View Full Version : Stihl SH 85 vs. Tanaka THB-2510 blower
03-22-2007, 11:38 AM
I need a blower/vac for 1 guy that likes his edging done along his driveway and sidewalk (over 400ft) and then cleaned up after. I found that the vac portion of the Stihl worked best for cleanup but haven't really been too happy with the unit. The motor doesn't sound right at full throttle and it sounds like it's missing. It's weird weird so I took it in for repair and they couldn't find anything wrong with it. I bitched and they gave me a new one and it does the same thing. A friend of mine has a few of the 55's which use a different motor and they run fine.
Anyway, I have some Tanaka trimmers and like them a lot, just wondering if anyone has used the blower and if you have any thoughts. I'd like to ditch the Stihl but don't want to spend money without doing research first. I'll be buying based solely on recommendations since I'll be buying it online.
03-22-2007, 11:44 AM
Hello, my name is Ron Lavigne. I'm the owner of Ron's Lawncare in Southern Maine. Recently, I had the opportunity to field test a Tanaka THB-2510 hand held blower. I used this blower for about 3 weeks. The test time included the tail-end of my mowing season and continued into fall cleanups. I was pleasantly surprised with the performances of this unit. It worked extremely well for blowing driveways and cleaning out mulch beds.
1. Weight: 10
The unit has a great power to weight ratio. It is lighter than other less powerful hand-held I own.
2. Balance: 9
I found the balance to be good, and it was really comfortable to use.
3. Power: 8
Great power for a hand held unit.
4. Fuel efficiency: 7
Very fuel efficient, also it has a large fuel tank. The only problem I found is the size and angle of the filler neck. With the new gas cans, it's hard to fill without spilling fuel.
5. Ease of starting: 10
This is possibly the best starting 2 stroke engine I've ever had. During some of the cleanups it was cold in the morning. It started on the first or second pull every time. Once started it was ready to use. I didn't have to fiddle with the choke to keep it running.
6. Ease of use: 5
I did have some issues with accessibility to the primer bulb. It's a little tight to get your finger in there. This unit really needs a throttle lock so you don't have to hold the trigger all the time.
7. Noise level: 9
Nice and quiet.
8. Overall reliability: 6
Although I didn't have a major issue, I think the plastic is on the brittle side. I did knock it off the fender of my trailer (about 3' high) and the air filter housing cracked. Also the blower tubes fit together kind of sloppy and they are made of a thinner plastic than I'm used to.
Overall, the THB 2510 is a good blower. There are some unique features on this unit. I personally like the length of the blower tubes, the overall quiet operation, and the ability of the machine to start in run on the coldest of days.
The Tanaka unit feels so natural. The fan tip seems to blow the leaves out of the beds without displacing the mulch.
The THV-200 vacuum attachment was also included in the field test. It works as effectively as any other portable vacuum. It was durable and reduced leaf volume fairly The only drawback with the kit, was the complexity of converting from blower to vacuum requiring the use of tools. Also, the fact that it lacked a trigger lock made it cumbersome to operate.
In conclusion, the blower did such a good job separating leaves form the mulch that the vacuum kit didn't get much use. I wish there was a dealer network in the northeast, because if there was I would be a proud owner of the Tanaka THB 2510 blower.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to test your product, and help make my job easier.
Ron E. Lavigne
03-22-2007, 11:51 AM
Thanks Mark, I read that. Any comparisons to the Stihl anywhere? Any changes in design since that was posted?
Is the bag volume the same as the Stihl?
03-22-2007, 12:40 PM
ADVANTAGES OVER THE STIHL BG 85D:
No Catalytic Converter
Lighter: 7.9 lbs. vs. 9.3 lbs.
More Powerful Engine: 1.3 h.p. vs. 1.1 h.p.
Much Larger Fuel Tank: 23.6 fl. oz. vs. 13.5 fl. oz.
14:1 yard waste reduction
2.0 cubic feet bag capacity
No changes yet, but we are working on a new one for '08
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.