4-stroke lawn mower?

G'day all,

The day had to come eventually and so the 25+ year old Victa 2-stroke mower has gone to the great meadow in the sky. Or rather, I refuse to spend any money on a mower with more rust holes that a similar vintage Alfa Romeo, and so it will be recycled.

As a result I'm in the market for a new one. Now, my experience with 4-stroke mowers is a little dated and centres around the idea they they are more efficient but require more maintenance. Today one of work mates is trying to convince me that the 4-stroke mower is the way of the future and is in fact less hassle than a similar two stroke.

My particular very old 2-stroke steel bodied Victa had served as a commercial mower for more than a decade in my hands and was serviced only every couple of years at most. This alone is a very convincing argument in my book. However, I'm happy to submit to the elightened and change my opinion.

So, I've got less that 150m2 of lawn and a human powered cylinder mower, which works perfectly except for the fact that it's now Spring and I have to cut the grass daily if I'm to keep on top of it this way.

I was just going to pick up a second hand 2-stroke and call it a day (I refuse to buy a new mower because it will rarely be used outside of Spring), but I'd very much like to hear about experience with modern four-stroke mowers if anyone can spare the wisdom?

Thanks in advance folks.

Dave.

I haven't got any experience with modern 4 strokes, because like you I tend to buy them a bit older. Every so often you need to drain the oil and replace it, but then you don't need to mix up 2 stroke fuel. It is quieter than a 2 stroke. I also found that the head gasket on my old Victa 2 stroke was a disposable item and I got pretty good at replacing them. No idea how to do it on the 4 stroke. I guess it would be a similar process but I've never had to do it. Replace the spark plug every so often and it seems to be happy. Main thin gis to make sure you don't put too much oil into it. I've done that a few times and it's not pretty.

Peter

I have owned both. I have only ever had a standard 1/4 acre block.

I like the 2 strokes. Mixing 2 stroke is easy (especially if you buy one of those 2 stroke oil bottles with the little squeeze bottle on top, hard to explain but look through them, you find one).

Changing the oil on a 4 stroke (at least the one I had) is messy, the drain plig was above the cutting plate and it made a real mess when you dropped the oil.

Yes, 4 strokes are cleaner, more powerful, quieter(?) but I still like the 2 stroke. Nothing to go wrong in them either.

Hire a neighbourhood kid to push the cylinder mower, It'll be cheaper than a new mower

I've got a Honda 4 stroke mower, it is about 5 yrs old now, it replaced a 20yr old second hand Honda 4 stroke that was given to us. Main reason we replaced it was the wheels were kaput, and it was going to cost over $250 to replace them. It also used a single 21" blade that cost about $45 and needed to be replaced every 18 months or so.

I have replaced my crappy old 2 stroke whipper snipper with a Honda 4 stroke model. I have a 4 stroke Honda garden tiller, same engine as the whipper snipper.

When my crappy 2 stroke blower vac packs it in, I will be replacing it with a Honda 4 stroke blower.

Get the picture? :D:D:D

We have a 14 year old MTD self propelled 4 stroke (Briggs and Stratton 50), apart from the occassional air filter ($10) and changing the oil (when I think of it, twice so far I think), no maintenance whatsoever.

Quiet, not nearly as smelly as a 2 stroke.

In fact if I will ever need to replace my Stihl (2 stroke) brush cutter, or my Stihl (2 stroke) chainsaw) they will be replaced with 4 strokes. If the MTD ever packs it in, will be replaced with a Honda 4 stroke as well.

Have a 5.5hp 4 stroke fire pump, sits under a cover at the dam in all weather, always starts first time and is now 10 years old.

Look at outboard motors, most are now 4 stroke.

IMHO, Honda make the best 4 stroke motors, bar none.

Make pretty good cars too, wife had a Honda Prelude for more that 10 years.

Honda 'ey? The fellow trying to convince me owns a Honda mower, I'm seeing a pattern here. As much as I'd like one, $200 is about all I can spare at present. Everything Honda goes for a bit more than that, but a B&S powered Masport or Victa is within reach.

Interestingly, I walked through the Big B and had a quick look at new prices just to get a feel, and among the units on the shelves there was only one 2-stroke. They really are going the way of the dinosaur huh?

What's the feeling on a basic 3-odd HP B&S powered Victa or similar second hand? Am I buying someone elses problem or are they bullet-proof enough not to worry about. I've repaired mowers before and I'm confident doing any work on it, but I don't want to spend more time repairing the damn thing that pushing it. Got a second child on the way and time will be at a premium.

Thanks again all.

Dave.

My last mower was a special at Kmart - but not from Kmart.

I went into a mower shop and asked why so many second-hand mowers and he told me he had the contract for all the Kmart mowers that were returned faulty. - If someone bought one and it wouldn't start or a wheel fell off (circlip missing) Kmart gave them another new one and this bloke got the old ones - changed the spark plug or fitted a circlip and was then selling them about 20% off the Kmart price.

Mine was 2 stroke victa and very cheap IIRC.

So watch the specials at Bunnies/Kmart/Mitre 10 wherever then ask them what happens to the returns/warranty claims

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Shed

In fact if I will ever need to replace my . . . . . . or my Stihl (2 stroke) chainsaw) they will be replaced with 4 strokes.

---

The only production 4 stroke CS available I know about is a makita/dolmar but they are a touch on the teeny weeny side.

Specifications: Makita DCS34 14" 2-Stroke Chain Saw
Displacement -- 33 cc.
Max. engine speed (w/bar & chain) -- 12,200 RPM
Power rating/BHP -- 1.4kW/1.9
Net weight (dry w/o bar & chain) -- 8.2 lbs.

Although they do have comparable power to weight ratios to their 2 stroke cousins it will be interesting to see the compromises made in longevity in getting the weight down to meet these specs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kman-oz

$200 is about all I can spare at present. but a B&S powered Masport or Victa is within reach.

---

I bought a Masport 4 stroke, but it was closer to $500. Fantastic mower, starts on first pull and is very quiet in comparison to the 2 stroke. Its great not having to mix fuel, and it definately does not smoke up the place like the 2 stroke I had before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

The only production 4 stroke CS available I know about is a makita/dolmar but they are a touch on the teeny weeny side.

Specifications: Makita DCS34 14" 2-Stroke Chain Saw
Displacement -- 33 cc.
Max. engine speed (w/bar & chain) -- 12,200 RPM
Power rating/BHP -- 1.4kW/1.9
Net weight (dry w/o bar & chain) -- 8.2 lbs.

Although they do have comparable power to weight ratios to their 2 stroke cousins it will be interesting to see the compromises made in longevity in getting the weight down to meet these specs.

---

By the time I've worn out my Stihl hopefully they have some good 4 stroke chainsaws.

Then again, I may wear out before the Stihl does.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pellcorp

I bought a Masport 4 stroke, but it was closer to $500. Fantastic mower, starts on first pull and is very quiet in comparison to the 2 stroke. Its great not having to mix fuel, and it definately does not smoke up the place like the 2 stroke I had before.

---

No self respecting modern 2 stroke engine should be make any visible smoke. Any 2 stroke making visible smoke is either not tuned right or users are using too much 2 stroke lube. The lubes available these days have very impressive additives to aid in better burning and suppressing visible smoke formation. Most engines could even use about half the recommended petrol/lube ratio without any long term damage to the engine. It's a pity the newer lubes are so successful at reducing smoke because some users still think that two strokes have to make smoke so they add more lube than necessary and this just causes even more unburnt lube to be exhausted into the environment.

What I'm getting at is there may well be many reasons not to run a 2 stroke but making too much smoke is not one of them.

Here's my 2c worth:

I've had both. I think it's more about the machine you buy than the number of strokes.

Honda seem to be indestructable in most things although the little portable outboards seem to have some question marks.

I've had a rover 4 stroke B&S motor self propelled 18" cut for 10 years or something. Bought it second hand for $90 cos it wouldn't run. Got it home, tried turning on the tap and it went for years. Last month it got it's first ever service, $130 air cleaner, oil, blades, clutch etc etc

I've got a rover ranger ride on I bought a couple of years back. I have an acre and mow about 1/3 of it. Sometimes 35 degrees and mowing that much is too much for me. Tecumse 12 hp runs like a clock and cuts grass 4' high.

Had a victa model 18 I mowed with for years. Started it with an electric drill on a nut on top. Ran great weighed nothing. Got 2 stihl brushcutters and a chinese cahinsaw all 2 smoke. All run fine. Stihls are buggers to start if sitting for 6 months or more. Can't blame them, I get like that after 8 hours sleep sometimes :)

Opinion worth what you paid for it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

No self respecting modern 2 stroke engine should be make any visible smoke. Any 2 stroke making visible smoke is either not tuned right or users are using too much 2 stroke lube. The lubes available these days have very impressive additives to aid in better burning and suppressing visible smoke formation. Most engines could even use about half the recommended petrol/lube ratio without any long term damage to the engine. It's a pity the newer lubes are so successful at reducing smoke because some users still think that two strokes have to make smoke so they add more lube than necessary and this just causes even more unburnt lube to be exhausted into the environment.

What I'm getting at is there may well be many reasons not to run a 2 stroke but making too much smoke is not one of them.

---

Fair enough - I am certainly no expert. I do however like not having to mix fuel anymore. I just have to remember to keep the oil topped up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pellcorp

I bought a Masport 4 stroke, but it was closer to $500.

---

I'm only looking at used gear, not new. There is a fair selection of used 4-stroke Masport, Victa and Rover gear around which are my primary interests presently.

An interesting observation here, the more popular brands seem to be holding their value a little better in the used market, but without feature backup. Comparing a couple of used Victa's with used Rover's produces some interesting findings. With the same low-power B&S engine, the Rover will have a sturdier catcher, alloy base, larger cutting diameter, four folding blades and a greater height adjustment. In terms of features it seems like a no-brainer, but I've used Victa gear all my life without incident.

Better the devil you know, or does the Rover really represent better value?

I found myself a nice 4HP Victa within budget, thanks for your help folks.

Well, I don't think I'll ever buy a 2-stroke mower ever again! I serviced my new mower on Saturday and it wasn't difficult or particularly messy (I'm used to servicing cars anyway) and it's a small price to pay for the lack of noise and ease of start.

My neighbor borrowed it on Sunday to cut grass two feet tall and he loved it. It certainly has a lot more power than the old one, and a lot more than I'll ever need. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kman-oz

I'm only looking at used gear, not new. There is a fair selection of used 4-stroke Masport, Victa and Rover gear around which are my primary interests presently.

An interesting observation here, the more popular brands seem to be holding their value a little better in the used market, but without feature backup. Comparing a couple of used Victa's with used Rover's produces some interesting findings. With the same low-power B&S engine, the Rover will have a sturdier catcher, alloy base, larger cutting diameter, four folding blades and a greater height adjustment. In terms of features it seems like a no-brainer, but I've used Victa gear all my life without incident.

Better the devil you know, or does the Rover really represent better value?

---

I realise you've already bought so this is somewhat redundant.

Had both. Rover I'd call medium quality, not the best but ok. Victa's newer stuff is lower end. MTD are the bottom end. Maspost probably about the same quality point to victa. Honda and older cox were the top end of ride on's, but after cox got taken over the quality went through the floor. Greenfield were always inferior to cox, probably about rover quality but I'd not own one, prefer the rover.

So for garden stuff generally:

Top quality is stihl, honda, shindawa,old cox

Next is husvana, rover, greenfield

Next is victa, masport

last is mtd

all based on my experience, others will no doubt differ.

Interesting observations Damian. I'm particularly interested in why you rate Victa relatively poorly. Being most familiar with Victa gear I find this opinion at odds with my own.

Purely as a topic for conversation I find the Victa to be of very good quality for a domestic appliance. Moreover, as a commercial appliance my old mower suffered considerable abuse and neglect and still lived to a good age. To my mind 'appropriate quality' in a domestic mower is the sum of usability and longevity; both of which the old Victa had in spades. As a commercial device it would have rated poorly for various reasons.

The new 4-stroke Victa is a lot more usable, though I can't speak for longevity of course.

Out of curiosity, on what qualities do you make your assessment?

Like most people I've had a few victas over the years. Generally they need repairs more often and produce a lesser quality of cut.

The self propelled rover I mentioned before has been mowing a good 300-400 sqm of my lawn for about 8 years with 1 set of blades, top ups of oil occasionally and tanks of fuel. The choke stopped working properly so I'd occasionally use aerostart to fire it up but otherwise no serivces nor repairs in that time. Note I bought it second hand and well used.

I've never known a victa to run that long with that sort of use without some sort of maintenance. They are light, but give an inferior cut and don't start as easily.

I'm not knocking victas, but if you park two mowers next to each other and examine them there are clear points of difference beyond "features".

I just finished buying a new car. Love toyotas, but I drove the rav, crv, vitara, xtrail, overlander, tiguan and the forester and the differences were demonstrable. All can be had in basic manual for about $32k. The Suzuki was cheap, the mitsubishi was just plain awful, the xtrail was nice to drive and great luggage area but the old model is known to blow transfer cases, the VW and Toyota rode like buckboards and the toyota had shocking seats. The honda was ugly and uninspiring.

I bought the subaru. No doubt someone else would make a different choice, but the sub' rides like a car corners nicer than the nissan looks easier to service, it just ticked all the boxes. I wasn't looking for a 4b and don't really like them but to get a wagon that towes that was the cheapest option.

The point is you see just as many ravs and crv's and xtrails on the road as foresters, so clearly either those people didn't try everything or they have a different criteria/opinion to me.

Anyway the point is if your only mowing a small yard flat grass occasionally a victa is probably fine, but spend 5 years with a victa and 5 years with a honda (or 6 months mowing professionally) and you see a difference. Note however there is a price difference so you have to weigh value for money. Also for a given make not every model/year is the same in performance.

So it's just an opinion as I said based on my experience.

I think you guys are all missing the point here. I have a Rover and its great. Now what I need from a mower is foolproof and easy to start and the Rover is just that. It doesnt need fancy fuel. It always starts first pull and its not so hard to pull. The wife seems to have no issues at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrobor

I think you guys are all missing the point here.

---

I don't think so. The key issue is appropriateness for the task at hand, and reading the replies from damian and yourself I reckon we're all in agreement actually. The qualities that make the Rover valuable to you are the same that make the Victa valuable to me. Damian's perspective is different because he has a greater area, perhaps. Or because the grass grows more vigorously in QLD?

I use the hand-powered cylinder mower for nine months of the year because I like the excersice. The petrol mower gets used almost exclusively in Spring when the hand mower just doesn't cut it. In this regard a $200 Victa is probably still over-kill. The old rusty (free) 2-stroke was perfect until it stopped working. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rrobor

The wife seems to have no issues at all.

---

Sugar. Does she have a sister ? :D

I think also we're all in agreement. I had victas for years and was happy. The second hand rover was cheap and demonstrably better, but it was probably demonstrably dearer new, so then you get down to $ vs performance.

With regards ride ons rovers were $100's cheaper than cox when cox were good. A rover might last 10 years and a cox a lifetime, but it's a personal decision which to buy.