Which Chainsaw Brand Wins?
We compared 3 chainsaw options head to head. Stihl MS 291 came out on top. See the measured results, the runner-up, the budget pick, and a link to the full test video.
Stihl MS 291
Price shown in test: $550
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Topteng
Price shown in test: around $100
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Topteng
Price shown in test: around $100
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
The measured results
Every number below is read straight from the test. Scroll sideways to see all measurements. Products are listed in the order they finished.
| Product | Engine | Spark plug | Weight before fuel/oil | Fuel capacity | Starter pulls (initial start) | No-load sprocket speed | Torque test (downward force to stop chain, 3 attempts) | 9x 4x4 cut speed, full pressure (3 cuts) | Cut speed with 5 lb added weight on bar (1 pass) | Hardwood tree cut speed, ~14x18in trunk (3 cuts) | Fuel efficiency (full tank, run to empty) | Cold start after overnight outside in low-30s F | Cold start peak pull force | Noise | Cut speed with genuine Stihl bar/chain swapped on (1 pass, no added weight) | Cut speed with genuine Stihl bar/chain plus 5 lb added weight (1 pass) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Stihl MS 291$550 | 55.5cc, outward-facing sprocket (easier bar/chain install than the two knockoffs), chain adjustment screw on the side, chain break built into the saw body (not the side cover) and mounted at two points for sturdiness, more aggressive felling spikes than the knockoffs | NGK brand, little carbon buildup noted (already started and tuned) | 15.52 lb, heaviest of the three | 12.9 oz, smallest tank of the three (about 1.5 to 2 oz less than the other two) | 11 pulls | 13,137 RPM, about 2,000 RPM faster than the other two saws | 28 lb, 28 lb, 28 lb; by far the best of the three brands | 10.4s, 9.6s, 9.7s; fastest cut 9.6s, about 4 seconds faster than the Topteng's fastest | 12.7 seconds | 27.8s, 23.9s, 22.3s; fastest cut 22.3s, about 12 seconds faster than the Topteng's fastest (34.3s) | 41 log passes/slices before running out of fuel, over 19 minutes runtime; 10 more passes than the Topteng and 28.5 more than the 58cc saw | 5 pulls to start (same as the 58cc saw) | about 31 kg / 68 lb, more than twice the other two saws; described as comfortable to use with very little vibration | not tested | not tested | not tested |
| 2Toptengaround $100 | 52cc, claimed 2.7 horsepower by manufacturer, inward-facing sprocket (more challenging bar/chain install), bar secured by two studs directly into the aluminum engine, chain break and bar adjustment screw built into a light-duty plastic cover, felling spikes require installation | SAP brand, notable carbon deposits already present (manufacturer had spent time tuning it) | 12.57 lb | close to 14.8 oz (calculated from a 17.3 oz fuel container weighing 2.5 oz after filling the tank) | 10 pulls | 11,190 RPM | 22 lb, 22 lb, 22 lb | 13.7s, 13.5s, 14.4s; fastest cut 13.5s | 18.8 seconds | 35.7s, 37s, 34.3s; fastest cut 34.3s | almost 15 oz of fuel, 31 log passes before running out, 17 minutes 22 seconds runtime | 12 pulls to start | about 15 kg / 33 lb | 118.5 dB measured from 24 in | 13.5 seconds, tying its own fastest pass from the standard-bar test | 12.7 seconds |
| 358cc Sawbetween $100 and $110 | 58cc, claimed 3.2 horsepower and a claimed maximum working speed of 13,000 RPM by manufacturer, made in China, construction similar to the Topteng but includes an air filter gasket the Topteng lacks, has a throttle lock the Topteng lacks | MYSP brand, noticeably less carbon buildup than the Topteng (less time spent tuning by manufacturer) | 12.8 lb | 14.4 oz, about the same as the Topteng | fired on the 11th pull, running reliably by the 12th attempt | 11,084 RPM, about 100 RPM less than the Topteng | 16 lb, 17 lb, 17 lb; weakest of the three | 25.2s, 29.7s, 28.5s; fastest cut 25.2s, almost twice the Topteng's fastest time; chain stalled once during this test | 19.3 seconds | first cut just over a minute (narrator's closing recap puts the fastest of the three at 64 seconds, implying this first cut is that fastest pass), second cut 1 minute 24 seconds (84s), third cut 72 seconds; fastest cut about 64 seconds, took twice as long as the Topteng's fastest | 12.5 log passes before running out of fuel, just over 18 minutes runtime; longer runtime than the Topteng but only about half the cutting work done | 5 pulls to start (trigger lock credited with helping), same as the Stihl | about 14.5 kg / 32 lb, very similar to the Topteng | 118 dB, about the same as the Topteng | 25.7 seconds, close to its own fastest pass from the standard-bar test | did not complete a clean time; the saw stalled a couple of times during this test |
How it was tested
- torque test: downward force (lb) required to stall the chain, 3 attempts per saw
- 9x 4x4 lumber cut speed, full downward pressure, 3 cuts per saw
- cut speed with 5 lb of added weight on the bar (apples-to-apples pressure test)
- cut speed with a genuine Stihl bar and chain swapped onto the knockoff saws, with and without 5 lb added weight
- hardwood tree cut speed (dead tree, roughly 14x18in trunk), 3 cuts per saw
- fuel efficiency: full tank run to empty, counting log passes and total runtime
- cold start performance after sitting outside overnight in low-30s F temperatures, pull count and peak starting force
“Not surprisingly, the $550 Stihl easily won the showdown, but it is very expensive. However, if you're looking for a budget saw considering the price and performance, the Topteng seems like a great buy.”
Data notes and caveats
Clean 3-way comparison with a clearly stated winner and budget pick. All three products from the description's Products Tested list are accounted for; the '58cc Saw' has no actual brand name anywhere in the source material, so the description's own generic label is used. Every cross-referenced recap statement in the transcript (torque delta, cut-time deltas, fuel-efficiency pass-count deltas) checks out arithmetically against the individually stated numbers, supporting high confidence despite the Topteng brand name drifting between 'Top Teq' and 'top tang' in the transcript.