Stihl362 vs Stihl066

djsharpe

Sirs
Days ago I bought a new 362 because my 066 was too big for mid sized jobs & was chewing too much juice. I have found the 362 is much more economical & to prove it I would like to do some comparative tests. This is was I suggest:
Each csaw will be given a task in keeping with its power & normal suggested bar size on dead hardwood with a harder chain than stock so it keeps the edge longer. A number of sections will be cut and the fuel used will be measured in a similar way that you do fuel economy tests on a car. The difference is that I will need to compute the area of wood cut or measure its weight. The weight might be a problems as I dont have scales big enough. Area I can do OK. I call for comments before I start. NB plenty of candidate timber at our place. On another matter the bar of the 362 has given me grief-the nose sprocket jams when it gets hot. Not good for a new csaw me thinks. Will sought out with dealer/ Stihl.
It is a beautiful saw to use though ,little vibration & reduced noise.
David

Work Saw Collector

I'm not sure I see the point, they are not the same saws. Yes the 066 will use way more fuel, but makes more power. They are two different saws for two different jobs. Its like compairing a coffee cup to a bicycle.

djsharpe

I will come up with data such as the 066 & 362 produced a cut of xxcm2 from xxml of fuel and thus yy cm2/ml so it may not follow that one may use more than the other as you say. However Stihl says that the 362 (and other models) are up to 20% more efficient than earlier models but which I dont know. David

Work Saw Collector

I just think it will be a tough comparison to do. Not saying it can't be done. My 660 runs out of fuel fast in 42" wood it runs out before I do. My MS361 will cut a long time in 18" wood I run out before it does.

superfire

There aint any reason to compare a quarter horse to a mustang. Now if you are wanting a real test try a 361 versus 362 then you have valuble test.

MrDiesel

Yep, i agree with Superfire. I dont see the value in it but the tests results between a 361 and a 362 would be interesting

Cut4fun

Lets see a MS362 / 562xp / MS361

I know the 262xp has a cult like following, but I have never been that impressed with them. Mine were like new and ran good. I just thought there were better choices out there for me.


Here is the 2 I had and sold later on.

Attached Thumbnails

         

Eric Frei

Like it's a waste to use a 660 to cut up 12" dia logs and a 362 to fell a 36" DBH dead tree. Can be done but common sense prevails.

Invalid comparison IMHO. It's about horses for courses, that's why many sawyers have more than one saw.

I agree the 660 drinks like a fish, but what that fish can swim in a fast running river will exceed the minnow.

__________________

gooddog

"the 362 has given me grief-the nose sprocket jams when it gets hot. Not good for a new csaw me thinks."

How long is your bar? Is your chain too tight? Is your oil pump adjusted up? You can up-grade your pump with the 460R pump parts to get WAY more oil.

djsharpe

I will respond with a report when I see my dealer. New csaw, no fidling.
D

066logger

i have heard this arguement before from one of my tree trimmer friends that uses a small saw. do this test. put a 20 inch bar on both saws. cut till you run out of gas with both saws and then pile up the wood. i proved my point in the first 5 min lol. 066 wins everytime unless your cutting twigs lol.. and not to mention the saved time cutting the wood.

djsharpe

We have hard wood eucalyptus species here that might effect the outcome. Ill try to do a more scientific test rather then "piles" of wood which will certainly upset some folk. Ill do this so I can submit my results to Stihl. D

Eric Frei

It's an unfair test.

Why?

Because you have tilted the workload in favour of the smaller saw.

Maybe few tests have to be made, and I think the outcome would be expected.

20" bars cutting rounds off a log (same sized log say 15" dia)

25" bars cutting rounds off a log 20" dia

30" bars cutting rounds off a log 26" dia etc


I think you can see my point, the smaller saw will be slower and drink a lot more when the workload is increased. This is why climbers switch up to larger saws as they come down the trunk of the tree.

__________________

djsharpe

I said at the start that each saw would be given a task appropriate to its size. The outcome may surprise us. D

Eric Frei

The end result should read ml/cm2 etc

In other words millilitres of fuel used per centimeter square of surface area, just like with all cars they use L/100km

I'm keen to see your results.

__________________