Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-26-2010, 03:28 PM
NORTHMAN NORTHMAN is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 304
Fs80 or fs100 rx

I'm looking for opinions on these two trimmers please?I know the FS80 has just been discontinued but I would think theres still some around.Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-26-2010, 03:38 PM
mowerbrad's Avatar
mowerbrad mowerbrad is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Grand Haven, Michigan
Posts: 6,273
The fs100rx is a dedicated trimmer, so if you are planning on running attachments with it, then that is definately not the one for you. But if you are just planning on using it as a trimmer it will be the best one for you. I love my fs100rx, I've used it for 2 season and no problems yet. It is powerful and lightweight, best trimmer I have ever used.
__________________
'07 Chevy 2500HD
2010 John Deere Z925A 54" MOD
2011 John Deere Quik Trak 647A
John Deere walkbehind
81"x18' trailer
Stihl handhelds
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-30-2010, 02:09 PM
NORTHMAN NORTHMAN is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 304
Thanks for your response.I think I'm going to try the FS 100 RX.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-30-2010, 03:39 PM
bighaydenslawn's Avatar
bighaydenslawn bighaydenslawn is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Remington, IN
Posts: 516
I believe both are only dedicated trimmers, and since they are discont. the FS80, I would get a FS90 or FS100RX.
__________________
Big Hayden's Lawn Service
17 Years Old - Remington, IN
15 Accts.

John Deere Z425 23-48" (Mulch, Hitch, Stripe Kits)
3' x 5' Landscape Trailer
Stihl FS 90R Trimmer
Stihl BG 55 Blower

"Turning Grass Into Cash!"

Last edited by bighaydenslawn; 01-30-2010 at 03:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-30-2010, 03:47 PM
HenryB HenryB is online now
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighaydenslawn View Post
I believe both are only dedicated trimmers, and I since they are discont. the FS80, so I would get a FS90 or FS100RX.
It depends on the attatchment. Hedgers are fine. I've used hedgers on my 100rx's for years never broke a shaft. The edger I'd avoid put's too much irregular torque on the cable shaft.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-30-2010, 06:56 PM
Richard Martin's Avatar
Richard Martin Richard Martin is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Greenville, NC
Posts: 14,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryB View Post
It depends on the attatchment. Hedgers are fine. I've used hedgers on my 100rx's for years never broke a shaft. The edger I'd avoid put's too much irregular torque on the cable shaft.
The old FC75 edger used a cable shaft as does the newer FC90.
__________________
Serving Greenville, Winterville and Ayden NC



Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-30-2010, 08:06 PM
Turf Dawg's Avatar
Turf Dawg Turf Dawg is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Gainesville Texas
Posts: 3,651
This is just my personal opinion, but I feel that the FS80 has one of the best engines that have been made for awhile. I prefer the FS85 because of the solid shaft, but they quit making those a couple of years ago. If you do not mind the flex cable [like most echos use] I personally would go with the FS 80. It is one of the last "dirty engines" out there.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-30-2010, 10:55 PM
Alan0354's Avatar
Alan0354 Alan0354 is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Jose, Ca.
Posts: 4,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turf Dawg View Post
This is just my personal opinion, but I feel that the FS80 has one of the best engines that have been made for awhile. I prefer the FS85 because of the solid shaft, but they quit making those a couple of years ago. If you do not mind the flex cable [like most echos use] I personally would go with the FS 80. It is one of the last "dirty engines" out there.
they have a lot of talk about you can change the flex cable to the solid shaft and the FS80 become the FS85.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-30-2010, 11:05 PM
STIHL GUY's Avatar
STIHL GUY STIHL GUY is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 5,169
i think the FS100 is pretty light but you cant use attachments
__________________
2005 Chevrolet 2500HD LS 4x4 6.0L
8' Fisher MM Snowplow
6.5' x 14' Big Tex Open Trailer
61'' Scag V-Ride 29 HP Kawi
48" Exmark Lazer Z HP
48'' Bobcat Ransome Mower
21'' Husqvarna Mower
Stihl FS55R Weedwacker
Stihl FS100RX Weedwacker
Stihl BR600 Backpack Blower
Stihl MS180C Chainsaw
Giant Vac Walk Behind Blower
Kawasaki KHT600S Hedge Trimmer
Giant Vac 16HP Leaf Loader
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-31-2010, 12:20 AM
genesis215 genesis215 is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Russellville, AR
Posts: 791
I have seen both side-by-side. The FS 80 is head heavy, and motor light, and the FS 100RX is motor heavy, and head light. In your hand the FS 100RX feels very balanced (you could trim one-handed), and the FS 80 is unbalanced. But I actually like the head-heaviness of the FS 80, as it keeps the power under control very well, and the head doesn't jump around very much. But, the FS 100RX has about 1/2 again as much power, is lighter by 1/2 a pound, and is easier to start. It is a monster of a trimmer powerwise, especially noticeable at low rpms.

The FS 80 is being discontinued, and is the last of a super-reliable breed, so you either get it now or never. But really, it's your pick. Either one is great.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:44 PM.

Page generated in 0.09425 seconds with 7 queries