cylinder porting

  • Thread starter Thread starter Climbhigh
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 37
  • Views Views 9K
It is not easy this stuff. How X-torq is meant to work is pretty well explained and just as it is supposed to be said. It is not a bad idea, wasn't in the 20's and 30's when it was a new concept either, but it had issues and still do.
Problems is the amount of fresh air in transfers, flow of gasses and pressures. Change any of this and regardless of performance the saw is now not legal as fumes going out are not good enough. For racing it is OK, but not for work here.
The pressures and flow in case and transfers is not the same all the time. Transfers add to crank case volume.
It makes even less sense when you see the flow of gases in a gif.

If you want to alter the X-torq to run well and last, you loose the point of it as you get worse emissions.

Better not to buy it at all...
 
Ahhh... but you are a Swede sir. You've still a lot to learn about the American redneck.

Emissions! Meh... :|:
 
Well it seems to be important enough to get emission saws, if not they would not be built.

I see your point and raise you a thought...

Why not get a saw without X-torq and have some serious fun.
 
Definitely California has alot of pull in EPA
but a state that has more population then all of Canada and smaller then Manitoba better clean up their act.
 
I don't see what the fuss is about. Let them have their rules and be without saws then.
They can sell saws in stores that is non EPA, that is no problem...

It is a lot of BS if you ask me.

If you think about it in a tad longer way than just from market point of view, it is not very environmentally friendly to do this stuff this way.
The saws fly up the eventual gains there could be on the ride from Europe or Orient anyway...
Not to mention the impact a new model make on its way to counter, before it even gets used.....
 
Well it seems to be important enough to get emission saws, if not they would not be built.

I see your point and raise you a thought...

Why not get a saw without X-torq and have some serious fun.

Because the only two top handles that are readily available right now are the 201t :whine: and the 540. They want about $200.00 over here just for a new piston and cylinder, for a 200t, so the 200 is really no longer a viable option. What does that leave us with.... a 338? :crybaby: I'd almost as soon run a stupid 201.
 
Now consider this with regards to a 200T.It's not made any more but it ranks at the top of any trim saw ever made .Considering this 200 bucks is a drop in the bucket unless the rest of the saw is trashed.

I've reworked many of them and the cause of failure is the caged needle bearings for the mains .They use a fiber internal thrust washer which wears out and causes side wobble and takes out the seals which cause a lean run .A complete set of OEM bearing and seals is around 60 dollars and for me about 1 hour to change them .Then again I've done a lot of them .That said 60 bucks is darn good insurance on an over 600 dollar saw .

FWIW there is an after market cylinder and piston on the market for about 1/2 OEM price .
 
There is a tree company owner running the updated 201T off the shelf with 14" and 16" on my site. It sure reminds me of the 200 in sound and in the cuts in his videos.

I'll try and get them to link here.
 
Bought right off the dealers shelf.

copy paste

Bought a few of the new 201t's with updates already installed, ran very good with the limiters removed and arrester screen out. Saws actually gained quite a bit of rpm richening the high speed from the max limited setting.


Kev, these are new saws with the updated coil, carb, fanwheel factory installed. Should have been more clear. Way better than the early 201T.

Pretty damn close to 200T will compare once these 2 broken in.

14" bar. PS3 chain



16" bar PS3 chain. Pulls good, good torque. Melaleuca tree (paper bark) soft bark, firm wood.

 
Back
Top