346xp vs 357xp

[pigwot]

They are out there:

http://knoxville.craigslist.org/tls/2974064149.html

 

[Cut4fun]

Little pricey and bar wow. I sold my like new looking one with new oem piston for $350 with 20" bar and 2 new chains.

 

[rbtree]

I've yet to run a new edition 346xp, but the old versions I've run, I'll keep my 350 or 5100 before I own another! Screaming madness with no balls is what I think of those saws! I need some grunt for my style of cutting I guess?

You should try either saw but woods ported. I've had three, and may get another. The NE one I have is wicked fast, and has a fair bit more torque than the higher revving 45 cc one, which was built by Ed Heard years ago, and is still a mean cutting machine.

I'm about to reassemble by ehp 357. Another great saw. Easily outcuts any stock 5 cube saw.

 

[sawinredneck]

I ported the 346 I had, it didn't live up to what I expected so I ported the 350 and loved it! I sent the 346 to Rich to see what the Hell I'd done wrong. He had the saw three hours and called wanting to buy it! He claimed it was a tick slower than his EHP 346 and loved it?
My 5100 eats my 350 for lunch with a 20" on it, just goes to show, different strokes for different folks!

 

[Cut4fun]

Dont have a torque problem with my 2 ported 45cc's. Agreed though 50cc will take it all day torque wise.

Now I ran another persons 45cc ported saw by different person, that saw had no torque whatsoever and was horrible to run. I handed it back quickly.

Now if you take a stock 45cc and stock 50cc you will notice the missing torque you like in the bigger saws.

Ported 45cc 346 ripping oak with 3/8 chain.

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4R0uImGrp84" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[sawinredneck]

I guess I'm just ham handed with saws, I don't know, but for a felling/bucking general use saw, the 346 wasn't for me!

 

[HolmenTree]

I guess I'm just ham handed with saws, I don't know, but for a felling/bucking general use saw, the 346 wasn't for me!

Husqvarna has much better saws in their lineup for felling/bucking in general use. The 346XP was primarily designed for felling and limbing small softwood/ pulpwood.
My 272XP-16" has pretty well replaced my 346XP. I just grab the 346 to wack down some shrubs or willows when I stump grind.

 

[HolmenTree]

A little off the subject, but I spied this 262xp being offered at the Jap auction. I have been wanting one since Willard told me that it is one of his favorites, and had been keeping my eyes open for one. Especially with the handle heater it will probably bring a feeding frenzy, but I like to at least hope. Looks in real good shape, and so described by the seller. Not that i really need it, to be honest.

Heated handles are real nice to have on those cool wet days Jay. Alot of old timers tell me they credit them for keeping carpel from setting in.
Yes the 262XP started the air injection [Partner/Jonsered actually had the 1st] and spring AV technology in the late 1980s. Now Stihl is also using it today.

But Stihl did have one thing over Husqvarna for about 10 yrs. The side chain tensioner screw that they introduced in 1984 on the 024,034. It wasn't until about the mid 1990s Husky got it . Oregon did help out Husky though up until then with a chain tensioner built into the guide bar , but wasn't available on all bar lengths.
I like the 262XP for the status it started at the time, and with todays standards it's still an excellent saw.

 

[SkwerI]

The chain tensioner built into the guide bar really sucked.

 

[Magnus]

If it is the "Intenz" system that is referred to yes, that was a consumer grade idea.

 

[woodworkingboy]

I seem to remember that putting on the side cover was a pita with the tensioner in the bar. Didn't the bar kind of flop around and be hard to position?

 

[HolmenTree]

If it is the "Intenz" system that is referred to yes, that was a consumer grade idea.

Yes you are correct Magnus. My memory seems to tell me that the Intenz only came in the consumer laminated bars.

I never tried this setup. At the time I was running only Stihl and never had any experience with it.

I don't fully understand why Husqvarna took 10 yrs or so to introduce the side chain tensioner after Stihl did. Rumors said Stihl held a 10 year patent on it, but I think that was just hear say from the Stihl camp.
Husky never put it on todays 395XP so I guess it's no big deal to them.

 

[woodworkingboy]

Personally, I get a nostalgic feeling when turning the old style chain adjuster, and I bought a slim handled screwdriver especially for it. I can't understand why Stihl doesn't cop one from Husky's book and put a hole in the crank shaft for greasing the clutch bearing? People that don't think it necessary to grease the clutch bearing needn't comment, save it for bar tips.

 

[Magnus]

If memory serve me correct it was not as simple as a patent thing... There was no way around it worth the effort and cost involved so it was dropped at the time.

To the loggers it was not so important at the time as they are more concerned the saws performance and runtime between service with low service costs.
Now they have the features, but ....

 

[Magnus]

To me it is of no importance really as you still have saw in same position, still need to take it back before mount, still hold the bar tip up and can easily turn the screw no matter if it is on side or in front.

 

[HolmenTree]

From using my 2 year old 395XP-32" with its front tensioner between the dogs and bar, I find it's easier to reinstall a derailed chain or just to retension the chain with the rear handle on the ground and bar straight up.
In this position the tension screw is in full view with easy access.