Milwaukee top handle is coming

Then again, that reviewer doesn't seem to know the difference between lawn care professionals and tree care professionals. I was happy though to see two hands on the saw and chainsaw chaps being worn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
It was obvious in the first paragraph the reviewer isn't a tree worker:

"They have the power to cut hardwoods without the headaches that come with gas power, like fumes, maintenance, and cost." Anybody who thinks those are the biggest headaches of a gas saw vs. a battery saw hasn't pulled the starter cord while balancing on the end of the branch in a wet Honey locust covered in lichens while hanging over a skylight on a windy day.

And another:
"I don’t know about you, but I want the weight of that saw as small as possible if I’m up in a bucket near power lines. If you need something more than a 12-inch bar, you don’t need to be dealing with that branch!"
OK...great. Then who is going to deal with that branch? (I personally don't do line clearance...but somebody's got to do it!)
 
Last edited:
The review states:
"...this chainsaw operates at around 15 meters per second (that’s around 49 feet per second). That’s not as fast as many gas-powered top handle chainsaws—which is where most of the complaining comes from online (we know who you are!) What Milwaukee does, however—like most battery-powered saws we’ve seen and used—is drop the speed and give you torque. That means you don’t really see the chain speed drop very much as you go through the cut. It’s very confident."

FWIW:
Makita XCU08 claims chain speed of 3940 feet per minute. That translates into 65.7 feet per second.

Husqvarna T540i XP (battery saw) is 78.7 FPS
Husqvarna T540 XP II (gas) is 63.6 FPS

A quick search didn't turn up chain speed for a 201T...or torque specifications for any of those



I've assumed, based on use, that Makita gave up torque for chain speed. This Milwaukee better have some serious torque to give up that much speed.
 
ATH said:
The review states:
"...this chainsaw operates at around 15 meters per second (that’s around 49 feet per second). That’s not as fast as many gas-powered top handle chainsaws—which is where most of the complaining comes from online (we know who you are!) What Milwaukee does, however—like most battery-powered saws we’ve seen and used—is drop the speed and give you torque. That means you don’t really see the chain speed drop very much as you go through the cut. It’s very confident."

FWIW:
Makita XCU08 claims chain speed of 3940 feet per minute. That translates into 65.7 feet per second.

Husqvarna T540i XP (battery saw) is 78.7 FPS
Husqvarna T540 XP II (gas) is 63.6 FPS

A quick search didn't turn up chain speed for a 201T...or torque specifications for any of those



I've assumed, based on use, that Makita gave up torque for chain speed. This Milwaukee better have some serious torque to give up that much speed.
Click to expand...
Low chain speed is terrible, one of the guys who works with me has one of the dewalt top handles it feels terrible to use unlike my stihl or husqvarna.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
ATH said:
The review states:
"...this chainsaw operates at around 15 meters per second (that’s around 49 feet per second). That’s not as fast as many gas-powered top handle chainsaws—which is where most of the complaining comes from online (we know who you are!) What Milwaukee does, however—like most battery-powered saws we’ve seen and used—is drop the speed and give you torque. That means you don’t really see the chain speed drop very much as you go through the cut. It’s very confident."

FWIW:
Makita XCU08 claims chain speed of 3940 feet per minute. That translates into 65.7 feet per second.

Husqvarna T540i XP (battery saw) is 78.7 FPS
Husqvarna T540 XP II (gas) is 63.6 FPS

A quick search didn't turn up chain speed for a 201T...or torque specifications for any of those



I've assumed, based on use, that Makita gave up torque for chain speed. This Milwaukee better have some serious torque to give up that much speed.
Click to expand...

I believe the comment about cutting hardwoods is related to the ability of an 18V battery to torque its way through hardwoods. Left out is that it will likely cut slower through pine, which requires less torque and benefits more from chain speed. I would like to buy this milwaukee saw. But, I'm not sure I'd want to top a big pine top with it. I wouldn't top a big pine top without my ms661 anyway, so it doesn't matter to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
colb said:
I believe the comment about cutting hardwoods is related to the ability of an 18V battery to torque its way through hardwoods. Left out is that it will likely cut slower through pine, which requires less torque and benefits more from chain speed. I would like to buy this milwaukee saw. But, I'm not sure I'd want to top a big pine top with it. I wouldn't top a big pine top without my ms661 anyway, so it doesn't matter to me.
Click to expand...

And my m18 ground saw does great, so if this new saw is anything like it I'll be excited. The bar on the ground saw is flimsy, so if you have an indelicate employee I'd arm them with something else...

I have lasted my entire career having used a 201t only once, for recutting a stump... This may be one of the signs that you should have shorts in your financial portfolio for companies that cannot transition to making complete battery-powered lines of tools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
Any idea on the weight of the saw in comparison to the 540i? A 8.0 Milwaukee battery is significantly lighter and smaller than the husky, and they aren’t that much lighter than a 201..

I have a pile of Milwaukee tools and batteries so that tool pile will likely grow once this saw is available. I don’t care about chainspeed if the saw can chew through wood! Something the husky lacks for sure. If it’s about the same weight as a 150, with more grunt I’d be very happy!

Will this saw take a real bar?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
Does anyone know if published chain speeds are freewheeling or under load? My understanding is that you load a saw in the cut carefully balancing load and rpm drop to find the sweet spot for max cutting power, different for each saw. Electric saws only make torque if they drop some rpm, it's how the motors work. Like an older Stihl, more torque, lower revs, chugging through the cut but muchos chips produced. (?)
 
I’ve been looking at the ego pro top handle as I’m thinking to switch to their battery blower. Heard good things about their products.
 
Serf Life said:
I’ve been looking at the ego pro top handle as I’m thinking to switch to their battery blower. Heard good things about their products.
Click to expand...
I get the impression that they are built light duty for pro use. They come across as a robust homeowner grade tool however. My mom has a few of their tools blower, mower, and strimmer, a year and half of weekly use so far so good.
 
evo said:
Only way to find out… which one of us is going to buy one?
Click to expand...
I'll buy it. Who is going to help withgofundme? :LOL:

It sounds like the Milwaukees are due out in January. I'll wait a couple of months to make sure there aren't horrific reviews then will probably buy one.
 
One of my clients had the Milwaukee rear handle it was ok better than dewalt not comparable to either my stihl msa161t or the husky 540ixp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
Alright folks here it is:

I was waiting to talk about this saw until Milwaukee finally released it. I've been fortunate enough to be in contact with the folks developing and testing this saw and have been running a late stage prototype for a while now. Heres my take: This thing cuts very well. Its not a light weight saw. It feels sturdy. Its got torque for days. I can't get it to bog down unless I legitimately abuse it in the cut far beyond what would be considered normal. I've been running it with the largest 12 aH battery just to get a feel for how it is when its the heaviest setup. Most folks will likely go for the 8aH battery but I won't complain about using the 12 for a removal. I don't have weights yet but I'll get them soon. I'm not exactly sure what is different between the late stage prototype that I have and what is officially going to be on store shelves just yet. I'll get a more thorough comparison in the next few weeks but what I have looks like finished product.

Pics 1.1-1.4 are a white pine. Used half the 12 ah battery
Pics 2.1 and 2.2 are a mulberry. Used half the 12ah battery
Pics 3.1-3.3 is sugar maple. Used half the 12ah battery.
pic 4 is saw sitting next to echo battery top handle for comparison.

Things I'm not too fond of: the chain size of .043 .325 low profile Oregon. I can't find a non reduced kickback chain for this. The angled side handle but that's not a deal breaker for me.

Things I like: Durable. Torque/chain speed balance. Simplicity of electronics so no lights or chain brake resets needed. Chain brake off and have the palm lockout depressed for operation. Chain brake is a physical chain brake band and an electric cut out switch. On board saw tool. Good balance and top grip profile.

Not sure what else to add but at the end of the day, I would spend money on it.

The one thing I learned while using this saw, I will never buy a gas top handle again. Regardless of me using a Milwaukee or any other brand, The smooth operation of a battery top handle is here.
 

Attachments

  • 1.1.jpg
    1.1.jpg
    120.6 KB · Views: 44
  • 1.2.jpg
    1.2.jpg
    86.9 KB · Views: 37
  • 1.3.jpg
    1.3.jpg
    394.4 KB · Views: 32
  • 1.4.jpg
    1.4.jpg
    426.2 KB · Views: 31
  • 2.1.jpg
    2.1.jpg
    296.3 KB · Views: 34
  • 3.1.jpg
    3.1.jpg
    732.4 KB · Views: 34
  • 3.2.jpg
    3.2.jpg
    642.7 KB · Views: 35
  • 3.3.jpg
    3.3.jpg
    586.7 KB · Views: 42
  • 4.jpg
    4.jpg
    607.2 KB · Views: 44
  • 2.2.jpg
    2.2.jpg
    524.8 KB · Views: 50
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom