[Stonehenge]

Now that we've got one significant test underway, I'll post some thoughts on another test I've been thinking about running - cutoff/demolition saws.

Here are some of the issues/restrictions as I see them. Please add or critique if you think there's something missing or out of whack...


I'm thinking that the engine size between brands needs to be as close to identical as possible. Running a Partner K1250 against a Stihl TS 400 wouldn't give accurate results.

Given similar engine sizes, blade size needs to be identical. In fact, I'm thinking it should be the same blade.

Speaking of blades, the blade should already be broken in before it's used as a test blade.

The belts on each blade - not sure on this one - tensioned to the mfg specs, or tensioned to identical taughtness. A tighter belt would mean more torque making it to the blade, so a difficult or deep cut might go faster with a tighter belt.

The test should be time to cut some # of identical pavers or block (maybe 10??).

The same person should run all the saws, so techniques don't differ.

Is there anything else that should be considered for this test?

[Tim]

Just curious, do you ever use the water atachments and the diamond blades to cut your stone with your chop saws? One might out preform the other in that test too. Tim

[dan deutekom]

I am not sure what a fair test would be. I guess you would use the same blade on each saw for the test. But how do you test durability, startibility, idling, ease of fueling. Believe it or not my favorite saw for comfortable use was the Sthil 350. Even though it was underpowered, slow cutting and not the most reliable saw I have used, it just felt right to me and I loved it for cutting coping. I also love Makita even though it is big, heavy and bulky. It too is not the most reliable saw that I have used but it certainly is the smoothest running and quietest. All of the Partners I have used are light, easy starting, and quick cutting but I find they vibrate my hands and give me the tingles after an hour or so of cutting. I think a lot of factors that make a saw good are personal preference. By the way, My favorite all round saw is the Sthil ts 400.

[Stonehenge]

I think this would be like a JD Power test of initial quality. So durability would not be part of the equation. I wish I knew how to test vibration (that's part of the reason I don't like the Stihl). Some of the other measures you mention would admittedly be subjective. But 'ease of fueling' would be hard to quantify.

[dan deutekom]

Ease of fueling, I guess is a personal preference. I would also think how easy is it to blow out the air filter, change a starter rope or spark plug. Why dosn't Consumers Report do tests on our tools?

I think it would be easier to test different blades then cut off saws. All the saw does is spin a blade at a certain RPM. If each saw can maintain that RPM at the same pressure exerted on the blade, then they are equal in performance?? Why do you make me think so hard when I am tired?

[jwholden]

Umm...Dan, I've got an old TS350 thats still in good condition and I'm taking offers...

[Rex Mann]

We are looking at buying a new saw. We have only had Stihls before however, we are considering buying a Partner 700.

In my research I found they recommend a minimum of 90 octane for the gas. Is this correct?

And, if it is, how many of you partner users follow this guideline?

Peace,

Rex

[Stonehenge]

I use what the pumps give me. I think it's usually 80 or so - whatever the regular unleaded is. I only use Partner 2 cycle oil.

The saws seem to be holding up fine - our K950 purchased in spring of 1999 is running like a champ. Our K650 purchased in spring of 2000 would be running fine, if it hadn't been stolen (though this one took a lot more abuse, and didn't run as well is it's older 950 brethren).

We bought a new K700 this season, and it seems to be an excellent balance of power and size.