outinthewood

Interesting few posts on this but none from the main man ..Now we all have a life outside of this forum and I'm sure Mr Aspen has other things to do other than answer my questions about just what is used in "his" product. I'm not for a moment suggesting anything untoward but when you make such a sweeping statement you really have to step up and back up your claims as we all work hard for what we have and deserve an informed and straight forward answer ? Not to dismiss Gardenkit posts but you Sir did not make the claim. I've tried Aspen about 5/6 years ago maybe longer and I ran a strimmer on it around the yard ( 10l over about 3 weeks) and yes I agree it's clean and if I was a landscaper doing a bit of that type of work then how could you not use it ! If I was still climbing then I'd use battery. I recently did a bit of Ash dieback removal on patches a harvester could not get to and in that situation - bent over the saw all day then I would use it again but only in that situation as it's just to expensive for full production felling and I will I'm sure get it in the neck for this, but, I feel it's just to "clean" for a flatout production saw ?? I know two guys that work on saws ( all makes ) and garden gear and one of the uses they use Aspen for is it's detergent ability on you average joe's gear that says to me that albeit "clean" it's also quite harsh ? I'm sure I'm wrong but until "we" have a more informed answer that's what I'll be going with. I had a look at Aspen's website today and no real info about what is added which I'm sure will be covered by "sensitive commercial information" ? I look forward to being very wrong as I do think Aspen is ,in it's place a good product , but as it seems from the info I've seen it's a decent product not the "magic bullet" ?

That's a very powerful statement Mr Aspen ! So the mix oil in Aspen exceeds all other oils ?? Motul, Bel Ray, Maxima, Rock Oil, Red Line and on and on. Do please tell us more ...

No I was thinking of the tank breather but remembered later that what I had described was that small filter !! I came back to correct myself ...I got a very nice 242 a while ago and sure enough the breather mount hole had been stuffed with sponge which will work for a good while before degrading and turning almost solid giving the problems. Seems a very common "problem" on the 242/254

Don't forget the tank breather behind the small "plate" above the fuel cap , it's secured by a single screw. I 've found over the years everyone forgets about this on the 254 and 242 also since they were prone to leaking fuel out when being transported a lot of guys bunged them up with sponge which for a good while would cause no problems but would as poss in this case the saw not to start hot but if you undid the fuel cap it would often start and run ok.

I'm just amazed that Gaz has time for his strict gym rota, as he advised me, with all this work booked in...…. By the way I have an extensive forces background, I just go on what I do now not what I did... Being proud of what you did do is fine but it's what you do now is what you are judged by !

??????

I must have a look, I did get a carb off a 395 and that must have been for a reason..so as I said I'm probably wrong on the cyl/carb thing ! I'm sure someone will come along to put me right.

On the 394 - I've had 2 as well one low and my present one a Hi top, used a couple of 395s and yes I reckon the 394 has the edge on torque and would say I was almost disappointed with the 395 ? I'm going to get this wrong but is it the carb better on the 394 and the cyl better to port on the 395 ? put those together and a good result ! On the ported saws - I run 562,372,"375" 385,390 and 394 just MM'd 288, 2101s , 576s, 562, 461, 550 , 560 , 346 and no problems on site but then I don't say a whole lot about what I'm using …

And what problem do I have to solve ? After almost 30 years of using saws and cutting timber I have more than a fair idea of how to do my job … Why would anyone want to use a 395 when if you have a very well ported range of saws to do the same job with less effort ?? Oh and as I have a ported 394 no thanks on the 395 !!

The sis wheel works very well if the face is constructed correctly, It will only work correctly if it has room to hold on the side you wish to hold. So I tend to use traditional face put in the sis then finish with swanson angled in the direction you wish to "pull" the tree. It is in my view not going to work to well with a Chestnut...Did a very hard leaning Beech using this a few weeks ago and it worked very well. You are putting a second hinge in the face to put it simply, I use it on nasty edge stuff with good results. Now if you want to take a chance ...try a triple hinge ? The principle on that is it allows travel then slows the fall as it hits each "hinge" helping to pull the tree around.

Would advise looking at ex military pouches belts etc as far tougher I would imagine looking at Oregons offering .. I started with a Husqvarna tool belt and added my own sourced pouches as required.

Not really a one saw answer, I've used the full range of Stihl and Husqvarna and as the years have gone by I've found the Husqvarna's suit me better. Hard to beat the 550 for small stuff and brashing, 562 for medium and I'm finding the 572 very good for the stuff 1470 or 951 leaves behind. This is the stock saw list ported is another conversation ! Been doing a job this last couple of weeks and going from Douglas Fir to Scots to Larch and Beech all with 28" on the 572 and been no trouble a good saw with same weight as 372 XP XT. Haven't seen a 565 yet be interesting to see how it sells as the replacement for the 365.

Beech, Oak and I recall some of the biggest hardest Yew was prob the last time in real anger with 48" . The low revs and torque meant you could keep cutting through wire and nails within reason ! Now used for large hardwood root plates with 60" Thank goodness for ported saws !

The HP figures are Stihls own but the max power figure for 090 is @ 6.500 rpm so take that as you like and like all figures open to a little massaging I'm sure.... Only the lack of a chain brake precludes you from taking it on to a commercial site. As I said I have four of them and the "G" has no AV as with the Contra "S" the early AV one is okish but the later AV is not that bad for the size of the thing. I would have cut fairly regular with one maybe 15 yrs ago but with the discovery of ported saws they now sit in the corner most of the time !

Just a quick and very big thanks to Shavey aka AJS Chainsaws. As most of know he runs a very decent Dolmar agency and also supplies some very nice gear from his Ebay shop. I know a lot of stuff on Ebay is over priced over rated rubbish but Shavey's stuff is spot on ! I've just got my second axe from him at pretty much a give away price for the work he puts in hanging them with new handles. It's a pleasure to spend money with him, thanks Andrew !! It will be banging wedges into some pretty decent Douglas tomorrow.

088/880 more power ??? It depends how you look at it , on paper the 090 has 13 hp the 088 8.5 hp . The saws deliver that power in a very different way but if you adjust the speed flap on the 090 it will walk all over a 088/880. I' ve run a 090 a lot with bigish bars ( I have 4 of them) and I've owned several 088/880s and still have an 084 so I know the real difference or should I say understand the way they act ? For milling it's hard to beat the raw "power" of the 090 .

In agreement about the missing grub screw, a blocked or in this case over restricted vent could lean the saw. I had the reverse a while ago when I lost the same type of vent pipe off one of my 090s and it ran like it was on choke ! Be interested on how you get on with the RW Oregon ? Yes it's Dave !

Yes tank vent, should it have a small grub type screw in the end ? has a one way breather so negating the screw ?

The starter and clutch are bigger other than that pretty much. Good luck on the genuine 090 p&c !! When I say bigger clutch I should say more segments !

When I got the Oregon Hyper skip chain thought I'd give a couple of "smaller"saws a go and have been using 2x 576s and been very happy with how they are doing. I had always been of the mind the bigger the better but now have a couple of 090s sitting in the corner ! Have also run 394-390 combo with good results.

As the others have said , although 30" are not that common I would have thought your local dealer could have spun one up for you ?

He is jacking up hill to allow extraction by winch , side of a mountain etc ! He seems to take almost pride in posting "fails" ? or is it " my trees are harder than anyone elses " I came across a couple of his videos in a thread "worst chainsaw videos" on another site which was a bit unfortunate for him ....

Any 371-372-385-390-576-570 will fit to get you out of trouble. A pushing chain against tension will certainly show up any weakness which you would like to think would not be there ! Not being smart but how was the chain tension ?

The point I was making (not very well !) was that the talk about the wieght of the two was being a little confused by folk quoting Lbs and Kgs and mixing them up, I have seen on another platform someone who was busy telling the world that the 572 is "over 3lbs" more than the 462. MattyF I 100% agree with you on the "work smart" comment and if the situation allows that type of work then you would be stupid not to do it, I tend to do most of my work with a brace of 562s (ported and stock) as I work away from base for the week I carry a 550, 2x562 and now the 572 replaced a 576.

Seems to be a lot of talk about the "huge " wieght of the 572 , it's the same as a 372 AT XT ! The 462 is just1lb and a few oz's under it ..a Kilo is 2.2 lbs. I spend 8-10 hrs a day in the wood 5 days a week for me I'm ok with the same deal wieght wise.