Trimmer Blade Stihl Polycut 2-2, 3-2 / 90mm

Replacement blades for a Stihl trimmer.

For the variants Polycut 2-2, 3-2. Length 90mm

Flexible Variant: (TPU for AMS_V1 / optimized with ASA CF_V3 and TPU for AMS V3)

does not break so easily on obstacles. but wears out faster

lies flat on the print bed and cuts on one side and is thus semi-circular

so far only tested with the flat side down in the trimmer

Stronger Variant: (TPU for AMS V1)

is more durable in normal use.

cuts centrally

breaks more easily when hitting obstacles

Do not mix both types on the trimmer. Both have a different mass, which leads to an unbalanced run when mixed.

Which causes the trimmer's bearing to wear out faster.

Print:

I printed it in TPU for AMS. with 0.12 layer.

Flexibility is similar to the original. but subjectively not as durable. (almost only tested on edges against concrete, steel, and chain-link fence)

Better to leave wall lines at 2 or the connection between blade and holder will be weakened.

Slicer must draw infill lines into the holder so that the connection does not tear due to the forces during trimming.

A filament like Nylon or something with fiber reinforcement would certainly be better.

ASA CF V3 profile created (2026-05-15)

Optimizations mean the trimmer blade no longer breaks at the holder first when contacting overly hard obstacles.

TPU for AMS V3 profile created (2026-05-18)

Blade shows less fraying in the front part compared to V1

ASA (gray) currently under test (2026-05-21)

Behaves similarly to ASA CF and I also tested it with the ASA CF profile (only it sat significantly tighter in the holder)

TPU 95A HF (2026-05-27)

Print went well, with TPU for AMS profile, they are very flexible but still untested with trimmer
(Hope is that they don't break)

Other:

Problem areas during testing were the transition from holder to blade, the blade splitting with grass ingress, crumbling of the foremost part, and premature breakage. Partially improved by slicer settings and partially by redesign.

Filaments tested so far:

• TPU for AMS V1 / 2026-05-04 / similarly flexible as original but slightly more brittle
• ASA CF V3 / 2026-05-15 / slightly stiffer than TPU and therefore slightly higher risk of breakage on obstacle contact at the transition from holder to blade
• ASA / 2026-05-21 / similar to ASA CF

Unfortunately, I lack the means to purchase and test more suitable filaments.

Filaments with good layer adhesion would be well suited. They should be flexible enough but also not too flexible.

Additionally, the impact strength must be high (which ASA CF unfortunately is not).