and in the post previously mentioned you stated that you had never used an 090 yet you are claiming to be the fountain of knowledge about them. I have used them and all I will say is that they are a ballsy saw, well deserving of their reputation.

Any further debate will be done on your own.

BobL
11th Feb 2011, 07:40 PM
ok bob you stated the 090 had no chain brake, yet on the 15th of november 2009 At 7.00 pm YOU posted a link to hunter mcphersons website that clearly showed that they had a chain brake!!!! and it was discussed in the thread by yourself, myself and others at the time. Unfortunately hunter mac have now removed the saw from the link so there is no point putting it up.

Perhaps you were too quick to assume what you saw in that picture was a chain brake. I had another look at that thread and all I can see is that you thought it might have a retro fitted brake, but I didn't claim anything either way as at that stage I was not sure.

The hypothetical 090 chain brake is again discussed in this (http://www.woodworkforums.com/f132/stihl-032-parts-120461/index2.html) Jul 2010 thread but once again there is no evidence of a brake.

What is interesting is I just checked again and the 090 is no longer listed on the Brazilian or Mexican Stihl websites although the Mexican site still lists the 070 and the 076.


You also had a dig at me for not reading posts, and a go at me about why they are no longer imported, If you read my first post I clearly stated that the main reason they no longer are imported is because of emissions!!! There are also OHS issues as even though the AV system was implemented on them it no longer met what worksafe etc. considered to be safe levels, the comment about the big trees etc. was clearly a bit of light humour!!!!

Sure - no problem - all I was reported was what my stihl dealer said when I asked him why we don't import the 070/090 so I was in fact supporting your statement.


SO Put the nasty pills away for ten minutes, What I was saying in my first post is that yes the 090 IS a hell of a saw! Nothing more, nothing less!!!
I agree about the saw, but that still doesn't make all of your reported data about the 090 or 880 correct.


You say that I should have looked at your chart well I did and it doesn't tell much really! it has no indication of rpm where the given values are generated. And I have seen that chart hundreds of times.
Forget the chart and read the actual post. Like I said above, I'll provide my evidence if you show me yours.


Oh and in the post previously mentioned you stated that you had never used an 090 yet you are claiming to be the fountain of knowledge about them. I have used them and all I will say is that they are a ballsy saw, well deserving of their reputation. Any further debate will be done on your own.

That's fine but I wasn't actually posting just or your benefit - other people besides us do read this forum have some rights to information from more than one source.

I never claimed to be an expert 090 user. Anyone can read a manual and point out something that is not in the manual. I'm just trying to keep the facts about 090's and other saws straight on this forum - sorry I'm not always PC about the manner in which I point these things out, but then again I don't see you as PC about life either. If I make a factual error I want to be corrected about it. If someone can't handle that then that's too bad I'll correct them anyway, there are already enough mistakes on this forum and the web as it is.

BobL
12th Feb 2011, 03:39 PM
Here's Some interesting racing 090s, pics courtesy of Ric from ArboristSite.


161098
161099
161100

The last two are a 163 cc model modified for CS racing.

It was, according to someone who saw it racing, "Consistently smoked by a modified 120 cc Stihl 084".

InterTD6
13th Feb 2011, 12:21 AM
Up this way the 090 was the standard equipment for a good faller & I would hate to say how many are sitting under benches in the back sheds around the area. One fellow alone I know had 3 in his shed. Very reliable machines, the fallers would leave them in a hollow log over the weekend at the log dump. Because every body used them an extra long bar could be borrowed or bought off some one in the game for some extra large trees. Yet to see one with a chain brake. You need to wear earplugs plus muffs when operating them if you want to keep your hearing in good order.
regards inter

itsposs
13th Feb 2011, 07:29 AM
Hey Inter was down your way at Xmas took the back road from Kempsey to Armidale. through the back of the Dorrigo. Sure as hell wouldnt want to be lumping an 090 up an down there orfor that matter try and snigg logs

Karl Robbers
13th Feb 2011, 10:52 PM
I really will have to lay my hands on one of these beasts and a stopwatch.
Was talking to an ex sawmiller and logging contractor, ( a man I have IMMENSE respect for) a couple of days ago and posed the question of how good these saws were.
His reply was that a Stihl 084, 088 or Husky 3120 will absolutely eat them. I might add that he has run all of these saws.
It gets more and more interesting doesn't it.
I am beginning to wonder if theyh are the Harley Davidson of the saw world - Loud Heavy Aggressive but outclassed by the modern bikes.
Only one way to find out I guess.

tlbsg
13th Feb 2011, 11:26 PM
i will own up to owning one which has been under the bench for 8-10 years must dig her out one day and give her a run:2tsup:

InterTD6
14th Feb 2011, 03:33 PM
Hey Inter was down your way at Xmas took the back road from Kempsey to Armidale. through the back of the Dorrigo. Sure as hell wouldnt want to be lumping an 090 up an down there orfor that matter try and snigg logs
They were pretty hardy blokes to log that country with the machinery available to them in the day. An 090 had to be carried on the shoulder a certain way or you wouldn't make through the day, in the steep & rough country around 5 day creek & chalundie there were places where a D8 was running out of puff on the bigger logs & moving granite boulders. A good faller with a good dozer operater would get out to the log dump & onto jinkers an average of 120 m3 for the day & only drop 6 - 10 trees using chain braked saws like the 3120s etc
regards inter

Softbreeze
14th Feb 2011, 08:47 PM
I have got a 090AV that was my Dad's. Feels and sounds like it has plenty of power, but when we bought a new 066 a few years ago, it will pretty well cut at the same rate as the 090, and much lighter to use. Still have a soft spot for the old beast, but very rarely use it.

gerhard
14th Feb 2011, 11:54 PM
Hi all,

boy, what a thread this has become! Karl, you asked quite a question! Judging from the very intersting comments and experience reports, you can see what kind of interests and emotions this vintage machine still raises! It is indeed a very fine machine and, though technically superseded, it is of a build quality that Stihl, too, can no longer afford today. More modern saws could perhaps outperform the 090, but they will not be of the same durable construction standard. More forum menbers seem to agree with me on that. Anyway, when wanting an 090, choose the AV-version, the non-AV is hard on your wrists. The failing of emission rules is the main reason for sales and import restrictions on the 070/090. I've read this in almost every efficionado-forum and i was told so by many Stihl connoisseurs, including the guy who sold me the 070AV. I can't comment on a safety brake ever been present or not. Knowing Stihl they must have tinkered around with the idea, especially on such a powerful machine with such professional sales potential. If they endorse timbersports and come up with manuals that carry a warning triangle in the header of virtually any handling topic, they must at least have thought about it. In principle there would be room inside the housing to combine the centrifugal clutch drum with an automatic inertia system, as present in many saws.

Bob, the graph is very useful, thanks for that. Although 9, 10 and 11 toothed sprockets are rather meant for timbersports purposes, i think, like cutting off as many slices of less-than-two-feet diameter softwood trunks. There are some interesting Youtube movies on that; you see guys waving the bars through the log, alternatively using the bar's down and top part. Race saws in soft wood have a clear advantage with 10- or 11-wheels. Strong as the 090 may be, it would loose too much torque with such large sprockets as a regular felling saw. Malloff's .045 rake pitch suggestion is definitely meant for soft wood, .03 is more the way to go for hardwood. Shaving off thick curls in wood is very very hard work anyway, this goes for routers and planers and all kinds of saws alike.

Great to see those 090 racer version pics. It's looks like these are not the variety in which Stihl was secretly involved with the development of the 166 cc cylinder of the original squat design, since these fit underneath the original factory fitted flat covers. In the Collector's website that i quoted in a previous post, you can see in some pics of Contra machines partly dismantled, how low profile the 070 and 090 cylinders really are. A mere look at these pics make obvious why a stroke much longer as 40 mms is not possible for this design. In Bob's racer pics, higher cylinder array experiments were clearly carried out. One machine even has a mud bike expansion type exhaust. Brilliant! This produces a very sharp trumpet-type sound and may even enhance rpm or at least efficiency as compared to fuel use. Whereas the standard 090 exhaust is very effective for its size (there is still a lot of noise but 137 ccs are very demanding on such a tiny component), i find the air filter a bit basic. It looks like a perforated anti-slip shower/bath mat, probably designed that way to make cleaning and removing/putting back easy. Although the Husqvarna filter system may not beat the filters in all Stihls, it definitely does so in the 070/090.

While rummaging on the web, i stumbled across Granberg's chainsaw accessory site. Check out their nifty ripping chain:

Granberg International Chainsaw Mills and Chainsaw Accessories - Ripping Chain | www.granberg.com (http://www.granberg.com/ripping_chain.html)

Also have a look at the nifty milling attachment:

Granberg International Chainsaw Mills and Chainsaw Accessories - Testimonials | www.granberg.com (http://www.granberg.com/testimonials.html)

The 090 is one of the best and most durable drive sources you can get for jobs like these. With a standard 7 tooth sprocket and .03 chain rake pitch, you will have a solution with power reserves, even in hardwood. Stihl has very nice TCT "Duro" chains. If Granberg has ripping chains in such quality, i think you will have a milling machine to drool over.

greetings

gerhard

gerhard
15th Feb 2011, 03:57 AM
With a bit of luck you can still find the manuals on the web. This is the link to the PDF-version of the 070. It's almost the same as the 090 , so this will give you a good impression how the machine is put together:

http://www.bayenltda.com/MOTOSIERRA%20STHIL%20070.pdf (http://www.bayenltda.com/MOTOSIERRA%20STHIL%20070.pdf)

BobL
15th Feb 2011, 10:45 AM
Bob, the graph is very useful, thanks for that. Although 9, 10 and 11 toothed sprockets are rather meant for timbersports purposes,

These sprockets can also be used on low revving four stroke in a CS slabbing mill design. Either way the bar needs to be modified otherwise there is danger of the chain jumping off teh bar.


Granberg International Chainsaw Mills and Chainsaw Accessories - Ripping Chain | Granberg International Chainsaw Mills and Chainsaw Accessories | www.granberg.com (http://www.granberg.com)

The Granberg ripping chain has been tested by a number of CS millers in the ArboristeSite and reported times are not sufficiently different to convince me one way or the other. It seems like the optimum filing angles used on this type chain has not been optimized. Weisyboy has also made his own version of this chain and found little difference.

Travis Edwards
18th Feb 2011, 07:45 PM
It seems like the optimum filing angles used on this type chain has not been optimized. Weisyboy has also made his own version of this chain and found little difference.

You wouldn't be referring to this thread would you bob?

http://www.woodworkforums.com/f132/home-made-full-complement-ripping-chain-109843/

or this one? http://www.woodworkforums.com/f132/first-run-my-rail-mill-first-true-test-my-home-made-ripping-chain-111678/

I have actually done quite a bit of further testing and research since these posts and can honestly say that I think I have sorted the angles etc. out quite well.

I will also say that in a lot of instances a standard chain will outperform them. however the required hp to pull one of these is far less and will enable you to cut a larger log than standard full comp will.

This style of chain DOES give a better finish and tears less grain, but this and the required hp reduction are the only areas it wins out in. Standard single skip chain sharpened to 10 degrees will cut faster.

the granberg style of chain does work well when you are cutting purely endgrain but is not quicker by any means than standard or skip chain and is also more difficult for an amateur to maintain. Most of the data I have read shows it to be around 10 percent slower but gives a better finish, which reflects my findings. I guess it comes down to what you want, SPEED or FINISH.

Bedford
18th Feb 2011, 08:04 PM
Coupla things, the 090 is governed a 7500 RPM and if comparing with newer saws, they should at least have the same pitch chain i.e. don't compare one saw with 404 to one with 3/8.

gerhard
19th Feb 2011, 06:26 AM
Hi Bedford,

very true, and for durability's sake it's recommended to leave the governor intact. Stihl's present record is around 16,000 rpm, but that's for very modified machines in their timbersports endorsements. The 070 and 090 have changed little from the Contra design and are medium-rpm, so 10,000 is already stretching it.

And hi Sawchain,

magnificent, this tandem-090; up to 16 hp in one chainsaw! I just wondered how the bearings fare in this layout. Just like the bar's nose tip (with or without wheel) takes the strain of the motor pull when you use the bar's upper side, one of the crankshaft and sprocket bearing sets must cope with the pull of both motors in this tandem layout, or so i imagine. Do you change the bar sides for sawing now and then (= turning the entire machine 180 degrees)? Just wondered, because the needle bearings are already designed pretty minimal as they are for so much horsepower, in my humble opinion.

greetings

gerhard

gerhard
21st Feb 2011, 10:54 PM
There is no direct Chinese copy of the 090 to be found on the web, but an 070 copy does exist:

China 070 chainsaw - Sell Offer,Trade Leads From China Zhejiang Yongkang Lvshen Gardening Tools Co., Ltd. (http://www.tradett.com/tradeleads/u29682p154140/china-070-chainsaw.html)

Fortunately, there are enough visible differences on this product to distinguish it from the real thing. The Chinese version is called "Ivshen LS-070" and has roughly the same specs.

gerhard
21st Feb 2011, 11:00 PM
Another link:

Chain Saw (LS070) - China Chain Saw, Gasoline Saw, Power Saw in Power Tools (http://zjlvshen.en.made-in-china.com/product/doaQWVbYYgcE/China-Chain-Saw-LS070-.html)

and some pics

gerhard
22nd Feb 2011, 05:56 AM
After my chain speed discussion with Bob i got my old calculator out and set about making a speed diagram. Just finished it. In school i was worthless at maths and i tend to punch the wrong keys, so don't string me if there is the odd mistake. Still, a few conclusions can be made. Just one tooth more on the sprocket makes a lot of difference and with speed increase there is matching torque loss. The orange section is the rpm-range of the 090, with the added 0.404 chain calculations.

A 9 tooth sprocket in hardwood would either cause smoking wood or a smoking piston; i think 7 tooth sprockets are the best way to go for this machine.

This weekend i purchased another three-phase electric E30 on Ebay. Its motor has 2.7 kW output for 3.3 kW input and turns at 2750 rpm, yet has a 7 tooth sprocket, giving it plenty of pulling power at only half the 090's chain speed!

greetings all

gerhard

Sawchain
22nd Feb 2011, 09:36 AM
The Granberg ripping chain has been tested by a number of CS millers in the ArboristeSite and reported times are not sufficiently different to convince me one way or the other. It seems like the optimum filing angles used on this type chain has not been optimized. Weisyboy has also made his own version of this chain and found little difference.

I made a modified version of this chain some time ago along with the standard version, my findings were that the modified skip version I made cut faster than the standard and left a very good finish with around 1mm of washboard effect. I use a 15o top plate angle with considerably lower than normal depth gauges.


There is no direct Chinese copy of the 090 to be found on the web, but an 070 copy does exist:


Fortunately, there are enough visible differences on this product to distinguish it from the real thing. The Chinese version is called "Ivshen LS-070" and has roughly the same specs.

Hi Gerhard

Once again these threads seem to go off track, we start on an 090 and end up with 880's, 070's and ripping chain.
For a start there would be no more load on the bearings running two powerheads on a mill than a single running a long bar. Bars are also double ended which has a powerhead mount each end of the bar.

As for visible differences on the 070 copy, there aren't many, I have just worked on a Wun Hung Lo 070 copy and all the parts had Stihl part numbers cast into them, recoil starter side cover had Stihl on it, even the bar had the Stihl logo, it's just that the quality of the saw is total crap. I will not be working on any more of these, just not worth the headaches.
Check out the pic on the Alibaba site.
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/279417718/070_chain_saw/showimage.html

On this particular saw which is 3 months old 2 recoil start assy's had to be replaced, the flywheel fan contacts the recoil starter housing, the crankshaft nut on the clutch side had worn a hole in the chain cover due to the nut being too long, the carburettor was near on impossible to adjust correctly to get the saw running, everything was loose, the muffler had almost fallen off, the list is too long to name all the faults.

The owner of this saw is now looking to get rid of it and buy a decent saw for milling.

Cheers .... Laurie

BobL
23rd Feb 2011, 12:52 AM
After my chain speed discussion with Bob i got my old calculator out and set about making a speed diagram. Just finished it. In school i was worthless at maths and i tend to punch the wrong keys, so don't string me if there is the odd mistake. Still, a few conclusions can be made. Just one tooth more on the sprocket makes a lot of difference and with speed increase there is matching torque loss. The orange section is the rpm-range of the 090, with the added 0.404 chain calculations.

A 9 tooth sprocket in hardwood would either cause smoking wood or a smoking piston; i think 7 tooth sprockets are the best way to go for this machine.

I don't see why a 9 pin 404 at 7000 rpm (1290 m/min) would smoke wood as it's about the same chains speed as 8 pin 3/8 at 9000 rpm (1342 m/min) which my 880 will cut all day.

The number of drive sprocket teeth used depends what is being cut. In small wood unless the rakers are lowered the 090 will be outcut by a higher reving saw. Dropping the rakers is not going to be a lot of fun if tomorrow the operator is back to cutting big wood, The excess torque on the 090 does nothing in small wood so if all one had was an 090, slipping an 8 or 9 pin on the drive would be a way of getting the job done quicker. Tomorrow when the big wood cutting is needed then the 7 pin could be put back on, one can't exactly put the raker metal back on the raker. The problem with doing this on an outboard clutch saw is that unlike saws with an inboard clutch it is a PITA to continually want to swap the drive sprocket so it rarely happens. I will swap the 880 between 7 and 8 pin on a regular basis. I also have 9 - 11 pin sprockets but I just play with those.

There is one error in your table, There is no such thing as 0.375" chain, 3/8 chain is 0.367", this is why my graph reports 367 data. I agree with your other calcs to about the 3rd figure.

gerhard
23rd Feb 2011, 04:45 AM
Thanks Bob,

i'll recalculate the 3/8 lines and edit the table

maragle
23rd Feb 2011, 09:55 AM
I made a modified version of this chain some time ago along with the standard version, my findings were that the modified skip version I made cut faster than the standard and left a very good finish with around 1mm of washboard effect. I use a 15o top plate angle with considerably lower than normal depth gauges.



Hi Gerhard

Once again these threads seem to go off track, we start on an 090 and end up with 880's, 070's and ripping chain.
For a start there would be no more load on the bearings running two powerheads on a mill than a single running a long bar. Bars are also double ended which has a powerhead mount each end of the bar.

As for visible differences on the 070 copy, there aren't many, I have just worked on a Wun Hung Lo 070 copy and all the parts had Stihl part numbers cast into them, recoil starter side cover had Stihl on it, even the bar had the Stihl logo, it's just that the quality of the saw is total crap. I will not be working on any more of these, just not worth the headaches.
Check out the pic on the Alibaba site.
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/279417718/070_chain_saw/showimage.html

On this particular saw which is 3 months old 2 recoil start assy's had to be replaced, the flywheel fan contacts the recoil starter housing, the crankshaft nut on the clutch side had worn a hole in the chain cover due to the nut being too long, the carburettor was near on impossible to adjust correctly to get the saw running, everything was loose, the muffler had almost fallen off, the list is too long to name all the faults.

The owner of this saw is now looking to get rid of it and buy a decent saw for milling.

Cheers .... Laurie


Gee Laurie, I thought you enjoyed spending your weekend swearing in chinese then charging me next to nothing for your time!

Laurie is dead right about my saw. The standard of construction and the poor quality of some of the components justify the Piece of #### medallion. I bought it knowing that I could choose the wrong supplier. I ended up getting it on my door for under four hundred dollars (AliExpress) and in the knowledge that I was buying a fake.

Scumbags on Ebay.com.au have been selling these things as originals and getting up to 1400 spondulas for them...nice little earner as long as you keep your home address a secret.

I am looking for a replacement at the moment but in the meantime have sourced some better components in the hope I can get it to be a little more reliable. Oregon drum and sprocket, Better quality Carb and an AET electronic ignition assembly....and I'm about to order the right nut for the clutch assembly. Laurie also pointed out that it has been vomitting oily muck from the muffler so I don't hold any great hopes for its longevity even if I can get it running right.

It does run and does cut well on my mill, it's just that when bits stuff up, as they do regularly, I have to drive the thing three hours back home to get it fixed.

itsposs
23rd Feb 2011, 09:06 PM
I dont know if an 084 would be any good to you if so PM or look in the City, Coast & Country Trader - FREE advertising (http://www.ccctrader.com.au)
pm me I ll give you the number in the add

InterTD6
23rd Feb 2011, 09:43 PM
There is one error in your table, There is no such thing as 0.375" chain, 3/8 chain is 0.367", this is why my graph reports 367 data. I agree with your other calcs to about the 3rd figure.

Bob just wondering how you came about that 0.367" figure? when 3 divided by 8 = 0.375 of an inch. Carlton other manufacturers designate it like that as well.
regards inter

Karl Robbers
23rd Feb 2011, 10:29 PM
Bob just wondering how you came about that 0.367" figure? when 3 divided by 8 = 0.375 of an inch. Carlton other manufacturers designate it like that as well.
regards inter
Me too.:)

gerhard
24th Feb 2011, 11:42 PM
Yes, that's what i thought when measuring up the 3/8" chains of my Stihl E15 and E220 saws. The alternative figure of .375 pops up on the web regularly, whereas i haven't found .367 yet. Bob, can you give any examples, please?

BobL
25th Feb 2011, 01:21 AM
3/8 is just a nominal size. Go and measure 100 drive links of any 3/8 chain and do the gauge maths - it won't come out to 0.375" it comes out to 0.367. I didn't believe it either till I tried it myself.

Karl Robbers
25th Feb 2011, 08:31 PM
3/8 is just a nominal size. Go and measure 100 drive links of any 3/8 chain and do the gauge maths - it won't come out to 0.375" it comes out to 0.367. I didn't believe it either till I tried it myself.

Velly hinteresting!
You learn something every day.
Hmm, I wonder why it ended up that way???

Travis Edwards
25th Feb 2011, 10:02 PM
3/8 is just a nominal size. Go and measure 100 drive links of any 3/8 chain and do the gauge maths - it won't come out to 0.375" it comes out to 0.367. I didn't believe it either till I tried it myself.

how can you do the equation on 100 links???? the equation works on measuring 3 links and then dividing by 2. 100 doesn't divide into a whole number when divided by three hence the fact that you get 0.367 you would need to work on 102 drive links to give a number divisible by 3.

102 divided by 3 equals 34 for those who cannot work it out. But as we all know chains stretch a bit during their life, so whether the initial is slightly less to allow for this stretch is something that the manufacturer may have worked in.

BobL
25th Feb 2011, 11:11 PM
how can you do the equation on 100 links???? the equation works on measuring 3 links and then dividing by 2.

One can measure any number of links.

From the Carlton Chain manual this is how I measure pitch.
When measuring using one drive link it's the distance between 3 consecutive rivets divided by 2
http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=162578&stc=1&d=1298635271

It can also be done with using as many rivets or drive links as one likes (the more rivets or drive links the more accurate the measurement is.

Here's 10 consecutive drive links (21 rivets)
http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=162579&stc=1&d=1298635271
That comes out to ~7 3/8" or 7.375"
Now instead of dividing by 2 one divides by 20 = 0.369", this is about right for well used chain.
Actually, now that I look at the zero mark, the ruler has moved and should be moved over a bit towards the right which will make it less than 0.369"

When I measure new chain I get 0.367"

InterTD6
25th Feb 2011, 11:19 PM
http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=162578&stc=1&d=1298635271

http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=162579&stc=1&d=1298635271
"

I think the top diagram says it all bob.
regards inter

Travis Edwards
26th Feb 2011, 01:47 PM
OK first of all I realised upon further thought my own silly mistake made in my previous statement, too many beers after a hard day will be my excuse.

any way I went to my shed and got out a brand new stihl chain and my 300 mm/ 12 inch digital verniers and did some measurements with the chain held taught so as not to get any possible distortion of measurement and after careful measurement one figure consistently appeared. As I say this was on BRAND NEW UNUSED stihl chain and carlton or oregon or windsor may differ a small amount. I do know that stihl extensively pre stretch their chain in production.


I can say that .375 is wrong and .367 is as close as to what I got, measuring as accurately as possible regardless of number of links I got .368 every time although the difference between 0.367 and 0.368 could be as simple as thumb pressure on the verniers, but the the difference to 0.375 is huge and visible by eye quite clearly.

Congrats BobL you are right.:2tsup:

itsposs
26th Feb 2011, 01:53 PM
Now thats sportsman like big thumbs up for Travis

InterTD6
26th Feb 2011, 08:43 PM
What does .404" chain measure when tested the same way ? Are we dealing with a chain measuring conspiracy / plot to throw us off the scent of something bigger.
regards inter

BobL
26th Feb 2011, 09:18 PM
What does .404" chain measure when tested the same way ?
0.404


Are we dealing with a chain measuring conspiracy / plot to throw us off the scent of something bigger.
regards inter

Nah - it's just tit bit of info I only picked up a few years ago and the a Norwegian CS buff reminded me about it recently when I did some chain speed calcs similar to gerhard.

3/8 has always been called 3/8 because calling it 367/1000 is a bit of a mouthfull.
0.375 differs from 0.367 by only 2% , so 3/8 was the closest simple fraction that could be used, and yanks like simple fractions so it couldn't be called 0.367. it could also be called 47/128 (since that differs from 0.367 by only 0.05%) but that is probably worse.

InterTD6
26th Feb 2011, 09:41 PM
So technically its called .375" pitch chain, but technically it doesn't exist.
regards inter

gerhard
27th Feb 2011, 12:58 AM
Hahaha! Still, i got the same results as Travis, so congrats indeed. Took a used Stihl 3/8 RSC chain and laid 25 sets of three rivets in a straight line (just like Inter did with 10 sets). Here in metric mainland Europe, i was tought that one inch equals 2.54 centimeter. So, with each unit of 0.750" being 1.905 centimeter, i should have arrived at 47.625 centimeters for 25 units. But i didn't, it measured 46.7. Devided by 25 you get 1.868 cm for each unit and that's 0.734 inch instead of 0.750. 0.734 devided by 2 is 0.367125.
No idea why they chose that particular size. Whereas a "13 mm drill" for metric markets sound nice and round as a "1/2 inch drill" on imperial size oriented market (in spite of 1/2"being only 12.7 mm), there is neither a nice round logic to be found in 0.367" nor in its metric translation 0.93218 cm. Like others have stated in their contributions, i also think 3/8 sounds nice, since it is a very frequently used unit in the tool world, of which even leymen tool users can have a good imagination.

To bend the thread back to the 090;
do anyone of you use a rim sprocket on an 090? What are your experiences on wear and behaviour?

cheers

gerhard

cheers

gerhard

BobL
27th Feb 2011, 02:27 AM
Congrats BobL you are right.:2tsup:

Cheers Travis. Like I said I didn't know this either till I read in on another website only back in 2009, and just like you all I had to measure it for myself.

Travis Edwards
28th Feb 2011, 07:46 PM
Cheers Travis. Like I said I didn't know this either till I read in on another website only back in 2009, and just like you all I had to measure it for myself.

You would think that being a saw doctor I would have known this but it is honestly something I have never had to check, you look at a chain and you can see what it is, .325, 3/8 lo pro, 3/8 or .404. When you make up a chain off a roll you simply pick it off the one marked with the appropriate size. I have measured practically every other thing you could ever need to on a chain but never bothered with the obvious....lol:2tsup:

gerhard
28th Feb 2011, 09:59 PM
Hi Travis,

it was my meter per minute diagram measured at several RPM's, that brought the topic of 0.08" difference up in the first place, because i based my calculations on 0.750" worth of chain tranport for every sprocket tooth. Since i promised a corrected diagram for 0.734"anyway, i think i better measure up 0.404 and 0.325 as well before i upload it, to prevent this issue from becoming a never-ending story. Though i believe Bob stated that he agreed with my other figures.

404-chains i do have, but 0.325 will be hard to find over here. The neighbours have a B&D-thingy, but i believe that's 3/8 LowProfile, as most hobby saws are. I'll try to get back with the results soon.

My question: has any other forum member and 090 owner experience with rim sprockets on his saw? My 070 is fitted with one and it works, but it looks very flimsy. I can see this option tear to bits or derail with 8-plus hp.

regards

gerhard

Travis Edwards
1st Mar 2011, 08:26 PM
Hi gerhard I run rim sprockets on all of my saws, I would not consider them any more flimsy than a spur sprocket. There is actually a lot of strength in a rim sprocket in the way it is made. I would say that BobL would have rims on his 880 which is over 8 hp and they handle it alright. The crankshaft was designed to be strong enough to handle the out board clutch of the 090, so I would not even consider it to be an issue and would honestly think a large percentage would have been sold with them especially of the later model av's.:2tsup:

maragle
10th Mar 2011, 04:07 PM
As for visible differences on the 070 copy, there aren't many, I have just worked on a Wun Hung Lo 070 copy and all the parts had Stihl part numbers cast into them, recoil starter side cover had Stihl on it, even the bar had the Stihl logo, it's just that the quality of the saw is total crap. I will not be working on any more of these, just not worth the headaches.
Check out the pic on the Alibaba site.
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/279417718/070_chain_saw/showimage.html

On this particular saw which is 3 months old 2 recoil start assy's had to be replaced, the flywheel fan contacts the recoil starter housing, the crankshaft nut on the clutch side had worn a hole in the chain cover due to the nut being too long, the carburettor was near on impossible to adjust correctly to get the saw running, everything was loose, the muffler had almost fallen off, the list is too long to name all the faults.

The owner of this saw is now looking to get rid of it and buy a decent saw for milling.

Cheers .... Laurie


Just an update. My Fake 070 has about 8 hours on it....now the crank is stuffed and the magneto damaged. Add to that the barely functional carburetor and the replacement rewinds you should get the general picture of what a few hundred bucks will buy you in the way of a Chinese "Stihl" 070 .:no:

I picked up a lightly used MS 880 on the weekend before I got the news about the 070. If the pull start doesn't break my wrist I should be much better off now.:2tsup:

sr thuemler
1st Feb 2012, 02:26 PM
The 090 stihl comes alive if you bend the governor off and use a straight through midway muffler.

BobL
1st Feb 2012, 04:15 PM
The 090 stihl comes alive if you bend the governor off and use a straight through midway muffler.

As far as I know the 090 governor kicks in when the revs get too high by slightly activating the choke at higher rpm. This just limits the max revs the saw can reach by indirectly richening up the air/mix ration but doesn't change the performance of optimum cutting rpm in the cut so it does not affect milling speed in anything except small logs where more chain speed helps. The saw sounds more alive when the governor is removed because high rpms are achievable but these extra rpms have little useful power behind them. In the cut optimum power RPMs will still be in the 6.5-7k RPM range which can be obtained with the governor on. Raker depths of course must be optimised.

Modifying the muffler will increase power in the cut provided the saw is re-tuned correctly.

DutchEnglishFrenchGermanItalianPortugueseSpanish
vBET 4.7.1 gives automatic translations