# Got me a 560XP sittin' here boys!



## spike60 (Jun 3, 2010)

Got me a nice 560XP prototype sitting on the counter here at the store.  Going to take some pics tonight and figure out how to post them. Taking it home to cut and do some comparisons. It's my "date" tonight. LOL! Only a few of these in the country, and it's the only one in the northeast. I'm told to run the snot out of it for the next week or two, and then send it back for tear down. Any GTG's coming up? 

Visually, this thing is really different from what we are used to. Different enough that some guys aren't going to like it. (It has an ugly gray top that will not be on the production version, otherwise I like it.) Slim design, and slightly longer than a 357. Real good balance as your hands are a little farther apart. It is noticeably lighter than a 357 we are comparing it to, and the 357 has no fuel or oil in it. Cylinder is not straight up and down; angled back around 30 degrees sort of like a Stihl. Outboard clutch. (Sorry Pete.) Very smooth anti-vibe. Power seems really good, but I want to compare it to a couple of other saws before I start beating the drum on how good the thing runs. Has auto-tune of course. 560 is a narrow tail bar, and this one came with a .325 rim, so I'll try and change that and run it both ways. Has the captured bar nuts for you guys that lose them all the time. 

Gotta get back to work.....................


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 3, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Any GTG's coming up?



Sounds very interesing. Will this be the first strato saw to be lighter than what it replaces?

There's a GTG in southwestern KY next weekend.


----------



## little possum (Jun 3, 2010)

Not fair to tease us like that :censored:

So hurry up already, will ya? ...


----------



## TRI955 (Jun 3, 2010)

Send it on down Bob, I'll take it to the KY GTG next weekend, I think you have my address....


----------



## Tzed250 (Jun 3, 2010)

.


Uh oh. 

Could create a real bad case of Huskylust...


Pics ASAP!!!


.


----------



## Josh777 (Jun 3, 2010)

It's ugly huh. So much the better, lol.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 3, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Sounds very interesing. Will this be the first strato saw to be lighter than what it replaces?
> 
> There's a GTG in southwestern KY next weekend.



Geez, that's a long ride. 

Yeah, I guess it's the first strato that isn't a porker. 

Thing is taching out at 14,000 too. 

Sorry about no pics yet, but the camera is at home. Then we have dial up.....but at some point, we'll all have a look here.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 3, 2010)

Josh777 said:


> It's ugly huh. So much the better, lol.



There's gonna be some interesting comments for sure.


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 3, 2010)

i take it that it is a strato saw?

why do you think they stayed with the outboard clutch?



oh and PICS :greenchainsaw:


----------



## Erick (Jun 3, 2010)

I had a picture shown to me a while back of what was supposed to be the 560 but I never said anything here or thought much of it cause it was a little Stihl MS270ish in appearance ..... I guess it was the new 560 after all. :dunno:

The guy that was showing the pics said it was a nice saw but was nothing to really write home about..... can't say personally as I've never seen it in person much less ran it.... and it could just be that it is that much different that he just didn't like it. 

I look forward to a good HONEST evaluation.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 3, 2010)

Erick said:


> I had a picture shown to me a while back of what was supposed to be the 560 but I never said anything here or thought much of it cause it was a little Stihl MS270ish in appearance ..... I guess it was the new 560 after all. :dunno:
> 
> I look forward to a good HONEST evaluation.




Got kind of a wedge shape to it. Looks like the original Izuzu Impulse. LOL

You guys are gonna murder me if I don't come across with the pics tonight. Where the heck is Woodchucker81 when I need him??????


----------



## adkranger (Jun 3, 2010)

husq2100 said:


> why do you think they stayed with the outboard clutch?



Because it's a Husky.....:monkey:




Spike is such a tease.


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 3, 2010)

adkranger said:


> Because it's a Husky.....:monkey:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yeah, well......... yeah ok got me....but....yeah ok umm hmmmmmm

why Husky why :greenchainsaw:

(they may be benificial on the 346 for limbing but......)


----------



## REJ2 (Jun 3, 2010)

Might just be the next "big thing". REJ2


----------



## WoodChuck'r (Jun 3, 2010)

Guess I'm gonna be at your place sooner than I had thought. :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## Elim (Jun 3, 2010)

Thanks for the info, and soon to be pics Bob.


----------



## taplinhill (Jun 3, 2010)

The rep that I talked with at the expo mentioned "the gray top wedge prototype in Charlotte". I've been curious ever since.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 3, 2010)

I feel like AS has its hands in a large portion of what's going on in the chainsaw world...


----------



## computeruser (Jun 3, 2010)

Interesting stuff. Not that I need another saw, but if they can get 357xp power, or more, in a lighter package...might be interesting.


----------



## J.Walker (Jun 3, 2010)

WoodChucker81 said:


> Guess I'm gonna be at your place sooner than I had thought. :hmm3grin2orange:



Just don't forget that we're headed west Saturday at 5:30am.
Should we go to Bob's before or after?


----------



## pops21 (Jun 3, 2010)

I'm interested in seeing the pics.


----------



## nmurph (Jun 3, 2010)

computeruser said:


> Interesting stuff. Not that I need another saw, but if they can get 357xp power, or more, in a lighter package...might be interesting.



yes, it would be........a 361. 

i'm ready for some pics!!!! where are they?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!


----------



## HARRY BARKER (Jun 3, 2010)

bet it dont run as good as that 359 :greenchainsaw:


----------



## spike60 (Jun 3, 2010)

HARRY BARKER said:


> bet it dont run as good as that 359 :greenchainsaw:




It's actually pretty close. Had them both out tonight before it got dark. Doesn't sound as good though, cause that 359 that motomedik modded is really opened up. It did beat my decked and ported 2153. 

Basics are: Good power and torque. They did a good job with the weight; it is noticeably lighter than the 359. Handles like a 346. Hands being a little farther apart is very nice. 

On the down side, the acceleration isn't as quick as it should be. Maybe it's the auto-tune and the programming of the prototype, and of course it's only on it's first tank of fuel. Did some limbing with it, and being used to a 346, I was hitting the limbs before the revs got there. Room for improvement there.

Another little surprise is when I went to try a 3/8 set up, is that it uses a small CMR6H plug, so the piston stop wouldn't fit in that small hole.

Took all kinds of pics, and spent an hour trying to upload them, size them or whatever. Came close, real close, to smashing this computer into small molecular sized pieces, so I went out in the shop to wind down. I'll try tomorrow from the store where I at least have hi speed. 

Not into computers. Hate the f'ing things actually. :censored:


BTW, I won the family rib fest. That Rudy's Rub you gave me did the trick. Used a different sauce. Found a different Sweet Baby Ray's; Honey Chipotle. Didn't need the brown sugar. One hour on wood, two hours on charcoal. They were great!


----------



## spacemule (Jun 3, 2010)

husq2100 said:


> i take it that it is a strato saw?
> 
> why do you think they stayed with the outboard clutch?
> 
> ...



Here's my common man's sense. Clutches generate heat. Engine cases radiate heat. Having the shoes farther from the case will improve cooling and therefore clutch performance and life.


----------



## adkranger (Jun 4, 2010)

spacemule said:


> Here's my common man's sense. Clutches generate heat. Engine cases radiate heat. Having the shoes farther from the case will improve cooling and therefore clutch performance and life.



If the saw is operated correctly, using the rpms intended for proper clutch engagement the clutch should not be experiencing excessive heat. Clutch failure is usually operator induced from my experience. Poor engagement, powering up in the cut (rather than setting into the wood at speed), excessive throttle blippin', installing B/C setups longer than engineered for then sinking it into large wood, etc..... Also from my experience outboard clutches are not more durable than a comparably designed inboard clutch. Purely anecdotal, but I have had to fix/replace more outboards than inboards.

Ever have to remove the powerhead from a saw with a stuck bar? I'll take an inboard clutch every time given the choice. All that said, I have saws with both and it is not necessarily a deal breaker, just a consideration. I do not see how the outboard is any kind of improvement, or has any advantage over the inboard. There is also the ease of clutch drum removal, inboards can be done in the field in less than a minute w/o any special tools........

To each their own though.


----------



## adkranger (Jun 4, 2010)

spike60 said:


> It's actually pretty close. Had them both out tonight before it got dark. Doesn't sound as good though, cause that 359 that motomedik modded is really opened up. It did beat my decked and ported 2153.
> 
> Basics are: Good power and torque. They did a good job with the weight; it is noticeably lighter than the 359. Handles like a 346. Hands being a little farther apart is very nice.
> 
> ...



Sounds like you need some technical assistance there.......maybe you need to pass the beta saw on to someone who can post some pix & vids.:monkey:

I may be late to the party on this, but with auto-tune are you able to tweak it yourself with conventional tools? Or have saws entered the realm of laptop tuning? That may not be the worst thing, depending on the availability of the software........


----------



## mweba (Jun 4, 2010)

+1 on the sweet baby rays. Great stuff. 
When will they be taking orders on the 560xp?


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 4, 2010)

adkranger said:


> If the saw is operated correctly, using the rpms intended for proper clutch engagement the clutch should not be experiencing excessive heat. Clutch failure is usually operator induced from my experience. Poor engagement, powering up in the cut (rather than setting into the wood at speed), excessive throttle blippin', installing B/C setups longer than engineered for then sinking it into large wood, etc..... Also from my experience outboard clutches are not more durable than a comparably designed inboard clutch. Purely anecdotal, but I have had to fix/replace more outboards than inboards.
> 
> Ever have to remove the powerhead from a saw with a stuck bar? I'll take an inboard clutch every time given the choice. All that said, I have saws with both and it is not necessarily a deal breaker, just a consideration. I do not see how the outboard is any kind of improvement, or has any advantage over the inboard. There is also the ease of clutch drum removal, inboards can be done in the field in less than a minute w/o any special tools........
> 
> To each their own though.



Well said. rep sent.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 4, 2010)

Pics?

If any assistance is needed in posting them please send me a PM. If they can be e-mailed to me I will get them up asap


----------



## spacemule (Jun 4, 2010)

adkranger said:


> If the saw is operated correctly,



I'd wager that fully half of the saws out there are, in fact, operated incorrectly. Furthermore, I'd wager that manufacturers design with this in mind. And finally, if you're "operating correctly," you should never have to remove a bar from a saw that is stuck in the tree.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 4, 2010)

spacemule said:


> I'd wager that fully half of the saws out there are, in fact, operated incorrectly. Furthermore, I'd wager that manufacturers design with this in mind. And finally, if you're "operating correctly," you should never have to remove a bar from a saw that is stuck in the tree.



tha's BS. If you cut enough wood yer gonna get a bar stuck. Armchair loggers never get pinched bars though


----------



## TRI955 (Jun 4, 2010)

opcorn: where's the pics... :camera: :bringit:


----------



## belgian (Jun 4, 2010)

c'mon spike...


----------



## TRI955 (Jun 4, 2010)

Hi Roland!


----------



## belgian (Jun 4, 2010)

TRI955 said:


> Hi Roland!



*Hi Mike,*

it's Husky weather, isn't it ! LOLOL


----------



## cuttinscott (Jun 4, 2010)

Hey Spike, Steve says GRAB your Poloroid snap a few pics drop them in the mail to him and he will upload them for ya LOL.... Or Ship him the saw for a PHOTOSHOOT!!!! He Will send it back asap 

Or email what you have and he will upload them??


Scott


----------



## adkranger (Jun 4, 2010)

spacemule said:


> ... you should never have to remove a bar from a saw that is stuck in the tree.




In theory, yes, but those of us that actually work in the real world with saws on imperfect wood, in real world situations feces happens. Even to the best sawyers. If someone claims they have never stuck a bar they are either liars, posers or just full of chit.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 4, 2010)

adkranger said:


> In theory, yes, but those of us that actually work in the real world with saws on imperfect wood, in real world situations feces happens. Even to the best sawyers. If someone claims they have never stuck a bar they are either liars, posers or just full of chit.



yep


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 4, 2010)

In the real world saws get stuck, it doesn't matter how good you are.

Spike zip the files and Email them to someone that can post them.


----------



## AUSSIE1 (Jun 4, 2010)

Husqvarna XP560 on a string!


----------



## RAMROD48 (Jun 4, 2010)

Maybe it doesn't really exist.....


----------



## Elim (Jun 4, 2010)

Bump 4 pics!!! :spam:


----------



## SkippyKtm (Jun 4, 2010)

This is starting to remind of that 362 thread from a while back...:monkey:


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 4, 2010)

I'm guessing the swedish chainsaw mafia got him...


----------



## Tiger Rag (Jun 4, 2010)

opcorn::greenchainsaw:opcorn:


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 4, 2010)

ya, I was thinkin well proportioned blonde swedish chicks in tight leather jumpsuits pulled an Ikea sack over his head and threw him in the back of a Volvo.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 4, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> ya, I was thinkin well proportioned blonde swedish chicks in tight leather jumpsuits pulled an Ikea sack over his head and threw him in the back of a Volvo.



I think I'd all be ok with it if I were taken captive with this kind of mafia kidnapping, at least in the short term


----------



## adkranger (Jun 4, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> ya, I was thinkin well proportioned blonde swedish chicks in tight leather jumpsuits pulled an Ikea sack over his head and threw him in the back of a Volvo.



Ummm, OK. I call dibs on the saw next.........


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 4, 2010)

adkranger said:


> Ummm, OK. I call dibs on the saw next.........



I'm cool with that. I call dibs on the Swedish Girls. By the time I'm done with them the production version of the saw will be in stores.


----------



## Dan_IN_MN (Jun 4, 2010)

*Here's the long awaited pics! In wood even!*

Here's the long awaited pics! In wood even!





























[/IMG]


----------



## Arrowhead (Jun 4, 2010)




----------



## mweba (Jun 4, 2010)

manyhobies said:


> Here's the long awaited pics! In wood even!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He said GREY top not green.


----------



## gallegosmike (Jun 4, 2010)

adkranger said:


> Ummm, OK. I call dibs on the saw next.........



Naaaa! No self-respecting swede would be caught dead in a volvo now that the ChiCom's own volvo! LOL Not that your average swede has anything agaist the chicoms!

Good fellow, it would be a nice saab that he would thrown into! 

Oh wait, who owns saab now?????? The dutch just bought them out!

Arrggg! What is a dyed in the wool swede car driver going to do???

Ride a "nice" green bike! 

Mike


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 4, 2010)

See! I finished with all 23 Swedish Chicks and the production version is already makin chips! Being quick has its advantages you know. 

Looks like nothin fancy. I can buy another Stihl now


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 4, 2010)

it was not a geely chicom volvo, it was an old school 240 with that stank, nauseating, yet sweet exhaust.


----------



## Moss Man (Jun 5, 2010)

If it were sitting on my bench............you'd be looking at it right now.......


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

From spike:!!!!!


----------



## spike60 (Jun 5, 2010)

Thanks for the help Mike! 

How'd the finals go?


----------



## Moss Man (Jun 5, 2010)

Thank you gentleman! Looks a little futuristic like the Dolmar. I didn't say that.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> How'd the finals go?



I've got another one in about an hour then I'm all done except for a little paper....quarter system... I'd be so sound asleep for another few hours otherwise....

That saw looks pretty freakin' cool


----------



## WoodChuck'r (Jun 5, 2010)

mikefunaro said:


> I'm guessing the swedish chainsaw mafia got him...



Not a chance.


----------



## WoodChuck'r (Jun 5, 2010)

mikefunaro said:


> From spike:!!!!!




Definitely NOT what I was expecting! Maybe asthetics aren't critical with a prototype....

Dolmar style colors, interesting..... 

Maybe it'll grow on me. It's way too soon to tell. Haven't even seen the clutch cover side so I'll be optimistic.


----------



## weimedog (Jun 5, 2010)

Got the pics...interesting looking saw! How is that exhaust layed out? I would like to see what the ports look like in that casting. Wonder if part of the mojo of this design is the extra space & length in the exhaust area allowing more tuning options. Since the exhaust area would be largely hollow there probably isn't much weight gain as a result.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

Honestly the shape of the saw doesnt seem that radically different it just seems like they carried the line between the top cover and the pull cover a little low...


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 5, 2010)

thanks for the info and pics Spike60


----------



## spike60 (Jun 5, 2010)

The gray top is NOT supposed to be on the production model. (thank God) It will be orange, but the top snaps are going to be gray. There a couple more pics uploading now, (maybe???) I have one with the 560 next to a 357 for comparison.


----------



## A10egress (Jun 5, 2010)

not too crazy about the top cover.... actually, I dont like it at all! Now... if it was all orange... then it would be sexy...


but performance matters more than looks.


----------



## cpr (Jun 5, 2010)

It's ugly... If it cuts well, I suppose it'll grow on me.

Why's that jug so sculpted? It's like a weird pyramid. And, I can't make the bore center make sense relative to starter center and the cylinder's shape. Seems like the exhaust is exiting crazy low, but then the cooling fins must not be concentric to the bore...

If this is what the new 372 strato is going to be like, I'm racing to get one of the last XPs from my dealer today!


----------



## SkippyKtm (Jun 5, 2010)

Doesn't look ugly to me anyway, just a little different. I think its got the kinda looks that will grow on you. 
I'd like to see a few shots with the air cleaner off to get an idea of how the carb and intake is set up, looks kinda tight in there...:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

More from spike:


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)




----------



## spike60 (Jun 5, 2010)

cpr said:


> It's ugly...



But she has a great personality.


----------



## cpr (Jun 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> But she has a great personality.



Like a moped, everyone wants to ride it, but no one wants to be caught doing it!!!


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

Id be very interested to see what the bore and stroke is. And yes, I do think it's kinda ugly....


----------



## craig71 (Jun 5, 2010)

That thing looks like it came straight from a Transformer movie. Fugly.:monkey:


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 5, 2010)

The exhaust port does seem really low. Is this a traditional split magnesium case with a one piece bolt-on cylinder? The picture from the clutch side showing the bottom of the cylinder looks really confusing, in terms of how the cylinder bolts to the case.


----------



## Gizzard (Jun 5, 2010)

mikefunaro and spike60,

Thanks for the pics. Sounds like you're being informed that the 560 will be an XP? When I spoke with rep in this area in May he mentioned the 555 and 560 as small bar mounts and not XP's and the 562 with large bar mount as an XP. In the rumor mill and forums I've noticed all kinds of versions though. Either way, look forward to your info after using the saw.


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 5, 2010)

Spike,
how many cc's is this saw?


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 5, 2010)

It looks almost like the transfers are separate castings and are bolted on to the cylinder. If this were the case it would make for interesting porting possibilities!


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 5, 2010)

mikefunaro said:


> More from spike:



This is the image I am talking about.


----------



## Tzed250 (Jun 5, 2010)

.


External transfers. The plug in the center of the CC should make
for less spark lead. Looks like a good step forward. 


.


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 5, 2010)

Tzed250 said:


> .
> 
> 
> External transfers. The plug in the center of the CC should make
> ...



I am much more of a saw user than a collector or expert, but I have never seen external transfers on a production saw. I am probably showing my ignorance here, but has this been done on a stock saw before?


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

Tzed250 said:


> .
> 
> 
> External transfers. The plug in the center of the CC should make
> ...



Like an old Hemi....interesting. Should have a uniform flame front.


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 5, 2010)

Tzed250 said:


> .
> 
> 
> External transfers. The plug in the center of the CC should make
> ...



can you explain spark lead?


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

the westspartan said:


> I am much more of a saw user than a collector or expert, but I have never seen external transfers on a production saw. I am probably showing my ignorance here, but has this been done on a stock saw before?



I know the 359's have external transfer's


----------



## Arrowhead (Jun 5, 2010)

Funky lookin saw... how many cc is it?


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 5, 2010)

Should sell well with the wildthingy crowd.:hmm3grin2orange:

Hope it cuts good, sure looks terrible.


----------



## fishercat (Jun 5, 2010)

*i like it.*

they made the weight less but the price might be a different story.

I like my 357 just fine.i wont be replacing it any time soon.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 5, 2010)

the westspartan said:


> The exhaust port does seem really low. Is this a traditional split magnesium case with a one piece bolt-on cylinder? The picture from the clutch side showing the bottom of the cylinder looks really confusing, in terms of how the cylinder bolts to the case.



Bolts up like any other cylinder. Bolts run parallel to the cylinder as always, Top of the crankcase is angled to match the angle of the cylinder, and it is the traditional split mag case.

560 and 562 are both XP's and the displacement is 62CC. Difference is 560 is narrow tail and 562 is wide tail bar mount. 555 is a non-XP, and I'm not sure of the displacement. 

If you look at the pic with the 357, you'll notice how the handles are a little farther apart. So, despite the lighter weight, it should balance well with an 20" bar, where as the 357 never did IMO. Despite the strange appearance, this is a very comfortable saw to run. The weight and handling are REAL good. 

What do you think of the offset top spring mount? Looks to me like a part I'll have to stock. 

Another little item: They got the "weight" right, but the "wait" is a different matter. I think they'll be here in time for Christmas.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 5, 2010)

2000ssm6 said:


> Hope it cuts good, sure looks terrible.



Oh yeah, it cuts good.

What's the weight of that MS362???


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

The laid back cylinder definitely takes ya a few years back. It's set up like an 031/032 sthil. Different in deed. Does that mean that they stole the technology from the 30 year old stihls....yep, that's my story anyhow.


----------



## Tzed250 (Jun 5, 2010)

husq2100 said:


> can you explain spark lead?



I meant to say "less spark lead". iPhone challenged. 

The proper plug position should mean the saw can run less timing advance, which will help with efficiency. 


.


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Oh yeah, it cuts good.
> 
> What's the weight of that MS362???



13lbs. I think, haven't had one in my hands yet. I'm sure it feels heavier than the 361. If the 560 can cut with a 362, its competetion for sure.


----------



## TRI955 (Jun 5, 2010)

I have no problem with the way it looks, I just want to run it! Thanks for the pics. and info Spike!


----------



## L.R. (Jun 5, 2010)

gallegosmike said:


> Naaaa! No self-respecting swede would be caught dead in a volvo now that the ChiCom's own volvo! LOL Not that your average swede has anything agaist the chicoms!
> 
> Good fellow, it would be a nice saab that he would thrown into!
> 
> ...



We drive Land Rover Defenders... Switched from a Volvo V70XC - not a real offroader in my opinion. Sorry, that was OT... Nice looking prototype, now that we finally have pics! Do newer Stihls also have that kind of laid-back cylinder, so to speak?


----------



## Tiger Rag (Jun 5, 2010)

mikefunaro said:


> From spike:!!!!!



I like it. Different but I like it. I like the fact that it is lighter than the 357xp too. Only matters how it cuts though.


----------



## husky455rancher (Jun 5, 2010)

all futuristic looking...id take her for a ride lol


----------



## rayIN (Jun 5, 2010)

THe cylinder looks like a Maytag Hit and Miss


----------



## TommySaw (Jun 5, 2010)

I kinda like it, will look better I think in all orange, but I'm diggin' it so far:greenchainsaw:


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 5, 2010)

Thanks for the pics Spike




She is *FUG LEE!!! * 

I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers though.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

If that sort of vented/indented cover design stays, where the xp sticker normally goes...where is it going to go??? Is this the beginning of the end of for those wonderful little guys???


----------



## les-or-more (Jun 5, 2010)

I kind of like it and i'm not a husky man, if ya get bored next weekend bring it up so we can get a good look at.


----------



## eyolf (Jun 5, 2010)

How good is the heat barrier between the cylinder and carb box? I'm concerned that I can't see any barrier there in the pic's, thinking maybe all or most of it is part of the top.

If so, does that make putting the top back on a little harder, lining up even more close fits?

Is there a shutter or flap to accomodate cold-weather operation? 

I see a primer bulb, and that doesn't bother me as much as some people. NO choke/on/off? Does the on switch still set the throttle on fast idle?

I like the very clear carry through of the falling sights onto the top cover...helps to make up for the foreshortened "look". Some saws are useless, and some sawyers don't use them. But I like it.

I'm a bit confused about why Husqvarna feels that both a large- and small-bar-mount saw (560/562) is neccessary, but then I don't know what sells in every market. It's not like they haven't been down this path before...

I kind of like the styling, and cant wait for it to be available in red, with a black lid. (probably still have the gray latches and decompress button...Grrrr) 

You know, I think I might know why some of us don't like the looks:







There's a vague relationship in styling, I think.


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

Why a primer bulb? I dont see the reason for them. All my saws without them start in 3 or 4 pulls. Kinda seem very "homeownerish" to me, and just one more thing for the ethanol to kill.


----------



## cpr (Jun 5, 2010)

wigglesworth said:


> just one more thing for the ethanol to kill.



+1! Any way to bypass them?


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

cpr said:


> +1! Any way to bypass them?



Im sure there is, but I dont know if the carb pulls fuel the same, or relys on the bulb...??


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 5, 2010)

yeah, every chainsaw on the market without a primer bulb works just fine yet they feel the need to add one? Its a solution to a non existent problem 

J-Red styling might actually make that saw bearable to look at. 

As it is, this saw makes the 441, 362 and 261 look like a beauty queens! 

Like a Dolmar 5100 that melted in the sun


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 5, 2010)

zombiechopper said:


> like a dolmar 5100 that melted in the sun



lol....


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 5, 2010)

mikefunaro said:


>



It looks as though they have done a commendable job in keeping the bulk and from what spike says the weight down as well. That's moving in the right direction. Looks just fine to me hope it runs real well. I'm curious if the transfers are open, being they are external? Anyone know something? Great thread and pics Spike.


----------



## eyolf (Jun 5, 2010)

Most primer bulb systems override the diaghragm, pressurizing ("flooding") the carb. As we know, the advantage is a one-pull start, sometimes. There are external (3 lines to carb...inlet, bulb, and return) and internal (2 lines...inlet and return)

The disadvantage is sometimes there is no more choke butterfly. They replace easy, and ebay shysters notwithstanding, most small-engine shops keep them on hand for cheap.

I have an old Eski-mo (Techumseh) ice auger; I back-fitted it with a primer system from a later model of the same series engine. I'm here to tell you that it matters, out on the ice, not having to pull endlessly to drill some ice-fishing holes. Am I lazy and soft?

Us guys may want the feeling of moral superiority of getting by without the primer, but I bet market research suggested that most users want convenience.


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 5, 2010)

If the primer bulb is a similar setup to the 346 it is easy to just bypass it.


----------



## Evan (Jun 5, 2010)

ugly thing aint it. ist it autotune with new fangled fuel injection


----------



## fishercat (Jun 5, 2010)

*i like the primer bulb.*

my 346 always starts on the first or second pull. it's the fastest starting saw i have ever seen. both 395s i owned ran a close second.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

Is this going to get the silver clutch cover or do you think it will stay orange?


----------



## Tiger Rag (Jun 5, 2010)

wigglesworth said:


> Why a primer bulb? I dont see the reason for them. All my saws without them start in 3 or 4 pulls. Kinda seem very "homeownerish" to me, and just one more thing for the ethanol to kill.



I agree with that statement. They bother me too.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 5, 2010)

les-or-more said:


> I kind of like it and i'm not a husky man, if ya get bored next weekend bring it up so we can get a good look at.



That's possible. (Was even more possible before I looked at the map. That would certainly be a Saturday night deal.) I'd like to meet some of you gents up north there.


----------



## 166 (Jun 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> The gray top is NOT supposed to be on the production model. (thank God) It will be orange, but the top snaps are going to be gray. There a couple more pics uploading now, (maybe???) I have one with the 560 next to a 357 for comparison.



I Like the gray cover.


----------



## les-or-more (Jun 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> That's possible. (Was even more possible before I looked at the map. That would certainly be a Saturday night deal.) I'd like to meet some of you gents up north there.


 Its just a hop skip n a jump spike lol, we would certainly enjoy meeting you.


----------



## belgian (Jun 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Bolts up like any other cylinder. Bolts run parallel to the cylinder as always, Top of the crankcase is angled to match the angle of the cylinder, and it is the traditional split mag case.
> 
> 560 and 562 are both XP's and the displacement is 62CC. Difference is 560 is narrow tail and 562 is wide tail bar mount. 555 is a non-XP, and I'm not sure of the displacement.
> 
> ...



My first impression by looking at the pics was that the saw was a bit longer than usual, but the comparison pic didn't show much difference really.

Funky saw for sure, but the design may grow on the user. I like it. Performance and handling are key factors of course. We'll need to run one to see how good she is....

thanks for posting the pics, Spike.


----------



## Stihl Crazy (Jun 5, 2010)

eyolf said:


> I'm a bit confused about why Husqvarna feels that both a large- and small-bar-mount saw (560/562) is neccessary, but then I don't know what sells in every market. It's not like they haven't been down this path before...



The 560 should outsell the 562 here. The most popular setup for 357/359 here is 15" bar running .325. Thats how they come from the distributer. As far as replacement bars the .325/15" outsells 3/8 16" at least 5 to 1.

Like the looks of the saw. Looks like a few $ in shop fees for routine work. Miss the old 200 series for simplicity.


----------



## Justsaws (Jun 5, 2010)

Spike60, thanks for the photos. It looks interesting. There will be a learning curve on that saw for sure. That antivibe mount certainly does look like a in stock at all times part.

The large mount option is great. 

I do not know any commercial users that care about a pound +/- of weight between like sized saws. They care about power, price and reliability. I really really hope that the crank case, carb, boot, clamp and myriad of other issues that plagued the 359/356 into commercial non existence around here does not occur with this series of saw. Husqvarna has a great opportunity on there hands as the 362 has some F/F and ignition issues right now and the 361s are on death row. Husqvarna could make a resurgence and that would be great. I look forward to some more info and hope it smoothly transition into the mainstream market, which around here at least is TSC, Lowes, Sears, etc.. Sad but true. 

FGS, the cutoff saw market is going to Stihl and Efco.


----------



## SWE#Kipp (Jun 5, 2010)

Thank you Spike


----------



## AUSSIE1 (Jun 5, 2010)

Thanks for the info and pics fella's.

Not a bad looking saw. Would look better all orange, but performance is more important. Just look at the Dolmars.

Interesting port layout. Very low Ex port exit and the carb looks to enter the crankcase (maybe not with the inlet, looks bit deceptive there). The layout lends well to a weight saving and good balance by the looks of things. Sounds like she would be nice with a few tanks under belt.

Looking forward to the pics of the HD filter/hightop. 

Looks like Husky is onto it!


----------



## craig71 (Jun 5, 2010)

Could you post some video of this saw running and cutting some wood. I bought the 357xp when it first came out and every issue described by Justsaws plagued my saw and the two others I purchased years later. Any new saw has its issues, the hope is that it can be corrected, with the 357xp it never was. I hope for Husqvarna that they get it right this time.


----------



## REJ2 (Jun 5, 2010)

Looks darn respectable to me. Did I miss the published specs, weight, h.p., fluid capacity's? REJ2


----------



## TimberMcPherson (Jun 5, 2010)

Very cool, I dont care what it looks like as long at the ratio of cuting power to weight to price is right. 

Thanks for the pics spike!


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 5, 2010)

Thanks for the pics Spike.

It's obvious to me this saw is definitely a prototype. The clutch side will likely be cleaned up on the production saws. Overall I like it, looks smaller and more compact than the 362.


----------



## woodgrenade (Jun 5, 2010)

Kind of looks like this one I found on the local Craigslist.

<a href="http://s921.photobucket.com/albums/ad54/woodgrenade/?action=view&current=WeirdHusqvarna.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad54/woodgrenade/WeirdHusqvarna.jpg" border="0" alt="Strange Husky"></a>

I haven't seen it on the Husky site though :monkey:


----------



## VI sawguy (Jun 5, 2010)

Looks good, can't wait for them to show up in Canada. It'll be interesting to see the other versions of this design when they start showing up.


----------



## Jacob J. (Jun 5, 2010)

The engine arrangement looks similar to the Stihl 032...

It's one ugly saw for sure, but I'm sure I'll buy one eventually.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 5, 2010)

It kinda seems to me like they thought the wedge design was cool.(which it kinda is, IMO) I mean, if they really wanted to, they could probably have had some extra baffles and extra space and just had the top cover look like a cover on a 576...high top or low top. The brake engagement lever and stuff up there would just be higher up off the saw...


----------



## mweba (Jun 5, 2010)

Jacob J. said:


> The engine arrangement looks similar to the Stihl 032...
> 
> It's one ugly saw for sure, but I'm sure I'll buy one eventually.



Yes yes and yes
Visited my dealer today and made sure the first one has my name on it.

Was thinking, with the cylinder arrangement could a guy muffler mod a stack out the top plastic:greenchainsaw:


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 5, 2010)

I actually like the styling. Maybe not the gray cover. But even that's not too bad. I'm totally confused by the exhaust. It looks to exit the cylinder way lower than seems possible. Is it perhaps ducted downward through the jug from the cylinder wall to the muffler flange?


----------



## nmurph (Jun 5, 2010)

why all the fuss? it's a 60cc saw.........

my take is that if the weight is close to where the 362 came from (361) and the power is where the 362 is now, then husky may have a winner that will take sales from the 362 stihl crowd. the stihl-heads will no doubt berate it for its funky styling. but those same people still have to defend the 441's looks!!! i think the dual-size tail will cause confusion, but it was probably done so as not to lose sales to someone bc they have existing bars of the 009 or 095 mount. this way the dealer can spec the saw to the buyer's existing stock of bars. the exhaust port does look very low, especially when you look at the angle of the screws holding the muffler. the primer bulb is not a bad idea from a marketing point. i have them on my trimmer, edger and a couple of saws. it is not a selling point to me, but to some HO's it might be a difference maker bw it and the competition. i am not sure if they are designed in a false-safe manner.the bulb on my fs 85 was totally cracked and it still cranked and ran fine. i would think that the tilted cylinder would make for a better handling saw. maybe the trend is back to horizontal engines.


----------



## dingeryote (Jun 6, 2010)

Spike,

Thanks for Pimpin' that slut here, so's we can all get busy speculating and stacking pop Bottle return $$ for when they do get turned loose.

Any scoop on the 562 differences other than the small tail bar?
Like maybe .2HP more?

I just can't wrap my head around the logic, not to mention costs, involved in marketing two saws that are Identical except for Bar dimensions. Just goofy!


Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## Terry Syd (Jun 6, 2010)

*Husky strato transfers*

This looks like a lot better design than on the clamshell 450 stratos. Take a look at the pictures of my 450, you can see how long the transfer tunnels are. They start way down in the crankcase and then loop up along each side of the exhaust port. Part of the problem lies with the position of the crankshaft weights blocking the entrance to the tunnels. I expect that the tunnels on the 560 extend well into the crankcase, you just can't see it. 

The 450's tunnels were actually too small for the area of the transfer port and you can see in one picture where I am enlarging them. On the 560 design the transfer tunnel covers look a lot bigger from the outside and should have adequate area for flow and the potential for a lot more if additional transfer area was needed.

I wonder how much the balance of the powerhead changed with the cylinder canted back like that.

I'm looking forward to some pictures with the jug off.


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 6, 2010)

I like it!!!

Kind of a cross between a 5100 and an 032!!
The best looking Husky ever! (IMHO)
Of course there isn't much to compare it to, Husky has the ugliest "shoebox on its side" saws ever made.

Are they going to use fade resistant plastic, or will this one look like it's been "beat through hell with a sack of soot" in a couple of years too?

If they will run and cut like they should, and hold their looks as well as a Stihl or Dolmar, I may have to have one of those!

There does appear to be quite an obtuse angle to the induction though.


Mike


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 6, 2010)

rms61moparman said:


> I like it!!!
> 
> Kind of a cross between a 5100 and an 032!!
> The best looking Husky ever! (IMHO)
> ...




See, every new generation of saws gets a little more grey and a little less orange. It starts with a clutch cover....then the top cover too...before you know it all Husqvarnas will be all grey! Very sneaky. 

but it isn't fade resistant grey, and each piece of the saw will be a slightly different shade of grey just to keep some familiarity and brand loyalty


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 6, 2010)

rms61moparman said:


> I like it!!!
> 
> Kind of a cross between a 5100 and an 032!!
> The best looking Husky ever! (IMHO)
> ...



Ya know, when I first saw it I though it looked a lot like the 5105, the muffler is set up a lot the same too.


----------



## mikefunaro (Jun 6, 2010)

It has been said repeatedly that the grey top will NOT stay, its on the prototype model only


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 6, 2010)

mikefunaro said:


> It has been said repeatedly that the grey top will NOT stay, its on the prototype model only



I know. just buggin ya. 

and it worked


----------



## tdi-rick (Jun 6, 2010)

Tzed250 said:


> .
> 
> 
> External transfers. The plug in the center of the CC should make
> ...



But there are good reasons for an offset chamber in a 'conventionally' ported cylinder like keeping the temps experienced on the exhaust side of the piston sane under arduous use.

I agree though, less advance is always a good thing in my experience.


----------



## redprospector (Jun 6, 2010)

Ya know, when I first saw it it reminded me of a dung beetle. Not that there's anything wrong with dung beetle's or anything like that. 

I've said it before, & I'll say it again. Are you taking it to a beauty contest, or cuttin' wood? Who cares what it looks like if it cuts the way it should and is comfortable to run.
I remember when everyone said the 7900's were ugly, called em "bubble saw's". But they performed well, and their looks kinda grow on ya. With the HD filter kit they look kinda like an English riding saddle now.

This saw will be the same way. If it performs well, and is comfortable to run everyone (except the die hard Stihl guy's) will start thinking it looks pretty good. If not, it will always look like a dung beetle. :dunno:

Andy


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 6, 2010)

redprospector said:


> I remember when everyone said the 7900's were ugly, called em "bubble saw's".



That one was nicknamed "The Alien" by my 3 year old after the HD kit went on.


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 6, 2010)




----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 6, 2010)

redprospector said:


> Ya know, when I first saw it it reminded me of a dung beetle. Not that there's anything wrong with dung beetle's or anything like that.
> 
> I've said it before, & I'll say it again. Are you taking it to a beauty contest, or cuttin' wood? Who cares what it looks like if it cuts the way it should and is comfortable to run.
> I remember when everyone said the 7900's were ugly, called em "bubble saw's". But they performed well, and their looks kinda grow on ya. With the HD filter kit they look kinda like an English riding saddle now.
> ...



I've said this before in other "new saw" threads: Nobody can buy one and only one guy can run one. No videos, no timed cuts to see, no nothin to actually go on. All we really can do right now is talk about what it looks like so thats what we're doing. Everything else is just guessing about how it will perform. Nothing wrong with discussing how saws look either. I only buy pretty saws so it is an extremely important criteria for me


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 6, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> I've said this before in other "new saw" threads: Nobody can buy one and only one guy can run one. No videos, no timed cuts to see, no nothin to actually go on. All we really can do right now is talk about what it looks like so thats what we're doing. Everything else is just guessing about how it will perform. Nothing wrong with discussing how saws look either. I only buy pretty saws so it is an extremely important criteria for me



:jawdrop: Now since when is a 170 a pretty saw?


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 6, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> I've said this before in other "new saw" threads: Nobody can buy one and only one guy can run one. No videos, no timed cuts to see, no nothin to actually go on. All we really can do right now is talk about what it looks like so thats what we're doing. Everything else is just guessing about how it will perform. Nothing wrong with discussing how saws look either. I only buy pretty saws so it is an extremely important criteria for me




It just sucks to have a great running low hour saw that won't sell for over half of its value because it looks like what the beetle above is rolling!!!

If you are one of those (rare around here) guys that buy a saw and wear it completely out and throw it away, it doesn't matter.
But if you are wanting to have any decent resale value to fund your next purchase that cheap junky azz plastic is a real drawback.


Mike


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 6, 2010)

MuleyJ said:


> :jawdrop: Now since when is a 170 a pretty saw?



I think she's pretty and that's all that matters. She was my first


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 6, 2010)

I rather have ugly plastic than a ugly piston and cylinder. Functionality wins end of story. Stihl is lacking in this regard as of now and Dolmar is on the bubble, but still has a long way to go IMHO.


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 6, 2010)

Andyshine77 said:


> I rather have ugly plastic than a ugly piston and cylinder. *Functionality wins end of story*. Stihl is lacking in this regard as of now and Dolmar is on the bubble, but still has a long way to go IMHO.




I'd rather have a pretty P/C covered by pretty plastic!!!

And for the cost of saws today there is no reason why we can't have both.
I know it can be done

<a href="http://s208.photobucket.com/albums/bb53/rms61moparman/?action=view&current=Andres7900.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb53/rms61moparman/Andres7900.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>


----------



## NEP (Jun 6, 2010)

Awsome looking saw. Can't wait to get one in my hands.


----------



## motomedik (Jun 6, 2010)

Little late to the party I am, as usual...
Is the crank centered with the bore? There are certain modern MX bikes being made with the crank center offset, more of a straight shot for the piston to act on the crank. Those are 4stroke, and I'm not sure if that would work well on a 2stroke with holes in the cylinder wall, unless they were bridged, or smaller.
Any way I can beg a picture with the Exhaust removed? Is it baffled heavily? Gonna answer that myself and say it is and with a catalyst inside, too, but can we see it, Pleeease??
Just for the record, I think it's about time that saws stop looking the same. Really theres only a handful of modern silhouettes. Nice to see the mold broken a bit- I like it.


----------



## Cantdog (Jun 6, 2010)

Me too Moto, but read the entire thread and all the observations, opinions and criticisms, so I'm gonna toss my thoughts in as well. First the grey cover doesn't bother me at all. The all orange saws look cheap and cheesy to me. Example the gray top 61s looked better to me than the all orange 61s. If the Stihl guys are complaining about faded Husky plastic then that's certainly the pot calling the kettle black!! Plastic is plastic, whatever name is on the sticker. Second, It is a very different motor layout than previous Huskys and we know how most folk HATE change. Good or bad. Time will tell if this is good or not.
The primer bulb seems to be another bone of contention however if the reason for it is the elimination of the choke plate and shaft thus allowing more carb flow and greater power. It may be a good thing. Most *** has this feature and I haven't noticed it to be of any particular maintenance concern. And face it less pulling is better!! 

At the end of the day looks become familiar but the reliability, weight, power and handling is what will sell this saw.......or not....


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jun 6, 2010)

Andyshine77 said:


> I rather have ugly plastic than a ugly piston and cylinder. Functionality wins end of story. Stihl is lacking in this regard as of now and Dolmar is on the bubble, but still has a long way to go IMHO.



I agree on the not so good looking Stihl cylinders but* "Functionality wins end of story"* applies also. They look bad but function fine???


----------



## motomedik (Jun 6, 2010)

Cantdog- I was freehand ripping with my dark cover 61 last weekend and loving it!! I'm watching for the parts to build like yours is- mine's ported mildly but the open port cyl- waiting for a better top end to come along, I still love the looks and sounds it makes. I wonder if that 560 would/ could someday be a replacement for it:monkey:


----------



## Cantdog (Jun 6, 2010)

motomedik said:


> Cantdog- I was freehand ripping with my dark cover 61 last weekend and loving it!! I'm watching for the parts to build like yours is- mine's ported mildly but the open port cyl- waiting for a better top end to come along, I still love the looks and sounds it makes. I wonder if that 560 would/ could someday be a replacement for it:monkey:



Yes Motomedik my earlier version had the open port Gilardoni 268 cyl lightly portd but all I had for a carb was 163A and it was awsome compared to a stock 61. I managed to pick up a 268XP closed port Mahle piston and cyl. off ebay ported that to 63% and adapted a 250A carb from a 670 Super II and it really goes good now. Very happy with the sound and power. I like this series saws.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 6, 2010)

redprospector said:


> I remember when everyone said the 7900's were ugly, called em "bubble saw's". But they performed well, and their looks kinda grow on ya. With the HD filter kit they look kinda like an English riding saddle now.



Nothing's changed here. They still are the ugliest saw on the market.
:greenchainsaw: IMHO, the HD filter actually greatly improves their looks by breakin up that bubble AMC Pacer look. The biggest improvement is on the 7901. That grey bubble really looks pathetic. Hehehe, flame suite on, lol.

I'm with you Mike on this Husky though. I think it's a good looking saw, even with the gray cover. I'll like it either way. However, I'm far more interested in 50cc and 70cc saws. I have no place in my work saw stable for a 60cc saw with a ported 346 and a 13 lbs MS440.


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 6, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Nothing's changed here. * They still are the ugliest saw on the market.*
> :greenchainsaw: *IMHO, the HD filter actually greatly improves their looks by breakin up that bubble AMC Pacer look. The biggest improvement is on the 7901. That grey bubble really looks pathetic. Hehehe, flame suite on, lol.*
> 
> I'm with you Mike on this Husky though. I think it's a good looking saw, even with the gray cover. I'll like it either way. However, I'm far more interested in 50cc and 70cc saws. I have no place in my work saw stable for a 60cc saw with a ported 346 and a 13 lbs MS440.




Well Brad, it has become poignantly clear why you AREN'T a highly sought after beauty contest judge!!!
With no more of an eye for beauty that you have displayed here today, it makes one wonder how in the heck you ended up with such a lovely wife!!
I guess it just proves the old adage that "Even a blind hog will find an acorn if he roots around long enough"!!!LOL


Mike

.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 6, 2010)

rms61moparman said:


> Well Brad, it has become poignantly clear why you AREN'T a highly sought after beauty contest judge!!!
> With no more of an eye for beauty that you have displayed here today, it makes one wonder how in the heck you ended up with such a lovely wife!!
> I guess it just proves the old adage that "Even a blind hog will find an acorn if he roots around long enough"!!!LOL
> 
> ...



Hehehe. I smiled when I saw that you had replied to the thread


----------



## Terry Syd (Jun 6, 2010)

*Choke*

The primer bulb doesn't replace the choke. Take a look at the side shot of the saw and you can see where the 'kill' switch will push down the chromed lever and set the choke when you lift the orange kill switch up.


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 6, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Nothing's changed here. They still are the ugliest saw on the market.
> :greenchainsaw: IMHO, the HD filter actually greatly improves their looks by breakin up that bubble AMC Pacer look. The biggest improvement is on the 7901. That grey bubble really looks pathetic. Hehehe, flame suite on, lol.
> 
> I'm with you Mike on this Husky though. I think it's a good looking saw, even with the gray cover. I'll like it either way. However, I'm far more interested in 50cc and 70cc saws. I have no place in my work saw stable for a 60cc saw with a ported 346 and a 13 lbs MS440.



Now how can you say this ain't pretty.opcorn:


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 6, 2010)

Andyshine77 said:


> Now how can you say this ain't pretty.opcorn:



That is beautiful clover. And a mighty fine piece of wood, is that Oak?


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 6, 2010)

2000ssm6 said:


> I agree on the not so good looking Stihl cylinders but* "Functionality wins end of story"* applies also. They look bad but function fine???



I can't see long term durability being the same as a good Mahle cylinder IMHO. In the short term they are very functional, ugly but functional.


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 6, 2010)

wigglesworth said:


> That is beautiful clover. And a mighty fine piece of wood, is that Oak?



It's Hickory, I took that pic a few years back, the lettering on the bar is long gone.


----------



## wigglesworth (Jun 6, 2010)

Andyshine77 said:


> It's Hickory, I took that pic a few years back, the lettering on the bar is long gone.



Maybe I'll get to see how pretty that thing is in person soon???


----------



## redprospector (Jun 6, 2010)

wigglesworth said:


>



Hahaha. Good pic.
When I was growing up we called them "turd rollers" but when I left that area no one knew what I was talking about, so I resorted to calling them by their common name.
Notice the similarity to the 560, kinda rounded off, and all jacked up in the assend. Looks pretty aerodynamic. Should be a fast saw, eh. 

Andy


----------



## redprospector (Jun 6, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Nothing's changed here. They still are the ugliest saw on the market.
> :greenchainsaw: IMHO, the HD filter actually greatly improves their looks by breakin up that bubble AMC Pacer look. The biggest improvement is on the 7901. That grey bubble really looks pathetic. Hehehe, flame suite on, lol.



Hahaha. Not many of them "purty" saws will hang with em though.
I remember when most folks ranted about how ugly the HD filter kits were. Then all of a sudden everybody just had to have one. 
I guess it's true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I mean, some people think the new Chevy pickups look good.  But I'm sure they'll grow on me.:hmm3grin2orange: (Flame suite on.)

Andy


----------



## Saw Dr. (Jun 6, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Nothing's changed here. They still are the ugliest saw on the market.
> :greenchainsaw: IMHO, the HD filter actually greatly improves their looks by breakin up that bubble AMC Pacer look. The biggest improvement is on the 7901. That grey bubble really looks pathetic. Hehehe, *flame suite on*, lol.
> 
> I'm with you Mike on this Husky though. I think it's a good looking saw, even with the gray cover. I'll like it either way. However, I'm far more interested in 50cc and 70cc saws. I have no place in my work saw stable for a 60cc saw with a ported 346 and a 13 lbs MS440.





redprospector said:


> Hahaha. Not many of them "purty" saws will hang with em though.
> I remember when most folks ranted about how ugly the HD filter kits were. Then all of a sudden everybody just had to have one.
> I guess it's true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I mean, some people think the new Chevy pickups look good.  But I'm sure they'll grow on me.:hmm3grin2orange: (*Flame suite on*.)
> 
> Andy



Anybody want to tll me what a flame suite is? A large hotel room where firemen practice their trade?


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 6, 2010)

Saw Dr. said:


> Anybody want to tll me what a flame suite is? A large hotel room where firemen practice their trade?






It's the French/Canadian way of saying "Flame Suit" the garmet you don when you know you have said something dumb and the masses are about to throw a few molotov cocktails at your feet!:angry2:


Mike


----------



## teatersroad (Jun 6, 2010)

I don't think it's ugly, can't say. Don't know the saw yet. If it were three years out, nimble, fearsome, and reliable; you'd look at it a say it's a good looking saw. If it turns out to be crap, that's what you'd see.

I'm afeard it'll cost as much as a current 372 though.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 6, 2010)

redprospector said:


> Hahaha. Not many of them "purty" saws will hang with em though.
> I remember when most folks ranted about how ugly the HD filter kits were. Then all of a sudden everybody just had to have one.



I can't deny either one. There's not a better value in the 80cc size saws than the 7900. I'm also guilty of having poked serious fun at the HD kit. Now I find it better looking than the stock plastic, especially on the Makitas. There's not doubt about it, they're great saws.

Now, back to your regular programming. Which was..... Oh yeah, the new Husky


----------



## cpr (Jun 6, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> I can't deny either one. There's not a better value in the 80cc size saws than the 7900. I'm also guilty of having poked serious fun at the HD kit. Now I find it better looking than the stock plastic, especially on the Makitas. There's not doubt about it, they're great saws.



Nah, need a K&N cone poking through the low-boy cover instead of that bike seat!!!


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jun 6, 2010)

If the 560xp weighs less than the 362, has the same power + good filtration, It may be the 346 of 60cc saws. I can already hear the Stihl boys crying.






 Andre.


----------



## blsnelling (Jun 6, 2010)

Andyshine77 said:


> If the 560xp weighs less, has the same power + good filtration, It may be the 346 of 60cc saws. I can already hear the Stihl boys crying.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is Stihl really going to let Husky take over my worksaw plan? They've already done that in the 50cc department. Many will say they've done that in the 70cc department as well. I'm not ready to concede that one yet.


----------



## redprospector (Jun 6, 2010)

Saw Dr. said:


> Anybody want to tll me what a flame suite is? A large hotel room where firemen practice their trade?



It's a distraction. Commonly used by magicians, and the U.S. government. I move my right hand a little so you look at it and don't pay attention to what I'm doing with my left hand. :hmm3grin2orange:

Well, it sounded good when I thought it up anyway.
Actually, when I decided to use the term flame "suite", or suit in my post I wasn't sure of the correct spelling, and didn't feel like using spell check. So I just coppied off of Brad. 
So I'm lazy, and brad can't spell for :censored:. That's what you were really asking wasn't it?

Andy


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 6, 2010)

redprospector said:


> It's a distraction. Commonly used by magicians, and the U.S. government. I move my right hand a little so you look at it and don't pay attention to what I'm doing with my left hand. :hmm3grin2orange:
> 
> Well, it sounded good when I thought it up anyway.
> Actually, when I decided to use the term flame "suite", or suit in my post I wasn't sure of the correct spelling, and didn't feel like using spell check. So I just coppied off of Brad.
> ...





Tried to rep you for your honesty but somebody says I have to spread it around!!!

Now youall don't tell my lovely wife about that, ya heah.LOL

Mike


----------



## B_Turner (Jun 7, 2010)

I sort of like the styling, except it looks so long. That puts the action further away from the body.

I would love it if husky had found a way to have a strato not pick up extra weight.

Makes me interested in what the 346 replacement will be like.....


----------



## dingeryote (Jun 7, 2010)

B_Turner said:


> I sort of like the styling, except it looks so long. That puts the action further away from the body.
> 
> I would love it if husky had found a way to have a strato not pick up extra weight.
> 
> Makes me interested in what the 346 replacement will be like.....



If the 560 makes 357+ power and weighs like a 346....the 346 replacement should be a snarling little demon.

I'm more interested in the 562 making 262 power.

The Fat and nasty 455, and 575/576 gave Husky years of time to tinker and a leg up on the others. Maybe they figured out the weight issue in the process?

I gotta run one before I warm up to Strato or the Gizmotronic carb silliness, but it looks good so far.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## Jacob J. (Jun 7, 2010)

I'll bet they have Redmax engineers helping sort these new strato saws out. Redmax really has the strato design down to an art. One look inside the 5000 is proof of that.


----------



## SWE#Kipp (Jun 7, 2010)

B_Turner said:


> I sort of like the styling, except it looks so long. That puts the action further away from the body.
> 
> I would love it if husky had found a way to have a strato not pick up extra weight.
> 
> Makes me interested in what the 346 replacement will be like.....



The info i have got from hva "sources" is that the new "346xp" will be lighter and stronger but i won't believe until i see it ,,,,,,,


----------



## spike60 (Jun 7, 2010)

B_Turner said:


> I sort of like the styling, except it looks so long. That puts the action further away from the body.
> 
> I would love it if husky had found a way to have a strato not pick up extra weight.
> 
> Makes me interested in what the 346 replacement will be like.....



Make no mistake: It's a lighter saw. It's like it went to Jenny Craig. And it has the power too. As it is, it would steal some 346 business. 

But........keep in mind that it's a prototype; things could change. Wanted to run the thing some more yesterday, but we got some much needed rain, so I just kept picking the thing up and starting it now and then. 

I really think that longer handle spacing is a big plus. That's why saws like the 651 Solo and Stihl 026 feel better to me than a Dolmar 115 or Jonsered 490, which to me feel as though the handles are too close together. Way more significant to me than the angle, (Jonsered vs Husky), that many guys like to argue about. 

Going to send the saw out with one of my tree guys this week and let him give it a proper workout. I'll keep ya posted.


----------



## adkranger (Jun 7, 2010)

spike60 said:


> I really think that longer handle spacing is a big plus. That's why saws like the 651 Solo and Stihl 026 feel better to me than a Dolmar 115 or Jonsered 490, which to me feel as though the handles are too close together. Way more significant to me than the angle, (Jonsered vs Husky), that many guys like to argue about.



Excellent point and you are correct sir. (as an overall statement 'cuz I've got no experience with that prototype) I think so many overlook handle placement and design. One of the most important items when it comes to a saw that will be run for hours on end. It is also one of the reasons why the 026/260 is soooo popular. It is as comfortable as a well broken-in pair of boots and just feels good in the hands. I'd personally give away a few ounzes of weight and a little power/speed for a saw that feels comfortable. Kind of like that old bull, young bull thing. run down for one or walk down and get 'em all (synopsis for those that don't know the joke).:monkey:

I don't really care how a saw looks, but how it feels in the hands, build design and how it runs are important.


----------



## BloodOnTheIce (Jun 7, 2010)

Jacob J. said:


> I'll bet they have Redmax engineers helping sort these new strato saws out. Redmax really has the strato design down to an art. One look inside the 5000 is proof of that.



That's why they bought them!


----------



## Nikko (Jun 7, 2010)

B_Turner said:


> I sort of like the styling, except it looks so long. That puts the action further away from the body.
> 
> I would love it if husky had found a way to have a strato not pick up extra weight.
> 
> Makes me interested in what the 346 replacement will be like.....



346 replacement?


----------



## NEP (Jun 8, 2010)

Nikko said:


> 346 replacement?



At the end of 2010 all 50+cc 2-stroke engines in Europe has to meet the high emission standards. (Thats why the cc was raised from 46 to 50,1 when the 346 became "New Edition")
So we will probably see a lot of new models in the beginning of 2011.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 8, 2010)

Nikko said:


> 346 replacement?



Funny you should say that. 

An arborist stopped in yesterday, and I showed him the 560, without telling him what size it is. He picked it up and handled it for a bit and said, "What's this, the replacement for the 346?" I said, "No, the 357; that thing's 62cc." "You're kidding!" He wants one as soon as they come out. 

Like I said, they got the weight/balance right.


----------



## taplinhill (Jun 8, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Like I said, they got the weight/balance right.



Have you weighed a 560 and 357 to compare?


----------



## spike60 (Jun 8, 2010)

taplinhill said:


> Have you weighed a 560 and 357 to compare?



Not on a scale, but pick them both up and the difference is obvious.


----------



## taplinhill (Jun 8, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Not on a scale, but pick them both up and the difference is obvious.



I may have to buy one (and some red and black spray paint) 




______________________


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 8, 2010)

spike all you need to do now is get a new 357xp and take that 560proto up to Timberwolf and run it on his dyno :greenchainsaw:


----------



## tdi-rick (Jun 8, 2010)

husq2100 said:


> spike all you need to do now is get a new 357xp and take that 560proto up to Timberwolf and run it on his dyno :greenchainsaw:




Just a few timed cuts between the two would be enough.

Tabbed browsing is great aint it, saws in a couple, Land Rovers in the other


----------



## spike60 (Jun 8, 2010)

taplinhill said:


> I may have to buy one (and some red and black spray paint)
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You probably won't need the paint. The 357/359, and therefore the 2156/2159 chassis goes away at the end of the year, so I expect that we will be seeing a Red version at some point. Figure the Jonsered teardrop starter similar to what's on the 2255, with the black top. Should be one sexy saw!


----------



## taplinhill (Jun 8, 2010)

spike60 said:


> You probably won't need the paint. The 357/359, and therefore the 2156/2159 chassis goes away at the end of the year, so I expect that we will be seeing a Red version at some point. Figure the Jonsered teardrop starter similar to what's on the 2255, with the black top. Should be one sexy saw!



I want a CS2262WH. Can't you pull some strings?


----------



## TRI955 (Jun 8, 2010)

taplinhill said:


> I want a CS2262WH. Can't you pull some strings?



Put me down for one too!!!


----------



## Nikko (Jun 8, 2010)

NEP said:


> At the end of 2010 all 50+cc 2-stroke engines in Europe has to meet the high emission standards. (Thats why the cc was raised from 46 to 50,1 when the 346 became "New Edition")
> So we will probably see a lot of new models in the beginning of 2011.



Hmmm - I though the NE 346 WAS the replacement!


----------



## husq2100 (Jun 8, 2010)

tdi-rick said:


> Just a few timed cuts between the two would be enough.
> 
> Tabbed browsing is great aint it, saws in a couple, Land Rovers in the other



yes it would,but running them on the dyno would be way cooler 

i better not start talking about antisquat, axle roll axis etc as it may be hard to calculate on a saw :greenchainsaw:


----------



## bwalker (Jun 10, 2010)

I will own one!:chainsawguy::


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 11, 2010)

bwalker said:


> I will own one!:chainsawguy::



I won't!

I like prettier saws. 


How many of you set out to marry ugly women that could cook really well?


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 11, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> I won't!
> 
> I like prettier saws.
> 
> ...



:monkey:

Now I seem to recall someone around here saying that an ms170's beauty was in the eye of the beholder? There is no way that could have been you is there?



Zombiechopper said:


> I think she's pretty and that's all that matters. She was my first


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 11, 2010)

listen, qoutey qouterson. 170's ARE pretty. I don't own ugly saws so she is a definate looker. Just can't cook is all.....


----------



## MuleyJ (Jun 11, 2010)

Now let me get this straight, you want women that can't cook and saws that look?


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jun 11, 2010)

MuleyJ said:


> Now let me get this straight, you want women that can't cook and saws that look?



yep! carazy loco!


----------



## BlacknTan (Jun 15, 2010)

First time I saw Spike's pictures, I thought it was butt-ugly...

Waited a week and went back and looked again... a little better.

Waited another week and looked again... I'm actually startin' to like it!

It reminds me of sitting at the bar with the leftover women... the longer you sit... the better they look!


----------



## B_Turner (Jun 15, 2010)

BlacknTan said:


> First time I saw Spike's pictures, I thought it was butt-ugly...
> 
> Waited a week and went back and looked again... a little better.
> 
> ...



With luck they are thinking the same about you.....no offense intented


----------



## BlacknTan (Jun 15, 2010)

B_Turner said:


> With luck they are thinking the same about you.....no offense intented



One can only hope!


----------



## nmurph (Jun 15, 2010)

B_Turner said:


> With luck they are thinking the same about you.....no offense intented



someone hit that man with some rep. it says i have to spread it around bf i can hit'm again. kind of the theme of his post!!!!


----------



## woodgrenade (Jun 18, 2010)

*Bumping this back to the top, and on topic-- since I ran this saw today!!*

I stopped by Spike60's for one of those pretty J-red bars for my newly acquired 365 ala Chevytown13 (both great guys to do buisness with btw). Needless to say it was mandatory to run the 560XP and the worked 365 (search for Chevy's thread). 

That 560xp was out of this world. Smooth as butta with the antivibe, had a cool spaceship look to it, and most importantly cut some wood! The 365 had a brand new chain, and the 560xp's was alittle dull, but man oh man that new saw can cut straight from the factory. I was impressed with both, but for a factory saw that 560 is something special, it is just like Bob said, "they got something right with that saw". 

No pics of the saws, but I can post some pics of the woodchips that were in my sneakers though


----------



## rms61moparman (Jun 18, 2010)

Looking forward to getting my hands on one!
Absolutely the best looking thing I've seen come out of Husky.......for.......a........WHILE!!!

I wonder how hard it will be to spank with a 6400???


Mike


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 25, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Got me a nice 560XP prototype sitting on the counter here at the store.  Going to take some pics tonight and figure out how to post them. Taking it home to cut and do some comparisons. It's my "date" tonight. LOL! Only a few of these in the country, and it's the only one in the northeast. I'm told to run the snot out of it for the next week or two, and then send it back for tear down. Any GTG's coming up?
> 
> Visually, this thing is really different from what we are used to. Different enough that some guys aren't going to like it. (It has an ugly gray top that will not be on the production version, otherwise I like it.) Slim design, and slightly longer than a 357. Real good balance as your hands are a little farther apart. It is noticeably lighter than a 357 we are comparing it to, and the 357 has no fuel or oil in it. Cylinder is not straight up and down; angled back around 30 degrees sort of like a Stihl. Outboard clutch. (Sorry Pete.) Very smooth anti-vibe. Power seems really good, but I want to compare it to a couple of other saws before I start beating the drum on how good the thing runs. Has auto-tune of course. 560 is a narrow tail bar, and this one came with a .325 rim, so I'll try and change that and run it both ways. Has the captured bar nuts for you guys that lose them all the time.
> 
> Gotta get back to work.....................




The most interesting post on here in years, and I wasn't here, because of computer issues....:censored:


Your weight observation is just what I wanted to hear!


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 25, 2010)

adkranger said:


> Because it's a Husky.....:monkey: ....



Well, an outboard clutch makes it much easier to make a better handling saw, as proven in a lot of cases in the past! 


The case can be made slimmer with an outboard (and Husky exploits that for all it is worth), and the bar is closer to the centre of gravity of the powerhead, which is more important than many want to believe.....


----------



## mweba (Jun 25, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> The most interesting post on here in years, and I wasn't here, because of computer issues....:censored:
> 
> 
> Your weight observation is just what I wanted to hear!



Don't take this the wrong way ST, you should have computer trouble more often. Been a good week on AS for saw unveiling.


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 25, 2010)

mweba said:


> Don't take this the wrong way ST, you should have computer trouble more often. Been a good week on AS for saw unveiling.



Well, my trouble is not over, I just am at another computer right now! 

Like a good bug, I am not easy to get rid of!


----------



## Zero Gravity (Jun 25, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Well, my trouble is not over, I just am at another computer right now!
> 
> Like a good bug, I am not easy to get rid of!



Saw
I am going to be in Gothenburg next week. I am presenting a paper to the ISO committee at the Volvo HQ. Do you have any suggestions for some tourist activities? I thought I might go to the Volvo museum. I have two free days before I head to Italy.
ZG


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 25, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> The most interesting post on here in years, and I wasn't here, because of computer issues....:censored:
> 
> 
> Your weight observation is just what I wanted to hear!



Welcome back


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 25, 2010)

Zero Gravity said:


> Saw
> I am going to be in Gothenburg next week. I am presenting a paper to the ISO committee at the Volvo HQ. Do you have any suggestions for some tourist activities? ....
> ZG



Sorry, that is waaaaay South of me, and wrong country!


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 27, 2010)

Are there any news on the difference between the 560xp and the 562xp?


----------



## spike60 (Jun 27, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Are there any news on the difference between the 560xp and the 562xp?




Just the small vs large bar mount from what I know. Apparently there are some areas where guys will prefer to run smaller bars and/or .325 chain. 

IMO this is not really necessary and could be accomplished easily with the small mount only. After all, the 262XP was a small mount saw. you could run 16" to 24" in either 3/8 or .325 with just the one mount. 

But then there are lots of guys who would like to be able to interchange bars with their larger saws. 

Obviously they feel there is a reason, and there's certainly nothing wrong with giving everyone a choice.


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 27, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Just the small vs large bar mount from what I know. Apparently there are some areas where guys will prefer to run smaller bars and/or .325 chain.
> 
> IMO this is not really necessary and could be accomplished easily with the small mount only. After all, the 262XP was a small mount saw. you could run 16" to 24" in either 3/8 or .325 with just the one mount.
> 
> ...



That is what I figured, but I don't understand why the large mount version weights .4lbs more, unless there are more differences? 

I guess time will tell the true story about the weights.......


----------



## SWE#Kipp (Jun 27, 2010)

Would a larger clutch and oil pump make up some of the weight difference ??


----------



## WoodChuck'r (Jun 27, 2010)

Did everyone get bored of the 372XT thread??


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 27, 2010)

WoodChucker81 said:


> Did everyone get bored of the 372XT thread??



noth'n else to say without pics, vids, or listed specs.


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 27, 2010)

SWE#Kipp said:


> Would a larger clutch and oil pump make up some of the weight difference ??



Makes sense. Also, they could have beefed up the case to support the added weight and leverage of the larger bars that could be run on this saw. Don't take much to add .4lbs.


----------



## spike60 (Jun 27, 2010)

the westspartan said:


> noth'n else to say without pics, vids, or listed specs.



Or, a GTG with both the new XT, and the 560XP.


----------



## SawTroll (Jun 27, 2010)

SWE#Kipp said:


> Would a larger clutch and oil pump make up some of the weight difference ??



If the clutch drum has the standard (some say large) seven, instead of the small seven, it would still be just a few grams difference, like the larger bar bolts - nothing like .4lbs......


----------



## WoodChuck'r (Jun 27, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Or, a GTG with both the new XT, and the 560XP.



That'll be the non Stihl / non Husky event!!!


----------



## the westspartan (Jun 27, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Or, a GTG with both the new XT, and the 560XP.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 1, 2010)

Where is that thread with the preliminary specs on the 555, 560xp and 562xp - I can't find it using the search function???


----------



## Gizzard (Jul 1, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Where is that thread with the preliminary specs on the 555, 560xp and 562xp - I can't find it using the search function???



Is post #33 in the following thread what you are looking for? http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=122709&highlight=562


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 2, 2010)

Gizzard said:


> Is post #33 in the following thread what you are looking for? http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=122709&highlight=562



Yes, thanks!



funky sawman said:


> Weight specs are: 555-12.3lb 560xp-11.9lb 562xp-12.3lb
> Horse power: HP=4.3 HP=4.7 HP=4.7



I just hope the weight specs are true this time - they were far off on the 357xp/359 etc......


----------



## spike60 (Jul 2, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Yes, thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> I just hope the weight specs are true this time - they were far off on the 357xp/359 etc......




All you have to do is pick one up and you'll feel it right away. 

But the question I have is how can there be specs on a saw that is hasn't actually gone into production yet?


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 2, 2010)

spike60 said:


> ...... But the question I have is how can there be specs on a saw that is hasn't actually gone into production yet?



LOL - I have also wondered about that, another reason to not trust those specs!


----------



## spike60 (Jul 10, 2010)

Time for a little update here. Got it back from my friends at LW Tree Svc who ran another 18 tanks through it. So, we've got 24 tanks total. My perceived acceleration problem looks to be history as the thing jumps up pretty good now. I'll poke it in some wood tomorrow and see if I notice any difference in the power. The guys that had it the last two weeks said that it does have a lot of snot to it, and like everyone else, "When can we get one?" Also should mention that it's been in the upper 90's all week, and it ran fine.

The auto-tune has been seamless, but it does have it's limitations. While it is supposed to compensate for altitude as far as the fuel/air mix goes, it apparently has a problem with altitude in the bucket truck as far as _gravity_ is concerned. The poor little saw took quite a hit; cracked the tank ahead of the fuel cavity, and busted off the hand guard. The top spring mount is stretched, but that offset piece that connects it to the top handle is fine, and that was something I thought might be an issue. She took a licking, but she's still ticking. 

Lack of a chain brake handle means I won't be lending it out any more, and being a prototype, I can't order parts for it. A few members will get a chance to run it tomorrow, so maybe they can post their impressions tomorrow night.


----------



## outdoortype (Jul 10, 2010)

*What bar & chain setup have they been using?*

I was just wondering if they liked it better with 3/8 or .325 that it came setup with.


----------



## Fugowwee (Jul 10, 2010)

Its not the fall that kills you it's the sudden stop at the bottom! On another post didn't you say something like 110' that doesn't sound like a lot of breakage given the fall. Should be a solid saw for "normal" use? Unless thats normal?!?!


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 11, 2010)

By now I wonder how Husky will handle the huge gap they have been creating between the 562xp and the 576xp?

I don't look at it as a problem though, more like an opportunity!


----------



## Gizzard (Jul 11, 2010)

I guess you could stick the new 372xp x-torq between the 562xp and 576xp, but still a nice gap to put something in.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 11, 2010)

Gizzard said:


> I guess you could stick the new between the 562xp and 576xp, but still a nice gap to put something in.



The 372xp x-torq or the 570 doesn't qualify as gap fillers in my thoughts. The weight is too close to the 576xp.


----------



## Gizzard (Jul 11, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> The 372xp x-torq or the 570 doesn't qualify as gap fillers in my thoughts. The weight is too close to the 576xp.



:agree2:

Forgot about the 570.... I should know that you would not leave any out.


----------



## Log Hogger (Jul 11, 2010)

*I want one.*

What a b!tchin' saw! 

I don't really care how my saw looks, but IMO that 560 XP prototype is beautiful. I like how the saw body looks like a single, sleek unit, compared to the traditional look where the handle/fuel tank is obviously not an integral part of the cylinder body. It's interesting what they've done with the muffler as well - I wonder if that's all styling, or if a little tuning is going on with it? 

Open transfer tubes with bolt-on covers - easy dremel access to transfer ports! I bet a ported 560 XP will rock.

Spike, any chance you could empty the fluids and drop that sucker on a scale? If that rumored weight of 11.9 lb. is accurate, I'll be camping out overnight at my Husqvarna dealer's parking lot to buy one!


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 11, 2010)

Log Hogger said:


> What a b!tchin' saw!
> 
> I don't really care how my saw looks, but IMO that 560 XP prototype is beautiful. I like how the saw body looks like a single, sleek unit, compared to the traditional look where the handle/fuel tank is obviously not an integral part of the cylinder body. It's interesting what they've done with the muffler as well - I wonder if that's all styling, or if a little tuning is going on with it?
> 
> ...



I would almost do that as well, if I had the right feeling about it!

As it is, the looks seem to support the light stated weight, but apart from that we don't know a thing, really!

LOL, actually I would snap one up immediately, if they appeared here - like I did with the NE346xp in 2007......


----------



## weimedog (Jul 11, 2010)

Ran that saw today. Three words: Fast, Smooth, and Light
Says it all. ( I think the 560 I ran today was a little lighter than a stock one would be..)


----------



## spike60 (Jul 12, 2010)

Yeah that thing is hooked up pretty good right now. (not to mention a little busted up. LOL)

It was good to run it side by side with those other saws, most of which were modded to some degree. The 560 was right there with the modded saws, and easily toasted the stock 357 and 359. Very impressive; just hope it stays that good when the production models come out.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 12, 2010)

weimedog said:


> Ran that saw today. Three words: Fast, Smooth, and Light
> Says it all. ( I think the 560 I ran today was a little lighter than a stock one would be..)



I am sure it was, as it is *modded* for lighter weight.......


----------



## BloodOnTheIce (Jul 12, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Yeah that thing is hooked up pretty good right now. (not to mention a little busted up. LOL)
> 
> It was good to run it side by side with those other saws, most of which were modded to some degree. The 560 was right there with the modded saws, and easily toasted the stock 357 and 359. Very impressive; just hope it stays that good when the production models come out.



All the guys at Va Beach thanked me for the secret footage I shot yesterday of the prototype, and they'll be giving me a promotion.

It's a good saw, not as good as that ported 359 mongrel saw.

Troll, you'll buy one in a heart beat. Looks aside, it's closest performance and weight wise to the old 262xp. It's a good saw.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 12, 2010)

BloodOnTheIce said:


> ....
> 
> Troll, you'll buy one in a heart beat. Looks aside, it's closest performance and weight wise to the old 262xp. It's a good saw.



 Yes, actually lighter, if the numbers that have been posted are true - but will it be much of an improvement over my Euro MS361, all things considered?


----------



## nmurph (Jul 12, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Yes, actually lighter, if the numbers that have been posted are true -


yeppers, by nearly a pound if the 560 is 12.1lbs


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 12, 2010)

nmurph said:


> yeppers, by nearly a pound if the 560 is 12.1lbs



The numbers I have seen so far is 11.9lbs for the 560xp and 12.3 for the 562xp, but I have no idea what the truth is. The posts by those that have used Spikes saw is promising though!


----------



## BloodOnTheIce (Jul 12, 2010)

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KXbmpm4h6t8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KXbmpm4h6t8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


----------



## CentaurG2 (Jul 12, 2010)

Well hot damb, if that’s the new generation husky, count me in. Most of them stihl leg humpers must be getting wet dreams watching that thing. I am sure stihl is busy engineering a new flippy cap, one switch wonder, or a battery powered gizmo on their stuff. Give stihl twenty years or so with their antique brick and mortar stores approach, they might actually get something to the saw market that can compete with husky.


----------



## mdavlee (Jul 12, 2010)

That saw does sound good and looked like it cut real good too. Might raise my interest in saws smaller than 70cc.


----------



## parrisw (Jul 12, 2010)

Very nice looking saw!!


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jul 12, 2010)

Seems to cut well, looks horrible though.:jawdrop:


----------



## weimedog (Jul 12, 2010)

2000ssm6 said:


> Seems to cut well, looks horrible though.:jawdrop:



I didn't get the entire story about the "weight mods"...something about a fast ride down (gravity fast) from a bucket some 70ft up...hey it runs!


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Jul 12, 2010)

weimedog said:


> I didn't get the entire story about the "weight mods"...something about a fast ride down (gravity fast) from a bucket some 70ft up...hey it runs!



I know it was damaged, even new off the shelf wood not look good.


----------



## little possum (Jul 12, 2010)

2000ssm6 said:


> Seems to cut well, looks horrible though.:jawdrop:



Looks dont matter when they are slicing wood 2K, dontcha remember that little Jredavarna, its got a eye on those 440s


----------



## Log Hogger (Jul 13, 2010)

*Will it keep up?*



spike60 said:


> It was good to run it side by side with those other saws, most of which were modded to some degree. The 560 was right there with the modded saws, and easily toasted the stock 357 and 359.



Do you think the 560 XP can run with any stock 70 cc saws?


----------



## Log Hogger (Jul 13, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> I won't!
> 
> I like prettier saws.
> 
> ...



How many of us take our saws to bed?

Seriously, if this 560 XP lives up to the reports on this thread, all the owners will be gushing over it's looks in a year or so. It's like any quality tool, guys will come to consider it an extension of themselves and thus revere it. Assuming, of course, that it has no glaring design oversights, like the 357 XP did.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 13, 2010)

BloodOnTheIce said:


> <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KXbmpm4h6t8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KXbmpm4h6t8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>




Nice video, but there is some high-pitched shrieking sound in there, during the last cut, that I don't understand.....

Maybe a result of that dive it took?


----------



## BloodOnTheIce (Jul 13, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Nice video, but there is some high-pitched shrieking sound in there, during the last cut, that I don't understand.....
> 
> Maybe a result of that dive it took?



My camera is a cheap 150$ digital, and chainsaws overload the mic, and it distorts the sound badly. Every saw I've ever recorded sounds like that, they all sound incredibly lean usually also.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 13, 2010)

BloodOnTheIce said:


> My camera is a cheap 150$ digital, and chainsaws overload the mic, and it distorts the sound badly. Every saw I've ever recorded sounds like that, they all sound incredibly lean usually also.



LOL - I actually wondered if it was the speaker on my computer! 

Good to hear that it wasn't the saw!


----------



## spike60 (Jul 13, 2010)

BloodOnTheIce said:


> My camera is a cheap 150$ digital, and chainsaws overload the mic, and it distorts the sound badly. Every saw I've ever recorded sounds like that, they all sound incredibly lean usually also.



Plus, someone else was cutting nearby on the other log at the same as I was, so that noise was also in the mix.

It also looks like the third cut was quicker than the first, after I got past that knot. I had a knack for finding those damn knots all day, didn't I? 
:censored:


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 13, 2010)

spike60 said:


> It also looks like the third cut was quicker than the first, after I got past that knot. ....



Yes, it looks that way!


----------



## the westspartan (Jul 13, 2010)

Log Hogger said:


> Do you think the 560 XP can run with any stock 70 cc saws?



Short answer YES. The 560XP prototype was the most impressive stock saw I have ever run. Weight in the 50cc range power near the 70cc range (at least in this small wood). This saw was REAL snappy and had the grunt that has become expected in the strato saws.

This is the first time I have really wanted a 60cc saw. I just hope it stays this good through production.

Thanks to Spike60 for a chance to run it.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 13, 2010)

the westspartan said:


> ..... I just hope it stays this good through production.
> ......



That's the big question by now + when it will appear at the dealers!


----------



## weimedog (Jul 13, 2010)

Log Hogger said:


> How many of us take our saws to bed?
> 
> Seriously, if this 560 XP lives up to the reports on this thread, all the owners will be gushing over it's looks in a year or so. It's like any quality tool, guys will come to consider it an extension of themselves and thus revere it. Assuming, of course, that it has no glaring design oversights, like the 357 XP did.



Agree..One thing I do have experience with is 357XP's...and can say this new 560 is a lot more saw. My only concern is weather the prototype we ran and all its good stuff actually ends up in production. Will the manufactured version be as good? Won't know until they hit the shelves..


----------



## Log Hogger (Jul 14, 2010)

*If release date is late summer*



weimedog said:


> My only concern is weather the prototype we ran and all its good stuff actually ends up in production. Will the manufactured version be as good? Won't know until they hit the shelves..



If it really is on track to be released in August or September, chances are good that the final design is all but nailed down, and this prototype is out more for the purposes of generating buzz than testing the design. In most fields, early prototype users have to sign an NDA that would end a career if they posted the sort of info in this thread. I don't know about chainsaw manufactures but I'd be surprised if that wasn't the case. If prototype users are leaking info, it's because Husqvarna wants them to leak info, because production is imminent.

Weight of a 50 cc saw, power of a 70 cc saw, here's to hoping for a price closer to the former.


----------



## mdavlee (Jul 14, 2010)

From what they have said if it ends up like the prototype then I might try one if the price isn't too close to 70cc saws.


----------



## BloodOnTheIce (Jul 14, 2010)

Log Hogger said:


> If it really is on track to be released in August or September, chances are good that the final design is all but nailed down, and this prototype is out more for the purposes of generating buzz than testing the design. In most fields, early prototype users have to sign an NDA that would end a career if they posted the sort of info in this thread. I don't know about chainsaw manufactures but I'd be surprised if that wasn't the case. If prototype users are leaking info, it's because Husqvarna wants them to leak info, because production is imminent.
> 
> Weight of a 50 cc saw, power of a 70 cc saw, here's to hoping for a price closer to the former.



Won't be released until 2011 from what Spike said.


----------



## spike60 (Jul 14, 2010)

Log Hogger said:


> If it really is on track to be released in August or September, chances are good that the final design is all but nailed down, and this prototype is out more for the purposes of generating buzz than testing the design. In most fields, early prototype users have to sign an NDA that would end a career if they posted the sort of info in this thread. I don't know about chainsaw manufactures but I'd be surprised if that wasn't the case. If prototype users are leaking info, it's because Husqvarna wants them to leak info, because production is imminent.
> 
> Weight of a 50 cc saw, power of a 70 cc saw, here's to hoping for a price closer to the former.




Not going to see them til the end of the year, or early next year. Maybe the first load will arrive in a sleigh driven by a fat guy in a red suit.

I haven't been told anything either way about whether or not I could post any of this stuff. If I was told not to, I certainly would not have said a word. I agree that the design is pretty well nailed down and should not vary much from this one.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 14, 2010)

Log Hogger said:


> .....
> Weight of a 50 cc saw, power of a 70 cc saw, here's to hoping for a price closer to the former.



That is a bit optimistic imo!


----------



## weimedog (Jul 14, 2010)

One more point to consider...this saw proves yet again that Strato saws can actually improve the breed. Not a technology to be afraid of. Now I'm waiting to see a saw with both the "auto tune" and ignition mapping controls adjusting real time for optimal performance...at least where a saw aftermarket guy can offer different timing and fuel maps to go along with other mods.


----------



## Log Hogger (Jul 14, 2010)

*Drats!*



spike60 said:


> Not going to see them til the end of the year, or early next year. Maybe the first load will arrive in a sleigh driven by a fat guy in a red suit.
> 
> I haven't been told anything either way about whether or not I could post any of this stuff. If I was told not to, I certainly would not have said a word. I agree that the design is pretty well nailed down and should not vary much from this one.



Next YEAR???

Crap. Some jerkoff posted back in February claiming these saws would be out in April 2010. <a href="http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=122709&highlight=560xp">Here it, post 21 by "funky sawman."</a>

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.


----------



## Gizzard (Jul 14, 2010)

I think Spike's prediction of late this year or early next year is on track. I speak with the Husqvarna rep in this area several times a year and he thought September at best and more likely late in the year. Last I discussed this with him was in May. If I asked him now, he may move it even later. This would be on track with what Spike is saying.


----------



## Log Hogger (Jul 15, 2010)

*Looks like I'll be getting a 361*

MS 361 is probably a better choice for me anyways, I'll save money and I won't be afraid to port a used saw. No way would I touch a dremel to a 560 XP until I've got way more experience.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Jul 15, 2010)

weimedog said:


> One more point to consider...this saw proves yet again that Strato saws can actually improve the breed. Not a technology to be afraid of. Now I'm waiting to see a saw with both the "auto tune" and ignition mapping controls adjusting real time for optimal performance...at least where a saw aftermarket guy can offer different timing and fuel maps to go along with other mods.



lets go straight to fuel injection and leave finnicky carbs right out of the system!


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 16, 2010)

Hello Spike! 

Your pics and video have "spread" over to a Swedish saw forum as well as that UK one, but no-one has offered any additional info!

....and no, I didn't do it!


----------



## SWE#Kipp (Jul 17, 2010)

I did it on the Swedish forum 
hope you don't mind or i can take them away !?!?

//Kipp


----------



## SWE#Kipp (Jul 17, 2010)

Come to think of it i put the video up on the English fourm also ,,,


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 20, 2010)

Gizzard said:


> I think Spike's prediction of late this year or early next year is on track. I speak with the Husqvarna rep in this area several times a year and he thought September at best and more likely late in the year. Last I discussed this with him was in May. If I asked him now, he may move it even later. This would be on track with what Spike is saying.



"Next years models" tend to show up in Sept here - I hope that will be the case.....


----------



## J.Walker (Jul 20, 2010)

Thanks Spike for the chance to run this 560. The 560 makes some good power. It was faster than my stock 359 and 357. The 560 is a very nice saw. I plan on buying one when they come to market.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 20, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> Thanks Spike for the chance to run this 560. The 560 makes some good power. It was faster than my stock 359 and 357. The 560 is a very nice saw. I plan on buying one when they come to market.



Hmmm - I never saw any pics of you running it.....


----------



## J.Walker (Jul 20, 2010)

Well Troll I was only in the background. Should have brought my 262xpg to compair, but I'm sure that the 560 was faster.


----------



## SawTroll (Jul 20, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> Well Troll I was only in the background. Should have brought my 262xpg to compair, but I'm sure that the 560 was faster.



Another good sign for the 560/562xp!


----------



## dingeryote (Jul 21, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> Well Troll I was only in the background. Should have brought my 262xpg to compair, but I'm sure that the 560 was faster.



By extrapolation, that would have the 560 faster than the MS362 as well, and lighter by a huge margin.

Yeah...it's goofy looking.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## spike60 (Aug 19, 2010)

A little update on the 560. Husky had me send down the saw so it could be repaired and then returned to me so we could continue to play, I mean test it. But when it took it's 60 foot drop and the chain brake handle busted off, it also broke the case right where that handle is attached. So, a new CB handle could not be installed on the saw without splitting it and using a new case half. 

So................they sent me another brand new one! :rockn: Oh, ya gotta love those guys down there. 

And this one is set up with 3/8 so we can get a better feel for how it will be set up in the real world. So, we got to break in another one now. I'm going to play with it tomorrow and then send it out with one of my tree guys for the weekend. New rule though: No bucket trucks and no climbing. :censored:


----------



## nmurph (Aug 19, 2010)

anymore info on when they will be available?

put me on the list, i will drive up to pick it up.....


----------



## Tiger Rag (Aug 19, 2010)

nmurph said:


> anymore info on when they will be available?
> 
> put me on the list, i will drive up to pick it up.....



Yep, waiting for the same information........Availability?


----------



## sunfish (Aug 19, 2010)

Tiger Rag said:


> Yep, waiting for the same information........Availability?



Yep, I'm a waitin also 

Matt, I'm liking the 357


----------



## spike60 (Aug 19, 2010)

Haven't heard anything different from the original "end of the year" estimate. I'll see a lot of Husky folks this weekend at the Woodsman's field days, so if there is anything new I'll certainly pass it along. 

Couple questions on how you guys would want this set up for yourselves. I figure most would want the 3/8, but what about the narrow vs. wide tail bar mount? What would your preference be? How about the primer and the deco? Do those things make a difference to you guys either way? ( I think it needs the deco myself. Plenty of compression there.)


----------



## nmurph (Aug 19, 2010)

skip the primer, don't care about the decomp, would prefer the large mount bc there are more bar options (i find).


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 19, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Haven't heard anything different from the original "end of the year" estimate. I'll see a lot of Husky folks this weekend at the Woodsman's field days, so if there is anything new I'll certainly pass it along.
> 
> Couple questions on how you guys would want this set up for yourselves. I figure most would want the 3/8, but what about the narrow vs. wide tail bar mount? What would your preference be? How about the primer and the deco? Do those things make a difference to you guys either way? ( I think it needs the deco myself. Plenty of compression there.)


I sure would want both the deco and the primer, you can just forget them if you have no use for them, and the deco can also be plugged.

Also, I would want the small bar mount, to save as much weight as possible, but standard 7-spline drum and 3/8" - I think right now......

Tomorrow I may think differently! 

I doubt all that will be optional, when they hit the market here.....


----------



## spike60 (Aug 19, 2010)

nmurph said:


> skip the primer, don't care about the decomp, would prefer the large mount bc there are more bar options (i find).



Yeah, and I'm also thinking a lot of guys will want to be able to interchange bars with their larger saws; 372's and the like.


----------



## mdavlee (Aug 19, 2010)

I think if I were to get one I would want the large mount so it would match the other saws and with 3/8s chain.


----------



## dingeryote (Aug 19, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Yeah, and I'm also thinking a lot of guys will want to be able to interchange bars with their larger saws; 372's and the like.



That's the ticket!

Small mount bars run .325, and mixing things up just leads to headaches.
I'll live with the extra 3oz and just run a RW bar.

No preferrence on the Bulb and decomp. I don't use 'em.

If ya get a chance, grab one of them boys by the stacking swivel, and explain to 'em that the thing HAS to be lighter than the MS361 and Faster than a 262XP, or they are just going where the 357XP languished and the 361's flew off the shelves.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Aug 19, 2010)

I had a long converstation with a husky rep today. The 550, 555 and 560 were mentioned. I asked if the 560 was all that and a bag of chips. He claimed it ran good. I asked how it compared to a 361. He said that saw isn't produced anymore, LOL. He had some interesting info, was nice to talk to a man from the dark side.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Aug 19, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Haven't heard anything different from the original "end of the year" estimate. I'll see a lot of Husky folks this weekend at the Woodsman's field days, so if there is anything new I'll certainly pass it along.
> 
> Couple questions on how you guys would want this set up for yourselves. I figure most would want the 3/8, but what about the narrow vs. wide tail bar mount? What would your preference be? How about the primer and the deco? Do those things make a difference to you guys either way? ( I think it needs the deco myself. Plenty of compression there.)



Spike, 

-I don't care about decomp. I don't use them on any saws but it doesn't hurt having it there 

-Primer bulbs are terrible. They end up leaking at the worst possible time and they are totally unnecessary.

-I myself would buy small mount 3/8ths because I already run small mount and don't have any large mount saws. I think you will just have to stock both. If someone already runs large mount they will want that I'm sure. Makes things a little tougher for you I'm sure. If you had to pick just one stay with small mount as that is what folks are used to getting on a 60cc husky.


----------



## BlacknTan (Aug 19, 2010)

I'll probably buy one..

I'd like to see it with de-comp, no bulb, set up for 3/8ths with the large mount..

Perfect!


----------



## Gizzard (Aug 19, 2010)

nmurph said:


> would prefer the large mount bc there are more bar options (i find).



:agree2: More options with large mount and seems like better pricing and sales on them out there. 

I wouldn't ignore the saw though if it only comes out in small mount.


----------



## CentaurG2 (Aug 19, 2010)

I would settle for a saw that runs when you pull the starter. God knows my ms361 can’t even handle that. Bring on them swedes!


----------



## sunfish (Aug 19, 2010)

Decomp OK. Bulb?. Small mount, I want a light weight bar on a light weight saw. I'm a buyer


----------



## Tiger Rag (Aug 19, 2010)

sunfish said:


> Yep, I'm a waitin also
> 
> Matt, I'm liking the 357



I'm glad it's getting some exercise! Thought you'd like it.

My 346xp got some exercise a couple weekends ago. Brad did a number on it.......scared me a little.....in a good way. Had only cut cookie's with it prior.....first time in the woods. Wow! :greenchainsaw:


----------



## super3 (Aug 19, 2010)

CentaurG2 said:


> I would settle for a saw that runs when you pull the starter. God knows my ms361 can’t even handle that. Bring on them swedes!





You could always sell it if you can't figure out how to tune it. By the way, "swedes" need that also now and then.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Aug 19, 2010)

CentaurG2 said:


> I would settle for a saw that runs when you pull the starter. God knows my ms361 can’t even handle that. Bring on them swedes!



operator error? :spam::spam:
opcorn:

:monkey:

:


----------



## nmurph (Aug 19, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Yeah, and I'm also thinking a lot of guys will want to be able to interchange bars with their larger saws; 372's and the like.



are there any difference other than the bar stud size???


----------



## Anthony_Va. (Aug 19, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> operator error? :spam::spam:



Mine starts. 

And the funny thing is..it starts everytime. :jawdrop:

I must be one of the lucky ones that got a 361 that'll actually run. :spam:


----------



## Zombiechopper (Aug 20, 2010)

Anthony_Va. said:


> Mine starts.
> 
> And the funny thing is..it starts everytime. :jawdrop:
> 
> I must be one of the lucky ones that got a 361 that'll actually run. :spam:



me too....they must have built two good ones by accident


----------



## little possum (Aug 20, 2010)

nmurph said:


> anymore info on when they will be available?
> 
> put me on the list, i will drive up to pick it up.....


Swing by NC, please  I wont cause much trouble durin the road trip


And Im starting to worry that 2K will be runnin Huskys in the future!


----------



## Anthony_Va. (Aug 20, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> me too....they must have built two good ones by accident



2 good ones!?!

Now that is amazing. I'm calling BS on that one.


----------



## Tiger Rag (Aug 20, 2010)

little possum said:


> Swing by NC, please  I wont cause much trouble durin the road trip
> 
> 
> And Im starting to worry that 2K will be runnin Huskys in the future!



After you get LP, may as well stop by and pick me up on the way! No promises on not being a trouble maker.......


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

I am sure there are good reason that they plan on making them with both bar mount options - maybe the clutch drums will have different spline sizes as well, between the 560xp and the 562xp? :biggrinbounce2:


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

sunfish said:


> .... Small mount, I want a light weight bar on a light weight saw. I'm a buyer



:agree2: And I have unused 16" 3/8" bars with both mount sizes waiting for a suitable saw.....:biggrinbounce2:



spike60 said:


> Yeah, and I'm also thinking a lot of guys will want to be able to interchange bars with their larger saws; 372's and the like.



...or with smaller ones, like 346xp etc.....

How many have 16 or 18" bars for their larger saws????


----------



## mdavlee (Aug 20, 2010)

20" is the smallest bar I've got for large mount huskys. It just hangs on the wall. I usually use 24"-32". I've got the 32" mounted on the 390 since it came in the mail.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Aug 20, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> :agree2: And I have unused 16" 3/8" bars with both mount sizes waiting for a suitable saw.....:biggrinbounce2:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I run 16" the most of any bar size. I have 16" for my MS460, MS361 and 357XP. Best bar size for my wood. I bought a couple 13" large husky mounts as well but I don't have a saw that fits them 

I tried to go PNW style and bought some big dogs and full wrap but it didn't work out for me. I guess I only know how to operate the small bars. Didn't know what to do with a big one 

As it stands right now I would buy a 560 with small mount because I would run it with small bars that could interchange with the 346 I don't own yet


----------



## sunfish (Aug 20, 2010)

My reasoning, is light weight, but same bar will fit my other two XPs' and the new 346xp I have not got yet  

I also have no need for a bar over 20". Really no need for a 20", as 16-18 works great around here.


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

nmurph said:


> are there any difference other than the bar stud size???



The placement of the oiler holes, as the bar tail is smaller on the small mount ones.

That is also the reason that they are lighter, even when they are the same make, model and tip size.


----------



## the westspartan (Aug 20, 2010)

large mount - yes 
decomp - yes
brimer bulb - don't care
3/8 chain - yes

probably run 18" or 20" bar most of the time


----------



## nmurph (Aug 20, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> As it stands right now I would buy a 560 with small mount because I would run it with small bars that could interchange with the 346 I don't own yet



if the weight of the 560 comes in on target, then the power to weight advantage that makes the 346 so attractive is greatly diminished and makes the 346 not so attractive. the actual weight of the 346 is 11.5lbs.


----------



## Zombiechopper (Aug 20, 2010)

nmurph said:


> if the weight of the 560 comes in on target, then the power to weight advantage that makes the 346 so attractive is greatly diminished and makes the 346 not so attractive. the actual weight of the 346 is 11.5lbs.



I agree actually. I'm not really a 50cc saw kind of guy anyways. I need to buck soem tough wood and 60cc power works much better for me. My combo is usually a 200T and a 361 or 357. I may just grab this new 560 when it arrives and port the muther F out of one of teh others for a fun saw.


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

nmurph said:


> .... the actual weight of the 346 is 11.5lbs.




That number don't fit the info I have (not talking about the specs), if it is a standard xp without any add-ons??? opcorn:opcorn:


----------



## J.Walker (Aug 20, 2010)

Spike if you still have that 560 I'd love to race it the weekend after Labor Day.


----------



## spike60 (Aug 20, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> Spike if you still have that 560 I'd love to race it the weekend after Labor Day.




Hmmmm, where's the race? 

We got to get this one broken in first. My friend Carl should get a few tanks through it this weekend.


----------



## sunfish (Aug 20, 2010)

> *nmurph*
> if the weight of the 560 comes in on target, then the power to weight advantage that makes the 346 so attractive is greatly diminished and makes the 346 not so attractive. the actual weight of the 346 is 11.5lbs. .



The price difference would still make the 346xp attractive. 346 is $200 less than a 357 here. I assume the 560 will be as much, probably more than the 357.

There are plenty of folks (myself included) who feel 50cc is ideal for firewood and 60cc a big saw. A 346 /16" and a 560 /18-20" would be an ideal combo for me. Just sayin'.

Then I'll Hot Rod the hell of of the 357:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## J.Walker (Aug 20, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Hmmmm, where's the race?
> 
> We got to get this one broken in first. My friend Carl should get a few tanks through it this weekend.



It's in a little town west of me. Big prize money, two bucks for first and a dollar for second. Good thing I'm not in it for the $$$. There will be some other AS menbers at the race too! They will enjoy seeing 560xp and not having my 365 Special show up again


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Hmmmm, where's the race?
> 
> We got to get this one broken in first. My friend Carl should get a few tanks through it this weekend.



Yes, it is a pity that all the "run-in" on the first one were lost!


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

sunfish said:


> The price difference would still make the 346xp attractive. .....



I couldn't care less about price, when it is about saws that I really want! :biggrinbounce2:


----------



## sunfish (Aug 20, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> I couldn't care less about price, when it is about saws that I really want! :biggrinbounce2:



Yeah, but you are different 

Just saying the 346xp has a great following and always will...


----------



## nmurph (Aug 20, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> That number don't fit the info I have (not talking about the specs), if it is a standard xp without any add-ons??? opcorn:opcorn:



i will have to double check, but i believe that is what i wrote in my notebook bf i ever filled it up. it was wearing a single dog, clutch cover and nuts. then again, i have been wrong bf.
what info do you have ???? it may have been 11lb, 6oz??


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

nmurph said:


> i will have to double check, but i believe that is what i wrote in my notebook bf i ever filled it up. it was wearing a single dog, clutch cover and nuts. then again, i have been wrong bf.
> what info do you have ???? it may have been 11lb, 6oz??



11.2 lbs, vs. 11.0 in the specs!


----------



## Anthony_Va. (Aug 20, 2010)

I personally can't wait to see what it's all about either. I just wonder how much weight they'll add to it and how much power they'll rob from it before it gets to consumer hands?

Hopefully none.  

And if it really does stay just as it is I'll be surprised, and my bank account will be in bad shape also cause I'll have me a 560!


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

Anthony_Va. said:


> I personally can't wait to see what it's all about either. I just wonder how much weight they'll add to it and how much power they'll rob from it before it gets to consumer hands?
> 
> Hopefully none.
> 
> And if it really does stay just as it is I'll be surprised, and my bank account will be in bad shape also cause I'll have me a 560!



I can see that you don't need it, nor do I - but even though I don't have CAD, I just want one!


----------



## Anthony_Va. (Aug 20, 2010)

Now you are tellin fibs ST.

I know you have CAD just as bad as I do. As so we will prolly both have one!


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 20, 2010)

Anthony_Va. said:


> Now you are tellin fibs ST.
> 
> I know you have CAD just as bad as I do. As so we will prolly both have one!



That may be, but I didn't buy a single saw between 2007 and 2010 - isn't that proof of no CAD????


----------



## nmurph (Aug 20, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> 11.2 lbs, vs. 11.0 in the specs!



this was my saw bf i ever fueled it.







i have verified my shop scale against our P-B postal scales at work using a 10lb weight. i think there was 0.2 oz difference at 10lbs bw the scales.


----------



## Anthony_Va. (Aug 21, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> That may be, but I didn't buy a single saw between 2007 and 2010 - isn't that proof of no CAD????



Thats just CAD rehab gone bad.


----------



## rms61moparman (Aug 21, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> That may be, but I didn't buy a single saw between 2007 and 2010 - isn't that proof of no CAD????








No Sir,

That is just proof that you had a lot of things going on in your life that were more important than chainsaws!!!

And we miss her too!


Mike


----------



## SawTroll (Aug 21, 2010)

nmurph said:


> this was my saw bf i ever fueled it.
> 
> i have verified my shop scale against our P-B postal scales at work using a 10lb weight. i think there was 0.2 oz difference at 10lbs bw the scales.



My friend, you *think* - more important, how consistant is that scale, did you test that?


----------



## nmurph (Aug 21, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> My friend, you *think* - more important, how consistant is that scale, did you test that?



yes, i have checked the scales on more than one occasion. and when i weigh a saw, i put it on, remove it, and the weigh it again. i'm pretty sure the weights are repeatable.


----------



## sweetjetskier (Sep 18, 2010)

If this saw holds true to its hype up to now, watch out 

any news updates on release dates?


----------



## MacLaren (Sep 18, 2010)

nmurph said:


> yes, i have checked the scales on more than one occasion. and when i weigh a saw, i put it on, remove it, and the weigh it again. i'm pretty sure the weights are repeatable.



didnt husqvarna also fib on the actual weight of the 357 also.. I mean the specs say 12 or 12.1 but actual weight i think is closer to what 13?:monkey:


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 5, 2010)

hillbilly22 said:


> didnt husqvarna also fib on the actual weight of the 357 also.. I mean the specs say 12 or 12.1 but actual weight i think is closer to what 13?:monkey:




They missed the mark totally on those saws, probably because they had to beef up the case at an early stage, and "forgot" to adjust the specs....umpkin2:


----------



## MacLaren (Nov 5, 2010)

nmurph said:


> this was my saw bf i ever fueled it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can believe it Murph, mine feels very light. I tell ya i really see what all the hoopla was about that little saw now. That little devil will really rip!!


----------



## J.Walker (Nov 5, 2010)

I was hoping that Spike got the first shipment of 560's in.


----------



## bookerdog (Nov 5, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> I was hoping that Spike got the first shipment of 560's in.



Yes waiting for that dang shipment.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 5, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> I was hoping that Spike got the first shipment of 560's in.



I know you will get the first 560xp!

...but the latest news are mentioning only the 562xp and the 555 (a different thread) - no news about the 560xp.....:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## HUSKYMAN (Nov 5, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> I was hoping that Spike got the first shipment of 560's in.



Yup, I have the green light to get a new saw for Christmas, and I am TRYING to hold out for this 560XP. Come on, Spike, make me like a 5 year old at Christmas pal


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 5, 2010)

I suspect this is not up to Spike......:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## J.Walker (Nov 16, 2010)

A spy photo of the 560 with the top cover off.










.


----------



## MacLaren (Nov 16, 2010)

HUSKYMAN said:


> Yup, I have the green light to get a new saw for Christmas, and I am TRYING to hold out for this 560XP. Come on, Spike, make me like a 5 year old at Christmas pal



LOL......Hang in there man, I know what youre goin thru! Ill prolly more than likely be gettin one too. I tell ya, IMHO, you just cant beat the Husqvarna/Jonsered chainsaws!


----------



## spike60 (Nov 16, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> I suspect this is not up to Spike......:biggrinbounce2:



If it was up to me, I'd have a pallet of them already. As soon as I get the product codes, I'll order a couple dozen of them. Some 555's too. 

It would be great if I could get them by Christmas. There should be one under every tree.


----------



## J.Walker (Nov 16, 2010)

After running that 372XT last weekend I'm not sure what new saw I want!

Spike I have alot of trees here.


----------



## oscar4883 (Nov 16, 2010)

Totally impressed with the 560 after running it this weekend. Real streamlined and super fast. The 560 reminded me of the 200t power wise, a real runner for what it looks like. Any idea of the price point for the production model? Thanks again Spike for bringing it along.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 16, 2010)

spike60 said:


> If it was up to me, I'd have a pallet of them already. As soon as I get the product codes, I'll order a couple dozen of them. Some 555's too.
> 
> It would be great if I could get them by Christmas. There should be one under every tree.




I thought you already had a lot of them on order, but I may have read you wrong.

I would have liked to have a 560xp under the (imaginary) tree as well, but according to Husky Norway if won't happen!

If I trust what they say is another story...


----------



## MacLaren (Nov 16, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> After running that 372XT last weekend I'm not sure what new saw I want!
> 
> Spike I have alot of trees here.



....I tell ya, that 372xt just gets better lookin every day......looks like Im gonna have to get another Christmas tree myself....LOL


----------



## spike60 (Nov 16, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> I thought you already had a lot of them on order, but I may have read you wrong.



I told my rep that I wanted two dozen of them, but until there is a product code in the system, technically you can't place an order.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 16, 2010)

hillbilly22 said:


> ....I tell ya, that 372xt just gets better lookin every day......looks like Im gonna have to get another Christmas tree myself....LOL




Looks like you have enough 70cc saws....:greenchainsaw:


----------



## spike60 (Nov 16, 2010)

J.Walker said:


> After running that 372XT last weekend I'm not sure what new saw I want!
> 
> Spike I have alot of trees here.



Yeah, that XT was really hooked up awful good. It actually kind of surprised me a bit. When we ran that at my house with the 8 pin, it just seemed average. But it really woke up going back to the 7, and you could push on the thing and it kept going. 

I'll come up and give you a hand with those trees.


----------



## spike60 (Nov 16, 2010)

oscar4883 said:


> Totally impressed with the 560 after running it this weekend. Real streamlined and super fast. The 560 reminded me of the 200t power wise, a real runner for what it looks like. Any idea of the price point for the production model? Thanks again Spike for bringing it along.




John, I really had a great time Sunday. Thanks again. Except for listening to the agonizing Giants game on the way home..........it was a perfect day.

I'm guessing I'll be selling them somewhere between $600 and $650, but they haven't released any price lists yet.


----------



## MacLaren (Nov 16, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Looks like you have enough 70cc saws....:greenchainsaw:



Yes sir, this is true.........


----------



## blsnelling (Nov 16, 2010)

It's been a while since I had a 60cc saw in the stable. This 562XP is looking mighty tempting.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 16, 2010)

spike60 said:


> John, I really had a great time Sunday. Thanks again. Except for listening to the agonizing Giants game on the way home..........it was a perfect day.
> 
> I'm guessing I'll be selling them somewhere between $600 and $650, but they haven't released any price lists yet.



There were prices in the press release??? 

Actually, it is a pity that the news on these saws are scattered over so many threads.....:censored:


----------



## angelo c (Nov 16, 2010)

Guys, 
if anybody has any doubts about this saw, those of us that ran it do not. 

thanks Spike for bringing it. It is very impressive. And I am a Stihl guy. 

see ya soon. 

A


----------



## fishercat (Nov 17, 2010)

*get it!*



hillbilly22 said:


> ....I tell ya, that 372xt just gets better lookin every day......looks like Im gonna have to get another Christmas tree myself....LOL



Everyone should own a 372xt!


----------



## fishercat (Nov 17, 2010)

*good to hear.*



angelo c said:


> Guys,
> if anybody has any doubts about this saw, those of us that ran it do not.
> 
> thanks Spike for bringing it. It is very impressive. And I am a Stihl guy.
> ...



I'm not a Stihl Guy but that 261 sure seems impressive.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 17, 2010)

fishercat said:


> I'm not a Stihl Guy but that 261 sure seems impressive.



HUH????? The saws that this is about is part of the reason that Stihl looks very *un*-impressive, outdated before it was introduced, really!


----------



## fishercat (Nov 17, 2010)

*dammit ST...........*



SawTroll said:


> HUH????? The saws that this is about is part of the reason that Stihl looks very *un*-impressive, outdated before it was introduced, really!



I was trying to sound supportive!


----------



## bookerdog (Nov 17, 2010)

Ok this saw is something Im really looking forward to. After running a 576 autotune for awhile Im really impressed with the autotune feature. The carb seems to compensate in all aspects. Im shocked at how hard I could lean on the 576 autotune on its first tank.

This saw sounds like it could take some major sales away from a 346. It also is going to steal the 372xt thunder as well. 

I hope we will see a whole new line up with this design. Would love to see a 550xp 562xp 572xp and 580xp. Come on husky counting on you.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 17, 2010)

bookerdog said:


> Ok this saw is something Im really looking forward to. After running a 576 autotune for awhile Im really impressed with the autotune feature. The carb seems to compensate in all aspects. Im shocked at how hard I could lean on the 576 autotune on its first tank.
> 
> This saw sounds like it could take some major sales away from a 346. It also is going to steal the 372xt thunder as well.
> 
> I hope we will see a whole new line up with this design. Would love to see a 550xp 562xp 572xp and 580xp. Come on husky counting on you.



I believe that process has started, I would be surpriced if there are no more models with similar designs than the known 550xp planned? :chainsawguy:


----------



## lupo (Nov 18, 2010)

impressive chain speed und weight:

http://www.mower-power.com/shannons...History=cat&strKeywords=&SearchFor=&PT_ID=137


----------



## brncreeper (Nov 18, 2010)

560 - 3.5 kw @9600 rpm and 5.4 kg
262xp DLG test - 3.6 kw @9500 rpm and 5.8 kg


----------



## parrisw (Nov 18, 2010)

brncreeper said:


> 560 - 3.5 kw @9600 rpm and 5.4 kg
> 262xp DLG test - 3.6 kw @9500 rpm and 5.8 kg



Was just thinking the same thing! Pretty similar.


----------



## dingeryote (Nov 18, 2010)

The new Darling of the Khoolaid crowd is rated at 2.8KW and 5.26KG and the 362 is rated at 3.4Kg and 5.9KG.

LOL!!!
One Husky is fixing to make two Stihl flagships obsolete IF the numbers hold.

It would also make a difficult argument for a 346 instead of waiting for the 550.

A guy would be smart to wait untill after the 560XP has been out for a bit, before considering buying a new 50-60cc saw.
It looks like the rules have been changed.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## peter399 (Nov 18, 2010)

dingeryote said:


> One Husky is fixing to make two Stihl flagships obsolete IF the numbers hold.



And one of them hasn't even reached all US dealers yet and will be around for 
another 20 years like the 026/260 was ? .
The 362 didn't get the recognition of the 361 in the first place and it will not get any easier now.


----------



## nmurph (Nov 18, 2010)

brncreeper said:


> 560 - 3.5 kw @9600 rpm and 5.4 kg
> 262xp DLG test - 3.6 kw @9500 rpm and 5.8 kg



well, if the 560's weight comes in close to the printed numbers, then it is close to two pounds lighter than a 262. i LOVE the 262. i own two, and they make a great substitute for a 70cc saw!!!! if the 560 IS 11lbs, then the next loud thump you hear will be the heads of the 261's engineering staff hitting the basket.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 18, 2010)

nmurph said:


> well, if the 560's weight comes in close to the printed numbers, then it is close to two pounds lighter than a 262. i LOVE the 262. i own two, and they make a great substitute for a 70cc saw!!!! if the 560 IS 11lbs, then the next loud thump you hear will be the heads of the 261's engineering staff hitting the basket.



11.8 vs. 12.8lbs is a one pound difference, not two. 

Then there is the 562xp, that reportedly split the difference........


----------



## nmurph (Nov 18, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> 11.8 vs. 12.8lbs is a one pound difference, not two.
> 
> Then there is the 562xp, that reportedly split the difference........



i guess the adding machine of my wife's was rounding the numbers. my trusty calculator at work agrees with you. thanks for keeping us straight, but the point still stands; nearly identical weight and a hp more......


----------



## sunfish (Nov 18, 2010)

562xp just sounds better and better.

It will not take the place of my 346s' but will compliment them well umpkin2:


----------



## bigredd (Nov 18, 2010)

Can someone explain the difference between the 560xp and 562xp, or was the 560xp just a pre-production prototype of the production model (562xp)?


----------



## sunfish (Nov 18, 2010)

bigredd said:


> Can someone explain the difference between the 560xp and 562xp, or was the 560xp just a pre-production prototype of the production model (562xp)?



560 was supposed to have small bar mount, 562 large. Looks like no 560 right now, just 562xp. Seems like small bar mount on the 562, but we wont know until it comes out. Either way, I want one.


----------



## bigredd (Nov 18, 2010)

sunfish said:


> 560 was supposed to have small bar mount, 562 large. Looks like no 560 right now, just 562xp. Seems like small bar mount on the 562, but we wont know until it comes out. Either way, I want one.



Thanks Don. I had actually purchased a new 346xp ($450) a few weeks ago and decided to return it, and just wait for the new models.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 18, 2010)

bigredd said:


> Thanks Don. I had actually purchased a new 346xp ($450) a few weeks ago and decided to return it, and just wait for the new models.


I bought a new 346xp ($475), 3 days ago, and will keep it. Still one of the best saws ever made 

I do want a 562xp though...


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 18, 2010)

bigredd said:


> Thanks Don. I had actually purchased a new 346xp ($450) a few weeks ago and decided to return it, and just wait for the new models.



Hmmmm, the 560/562xp and 555 will surely not replace the 346xp in my use, but I am sure that Spike is right that it will "steal" some sales from it 
- but probably more from other models....


----------



## angelo c (Nov 18, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Hmmmm, the 560/562xp and 555 will surely not replace the 346xp in my use, but I am sure that Spike is right that it will "steal" some sales from it
> - but probably more from other models....



Troll, 
No scientific info to add here other then having run both side by side and both were supposedly "un-altered" . after having run both at the GTG no one I saw looked at the 346 again to pick it up and run it again. Everyone gathered around the 560 for a second run though. I'm told a ported 346 is a different breed of saw but I have no experience with one. Knowing what $ a decent port job would cost, I would rather purchase the 560 and run it stock( until Brad or Jasha figure out how to up that ante).

there is a new girl in the classroom and she shur is purty....


----------



## sunfish (Nov 18, 2010)

angelo c said:


> Troll,
> No scientific info to add here other then having run both side by side and both were supposedly "un-altered" . after having run both at the GTG no one I saw looked at the 346 again to pick it up and run it again. Everyone gathered around the 560 for a second run though. I'm told a ported 346 is a different breed of saw but I have no experience with one. Knowing what $ a decent port job would cost, I would rather purchase the 560 and run it stock( until Brad or Jasha figure out how to up that ante).
> 
> there is a new girl in the classroom and she shur is purty....


It's just that everyone wanted to try out the *new saw*, as the 346 has been around for 11 years. Still a great saw and I will always have one or two of em


----------



## albert (Nov 18, 2010)

Nope Sunfish, That 560xp was really that much stronger.


----------



## MacLaren (Nov 18, 2010)

albert said:


> Nope Sunfish, That 560xp was really that much stronger.



well then i guess theres a new sheriff in town then.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 18, 2010)

albert said:


> Nope Sunfish, That 560xp was really that much stronger.



Well, it better be that much stronger, it's in a different class


----------



## sunfish (Nov 18, 2010)

And I want one!


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 19, 2010)

sunfish said:


> It's just that everyone wanted to try out the *new saw*, as the 346 has been around for 11 years. Still a great saw and I will always have one or two of em



I am sure that is at least part of it! 



albert said:


> Nope Sunfish, That 560xp was really that much stronger.



With 10cc and one hp more, it *should* damn well *be* much faster - the saws are in different size classes!

Wait for the 550xp, before comparing to the 346xp!


----------



## sunfish (Nov 19, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> I am sure that is at least part of it!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's the way I see it umpkin2:


----------



## angelo c (Nov 19, 2010)

sunfish said:


> That's the way I see it umpkin2:



Not trying to be a PIA but there was pretty much every Husky/Jonnyred made at the GTG. does it make anybody feel better if we said we ran it next to a 357 and if I remember correct Spike even had a ported 359 he brought. We keep bringing up the 346 because power to weight its a great saw, almost close to a 200t if you ask me. Power to weight and "Size" made the 560 so impressive for me.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 19, 2010)

angelo c said:


> Not trying to be a PIA but there was pretty much every Husky/Jonnyred made at the GTG. does it make anybody feel better if we said we ran it next to a 357 and if I remember correct Spike even had a ported 359 he brought. We keep bringing up the 346 because power to weight its a great saw, almost close to a 200t if you ask me. Power to weight and "Size" made the 560 so impressive for me.



Not trying to argue. From all I've heard, I will own a 560/62xp ASAP!

But I'm pretty sure it will not replace my 346s', only time will tell umpkin2:


----------



## J.W Younger (Nov 20, 2010)

Ani't read all 27 pages yet but I will.Nice looking saw,looks like it will set up when you sit it down and for sure the outboard clutch and the fact its a husky and not a dolmar should make it handle just fine, huh ST.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 20, 2010)

J.W Younger said:


> Ani't read all 27 pages yet but I will.Nice looking saw,looks like it will set up when you sit it down and for sure the outboard clutch and the fact its a husky and not a dolmar should make it handle just fine, huh ST.



It sure helps, as Husky puts a lot more thought into such things as handling than the German brands usually do.

I can understand that some don't care though, if they are costumed to long bars and/or much larger than 50-60cc saws. Some will disregard the difference just out of brand bias as well....:chainsawguy:


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 23, 2010)

I had a nice chat with my dealer on the way back from the cottage today. He found out that the 555 will be released for sale here by dec 7th - but no news about the 560xp and/or 562xp yet.....opcorn:opcorn:


----------



## MacLaren (Nov 23, 2010)

Way to go Niko! I bet that was a good conversation. Very cool man! Thats not far away at all for you. Good deal.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 23, 2010)

hillbilly22 said:


> Way to go Niko! I bet that was a good conversation. Very cool man! Thats not far away at all for you. Good deal.



Not so sure about that - as I am not interested in buying the 555.


----------



## bookerdog (Nov 23, 2010)

I seen this post come up again and I thought it was spike saying there here. LOL


----------



## Cedarkerf (Nov 23, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> It sure helps, as Husky puts a lot more thought into such things as handling than the German brands usually do.
> 
> I can understand that some don't care though, if they are costumed to long bars and/or much larger than 50-60cc saws. :


Yup any50 or 60cc saw feels nimble after 6 hours wrastlin an 066. To me Mntngals 260 feels like a light weight smooth as a sewing machine. The 562 looks like it mite be a great back yard saw maybe have to try one.


----------



## Trigger-Time (Nov 23, 2010)

Cedarkerf said:


> Yup any50 or 60cc saw feels nimble after 6 hours wrastlin an 066. To me Mntngals 260 feels like a light weight smooth as a sewing machine. The 562 looks like it mite be a great back yard saw maybe have to try one.




Other day I had a few saws out, had been playing with 880.
Then picked up 066, had to look twice to make sure I
hadn't picked up the wrong saw as 066 felt so light!


TT


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 24, 2010)

I found this picture of the 560xp (not 562xp) on a Swedish site.

It looks like it has the same lower profile of the air filter cover as the 555, not the higher profile of the 562xp???

That makes sense, regarding the differense in the weight specs, and may be because of a different air filter?


----------



## Tiger Rag (Nov 24, 2010)

Hadn't noticed that before Troll, but you can see it clearly here on the Husky website:

http://www.husqvarna.com/us/homeowner/press/a-world-leader-in-chain-saws-just-got-better/


----------



## thumper440 (Nov 24, 2010)

troll, the husky website shows the 555 and 562xp both being 60c saws. is husky really going to put 3 60cc models in the line?


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 24, 2010)

Yes, I compared the pic I posted to the pics in that link.


----------



## craig71 (Nov 24, 2010)

I think the 555 looks very similar in design to the 357xp that I already own. I am sceptical about buying any new saw and usually wait till the second year hoping that the bugs have been ironed out.


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 24, 2010)

thumper440 said:


> troll, the husky website shows the 555 and 562xp both being 60c saws. is husky really going to put 3 60cc models in the line?



It looks like they will. The question at the moment is more if both the 560xp and 562xp will be offered on all markets, or if the different ones are for different markets.....


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 24, 2010)

craig71 said:


> I think the 555 looks very similar in design to the 357xp that I already own. I am sceptical about buying any new saw and usually wait till the second year hoping that the bugs have been ironed out.



The specs are similar, but the design is very different!

Also, you are comparing the old pro saw to the new non-pro version.....


Nothing wrong with waiting a while, but this time it is hard to wait!


----------



## J.Walker (Nov 24, 2010)

craig71 said:


> I think the 555 looks very similar in design to the 357xp that I already own. I am sceptical about buying any new saw and usually wait till the second year hoping that the bugs have been ironed out.



The design of the 560 is very different from other Huskys. This saw makes some good power!












.


----------



## Officer's Match (Nov 24, 2010)

Love to find out first hand, not that I doubt ya'.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 24, 2010)

craig71 said:


> I think the 555 looks very similar in design to the 357xp that I already own. I am sceptical about buying any new saw and usually wait till the second year hoping that the bugs have been ironed out.



I love my 357, but this new saw is a lot different design. 

I want one!


----------



## fishercat (Nov 24, 2010)

*i wouldnt worry too much.*



craig71 said:


> I think the 555 looks very similar in design to the 357xp that I already own. I am sceptical about buying any new saw and usually wait till the second year hoping that the bugs have been ironed out.



I bought the 346 NE the first minute it was available and I have had zero problems with it.

well now that I think of it,I did buy that 441 when it first came out.what a pile that turned out to be.

win some lose some.thats what warranties and spare saws are for.


----------



## fishercat (Nov 24, 2010)

*No actually...............*



sunfish said:


> I love my 357, but this new saw is a lot different design.
> 
> I want one!



you need to quit screwin' around and get a 372xp!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## sunfish (Nov 24, 2010)

fishercat said:


> you need to quit screwin' around and get a 372xp!!!!!!!!!!!!!



That thought has crossed my mind more than once


----------



## fishercat (Nov 24, 2010)

*you're missing out !*



sunfish said:


> That thought has crossed my mind more than once



Bigtime! you have no idea. yes it's a big difference between the 357 and 372.

doesn't seem like it on paper but in the hand it's all the difference in the world and I love the 357.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 24, 2010)

fishercat said:


> Bigtime! you have no idea. yes it's a big difference between the 357 and 372.
> 
> doesn't seem like it on paper but in the hand it's all the difference in the world and I love the 357.



I know, I know, have been fightin it for awhile. I have little use for a 70cc, but I had 4 big trees this Fall, that a larger saw would have been nice.


----------



## Officer's Match (Nov 25, 2010)

sunfish said:


> I know, I know, have been fightin it for awhile. I have little use for a 70cc, but I had 4 big trees this Fall, that a larger saw would have been nice.



Yeah, but sometimes a little too much is just right.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 25, 2010)

Officer's Match said:


> Yeah, but sometimes a little too much is just right.


Yes, but maybe not for all day use though 

A 372 would fit right in here, but I really want to test drive a 560/62xp also umpkin2:


----------



## spike60 (Nov 25, 2010)

sunfish said:


> Yes, but maybe not for all day use though
> 
> A 372 would fit right in here, but I really want to test drive a 560/62xp also umpkin2:




So many saws.......too little wood.


----------



## sunfish (Nov 25, 2010)

spike60 said:


> So many saws.......too little wood.



Ain't that right, Bro!

Say, how does your 560 compare to a 372?


----------



## SawTroll (Nov 25, 2010)

sunfish said:


> Ain't that right, Bro!
> 
> Say, how does your 560 compare to a 372?



Simple, it doesn't!


----------



## sunfish (Nov 25, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Simple, it doesn't!



Yeah, I figured that, and wasn't clear in my question.. Just wondering if the 
power is close to the 372. Felt power, not specs  umpkin2:


----------



## taplinhill (Dec 1, 2010)

I was at the Husqvarna dealer yesterday and the Husky Rep was there, so I asked about the 555/560/562. He told me two interesting things. One, they are only going to import two models, the 555 and the 560XP or 562XP, but that choice hasn't been made. I put in my vote for the large mount 562XP. Second, and this is the bad news, they won't be available until April 2011. So, now I have heard Sept 2010, Oct 2010, First of the year 2011, and now April 2011. We ought to get a pool going.


----------



## spike60 (Dec 1, 2010)

I haven't heard anything different on the date yet, but I haven't heard anything at all recently. I'll try to get an update soon. 372's are backordered for two months, so who knows what's up with the 555/562. (No one has said a word about the 365XT either)

Interesting that you would prefer the large mount version. It's really only here in the Northeast that anyone feels it might be necessary. If there is any weight penalty associated with the large mount, then I'm strongly against it. The ability to swap bars with a 372 is not worth a half pound of weight in an otherwise perfectly balanced saw. I told my contacts that even if I could order both, I'd only stock the small mount. It was fine on the 257/262 and 357/359 saws, so it will be fine on this saw as well. 

However, the way I understand it, if the large mount does appear, it will be as a third model because most of the market prefers the small mount.


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 1, 2010)

Spike, I also would prefere the 560xp, provided the stated weight difference vs. the 562xp is there, but it isn't a big deal. 

The last picture I found of the 560 is in post #402, and it show the lower air filter cover of the 555 and the "gray" 560 - not the higher one of the 562xp.


----------



## mdavlee (Dec 1, 2010)

I was hoping these might be out soon. I'm kinda wanting a 60cc saw for my small saw.


----------



## sunfish (Dec 1, 2010)

I also want the small mount on this saw.


----------



## funky sawman (Dec 1, 2010)

I would perfer a 562 large mount so I can run 28" oregon light weight bars for slashing, that would be a light combo and wont have to bend over as far like I do with my 20" 346xp.


----------



## HUSKYMAN (Dec 1, 2010)

Big mount bar here, I have a 16, 2 20's, 24, 28 that all fit the big mount and nothing for a small mount 3/8 setup. Thats a lot of money for bars and chains on top of the cost of the saw


----------



## Tiger Rag (Dec 1, 2010)

Anyone know if you can port a saw with an Autotune carb? I know this saw isn't quite on the market yet but like on the 576XP? I'm thinking I read it had been attempted but not great results?


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 1, 2010)

Mye only concern with the small mount is that the slimmer bar tails may not be ideal with 3/8x8, and that they may come with a small 7-spline drum.

I have never tried 3/8x8 with a small mount bar before.


----------



## sunfish (Dec 1, 2010)

Tiger Rag said:


> Anyone know if you can port a saw with an Autotune carb? I know this saw isn't quite on the market yet but like on the 576XP? I'm thinking I read it had been attempted but not great results?



Hey Matt, sounds like this saw wont need any porting...


----------



## blsnelling (Dec 1, 2010)

sunfish said:


> Hey Matt, sounds like this saw wont need any porting...



Bah humbug Stock anything needs modified. It's a rare saw that doesn't respond well to porting. I'm curious about the AT too. Doesn't seem like there a consistent answer to that question on a ported saw.


----------



## sunfish (Dec 1, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Bah humbug Stock anything needs modified. It's a rare saw that doesn't respond well to porting. I'm curious about the AT too. Doesn't seem like there a consistent answer to that question on a ported saw.



Figured that statement would get a response :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## blsnelling (Dec 1, 2010)

sunfish said:


> Figured that statement would get a response :hmm3grin2orange:



Wasn't hard to get one was it, lol. Some fish are easy to catch


----------



## Tiger Rag (Dec 1, 2010)

sunfish said:


> Hey Matt, sounds like this saw wont need any porting...



Need and Want are two very diffrent things Don.....lol!


----------



## Tiger Rag (Dec 1, 2010)

blsnelling said:


> Bah humbug Stock anything needs modified. It's a rare saw that doesn't respond well to porting. I'm curious about the AT too. Doesn't seem like there a consistent answer to that question on a ported saw.



Brad, have you ported any of the autotune carbed Husky's? Will the carb respond to the porting? Good results or disappointing?


----------



## taplinhill (Dec 2, 2010)

spike60 said:


> I haven't heard anything different on the date yet, but I haven't heard anything at all recently. I'll try to get an update soon. 372's are backordered for two months, so who knows what's up with the 555/562. (No one has said a word about the 365XT either)
> 
> Interesting that you would prefer the large mount version. It's really only here in the Northeast that anyone feels it might be necessary. If there is any weight penalty associated with the large mount, then I'm strongly against it. The ability to swap bars with a 372 is not worth a half pound of weight in an otherwise perfectly balanced saw. I told my contacts that even if I could order both, I'd only stock the small mount. It was fine on the 257/262 and 357/359 saws, so it will be fine on this saw as well.
> 
> However, the way I understand it, if the large mount does appear, it will be as a third model because most of the market prefers the small mount.



This rep said he just received the email over the weekend, so it sounded like hot gossip to me. As for the 372XT, I think that it was much more popular than they thought it was going to be. 99% of the buyers (my local Husky dealer included), don't even know it's changed.

Why do I want the large mount? Well, I have a good supply of bars. But I'm getting ahead of myself, because it's not red and black........yet


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 2, 2010)

*Q*



taplinhill said:


> .....
> Why do I want the large mount? Well, I have a good supply of bars. But I'm getting ahead of myself, because it's not red and black........yet



That may take a few years, if the story of the 346xp and 357xp is repeated! :biggrinbounce2:


----------



## taplinhill (Dec 2, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> That may take a few years, if the story of the 346xp and 357xp is repeated! :biggrinbounce2:



That's true, but I can be patient because the last thing I _*need*_ is another saw!


----------



## Tiger Rag (Dec 4, 2010)

Noticed Amick's is showing the 562XP on their site and has a price, just no "add to cart" button......:bang: :biggrinbounce2:

http://www.amickssuperstore.com/Husqvarna_562XP_Chainsaw_p/husqvarna 562xp.htm

I'd also hope you could do a little better than that pricewise on a 60cc saw. I realize it is new though.


----------



## funky sawman (Dec 4, 2010)

I wonder if they will make a full wrap version??? what a great thinning saw that will be with a full wrap!!!


----------



## dingeryote (Dec 5, 2010)

Tiger Rag said:


> Noticed Amick's is showing the 562XP on their site and has a price, just no "add to cart" button......:bang: :biggrinbounce2:
> 
> http://www.amickssuperstore.com/Husqvarna_562XP_Chainsaw_p/husqvarna 562xp.htm
> 
> I'd also hope you could do a little better than that pricewise on a 60cc saw. I realize it is new though.




OOWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!$749.00!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Crap!
Blueberries don't pay that good!!! 

If they expect to get that kinda scratch, there's gonna be lots of dust on 'em in these parts, even if it is the best thing since the Wonder Bra!

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## funky sawman (Dec 5, 2010)

dingeryote said:


> OOWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!$749.00!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Crap!
> Blueberries don't pay that good!!!
> ...



I'll take 2 of them for 749 each, ohh yea, I get saws for cost cause Im a dealer:biggrinbounce2::biggrinbounce2:


----------



## Zombiechopper (Dec 5, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Mye only concern with the small mount is that the slimmer bar tails may not be ideal with 3/8x8, and that they may come with a small 7-spline drum.
> 
> I have never tried 3/8x8 with a small mount bar before.



9 pin .325 works ok on small tail and its a wee bit larger than 8 pin 3/8. I'm talking in terms of not throwing chains, not sure if there are other considerations.


----------



## funky sawman (Dec 5, 2010)

I wonder if it will have the torque to run a 8 pin 3/8 sprocket??


----------



## dingeryote (Dec 5, 2010)

funky sawman said:


> I'll take 2 of them for 749 each, ohh yea, I get saws for cost cause Im a dealer:biggrinbounce2::biggrinbounce2:



Kool, then you can snag me one at cost right.:hmm3grin2orange:

Seriously, who told Corporate Husky that the price point should be about the same as the 372xp is now?

They need some edumacatin' to say the least.
Most folks will see the MSRP and go running to the other guys before asking a dealer if they will come down outta the stratosphere.

My Dealer will cut me a huss simply because he gets 6-10K worth of bidness outta me annually and I don't worry about it.

Other guys, are just as likely to go buy one of those nasty Creamsicles things if they can save a dime.

$749.00 is nuts for a 60cc saw. 
There, I said it.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## funky sawman (Dec 5, 2010)

dingeryote said:


> Kool, then you can snag me one at cost right.:hmm3grin2orange:
> 
> Seriously, who told Corporate Husky that the price point should be about the same as the 372xp is now?
> 
> ...



That price isn't bad, I have 357xp's on the rac for 709.99 MSRP with a 24"bar if you want a 357xpW wrap it will cost ya 809.95!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## dingeryote (Dec 5, 2010)

funky sawman said:


> That price isn't bad, I have 357xp's on the rac for 709.99 MSRP with a 24"bar if you want a 357xpW wrap it will cost ya 809.95!!!!!!!!!!!



Ya just made my point.

The 357XP is a good saw, but for a couple bucks more, folks can make the jump to a 372, or for less, go snag a 359.

It's at an awkward price point that makes no sense to the consumer.
Hell, the MS362 at $699.00 might be heavier and slower, but will eat it's lunch on sales with that sort of marketing on price point.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## Tzed250 (Dec 5, 2010)

.


Husqvarna states the MSRP on the 562XP is $699.00-$749.00


.


----------



## spike60 (Dec 5, 2010)

dingeryote said:


> Ya just made my point.
> 
> The 357XP is a good saw, but for a couple bucks more, folks can make the jump to a 372, or for less, go snag a 359.
> 
> ...



It wasn't just that the 357 was too close to the 372 in price, it was also too close in weight. People woud pick them up and say that the saws didn't feel all that different. That's going to change now, as they really got the weight right on this one. 

Haven't seen a dealer price list yet, but I'm thinking that I'll be selling them in the $625-$650 range.


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 5, 2010)

Zombiechopper said:


> 9 pin .325 works ok on small tail and its a wee bit larger than 8 pin 3/8. I'm talking in terms of not throwing chains, not sure if there are other considerations.



That sounds promising, thanks! 

Throwing chains was my concern.



funky sawman said:


> I wonder if it will have the torque to run a 8 pin 3/8 sprocket??



I am thinking 15-16" bars - my MS361 does it easily, so I expect the 560xp/562xp to do as well!

Anyway, there is only one way to find out!

Which options that can easily be tried depends on what the availiable cluth drums will take, and there is no info on that so far.......


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Dec 5, 2010)

funky sawman said:


> That price isn't bad



Compared to what, a Lamborghini? And I thought the 261 was high @ $550. Hope that 560 runs like a Lambo, otherwise it's price is going to kill sales.


----------



## 2000ssm6 (Dec 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Haven't seen a dealer price list yet, but I'm thinking that I'll be selling them in the $625-$650 range.



That sounds much more accurate.


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 5, 2010)

Tzed250 said:


> .
> 
> 
> Husqvarna states the MSRP on the 562XP is $699.00-$749.00
> ...



The high number probably is an *xpg* (heated version) with a comparatively long bar.


----------



## Tzed250 (Dec 5, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> The high number probably is an *xpg* (heated version) with a comparatively long bar.



That is what I was thinking...


.


----------



## dingeryote (Dec 5, 2010)

spike60 said:


> It wasn't just that the 357 was too close to the 372 in price, it was also too close in weight. People woud pick them up and say that the saws didn't feel all that different. That's going to change now, as they really got the weight right on this one.
> 
> Haven't seen a dealer price list yet, but I'm thinking that I'll be selling them in the $625-$650 range.




And that's why we love our Spike!!!:hmm3grin2orange:



Gonna have to holler at ya again. Looks like I am trading into a GB bar.
You're still on deck for the next order though.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## thinkxingu (Dec 6, 2010)

Hey All,
Am I missing something? People are looking to the 562XP as the new cancer cure, but it specs out close to the 361 and 362:

361: 4.4 hp, 12.3 lbs.
362: 4.6 hp, 13 lbs.
562: 4.7 hp, 12.3lbs.

Quicker revving engine? Ergonomics? Also, how accurate are these numbers in reality?

S


----------



## spike60 (Dec 9, 2010)

Well boys, it's a sad, sad day here. Yesterday, I got "the call", and I have to send my 560XP back to Husky. It's going back to Sweden for tear down and inspection. This was part of the plan all along, even though I hoped they'd forget that I had the thing. But still, , like losing a best friend. But, I've been able to play with that saw since last June, and it's been fun and interesting to be a part of a field test like this. 

Thanks to all of you guys who had a chance to run it and give your feedback and for posting all of the good reviews. If I was raving about this thing all by myself, you'd have thought I was nuts. 

Maybe I'll keep it for one more weekend and send it back Monday.


----------



## peter399 (Dec 9, 2010)

I suffer with you Spike ! A man shouldn't have to go through this pain ...


----------



## taplinhill (Dec 9, 2010)

Maybe the production model will be so good it'll make you forget the proto.


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 9, 2010)

thinkxingu said:


> Hey All,
> Am I missing something? People are looking to the 562XP as the new cancer cure, but it specs out close to the 361 and 362:
> 
> 361: 4.4 hp, 12.3 lbs.
> ...



The 560xp is said to be 4.7 hp, 11.9 lbs , and the MS361 was 4.6 hp outside the US - regrettably the 361 is history.....

We know that the specs on the 361 was true, but we don't really know on any of the others - but there are no indication that they are far off.

Power specs are just a snapshot of one point of the power-band, and just give you a rough idea about the real performance.

Better trigger responce and better handling is what I expect from the new Huskys!


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 9, 2010)

spike60 said:


> Well boys, it's a sad, sad day here. Yesterday, I got "the call", and I have to send my 560XP back to Husky. It's going back to Sweden for tear down and inspection. This was part of the plan all along, even though I hoped they'd forget that I had the thing. But still, , like losing a best friend. But, I've been able to play with that saw since last June, and it's been fun and interesting to be a part of a field test like this.
> 
> Thanks to all of you guys who had a chance to run it and give your feedback and for posting all of the good reviews. If I was raving about this thing all by myself, you'd have thought I was nuts.
> 
> Maybe I'll keep it for one more weekend and send it back Monday.



Sad story, but I guess that is just is how it is....:taped:


You need to "loose" some part of that saw, like the gray top cover - and find it after you returned the saw...


----------



## bookerdog (Dec 9, 2010)

Can that saw go from you and make a side trip to the Pacific NW before it goes to sweden.


----------



## spike60 (Dec 10, 2010)

"Honey....I'm leaving you"

One last look before she goes back to Sweden.


----------



## Wildman1024 (Dec 10, 2010)

Put a 372 in the box...maybe they wont notice


----------



## BloodOnTheIce (Dec 10, 2010)

spike60 said:


> "Honey....I'm leaving you"
> 
> One last look before she goes back to Sweden.




Sorry to see the little hunchback go. :biggrinbounce2:


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 10, 2010)

Read the "invisible" text in my last post above.....


----------



## SWE#Kipp (Dec 10, 2010)

SawTroll said:


> Read the "invisible" text in my last post above.....



That is a good idea


----------



## SawTroll (Dec 17, 2010)

Just a 560xp link that I forgot to post earlier.


----------



## joecool85 (Dec 17, 2010)

Didn't read the whole thread, but when are these going into production and starting to be sold? I didn't see it listed on the husqvarna site. I could use a ~5hp saw that isn't wicked heavy and/or expensive.


----------

