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

Well, we got our first dump of snow over night.  I'd say ten to twelve inches of moderately heavy, but not too wet snow.  Nice stuff for giving the new used Murray SS machine a trial.  Have to say, I'm very much happy with it.  It's actually a bit better than the Craftsman SS machine I've been using.  Probably because the 2006 Murray was virtually new and had very little time on it.  Everything on it is fresh compared to the old 1997 Craftsman. 

I had some thoughts about how well the TH139 series engine would stack up against the HSK850 engine (both 139cc two strokes).  Being that the TH139 was supposed to have been cleaned up (carb main jet change?), I figured it would be down on power but I was pleasantly surprised to see that it gives up nothing power-wise.  It actually feels stronger when running at stock rpms and is pretty much the same, if not a bit more powerful when cranked up.  One thing I did notice about the TH139 engine in the Murray is that it seems to use considerably more fuel than the Craftsman.  Haven't done any scientific study but, the Murray seemed to run out of fuel quicker.  One thing that I have to admit though, is that the Murray was working in 10 to 12 inches of fairly dense snow and that likely caused it to work harder.  Nonetheless, I'm very much pleased with this $30.00 investment.  I'll tell you, I cannot understand how people would dump something like that for $30.00.  When cranked up, it works better than machines 20 times the price. 

Due to my neighbour's husband being out of town, I volunteered to clear their driveway using their one year old 824 Ariens Deluxe two stage machine.  Plenty of gizmos on it and nice enough to use but I'm not particularly impressed with it's performance.   A couple times I had to tie down the auger drive to walk around to the front to see if both augers were working.  They were ,but for some reason, even at the slowest speed, it left a good 6" high ridge of snow on the cleared side on just about every pass.  In order to avoid that, I had to make half width passes.  It's like the machine couldn't process the snow effectively.  Everything else was fine, engine was running well, very nicely actually (Powermore brand).  Now that I think of it, I'm suspecting that the Impeller belt might need tightening because it wasn't impressing me with how far it was throwing the snow either.  The Murray, when cranked up was actually pitching snow a bit futher.  Something doesn't seem right there for an eight h.p. 24" Ariens?   What's a bit confusing is that it did a fairly good job on the 30" high slush/snow mix EOD deposit from the plow.  Nothing seemed to be slipping and I didn't smell any burnt rubber for the couple of hours I used it.  When the owner get's home, I'll have to tell him to check the belt tension.  I'm sure that machine should be more capable than that.  Compared to my 928 Simplicity,  the 824 Ariens looks pretty whimpy.  I have to conceed howerver, that the Simplicity 928 could very well be an 1128 if one takes in the variable h.p. ratings of the 305cc engine.

I took some videos of the Murray.  I'll upload one to Youtube and post in a while.

Here's a short video.  Nothing special.  Not high definition.  Just the Murray getting it done:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWf6X1KsnRc

It's amazing how much power can be squeezed out of those wonderful little Tecumseh 139cc two cycle engines if you run them at speed.  

That day I spent equal amounts of time on both the reasonable sized Ariens dual stage and the Murray SS machine.  The only place where the dual stage machine was necessary was the 30" pile of EOD deposit.   I tried tackling it with the Murray, and, due to the fact that the snow hadn't hardened up, it could move it, albeit with lots of physical input.  If the SS machine is all had, it would have done but not very effectively.  If the EOD deposit had frozen, it's very unlikely the SS machine would have been of any use at all.   Once the EOD deposit was out of the way, the Murray easily managed that amount of snow with far less operator fatigue.   I did the neighbour's driveway with their Ariens 824 and was getting a pretty good sweat on.  Had to put on a dry shirt before doing my driveway, which is about 20% larger than theirs and using the Murray, I didn't break a sweat.  I did the entire front driveway, side parking spot beside my garage and a fairly large paved area behind the house all with the Murray with far less fatigue than using a dual stage. 

Not saying one doesn't need a dual stage.  There are times when it's necessary.  However, it would take quite a lot of snow (around 15" or more) and/or slushy wet snow or frozen/hard packed snow before I'd need to pull the dual stage machine out.  The cheap, light, powerful SS machines do 90% of the work. 

It's kind of ironic when you think of it.  An inexpensive $30.00 machine doing 90% of the work while an expensive, heavy, dual stage  prima donna lounges around in the garage, waiting for the right conditions to be put to work.

Going to haul out the MTD SS machine to put it to work on the deck.  I'll leave it there for the winter.  It's good enough for that assignment.  It's peculiar how minor differences in design of the machine can effect it's performance. The MTD has the same engine as the Murray and Craftsman machines but isn't nearly as effective.  It's quite a bit lighter than the other two machines but, personally, I think the most effective difference is the shape/design of the paddle housing and chute.   It just doesn't seem as capable at ejecting the snow despite the fact that it has the same style paddles and equivalent power. 

If one is in the market for a used two cycle powered SS machine, other than a decent Toro, I'd focus on a Craftsman/Murray or any derivative thereof.   One thing I'd like to point out is that the Tecumseh engine is the easiest to over-ride the governor to get the power boost and when that's done, the machine will outperform pretty much any stock Toro.   I know for a fact that my  Craftsman when cranked up, throws more snow further than my new Toro 221QRE and the Murray is stronger than the Craftsman.   From my experience, I'd likely choose Craftsman/Murray in preference to a used Toro even if prices were equal.  

All it takes is a piece of string and ten minutes of work to turn Limp Dick Willy into Jack the Bear!     

Borat,

That Murray snowblower moves the snow well.  I can see the engine has got some grunt behind it.  Sounds good too.  I wonder how that engine would perform in a modern rubber paddle and chute design of the Toro 221Q or 621QZ.   Seems like the Murray could use some optimization in those areas.

Awesome deal for $30.  I think I lost count of how many SS you have collected.  By the way, what's the differences in the TH139 and HSK engines?

aa335 wrote:
I've got four SS machines.  A new (last year) Toro 221QRE, a 2005 MTD Yard machine-TH139, the 2006 Murray-TH139 and the 1997 Craftsman-HSK850. 

The only significant difference that I've found between the TH139s and the HSK850, other than the name change is that the jetting in the carb is different and I think that is only in the  carb on the Murray.  The other two carbs have brass main jets while the carb on the Murray has a blue plastic main jet.  Other than that there's no detectable difference.  There is some difference in the crank length of the MTD engine.  Due to the different chassis, it has a considerably shorter crankshaft.  Otherwise, all three engines are identical. 

They'd make a great engine for a Toro chassis if it could be made to fit correctly.  Might take a bit of imagination and fabricating to get one in there but once in, it would be a fine combination.  If your snow removal area is relatively level, the added power will be appreciated.  If you have grades to contend with, the additional power may not be of much use unless you run it uphill. 

Regarding upgrading the paddle design, in my situation with the 10% grade on the driveway, I'd prefer not to have any more tractability than what the Murray/Craftsman have to offer.  They way they are, they're easy to handle and pump snow very well.  I find that the Toro has far too much forward bite going downhill and tends to pull me off balance.  No problem going up the grade, just a bit precarious going down if the surface is at all a bit slippery.  Accordingly, I've had to actually set back the engine rpms to 4000 to make the machine more managable.   I'm certain that the Toro is capable of moving considerably more snow if it were run at higher rpms.  Cranking up the Rtek would likely outclass the other machines easily, simply due to superior design.    However, I'd be less prone to run an Rtek like I do the Tecumseh engines.   From what I've seen of how they're built, the Tecumseh engines seem to be a better candidate for running at higher speeds. 

Borat,  Are you feathering the "string" setup you talk about in earlier posts, or do you leave it alone?  Sounds like the blower picks up just before snow contact.  Helluva blower either way to clear that stuff!
Now you got me looking for a cheapo Murray SS and I hate that brand

jtclays wrote:
I've got the string attached to the governor arm at the engine, run it out the left side of the cowling then up the handle.  I angle the line across the corner of the handle and leave it just slack of actuating the governor then I tie and tape it there to keep it from moving.  When operating the machine, I pull back on the paddle engagement lever and pin it to the handle then I use my little finger and ring finger of my left hand to squeeze the string to speed the engine up as required.  Not slick, not complicated but totally effective.  All three Tecumseh powered  machines have the same set up.  The only one that I haven't "strung up" is the Toro because it's still under warranty and the governor on that thing is the vane type which will be a pain in the a$$ to modify.  

The shaft type governor control on the Tecumseh is the primary reason I prefer that engine design.  Not to mention it has a one piece crank and one piece connecting rod.  Two important components to make an engine run at high rpms reliably.  

The Rtek engine is nice and makes good power at 4000 rpm and up but due to it's design limitations, I'm reluctant to spin it up.  It's not a whole lot different from the old Lawn Boy engines of the 60s with the two piece connecting rod and bearing cage. 

I operate them like a chainsaw. No need running it full steam when it isn't required right?

I'm certain that if you keep your eyes peeled, you'll find a Murray or a derivative thereof.  Just make sure you're getting either a TH139 or an HSK-8xx variant. 

The last one I bought wouldn't start when I went to look at it.  ,The guy selling wanted $50.00.  I checked for spark and compression.  Told him the spark looked weak (it did) so I, offered him $30.00 and he went for it.  When I got it home, I cleaned the spark plug and the spark was much better.  Then I pulled the carb and found the float bowl full of two cycle oil and hardly a hint of gasoline.  Other than that, the carb was spotless.  I put some fresh fuel in it, cranked it once or twice and it fired right up.  Sweet!  That was back in July or August so I had to wait until yesterday to see how well it worked. 
 

jtclays wrote:

Same here. Just one more SS and I'm caught up with Borat's line up.  :)

I saw a Craftsman in good shape selling locally for $175.00 a couple days ago.  Now it's no longer listed.  Must have sold.  

I think I have enough to last me a while if I don't blow them up.   

borat,  Check your PM's please!

jtclays wrote:
Reply sent.

There were a series of Toros that came with the 139cc engine.  Now that would be a find!   If I could get my hand on one of those, I'd most certainly string it up.  The combination of Toro's superior design and a jacked up Tecumseh two stroke, would be something I'd like to see.  I'm certain that it would out-perform any SS machine I presently have.