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

So I FINALLY got to use it the other day. First thing I did was shake the 2 cycle can for a few minutes to make sure it was well mixed. Then I poured it in the tank. I took my glove off and pressed the primer bulb twice covering that little nub. Turned the key to on set the choke and pulled. It started on the third pull. First time starting. Cool!
We received about 7 inches of snow.

That Quick Shoot is just down right cool. I debated whether I wanted it and a glad I splurged. I did not try the electric start.
I have a flat double concrete drive and the Toro had it done in about ten minutes. SO much easier than shoveling plus I am not getting any younger. There is a learning curve but that is part of the fun! IT does throw the snow far, it was powdery. ON the EOD is bogged down a little but did not stall. On shut down it sounds just like a Lawnboy, given the engines heritage.
I am impressed with it and would buy another.

Always feels nice when your purchase decision has been validated - good review!

kellyinkc wrote:

Good review. Thanks for posting it.

kellyinkc wrote:  " That Quick Shoot is just down right cool."

x 2

Thanks. I have nothing to compare it too though. I did notice that on packed snow it's not as good. Just get to it before someone drives on the snow.
 It seems easy on gas mix as well.  One thing, what is the life of the auger?

kellyinkc wrote:

Depends on the surface you are clearing-Longer on black top ,less on concrete or pavers.

Marc

kellyinkc wrote:
Concrete and brick paver wear out rubber auger real fast, I think I got two seasons out of mine before I have to replace.  Of course it was aftermarket so it was cheaper made. 

Freshly sealed blacktop gives the longest wear.

Wear life also depends on how much you tip it forward and now much you let the auger spin on clean pavement.

aa335 wrote:
Thanks, I was thinking maybe getting a spare to have on hand. Time ti go look up the part.

kellyinkc wrote:
It wouldn't hurt.  But I think you have 2 or 3 more seasons to go through before wearing them out. 

Yes, I have one but only the recoil start version, it starts so easy, it started the other day in 20 deg without using the choke, I forgot to set it, still started on the first pull.

TORO should consider adding a thermostatic carb warmer, a metal plate that mounts between the carb and the intake manifold that runs from a small generator under the flywheel, like on some chainsaws. I've read some people in Canada have carb icing problems. Overall I'm really happy with this TORO.

I called the dealer and it runs about $50. It should be good for several seasons. He did say use 87 octane instead of 89 gas, something about the possibility of burning a valve.

"  He did say use 87 octane instead of 89 gas, something about the possibility of burning a valve. "

now you tell me ....put about a gallon of 89 octane gas through my 421QE  :(

alty wrote:

There was a thread on gas a while back. My dealer said to use 87 octane not higher. Air is thinner in the winter so that has an effect on it and super burns hotter to begin with.

Just purchased the 221QE from a local dealer who does work for most of pro landscapers in my area. His suggestion was 89 octane for what it's worth so that's what I'm using. Only used it twice so far with no ill effects but hopefully I got good advice and burning a valve will not be an issue. Do you have a link to that thread about fuel? Thanx.

Higher octane is for high compression engine as they are designed to detonate at high compression.  Honda and B&S small engines have around 8-9 compression ratio so these do not qualify for high compression engine so again why waste money on something that will not help at all.  But again, if using 89 or 92 octane makes you feel better, then use it.

If I understand it correctly, octane is a chemical that is added, at a cost to the buyer, to gasoline to make it less flammable.  It is a combustion retardant to allow the gas/air mixture to be compressed to a greater amount without pre-igniting due to heat etc. and making the engine knock or fight itself.  In other words, regular low octane gas burns better, more flammable.  Don't use an octane rating higher than what the engine maker calls for.

Please correct me if I am off on this.  Just a rookie.

I'm hoping that the advice I received from my dealer,whom i trust, to use the 89 octane is founded in their experience with these engines. The small difference in cost for the amount of fuel I will use each year is worth it for my peace of mind especially considering my lack of experience with these engines.

This is a real issue for car owners as well.  I have been listening to Car Talk and those MIT grads say it is waste of money to buy gasoline above the required limit.  If your engine requires minimum of 86 octane than there is no need for anything higher.  There is a lot of old myths passed on from one generation to the next.  Again, if it makes you feel better go for it.  It is only money.

The cost difference is not a big deal; I would just rather go with what the engine maker specifies to attain the best burn efficiency (hopefully equaling max power) and most importantly engine longevity.

I used to sell products to refineries and automakers. It was explained to me that each gallon of gas contains the same amount of energy. The formulations are changed to alter the ignition temperature. The higher the octane value in the formulation the higher the ignition temperature. Higher octane is required for high compression engines to eliminate pre-ignition which results in engine knock. Using higher octane than recommended by the engine manufacturer will not provide any performance improvement nor will it prolong the life of the engine. Buying higher octane than is recommended by the engine manufacturer is spending extra money and receiving nothing in return.

"Buying higher octane than is recommended by the engine manufacturer is spending extre money and receiving nothing in return."

These same people will also buy over-priced synthetic oil and realize no advantage from that either.  It's a mental exercise to slay demons that don't exist. 

It's a dealer's job to hoodwink inexperienced customers into buying their expensive wares such as$15.00 qt. synthetic oil, $10.00 spark plugs, etc.  because that's where the money is.   Why a dealer would recommend fuel with higher octane unnecessarily is beyond me?  Maybe he has stocks in the octane chemical business??

I'm forever perplexed why people participate in these forums, receive perfectly sound advice/guidance, yet continue to be lulled into the dealership smoke and mirrors routines.

Why bother asking if you're not going to heed the advice from those with real world experience? 

BORAT: Not sure if you were referring to me or not but I was not asking for advice on octane. I was only offering information on what my dealer recommended for this machine. The next time I speak with them I will try to get the rationale for that advice. I will report back here at that time.

OK. I've done some internet research on fuels octane with regards to 2 stroke engines. The information I've read says that 2 stroke oil mixed at 50:1 will lower a fuel's octane by two point. Sounds reasonable to me. Here are links to threads where this is discussed:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/general/ot-grade-gasoline-2-cycle-lawn-equipment-206164/
http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-749087.html

Sorry youll need to copy /paste I cant seem to convert to hotlinks using firefox.

I asked my work buddy (snowmobiler & snow thrower guy) why he had recommended Premium gas for my snow throwers.  Turns out that what he meant was get the ethanol free (!) Shell V-Power 91 that "contains no Ethanol".  It wasn't the high Octane he was after, it was the no Ethanol part of it.  I just filled up my gas can at lunch of the Shell 91 and snapped a shot of the pump.  This is in Toronto, Canada so maybe it is a regional thing.

I usually get gas at Petro-Canada where they say "may contain up to 10% ethanol".  I think I am switching gas station brands.  One of my cars calls for Premium anyways.

As for the throwers, my Ariens wants "a minimum of 87 octane", "up to 10% ethanol" or "up to 10% MTBE".

The Poulan asks for "Unleaded Regular only", "do not exceed 87 octane rating" and "Do not use any fuel >E10 in this machine", also "Do not use E85 blended fuels.  This engine is not E20/E30/E85 compatible".

A downloaded 221QE Operator's Manual doesn't seem to mention Octane ratings from what I could see, but did say "fresh, unleaded gasoline" and "Do not use E85 or E20 fuel".

I figure that exceeding Octane ratings (i.e. on the Poulan) is less of an evil than running Ethanol if Ethanol can be avoided, as I am able to do at Shell.

NotMoneyGuy wrote:

I will have to stop by our local shell station and see if they have 10% ethanol in the super. My guess is that they do in this State and it probably varies by State.

I just noticed the photo's 1-800-661-1600 phone number "for more info".  I just tried it, Shell Canada; "please call back during business hours".  I'll call tomorrow and find out the geographic info on Ethanol-free gas availability.

On the way home I topped up my premium-needing car with this Shell Ethanol-free gas, and as I pulled out, placebo effect or not, I swore the car felt better....hello Shell, meet your new customer!

Once home, topped up both the Poulan and Ariens with the new vitamins.  Ran the Poulan, sound nice, too bad no snow to play with.

This site lists all the ethanol free gas stations that have been reported to their site. It's pretty depresssing as my State only has 1 gas station and the fuel they sell is racing gas at $8 per gallon!

Hope this helps someone who lives in a corn free area.

http://pure-gas.org/

Getting back on topic, I plan on ordering a 221QR tomorrow from a retailer in Wisconsin.  The woman who was selling a CCR-2000 for $475.00 won't budge on price.   So, rather than buy a used machine for an outrageous price, for less than $100.00 more, I can bet a better machine brand new.  

I've come to the realization that single stage machines have their applications.  From my experience, I know I will use it far more often than the big Simplicity.   The cheap, little old Craftsman has impressed me so much that a top quality single stage in now a must.  I can get the 221QR (no electric start) for $566.00 with free shipping to the border which is less than 30 miles from here.   Is that a good price?    

Good choice BORAT.  Especially if speed is a priority.  I have the 221QE but it seems to require a different starting technique each time I use it. Following the manual directions of 2 primes and full choke seems to flood it every time. If possible please post your observations about starting this beast and what works best for you. Thanks and good luck with it!

Is $566.00 USD a good price for the 221Q non-electric start?

Best price I could find was $568USD from WISE SALES so I would say that's a very reasonable price. SBD is $620.

borat wrote:
I gave up on finding a good CCR2000 / CCR3000 with the Suzuki engine.  I've heard good things about the Suzuki engine but the price people were asking for them was too high for my taste.  There were rust, dents, scratches.  The machines just look too worn for the price.  I have no desire to restore a Toro single stage.

Went and bought the 421QE and very happy with the purchase, even with the potential fuel leak recall (or is it just a hoax).  The newer model is just better designed with user friendly features.  It is also a higher efficiency auger systems so even if the engine isn't as good as the revered Suzuki, I can live with that.

I think the price you got for a 221QR at $566.00 from a legitimate dealer is decent.  I've heard people gotten it cheaper through Home Despot in Canada with stackable coupons and promotions for less, but those deals aren't available in my area.

There's a lot to like about single stage snowblower.  Some people discover it, some don't.  That's too bad.  Some people expect too much performance from a rubber auger and 5-6 HP machine when compared to a 2 stage machine. 

aa335 wrote:
Bought a Toro 421QE with a 2-year warranty.  The first winter  of 2010 it leaked gasoline all over the driveway.   It was a big snowstorm & I had to use it.  It was serviced and came back working fine, because gas was included in the tank.  I forgot to ask what gas they put in.  Now this winter of 2011, it leaked again, though for both winters, I used Shell Gold, with no ethanol in it.  My snowblower is still in their service department and it's been  weeks now.  They claim to be waiting for parts.

Perhaps I should ask for an extending of warranty.  We are expecting another snowstorm coming up from the Ohio Valley, two days from now.

Carl.

Just curious but for those who bought the 421Q machines, why would you chose a four stroke over Toro's proven two cycle engine?   I'm familiar with the advantages/disadvantages of both types of engines but when something works as well as the R-tek single stage machines with years upon years of solid performance, what would be the draw to the four stroke machine? 

borat wrote:
I assume for the same reason that I own a 4 stroke mini tiller and weed whacker...eliminates the need to mix gas/oil and store both types of fuel.  Not that it's a major hassle but it is one less thing to deal with.

Paul7 wrote:
True, but mixing two cycle oil into a fuel container is considerably easier than doing an oil change then having to properly dispose of use oil etc. 

I have numerous two cycle engines which use anywhere from 20:1 to 50:1 ratios.  I run a mix between 32:1 to 40:1 in all of them.  So, one can of fuel for everything two stroke.   Easy as pie.

borat wrote:
There's the difference Borat.  You have numerous two cycle machines.  My riding mower, walk behind mowers, front tine tiller, rear tine tiller, pressure washers, generators, etc...all are 4 stroke.  At one point everything I used was 4 stroke...except my lone 2 stroke mini-tiller.  Do you know what a pain it was to have to maintain a separate gas/oil mix for just ONE piece of equipment. Making sure it stayed fresh, running out and needing to mix a little more just to finish.   If I ran multiple two strokes engines regularly then it would be worth the effort.  So when I saw an 4 stroke mini tiller made by Earthquake I got one and it works great.  No loss of performance at all.  My 4 stoke weed eater on the other hand is less appealing than my previous 2 stroke one because the motor gets uncomfortably hot.  Probably will go back to a 2 stroke trimmer. 

PS.  You're making an assumption by thinking that all used oil is properly disposed of LOL.  I don't even know the proper way to dispose of it.  I use it to start fires when I burn leaves and brush. 

Paul7 wrote:
Whenever I change the oil in my driveway on my cars (or on whatever), I drain the old oil into an empty oil container or into an empty windshield wash container and then bring it to the auto centre of the Wal-mart or Canadian Tire or Costco; from wherever I bought the new oil, or to the nearest place.  If they can sell you oil, they can take it back IMO.  There may even be regulations to that effect, but I have never had a problem with returning used oil and filters like this.

"Do you know what a pain it was to have to maintain a separate gas/oil mix for just ONE piece of equipment."

In my previous post, I said that I use one can of pre-mix for every piece of two stroke equipment other than outboard motors.   There's no need to split hairs when mixing two cycle fuel.  Stay a bit on the rich side and all will be well. 

I readily see your point however, being that you've invested in primarily four stroke OPE.   I have a mixed bag of small engines.  Lots of both types, as well a a couple four cycle ATVs, motorcycles, riding mowers etc.   I find two cycle machines far easier to live with and easier to coax a bit more power out of. 

Other than the fuel leak in the 421, how does it perform compared to the two stroke when it comes to moving snow?   According to Toro's advertisements, the 421 series is the flagship of their single stage machines.  Supposedly, they throw snow five feet further  and move 100 lbs. more snow per minute than the 221.   Is that factual or just another sales ploy?    

borat wrote:
My neighbor has a 221Q and I have the 421Q.  In medium weight snow, the throwing distance is similar.  Neither engines are taxed too much.  They are so close that I don't notice the 421Q has more throwing distance.

However, when pushed into a cement thick snow, the 421Q will not loose RPM as quickly and still has enough rotor speed to eject the snow out of the chute.  The 421Q engine is quite gutsy and does 9.5/10 as well as the older Honda HS621 in this kind of situation. 

The 221Q would slow down and does not have enough velocity to push the thick toothpaste out the chute, instead it will spill out in front of the rotor.   However, surprisingly, the 2 stroke engine still have enough grunt to keep the rotor turning, just very slowly.

aa335:

Do you know what rpms the four stroke runs at?   Who makes the engine in the 421Q? 

The 221QE is supposed to be set at 4000 +/- 100 rpm.   Before adjusting mine, it was running between 3700-3800 according to the mini tach.   When I set it to 4100, there was a noticeable difference in power.  I'm wondering if your neighbour's 221Q engine is running at the correct speed?   Either way, four strokes are supposed have more torque and being a few ccs. larger than the R-tek, the added displacement should also increase torque.  

@borat and others who may be interested

I guess I should set the stage and provide some background info in case someone would question the performance of the 221Q versus the 421Q.

Both engines are in stock form.  No modifications were made to either.  My 421Q is new, so it has factory setting.  My neighbor's 221Q is 3 years old, may or may not be in top operating tune.  He hasn't messed with it so I assume it is factory setting.  So what I was comparing to is factory stock.  His paddles are a little more worn than mine so that might skewed the observation somewhat.

I don't know what RPM the four stroke runs at, but the engine is Loncin 163cc, probably a Honda GX160 clone.   Have not dig into the specs yet.  It sounds very similar to a genuine GX160 engine.  The GX160 has a more subdued sound, the Loncin has a little sharper bark to it.