# Husqvarna 435 my two cents



## mweba (Mar 19, 2010)

I have been looking at these for some time now for limbing it tight places. Wanted a less expensive saw in case a log started to roll on me I could drop it and move. 
I have done several searches on them at AS and not much available for info. One thread con and a couple pros. My first impressions are ...saw is light and powerful for the size. Runs smooth at all rpms with little vib. I ran it in some dry ash with several knots. First cut or two I just let it eat. After that I pushed on it a bit for a torque test.

By no means is this a commercial saw but for the money I think it is a bargain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcBJBAnH3bw


----------



## Eastexan (Mar 19, 2010)

I too, have been thinking about getting one, and run into the same problem as you have in trying to find out some reviews on them.

The Husky dealers around here don't carry them, but said they would order one for me. I handled one at Home Depot and like the look & feel of it.
I've heard that it's a genuine Husky and the smaller ones (235 & 240), are rebadged Poulans. 

There are 2 others I'm also considering, at the same size & price as the 435.
One is the Echo CS-370 which has good reviews, and the other one is the Stihl MS-211. It's a new design with lots of good reviews. Both are supposed to be really fast cutters for their size.


----------



## TommySaw (Mar 19, 2010)

435 is a good runner for sure, especially as it breaks in. IMO it has alittle more azz then the 211 or the Redmax/Ryobi


----------



## mweba (Mar 19, 2010)

TommySaw said:


> 435 is a good runner for sure, especially as it breaks in. IMO it has alittle more azz then the 211 or the Redmax/Ryobi



I agree with the exception of the ryobi. I have not run a ryobi so I can not comment.

I'm sure they are all good saws. Go with the brand with the best dealer support. My husky dealer is great so I tend to go down that road....alot!


----------



## miking (Mar 19, 2010)

I'll bet that 435 would do a fine job for you. My Echo 370 (as someone said) has become of of my faves for limbing and I'll bet that 435 would do the same for you. Go for it.


----------



## Gizzard (Mar 19, 2010)

The 435 is a powerful saw for its size and of excellent build quality compared to a lot of the competition. I had one last year and let my brother talk me out of it. He made me a deal for more than I paid for it. I'll just get another one sometime.

I really liked the controls on it, ease of adjusting chain, and removing bar and chain quickly compared to my 346xp. The 346 has a somewhat small side adjust screw and not as much room to manuever for bar and chain swaps.

This thread had some good photos of 435 by nikocker.
http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=95942


----------



## Kenskip1 (Mar 20, 2010)

*Husqvarna 435*

sears has the 435, Ken


----------



## CGC4200 (Mar 20, 2010)

*Husqvarna 435*

I bought one about a year ago. It seems to improve with break-in & a
little tuning, light and nimble little saw. I had some problems getting
mine to start easy out of the box. One of the other members replaced his 
with an MS 211 due to this issue.


----------



## SawTroll (Mar 20, 2010)

Why get the 435, when the 440/2240 exist?


----------



## CGC4200 (Mar 20, 2010)

*435's are available at box stores*

There are 445's & 455's at Lowes.


----------



## SawTroll (Mar 20, 2010)

CGC4200 said:


> There are 445's & 455's at Lowes.



Those are larger and heavier hunks of plastic - and the ones with the least cc and power in their respective size.....:censored:


----------



## mweba (Mar 20, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Why get the 435, when the 440/2240 exist?



Because I want one of each ofcourse
Besides it is a little cheaper for those that are watchin thier pennies.
I agree on the 455 though. For the price, many better saws out there.


----------



## Kenskip1 (Mar 20, 2010)

*445/455*

Here we go again,As stated in an earlier post I did a Google search on the 455 Husqvarna. I read close to 100 reviews from homeowners to arborists. Well over 80% were in favor of the 455/460.Granted the weight is a consideration however the key factors like easy starting, virtually no vibration and excellent fuel economy.For all that speak badly of this saw, have you ever ran one?How many have even held one?I am 6 ft 3, and the saw with an 18 BC the saw was near perfect balance.The 460 WILL be my next saw, Ken

Buy the way, my new 445 is a cutting fool


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 16, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Why get the 435, when the 440/2240 exist?



Because you can only get the 440 as an e-series, which means about 200gram higher weight, and since i bought this saw for the reasons of the low weight, the choice was simple.


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 16, 2010)

and i don`t like the tool free chain adjustment.

And the plastic feel off it?? well maybe, but sure it`s light


----------



## nicksterdemus (Sep 16, 2010)

Sliding off topic, but the 460 Ranchero I bought used is burnin' & churnin w/new 18" bar.

Of course I only paid 200 clams, so dropping another C-note on a bar, two chains & A/F was easy enough.

The tip of the dawgs to the cutters on the Farm Tough Husky bar is only 17"...

YMMV


----------



## Cliff R (Sep 16, 2010)

The 435's are excellent, PLENTY of power for the cc's, light and great limbing saws.

They are faster and stronger than the CS-370/400's but not by a great margin, and about equal in power to the Ryobi 10532, and just a better saw all the way around. 

I still like the Ryobi, but it's crude and cheap in comparison to the 435.

The 440E series just looks hokie with the funky chain adjuster. They are supposed to make more power, but to date I can't figure out exactly why? Hard to believe Husqvarna made two versions of the same X-Torque/Stratto engine between those two models.

The 435 comes in a box that says it's smaller in cc for some reason? I don't have the box anymore, but it sad closer to 36cc, and it says 41cc right on the saw, something else I never figured out??

I bought mine new off Ebay, originally sold a Lowe's but the box was never opened....Cliff


----------



## hamish (Sep 16, 2010)

Cliff R said:


> The 435's are excellent, PLENTY of power for the cc's, light and great limbing saws.
> 
> They are faster and stronger than the CS-370/400's but not by a great margin, and about equal in power to the Ryobi 10532, and just a better saw all the way around.
> 
> ...





The only difference between the 435 and 440 parts wise is the piston (a few extra cc's with the 440) and the toolless chain adjuster on the 440.


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

hamish said:


> The only difference between the 435 and 440 parts wise is the piston (a few extra cc's with the 440) and the toolless chain adjuster on the 440.



I have to say: that is simply not correct! According to my users guide the 435, the 435e and the 440e has the exact same bore and stroke, 41 by 31 mm.


----------



## Cliff R (Sep 17, 2010)

I believe that is correct, both are the same cc's of displacement. I do remember someone posting some time ago on a thread abou them that the part number for the pistons they use was different, and that the 440 was rated with slightly more power.......Cliff


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

Cliff R said:


> I believe that is correct, both are the same cc's of displacement. I do remember someone posting some time ago on a thread abou them that the part number for the pistons they use was different, and that the 440 was rated with slightly more power.......Cliff



Can`t say if the piston is the same or not? and i know that husky says the 435 is 2,2 Hp and the 440 is 2,4 Hp. 
But i do disagree, when hamish says the cc`s ain`tthe same. Since the stroke and bore is the same, the cc`s also have to be the same.


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

Boskaerm said:


> and i don`t like the tool free chain adjustment.
> 
> And the plastic feel off it?? well maybe, but sure it`s light



Ok, I understand your reasons then, and they are valid! 

Maybe you should set the carb real lean, to get an excuse for putting a 440 engine in it! :hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## CGC4200 (Sep 17, 2010)

*435 & 440 p&c*

I checked the IPL downloaded from Husqvarna Support.
The pistons & cylinders have the same part #'s on 435 & 440.
I had to turn up the fuel mix on mine new to get it to run right, it
was set a little lean out of box, but that seems to be common on other brands too.


----------



## Gizzard (Sep 17, 2010)

CGC4200 said:


> I checked the IPL downloaded from Husqvarna Support.
> The pistons & cylinders have the same part #'s on 435 & 440.
> I had to turn up the fuel mix on mine new to get it to run right, it
> was set a little lean out of box, but that seems to be common on other brands too.



http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=98441

Here is an earlier thread verifying what you found. Like Spike60 mentions in this earlier thread, not sure what the thought was in making two different model numbers.


----------



## Cliff R (Sep 17, 2010)

"The pistons & cylinders have the same part #'s on 435 & 440."

That makes sense. It appears that at some point they may have intended on producing the 435's with a 36cc engine, since that's what it says on the box! (And 435 somewhat indicates is close to 35cc)

I suppose at some point, to save money, logistics, etc, that someone working at Husqvarna woke up one morning and said, "why don't we just make the 435 and 440E with the same engine?" 

Glad they did, the 435 is a very good runner for the cc's and the price, and I wouldn't own one equipped with that "hokey" tooless chain adjuster. I wrestled with one of those once, and hopefully never again!........Cliff


----------



## CGC4200 (Sep 17, 2010)

*440 has tooless chain tightening & easy-start*

My 435 has an easy start starter assembly. I ordered and mounted it.
The toothed part of the fiberglass pulley doesn't look like it will hold up
long on std. one. The one I pulled already shows signs of wear.


----------



## spike60 (Sep 17, 2010)

Cliff R said:


> "The pistons & cylinders have the same part #'s on 435 & 440."
> 
> That makes sense. It appears that at some point they may have intended on producing the 435's with a 36cc engine, since that's what it says on the box! (And 435 somewhat indicates is close to 35cc)
> 
> ...



That's a pretty accurate post Cliff. 

There was a lot of conflicting info when these saws first came out, and it's still causing some confusion. Even on the retailer site, it was listed one way in the product section, one way on the price sheet, and the original hang tags said something else. The IPL's are no help either. As Cliff suggests, there may have been some _intended_ differences that never materialized.

Both saws use the same 41cc motor. (or 40.9 before Sawtroll corrects me. LOL) There are only two saws available, the 435 and the 440E. IMO, the 435 model number is a mistake, and it adds to the confusion. They should have stuck with their normal numbering logic which would have given us simply the 440/440E. (As was done with the 450/450E and 455/455E)

Power wise, there is a slight variation that IMO is the usual baloney that is meaningless. The saws are listed as 2.2 and 2.4 HP, and the Jonsered 2240 is listed at 2.5. All just a matter of how each _individual_ saw tested on the particular day it was tested.


----------



## Paul Bunion (Sep 17, 2010)

I'm glad I bought a new 350 on clearance last fall on ebay. for $269.
The last of the affordable 3--something huskys.


----------



## Gizzard (Sep 17, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Power wise, there is a slight variation that IMO is the usual baloney that is meaningless. The saws are listed as 2.2 and 2.4 HP, and the Jonsered 2240 is listed at 2.5. All just a matter of how each _individual_ saw tested on the particular day it was tested.



I agree on the variable HP ratings and the testing you mention would explain this. A couple of other same models listed with different ratings are Husky 359 @ 3.9HP and Jonsered 2159 @ 4.1HP or Husky 346XP NE @ 3.7HP and Jonsered 2153 @ 3.5HP. Also, I agree on the 440/440e designation and the 435 model number not being necessary.


----------



## CGC4200 (Sep 17, 2010)

*435 e-series*

I am almost + I seen them on Husqvarna USA website early last year, now
gone.They show on the IPL I downloaded early last year. They must have
been a figment of marketing's imagination. They did get around to
making an e-series starter decal, that is what I put on the spring assist
starter assembly now on my 435. They can keep their tool less tensioner,
I like the side adjust better than any other type so far.

There are several recon 435's and 445's on Fleabay, discounted with
some guarantee.


----------



## hamish (Sep 17, 2010)

well seems by the 2010 IPL all the parts are the same, guess we will just have to wait a few more years to get the specs right


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Ok, I understand your reasons then, and they are valid!
> 
> Maybe you should set the carb real lean, to get an excuse for putting a 440 engine in it! :hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange:



Maybe, seems to be alot of confussion, whether there are any differences in the engine?? 

So far i tried like it is.
See it, sort of, as the poor mans 339 xp
:chainsawguy:


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

CGC4200 said:


> I am almost + I seen them on Husqvarna USA website early last year, now
> gone.They show on the IPL I downloaded early last year. They must have
> been a figment of marketing's imagination. They did get around to
> making an e-series starter decal, that is what I put on the spring assist
> ...



On the Danish Husqvarna web-site the 435e is still available. 
IF anybody want it :bang:


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

spike60 said:


> .....
> 
> Both saws use the same 41cc motor. (or 40.9 before Sawtroll corrects me. LOL) There are only two saws available, the 435 and the 440E. IMO, the 435 model number is a mistake, and it adds to the confusion. They should have stuck with their normal numbering logic which would have given us simply the 440/440E. (As was done with the 450/450E and 455/455E)
> 
> Power wise, there is a slight variation that IMO is the usual baloney that is meaningless. The saws are listed as 2.2 and 2.4 HP, and the Jonsered 2240 is listed at 2.5. All just a matter of how each _individual_ saw tested on the particular day it was tested.



There is a possibility that the original pistons are different, even though the replacement ones aren't.....

If they actually have the exact same engine, the 435e and the 440e would be the exact same saw.


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

Boskaerm said:


> On the Danish Husqvarna web-site the 435e is still available.
> IF anybody want it :bang:



Here as well.


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> There is a possibility that the original pistons are different, even though the replacement ones aren't.....



so buying a 440 piston, put it in my 435 would give 0,2 hp? 
Could it be something with the ignition maping? could easily give/take 0,2 hp.


----------



## CGC4200 (Sep 17, 2010)

*e type starter*

ST may say it adds weight, but stays hooked up better for me, I want
a lightweight saw to start easy; I spend more time shoving or moving
trash wood & despise a hard starting saw.
All brands can keep their tool less chain tightener, as far as I am concerned;
maybe one day, they will get them more reliable. I also have a PP260 I
use sometimes with an Intenze type bar, I only had to add a screw tensioner
in the clutch housing to upgrade it, the slots were already molded in, a
cheap fix.

The carburetor adjustment tool # for 435/440 is 530035560, still shows up on FleaBay.


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> There is a possibility that the original pistons are different, even though the replacement ones aren't.....
> 
> If they actually have the exact same engine, the 435e and the 440e would be the exact same saw.





Boskaerm said:


> so buying a 440 piston, put it in my 435 would give 0,2 hp?
> Could it be something with the ignition maping? could easily give/take 0,2 hp.



Actually the piston is the same, *the cylinder is what is different*.

I just looked up the IPL, haven't cared to earlier....


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Actually the piston is the same, *the cylinder is what is different*.
> 
> I just looked up the IPL, haven't cared to earlier....



ok, thanks, that makes for a totally different price tag, to get the 0,2 hp.

Ass for the spring assisted starter, her we call it "dame start" whish means Womens start.


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 17, 2010)

CGC4200 said:


> The carburetor adjustment tool # for 435/440 is 530035560, still shows up on FleaBay.



Has the tool, it`s a MUST HAVE.


----------



## CGC4200 (Sep 17, 2010)

*Dames Start*

I am pushing 58, Slow P can probably start a saw better than I can, I
can start the 55 better w/o use of compression release, same for the old 85 cc
Poulan 5400. It may just have been a break in & adjustment issue on the 435.


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

Boskaerm said:


> ok, thanks, that makes for a totally different price tag, to get the 0,2 hp.
> 
> Ass for the spring assisted starter, her we call it "dame start" whish means Womens start.



Dame er det samme her! 

Here is the IPL that I mentioned.


----------



## spike60 (Sep 17, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Actually the piston is the same, *the cylinder is what is different*.
> 
> I just looked up the IPL, haven't cared to earlier....



But it's just the last two digits, 01 to 02, which means it doesn't mean anything.


----------



## hamish (Sep 17, 2010)

spike60 said:


> But it's just the last two digits, 01 to 02, which means it doesn't mean anything.




and 01 supperseeds to the 02 number, everything is the same on the 2010 IPL 435, 435E , 440E.

This thread has been buggin me so I pulled the 2008 and 2009 IPLs and there was a difference in the cylinder part numbers, I also have a paper copy of an IPL dated 2008-02 from the web ec site which i can no longer find on there that only has a different part number for the piston. EPC, and web ec only have IPL's dated 2008-05 and newer................after a few hours of digging there may have been a change at some point in time, but as it stands now today the 435 and 440 are identical save for the toolless chain tensioner and the ID plate/stickers, recoil badge, and box they some in. Here a 435 retails for $319.99CDN and a 440 at $399.99CDN, will definately be a no brainer..........doubt I will sell any 440's now that I know!


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

hamish said:


> and 01 supperseeds to the 02 number, everything is the same on the 2010 IPL 435, 435E , 440E. ...



That sound like the 2010-06 IPL where I found both numbers (se link higher up in the thread).

I am not saying that Spike and you are wrong, but I still regard the picture as "blurred".....opcorn:opcorn:


----------



## hamish (Sep 17, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> That sound like the 2010-06 IPL where I found both numbers (se link higher up in the thread).
> 
> I am not saying that Spike and you are wrong, but I still regard the picture as "blurred".....opcorn:opcorn:



Order either cylinder they get converted to the same part number.............and I agree very blurred...........marketing most likely..........but as said previously the series should be rebadged 440, 440E.

As A side note I cant even order a 455E here in Canada, so has to be related to marketing in different markets.................should would luv to have a 2010 61! but I cant order those either


----------



## CGC4200 (Sep 17, 2010)

*The only real differences I have noticed*

The tool less chain tensioner & the spring assist starter.
I rode the 74 JD 2030 this AM and noted a lot of future work for the
435. the only saw I have to compare it to is a PP260, same power, more
weight & less quality, but I have got my $'s worth out of it too.


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

It is just that spare parts aren't always the same as the original ones, to lessen the number of different spare parts in the logistic system.

The _original_ parts have to be inspected closely, to really know if they are the same.


----------



## SawTroll (Sep 17, 2010)

CGC4200 said:


> The tool less chain tensioner & the spring assist starter.
> I rode the 74 JD 2030 this AM and noted a lot of future work for the
> 435. the only saw I have to compare it to is a PP260, same power, more
> weight & less quality, but I have got my $'s worth out of it too.



The "problem" with that is that the 435e also exist here (and in the IPLs)....


----------



## spike60 (Sep 17, 2010)

hamish said:


> Order either cylinder they get converted to the same part number.............and I agree very blurred...........marketing most likely..........but as said previously the series should be rebadged 440, 440E.
> 
> As A side note I cant even order a 455E here in Canada, so has to be related to marketing in different markets.................should would luv to have a 2010 61! but I cant order those either



Yup. Be nice if we could order some new 288's from Brazil too.


----------



## Boskaerm (Sep 19, 2010)

*435e-series*



hamish said:


> Order either cylinder they get converted to the same part number.............and I agree very blurred...........marketing most likely..........but as said previously the series should be rebadged 440, 440E.
> 
> As A side note I cant even order a 455E here in Canada, so has to be related to marketing in different markets.................should would luv to have a 2010 61! but I cant order those either



like said more than one tim before in this thread: both the 435 AND the 435 e-series does excist!!


----------



## chevyforlife21 (Oct 7, 2010)

did you choose a saw?


----------

