Piston Skirt

2510 is in different league - when you put it side by side to 260/280 it looks even tinier. What's even more impressive - it has a carb heating channel, roller catcher, metal spikes and fixed bar nut yet it weighs half a kilo less than 260. Don't put it side by side to your 260 unless you're selling it )))

Well as far as I remember JASO reserves the right to purchase a sample of certified oil at any moment and re-test if it is the same spec as it was given for certification. This is one of the reasons why their certification itself is not cheap - for sample testing they use lab-spec engines under heavy conditions for 180 minutes for sole sample. Typically it's easy to see if modern engine was using FB grade (this means pretty basic) oil - heavy carbon deposits are very clearly visible everywhere after as little as 20-50 hours of actual work. The cleanest engines that I've seen were the ones that used Aspen or FD oils. And answering to your question - it's up to You IMHO independent testing always says the most. The only exception is when manufacturer's machinery suffers from certain problems and a spec-formula as a solution has to be developed. This was remotely similar when VW tried to solve DSG gearbox failures by changing the tranny oil to synthetic spec (and it did not help that much:) )

It is a bit simplier and at the same time might seem more complicated than that 1. JASO and ISO standards actually are very close (FD is nearly equal to LEGD) 2. Many oil makers (and re-badgers) use standard names on bottles without actually having the certificates or being certified. Yes, even the big names do that, I will just avoid naming them 3. The semi-synthetic (or "synthetic blend"=mineral based+synth.additives) oils can easily have a better set of characteristics and be superior to synthetic based oils. The reason is not really complicated - the oil has to have certain set of important characteristics of lubricity, carbon/ash deposits, detergency, smoke amount etc. If one of them is lower than required by standard - it has lower rating 4. The beauty of JASO procedure - the oil maker/brand can always be checked even online (which is not so easy with ISO). Also, in most cases you can find a square symbol on oil bottle with actual certificate number given for that oil. The list of oils that are actually certified can be found here: http://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/2T_EV_LIST.pdf The description of application and AFAIR testing procedures can be found here: JASO Engine Oil Standards Implementation Panel Now check the thread and your own post and you may notice that some names/pictures of oils mentioned actually are not JASO certified although you can find the "statements" on the bottles. Same story is with ISO ratings, however it's very hard for average Joe to check if certain oil is actully ISO certified. This is the reason why many non-sponsored kart and 2-stroke bike racers stick to FD oils (and yes, they fight over which one is better ) Happy reading!

Enjoy that deep clearly articulated stroker sound And make sure you have it readjusted after few gallons - it will loosen up and start idling higher. And gain some power

Yeah, it would be the best solution. Just a few seconds ago I started wondering if that S1-C1 adapter distance between stud hole centers is the same for Husky and ECHO (!). Visit the saw shop with Your bar - if they carry adapters and the chainsaw you want, it will take just a couple minutes to try it on.

Nope. The bar studs are fixed from the inside of oil tank. Technically it means it would take: a) custom machining of magnesium crankcase and then making the new bigger sized studs. b) making a couple spacers (internal dia. = stud dia., external dia. = bar slot width) which is effectively simplified version of bar adapter. Seems like it's better to check the oil hole position on your bar(s), measure the oiler slot position on the saw, check if Stihl-Husky adapter actually fits your bar(s) and (if YES)... get that adapter & saw & bars together EDIT: this adapter seems to have ALMOST everything right, except it would need some filing/milling in the middle - CS-501SX has additional screw head between the studs https://performanceoutdoorequipment.com/collections/chainsaw-bars-and-chains/products/cannon-cbw-20040-8mm-bar-adapter

Sounds like a lot to measure with all the adapters On top of that you'll want to be sure the oiler holes are where they have to be. It's really easier to bolt on another chainsaw to the existing bars.

Yes, just measured - the mounting pins are 8mm, which makes the 8.2mm mount (C1) the most adequate Also, tensioner hole centers are 28.5mm apart. Minimum distance between the 2 holes is 21.5mm, maximum - 36mm. Actual tensioner axis offset from center of the bar is 13.5mm Let me know if this sounds hard to understand - I'll just make a couple pictures then.

It uses the same 041 mount (OREGON) as CS-500 (the only difference is tensioner located in clutch cover). The rim is "small 7" which means it's 18720 for a 3/8 (OREGON) Sure, you can look up analogues from other manufacturers based on this info.

Just a curious picture that somehow proves that ECHO 590/600/610/620 chassis (= Shindaiwa 598/600/600SX) in fact had Kioritz serial number:

Well, that same guy I mentioned was given a 620SX for evaluation. Obviously more power at the price of more weight. As he spends all day in the woods, he chose a smaller one - fully equipped it's couple kilos lighter - easier on your back and really nimble when cutting branches. Of course if you intend to work on bigger trees and spend most of the time bucking it - 620 will shave off some time

Runs nice. Comparing to the older CS-500 it has a lot less vibrations on idle. Comparing to the CS-510 it has more power at any revs. My friend uses it daily in the forest since august 2015 - nothing wrong happened except usual forester scratches And yes, as usually it takes few tanks to unleash the full power - it's really noticeable.