Outdoor Power Equipment (Lawn Mowers, Snow Blowers, Chain Saws and more) Discussions

Apparently, my local Toro dealer says that this year's 421Q model comes with a B&S 4-stroke engine.  He said that this engine is more powerful than the 2-stroke R-tek engine that is in the 221Q. 

He started the 421Q 4 stroke engine.  It sounded fairly quiet and was relatively vibration free smooth running.  Definitely quieter and smoother than the Honda GX160 engine.  I was impressed.  Good job B&S.

He didn't start the 221Q 2 stroke engine.  Stated that it had no gas in tank.  Either that could be true or he didn't want to stink up the showroom with exhaust fumes.

Has anyone used both engines on the Toro 221Q and 421Q and can provide honest report?  Which engine is more powerful and can do the job of moving heavy snow better?

I know there are folks here are dyed in the wool 2-stroke fans, you know who you are.  Barring the 4 stroke heavier weight, complexity, and hassle of oil change, none of these draw backs are really a concern to me, I can go either way.  No big deal to change oil or mix oil in gasoline.  The 421Q felt slightly heavier in the front, but not enough to make a difference.  I won't be lifting either snowblower up and down the bed of a pickup truck so weight difference of 10 lbs isn't an issue. 

If both engines are operating at the same rpm, the main differences that will effect power output will be displacement and compression. The 221 has a 141 cc two cycle engine. Toro does not state the h.p. nor torque specs. However, I have an Echo lawn mower with an engine of the same displacement. At 2800 rpm, it's rated a 4.5 h.p. If you increase rpm to 3600 (28.5%) that should give you an approximate increase in power provided both the Echo and B&S engines have similar compression. Chances are that being engines of similar applications, for this purpose, the difference in compression wouldn't make that much of a difference. So, a rough estimate would be that 4.5 h.p. times 28.5% would extrapolate to 5.78 h.p. Not bad for a 140cc engine. Now, if you wanted to adjust the governor to allow the engine to spin at 4000 rpm, that would give you approximately 6.42 h.p. I've had my Echo lawn mower engine spinning at 6500 rpm. I did a mathematical calculation to determine h.p. According to the formulae, the engine was putting out close to 12 h.p. So, as you can see, the previously mentioned estimates, are likely conservative. The 421 has a 163cc engine. Power specification isn't listed for this one either. So, I'm left with only one way to estimate it's output. I have a 196cc engine and a 208cc engine. Both are rated at 6 h.p. running at 3600 rpm. Now if we use straight mathematics, the 163cc engine has 30% less displacement than the 196cc engine. If we do a direct 30 reduction in h.p., that would put the 163cc engine at an estimated 4.2 h.p. There is one difference between the two engine types that must also enter the comparison. That is torque. Four stroke engines make more torque. With engines of this size, we would have to wonder if the difference is significant. I really don't know. We do know that two stroke maintenance is virtually non-existent. Mix fuel and change the spark plug every five years. Done. Four strokes require oil changes and valve adjustments. Given the simplicity of maintenance and easily gained power potential of the two stroke, I know which engine I'd choose.

Borat,

Thanks for your insight on the engines.   I don't intend on changing the governor to get extra hp out of the engines, real concerned about shortening the life of the engines as well as overstressing the overall design of the snowblower.  The 2 stroke lower maintenance and no oil change is appealing.  Although oil change on a small engine is simple.  However, I do like the quieter noise level of the 4 stroke.

I just spoke to another Toro dealer and he said that the 4 stroke engine is a Chinese made clone of the Honda GX160 engine.  That would explain why I was so impressed by it's quietness and vibration.  Perhaps the engine mounting on the Toro chasis and a different muffler made it seems better than the actual Honda GX160 engine.  Of course, I am comparing the new clone engine to a Honda engine that's on a 10 year old snowblower.

Can anybody confirm that the 4 stroke engine is a Chinese clone and not a Briggs and Stratton engine?

From my limited experience with Chinese OPE engines, I noticed that the manufacturers go big on their mufflers and like to use rubber dampened engine mounts. Particularly on their direct drive applications, generators and pressure washers for instance. Not sure if they use rubber engine mounts on belt driven equipment. Yeah, most people don't like to tinker with their engines. Particularly if it's on brand new equipment. Running a two cycle at 4000 rpm is barely past idle for those things. They love to spin. That wouldn't be a concern for me. Look at chain saws, trimmers etc. running at 12000+ rpm in some cases. They hold up for ever at those speeds. How it would effect the rest of the machine is an unknown. That's for sure. But, I'd be willing to find out if I wasn't too satisfied with stock power output.

"Can anybody confirm that the 4 stroke engine is a Chinese clone and not a Briggs and Stratton engine?"
Yes, it is a Chinese manufactured engine made by Loncin. Not all engines made in China are clones of Honda's.
The 2-cycle version  on the 221Q is a Briggs R-tek engine.

clint wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't clear if this engine is a clone of the Honda GX160?

Hi aa335 - The Engine in the new Toro 421 is a Loncin engine.  This engine is not a clone of the Honda motor, though like all OHV 4-strokes it will have some similarity.  Briggs and Stratton does make some great OHV engines, too.  (They also make some lousy ones too, but then so does Honda i.e. the GC series motors)

I have not run the new Toro 421, but I have used last years model which came with a tecumseh 4 stroke.  The 221 was considerably more powerful.  

Based on the specs of the new 421 engine, and as Borat pointed out, there is no reason to expect that the new 421 is more powerful than the 221.  I'll readily admit that I'm a die hard 2 stroke fan, but I got that way for a reason.  And certainly I don't post here to push an agenda - merely to offer an opinion on something that I know about and enjoy talking about.  Many other discussions take place here that I learn alot from, so I make it a point to add knowledge and value where I have it.    The 221 engine (the R*tek) was also used on Lawn Boy mowers (known as the Duraforce - its a reed-valve version of the same engine).  Amongst lawn care people, this engine is known as the most powerful 21" walk-behind mower made.  It is SIGNIFICANTLY more powerful than anything else I've run, including even the fantastic Kawasaki full pressure lube FJ180v 4 stroke (the best 4 stroke mower motor made in my opinion)  In the 221, the Duraforce/R*Tek really shines.  In fact, in my fleet I even have a super-rare Toro 726te which is a 2-stage machine that uses the R*Tek motor.  Run back to back last weekend with a Craftsman Professional 11/32 (same snow, same driveway) the 726te bogged less and threw farther.  Point being the R*tek is a very underrated motor, and for that I love it.  They wouldn't have put it on a big 2-stage if it wasnt powerful and torquey enough to handle it.  

The bit about torque isn't completely true.  Torque is a result of compression and displacement.  The difference in displacement between the 2 engines is very insignificant, and with the 2 stroke making power every revolution, you'll find that it makes more torque as well.  Now, compared to a 305cc 4 stroke will it make more torque?  No.  But within its range (140-210 or so cc 4 strokes) I'd bet the duraforce/r*tek is the king of the hill.

The push for the 4 stroke is purely and simply marketing.  I've made a few posts on the "other board" detailing some of the mumbo-jumbo behind this.  I think you'll be happy if you buy either the 421 or the 221 - they are the best singe-stage units you can buy, but certainly I think the 221 is the superior unit as it both costs less AND is more powerful.  And although it doesn't matter much to you as stated, its lighter, simpler, and requires less maintenance. 

Here are some pictures of the aforementioned 726te Snowblower - its a really cool, rare machine.

Now that's a clean snowblower that's never seen a flake of snow or a garage that never seen a car.

Nice snowblower, even though it has quite a bit of plastic, I kinda like the Darth Vader theme.  Very nice and clean cable management.  When was this 726te in production?  This used the same engine in the 221Q?

Thanks for a good writeup Superbuick.   I'm almost convinced to get a 221Q as 2010 will be the last year for 2 stroke to be sold in USA.  Although I tempted to give that 4 stroke Loncin engine a try.  Also the 421Q also has a larger cowl housing that allows me to repower the chassis with another engine of my choice if the Tim Allen bug bites, say a Kawasaki or Subie engine.

Thanks aa335. The plastic is just a housing over the engine - seems to make it ultra quiet as it is lined with insulating foam. Its actually more like Glass Reinforced Plastic as opposed to straight plastic. The material is almost identical to that of the inner fenders on my Corvette. Plastic chutes don't bother me one bit - in fact I like them over steel chutes. They are more slippery than a painted steel chute (at least one that hasn't been waxed). Not to say there's anything wrong with an all-metal chute - I just don't see it as a "sign of quality" per se (though alot of really nice Ariens and Simplicitys have them).

As far as I can tell, they made the 2 stroke PowerMax for 3 years. 04-06. The first two years it was called the PowerMax 726te and then the name was switched to the PowerMax 6000 but nothing else on the unit changed. The engine is identical to that in my 221QR - the carbs and jetting are the same as well (I've taken them both apart to look for differences and found nothing) The chassis on the 421 and 221 are the same - but you are right about the plastic housing - the 421 is bigger to accommodate the OHV engine. I've seen the newest 421 in person and it almost seems like the housing for this year is bigger than last year's. I'd have to see it side by side with a Tecumseh powered 421 to be sure though. Like I said - either way you can't go wrong - they're great machines. I'm just a fan of the whole more power for less money thing ;-)

Next time it snows, I'll make a video for you of the machine working - I'll put it to the test as best I can so you can see why I like it. Didn't you say you have a Honda 6/21 single stage? Thats also a pretty awesome/legendary 4-stroke single stage (what with the GX motor and much sturdier construction than the current Honda single-stage junk).

Superbuick,

Thanks for all of the wonderful information on the 221 and 421.  Those photos of your 726 are awesome.  I wish they still made that machine.

So, the Chinese manufactorer is Loncin?  I've heard they make good engines.  A neighbour of mine just got the little powerlite with the 87 cc 4 stroke engine.  I'm guessing that's also a loncin engine.  He used a few times.  Started up well, had a steady growl but the unit would bog down in about 5 cm of wet snow mixed with freezing rain.  Guess that's to be expected with such a tiny engine.  My local dealer said the 2 strokes outsell the 4 strokes this year by at least 3:1. 

How do you find the 2 stroke engine to handle wet, heavy snow and the stuff the plow leaves at the EOD?

Why didn't Toro gets Briggs to make them a 4 stroke engine for their single stage units?  Doesn't husqvarana, simplicity, etc use a 148 ccc 4 stroke engine from brigss on their single stage units?