I have been eyeballing one of these reel mowers since December but had a hard time pulling the trigger to purchase one when my push mower still worked. Well, I just "happeend" to be walking through the Lowes lawnmower dept a week or two ago and spotted it sitting on display - at $190 how could I NOT buy it! :) First of all, let me say that I only have approx 7000sqft of lawn to mow. The front yard is full KBG and the back is a mix of KBG and Tall Fescue. I love having a nice lawn and mowing my yard, but have always had a hard time telling my children "I can't play tonight, daddy has to cut the lawn again and you can't be in the yard when I'm doing it", so this was one of the main reasons I purchased the Fiskars. Here are my bullet points on likes/dislikes so far: LIKES 1. It is very quiet! I goofed around and talked with my children as I mowed the lawn right next to them last night. I now can also cut my lawn when my children are asleep or taking naps. 2. It is no more difficult to push than my "non self propelled" craftsman mower, and may possibly be easier. 3. It cut right through my 4-4.5" high KBG down to 3" without breaking a sweat, and the fine clippings it kicks out just drop into my lawn, unlike my old gas mulcher which tended to clump. The grass in my back yard is extremely dense and thick and really should be mowed every 2-3 days as fast as it grows. The Fiskars cut right through it with only a little more effort than the front lawn. 4. It gives a very nicely groomed and level cut. This style of cutting is also healthier for my grass 5. It is so easy to just brush off and roll into the garage when i am done. Less space needed to store it as well. 6. No gas fumes or exhaust! 7. Love that it cut's up to 4" high. 8. It is fun (at least right now)! I enjoy the looks I am getting from neighbors and cars driving by :) DISLIKES 1. I am 6'5" tall and have had a little bit of trouble getting used to the height/angle of the handle. But, I have this trouble with all sorts of things, so it's just a matter of getting my back and muscles used to the new positioning compared to my old mower. 2. I miss not being able to cut the grass on the "pull back" of the mower. it obviously only cuts when being pushed forward, but this is a small complaint. That's it - I love everything else about it! I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have them.

I just registered here after reading all the posts regarding the fiskars and bermuda at the lower settings. I purchased a fiskars a couple of weeks ago and noticed the chopping look and the grabbing of the grass at the lower settings too. I laid my bermuda 419 in my front yard a couple of months ago and have been trying to keep it at the lowest setting like it was from the sod farm. When the mower does not jam up and stop dead it its tracks I get a rippled look like someone else mentioned earlier. I was going to post a couple of pics but can't seem to figure out how. I have sent an email with pics to fiskars explaining the difficulty with my bermuda and will post a follow up if they can offer a fix. I don't want to have to send it back since I ordered it online and I think it is a nice mower, but if it won't glide through my bermuda, what's the use? Someone mentioned that it needs a roller on the front instead of the two little wheels, what do you mean by that? I also have scott's classic 20" but didn't notice a roller on the front. I have read this explanation somewhere else too, but would like some clarification. Thanks, so far I love the advice given here.

I have both a Brill and a Scotts classic, and they both have their own advantages and disadvantages. For sure, I wouldn't use them on a big lawn (my house sits on slightly less than 1/4 acre). For the purposes of comparison, here's a rundown if anyone is interested in either mower. AFAIK, the sunlawn is similar to the Brill Maneuverability: The brill is much lighter than the scotts, and the rollers on the Brill make turning around obstacles much easier than the Scotts with the wheels. However, the Scotts is a bit easier to stay in a straight track because of this. Also, I find the Scotts better for hills, because the Brill is so light, the cut is compromised especially when going uphill or cutting sideways along a hill (where the wheels are slightly "lifted" up due to the light weight and slow the blade down). Advantage: for flat lawns with many obstacles, the Brill. For hilly lawns with no/few obstacles, the Scotts. The Blades: A lot of hype is touted with the contact free blade system of the Brill (and Sunlawn) over the scissor contact type blades of the Scotts (and many other traditional reel mowers). Yes, the Brill is much easier to push around when "not cutting grass", but when you are actually mowing, the difference is very little in the force required (and I'd attribute the difference to the narrower cutting width of the Brill). I also find I need to adjust the Brill once or twice a season for optimum performance (not the 4 years or whatever they claim) though it is very easy to do. There is also a good reason the Brill only has a maximum cutting height of 1.8": the cut quality suffers at its highest setting (in unevenness), but cuts awesome at the lower settings. I guess the blade needs to dig in lower where the leaf blade is stiffer and doesn't cut as well when the grass is longer and "floppier" You also need to maintain a decent speed when cutting with the Brill to get the best cut. The scissor blades of the Scotts are much less dependent on height and mowing speed than the Brill in getting a good cut. I'm not sure about sharpening interval, as I have only had the scotts a few months, but it is still cutting great. So, in my opinion, the contact free blade system might have an advantage in sharpening interval (with easy adjustments now and then), I prefer the cut of the Scotts overall, unless you are cutting short (under 1 1/2 in), where the Brill is probably equal. The dreaded wheel lines of the Scotts: Yes, you notice the lines, but they are less pronounced the shorter the cut, and depending on the grass type (I hardly notice them on my front lawn which is KBG, whereas it is more noticeable in the back with the KBG, fescue and rye mixture even at the same cutting height) The Brill with it's rollers has a much less noticeable track, and in fact due to it's slightly less quality cut (compared to scissor blades), looks more "natural", or like the lawn hasn't been cut recently (but nice and even, not that the lawn hasn't been cut!) So, I think neither is better than the other, it depends on your conditions. For a lawn with few obstacles and turns, but has hills, I'd recommend the Scotts even though it is heavier. For flat lawns with a lot of obstacles and curves and only minor grades, "and" you always cut shorter than 1.8", the Brill would be good. I'm glad I have both, as my lawn is in between the conditions that would prefer one or the other (some hills out back, flat in front, some obstacles and curves). If I only could have one, I would pick the Scotts mainly due to the higher cutting setting available. I will be pulling out my Brill when it gets cooler and am cutting shorter. As for my lawn, I get many good complements from the neighbors, who all use power rotary mowers, and some who even have sprinkler systems ( I use oscillating sprinklers when needed, and fertilize organically 90% of the time)

rager, thank you for the pic. That yard looks fabulous! What height is that cut? I will be leveling this spring. Like I said, I have been cutting with an American Reel. It does ok but I can really only cut it at about 1.25' (even though the blade will cut much lower) and not get the ripple/washboard affect across the yard. I am looking for something that is going to let me go down to atleast .75' with a precise cut which is what you have. I am assuming the picture you showed me has been cut by the mascot.