# The official 261 to 262XP conversion thread



## spike60 (Mar 31, 2008)

Well, for a lot less than $710........

Someone asked me about what is needed for this upgrade, so I figured I'd post it for everyone. First, here are the parts that would be involved, with part numbers and Husky list prices. 

Piston and Cylinder: 503907971 $292
Piston only: 503531171 $84
Muffler: 503555504 $83
Clutch: 503577101 $47
Washer: 503521202 $2
262XP decal: 503619803 $5

261 and 262 use the exact same cylinder; with the only difference being that the 262 uses a flat top piston and the 261 uses a dished piston. So if you have a running 261, only the piston would be necessary here. 

The muffler is a big item here. The 261 muffler was VERY restricted. They tried to correct this somewhat for the second year with the addition of the extra exhaust port on the front plate, but it was still not as good as the 262 muffler. The quick fix here is to mod the muffler by opening up those small holes under the side exhaust deflector.

The 262XP clutch is a 3 shoe design with much more contact area to the drum than the 2 shoe clutch on the 261. The washer is needed to prevent the 3 shoe clutch from rubbing on the drum. (The 261 clutch has an offset and doesn't require the washer.)

If you are wondering about the carb, the only real difference is that the 261 had limiter caps. And if you tried to order a 262 carb, it will supercede up to the one with the limiters anyway. 

For the most part, you could also do this upgrade to a 257. In one way you would be ahead of the game in that the 257 used the same muffler as the 262XP. You would have the different air filter and the one piece top cover, but this wouldn't affect performance at all. And there should be a lot more 257's out there than 261's. 

So, even if you had a toasted 261 or 257, it would be better to spend half of what the guy on fleece-bay did and build your own.


----------



## HUSKYMAN (Mar 31, 2008)

Thanks Spike, I have seen a lot of guys wanting to do this conversion. 

I have not ran a 261 but from what I understand the gains are substantial


----------



## epicklein22 (Mar 31, 2008)

Dang, my buddy has a 261 and that thing just rips. I am gonna have to find a 262xp some day, but I sure will not be using ebay.
opcorn:


----------



## barney34 (Mar 31, 2008)

*262 261*

spike what if i wanted to turn my 262 into a 261 ????


----------



## taplinhill (Apr 1, 2008)

If you start with a 257, you will also need the intake block, as the impulse holes on the 261/262XP are in a different location than the 257.


----------



## nikocker (Apr 1, 2008)

*Awesome Conversion.*

I did my 261 last September - just 262 piston and cylinder. Wow, what a difference! I retuned the carb but haven't done anything with clutch and muffler.

Al


----------



## PES+ (Apr 1, 2008)

I need to look.....but I think I will do a 359/2159 to 262 conversion.......more updated


----------



## spike60 (Apr 1, 2008)

barney34 said:


> spike what if i wanted to turn my 262 into a 261 ????



Well, in your case I would strongly reccomend that you pour some muratic acid down the spark plug hole so you can dish out the piston. While the acid is working, set it out behind the garage until some mud wasps build a nest in the muffler, then you'll be all set! 

How were you home working on your 3rd post in 4 months last night? Didn't you go to the game?


----------



## PES+ (Apr 1, 2008)

Hmmmmmmmm yankee engine-oo-itee


----------



## spike60 (Apr 1, 2008)

taplinhill said:


> If you start with a 257, you will also need the intake block, as the impulse holes on the 261/262XP are in a different location than the 257.



Yeah, I forgot about that. The 262/262 block is 503544161 and the 257 is 503832502. The gaskets are probably different also, but I didn't check.


----------



## SawTroll (Apr 1, 2008)

HUSKYMAN said:


> Thanks Spike, I have seen a lot of guys wanting to do this conversion.
> 
> I have not ran a 261 but from what I understand the gains are substantial



*Yes, very cool write-up by Spike!!!!!*    


The gains should be at least .8hp according to specs - so pretty substantiel, yes.


----------



## SawTroll (Apr 1, 2008)

PES+ said:


> I need to look.....but I think I will do a 359/2159 to 262 conversion.......more updated




That would be cool - just what Husky failed to make when the 262xp was discontinued.........


----------



## PES+ (Apr 1, 2008)

But I'm going to have to use one of the weak cased bases for testing........


----------



## PES+ (Apr 1, 2008)

I haven't tried one of the Baileys 262 after markets.......how are they?


----------



## barney34 (Apr 1, 2008)

*361*

spike you could do that or you could get a 361 and have a real saw


----------



## Farley9n (Apr 1, 2008)

I got an after market 262 piston from Bailey's for my xp. It was flat topped and from Italy. It looked real good. I just smoothed out the transfer openings at the pin boss. Saw runs good but not broken in as yet.........Bob


----------



## spike60 (Apr 1, 2008)

barney34 said:


> spike you could do that or you could get a 361 and have a real saw



Your right Barney; a 361 would be about equal to a 262XP with acid in the cylinder and a bees nest in the muffler.


----------



## Freakingstang (Apr 1, 2008)

Farley9n said:


> I got an after market 262 piston from Bailey's for my xp. It was flat topped and from Italy. It looked real good. I just smoothed out the transfer openings at the pin boss. Saw runs good but not broken in as yet.........Bob



was it a full circle piston or did it look like a conventional stihl piston?


----------



## brncreeper (Apr 1, 2008)

262 or 361, both good take your pick. I know people cringe when the name Red Max is mentioned, but a professionally ported NEW G621AVS could also be done for $700, maybe more if a limited coil needs to be changed.


----------



## SawTroll (Apr 1, 2008)

spike60 said:


> Your right Barney; a 361 would be about equal to a 262XP with acid in the cylinder and a bees nest in the muffler.



Today, the MS361 is the closest you get to the 262xp - with some plus and some minus........


----------



## HUSKYMAN (Apr 1, 2008)

spike60 said:


> Your right Barney; a 361 would be about equal to a 262XP with acid in the cylinder and a bees nest in the muffler.





> Well, in your case I would strongly reccomend that you pour some muratic acid down the spark plug hole so you can dish out the piston. While the acid is working, set it out behind the garage until some mud wasps build a nest in the muffler, then you'll be all set!



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  :hmm3grin2orange: :biggrinbounce2:


----------



## spike60 (Apr 1, 2008)

barney34 said:


> spike you could do that or you could get a 361 and have a real saw



And I'm keepin' the 2186!


----------



## barney34 (Apr 1, 2008)

*spike*



spike60 said:


> And I'm keepin' the 2186!



spike didnt your mom teach you to share just mention the word stihl and you get all flusterd


----------



## woodheater (May 19, 2008)

PES+ said:


> I need to look.....but I think I will do a 359/2159 to 262 conversion.......more updated



Is this possible? Will the 262xp cylinder bolt right on the 359? Any advantage or disadvantage to going this route? This sounds like a better option to me. I can get a 359 real easy.
Mark


----------



## taplinhill (May 19, 2008)

woodheater said:


> Is this possible? Will the 262xp cylinder bolt right on the 359?



No, but I hear that ported 359/2159 work really good.


----------



## Freakingstang (May 20, 2008)

taplinhill said:


> No, but I hear that ported 359/2159 work really good.



The 358's run even better.


----------



## eyolf (May 20, 2008)

There were enough similarities in the 254/257/357 and the 261/262 to make me wonder why?

If the 261/2 were better performers, why did they sell so many more of the little brothers? One dealer told me that the 261 had a bad rep for early demise...true, or was he stocked up in 257"s?


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 20, 2008)

eyolf said:


> There were enough similarities in the 254/257/357 and the 261/262 to make me wonder why?
> 
> If the 261/2 were better performers, why did they sell so many more of the little brothers? One dealer told me that the 261 had a bad rep for early demise...true, or was he stocked up in 257"s?



Because the 262's cost almost as much as the 272. I think the 261 was cheaper than the 254XP also


----------



## SawTroll (May 21, 2008)

eyolf said:


> There were enough similarities in the 254/257/357 and the 261/262 to make me wonder why?
> 
> If the 261/2 were better performers, why did they sell so many more of the little brothers? One dealer told me that the 261 had a bad rep for early demise...true, or was he stocked up in 257"s?



The 357 is a much newer design, and doesn't really belong on that list.....


----------



## woodheater (May 21, 2008)

SawTroll said:


> The 357 is a much newer design, and doesn't really belong on that list.....



On paper the 357xp looks like a real performer. The 357 has a better power to weight ratio than a Stihl 361 due to the fact that it is .2# lighter and has the same HP(4.4). I have not run one but it appears to be the next best thing to a 262xp. Would be interesting to run one against a 361.


----------



## SawTroll (May 21, 2008)

woodheater said:


> On paper the 357xp looks like a real performer. The 357 has a better power to weight ratio than a Stihl 361 due to the fact that it is .2# lighter and has the same HP(4.4). I have not run one but it appears to be the next best thing to a 262xp. Would be interesting to run one against a 361.



_Actually_, the 357xp powerhead is more than halv a pound _heavier_ than the 361, and is rated at .1kW _less_ than the 361 in the US, .2kW less elsewhere.

Forget the different types of *hp* - they tend to confuse people......


----------



## woodheater (May 21, 2008)

SawTroll said:


> _Actually_, the 357xp powerhead is more than halv a pound _heavier_, and the 361 is rated at .1kW (forget the different types of hp) _less_ in the US, .2kW less elsewhere......



Are you saying that the specs are not reliable? Husky lists the 357 as 12.1# and 4.4hp here. Stihl lists the 361 as 12.3# and 4.4hp here. I trust what you are saying about the weight but is Husqvarna fudging their weight ratings or is Stihl being conservative on their rating? Either way the 357 should be a good runner huh? You ever ran one?


----------



## SawTroll (May 21, 2008)

woodheater said:


> Are you saying that the specs are not reliable? Husky lists the 357 as 12.1# and 4.4hp here. Stihl lists the 361 as 12.3# and 4.4hp here. I trust what you are saying about the weight but is Husqvarna fudging their weight ratings or is Stihl being conservative on their rating? Either way the 357 should be a good runner huh? You ever ran one?




Specs are generally not reliable, specially weight ones - and the 357xp etc is the worst case I have seen since the Dolmar 115 (Dolmar eventually corrected it), along with the 2156 and 2159 "cousins".

This is not brand spesific, and happens with "all" brands - Stihls pro saw specs _used to _be more reliable than some others', but they messed it up a couple of years ago. The 361 specs is right on though.

Max power specs generally are quite reliable, according to independant dyno testing, regarding the *kW* output - what mess up the picture is that different kinds of hp are in use, hp vs bhp (as in your example) - SAE vs DIN - maybe more....

....and some times the maths simply doesn't add up .....


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 21, 2008)

woodheater said:


> Are you saying that the specs are not reliable? Husky lists the 357 as 12.1# and 4.4hp here. Stihl lists the 361 as 12.3# and 4.4hp here. I trust what you are saying about the weight but is Husqvarna fudging their weight ratings or is Stihl being conservative on their rating? Either way the 357 should be a good runner huh? You ever ran one?




Troll likes to spew numbers sometimes that I have no idea where they came from. Spike60 weighed both the 361 and 357 on a scale full of fuel and with the same size bar and both saws weighed the exact same. 

Anyways the 357 is a lot different than the 262XP. The 262 has the torque of a 70cc saw and the weight of a 60cc saw. The 357 is not nearly as torquey, and has a little more speed. Its a good saw, but different. The closest current saw to the 262 is probably the 362XP or Dolmar 6400, but they are both much heavier, and still maybe a touch shy in power.


----------



## blsnelling (May 21, 2008)

I give up on this one. A year ago at the GTG in Southern Ohio we weighed and posted pictures of a 361 and a 357 both outfitted with the same length bar and tanks full ready to cut. They weight the exact same amount. How hard can this be folks?


----------



## spike60 (May 22, 2008)

HUSKYMAN said:


> Spike60 weighed both the 361 and 357 on a scale full of fuel and with the same size bar and both saws weighed the exact same.



Hey, that wasn't me, as the above post clears up.


----------



## SawTroll (May 22, 2008)

spike60 said:


> Hey, that wasn't me, as the above post clears up.




I believe it was cut4fun that posted about it several times - the length of the bars was the same, but they were _not the same_ - and the scale looked a tad suspicious. Bar weights can differ quite a bit, even when they are equally long.

....and I trust the results by Dave Neiger and KWF/DLG more, and they both concluded that the 357xp powerhead is about 2/3 of a pound heavier than the 361 powerhead.


----------



## PB (May 22, 2008)

Did the saws go to the bathroom before they were weighed? A full bladder and bowels can add significant amounts of weight.


----------



## blsnelling (May 22, 2008)

SawTroll said:


> I believe it was cut4fun that posted about it several times - the length of the bars was the same, but they were _not the same_ - and the scale looked a tad suspicious. Bar weights can differ quite a bit, even when they are equally long.
> 
> ....and I trust the results by Dave Neiger and KWF/DLG more, and they both concluded that the 357xp powerhead is about 2/3 of a pound heavier than the 361 powerhead.



I took those pictures myself. What's so suspicious about the pics? Are you suggesting a 1/2 lb weight difference between bars due to brand? The saws weigh the exact same when full of fuel and oil when outfitted with the same length bar. Period, end of story.


----------



## tree_beard (May 22, 2008)

:spam: 

ahh....

but did they have gas from the same pump in them? were both clean of oil and chips (inside and out)? did either of them have crud between the bar rails? exactly how many sharpenings had each chain had? were the rakers of equal height? did either saw have chipped paint?

it all adds up...


----------



## taplinhill (May 22, 2008)

tree_beard said:


> :spam:
> 
> ahh....
> 
> ...



That is exactly why half a pound doesn't matter in the real world.
Those two saws are close enough in weight that it doesn't matter.
Probably in power too.
But the war goes on....................................


----------



## blsnelling (May 22, 2008)

I personally don't care what the saws weigh. But it just blows my mind how someone can look facts straight in the face and choose to believe something else!


----------



## blsnelling (May 22, 2008)

What's so fishy and hard to believe about this?


----------



## SawTroll (May 22, 2008)

blsnelling said:


> .... Are you suggesting a 1/2 lb weight difference between bars due to brand? ....




Happens all the time, and not only due to brand.....


----------



## SawTroll (May 22, 2008)

blsnelling said:


> What's so fishy and hard to believe about this?
> 
> .....



Looks like a bathroom weight......


----------



## SawTroll (May 22, 2008)

taplinhill said:


> That is exactly why half a pound doesn't matter in the real world.
> Those two saws are close enough in weight that it doesn't matter.
> Probably in power too.
> But the war goes on....................................



That is right - but it annoys me when people weights two used saws that probably have same gunk in them, with different bars, and _maybe_ not the same amount of fluids, on a bathroom weight - and conclude that it is the end of story about the empty powerhead weight........:censored:


----------



## woodheater (May 22, 2008)

blsnelling said:


> I give up on this one. A year ago at the GTG in Southern Ohio we weighed and posted pictures of a 361 and a 357 both outfitted with the same length bar and tanks full ready to cut. They weight the exact same amount. How hard can this be folks?



So how does the stock 357 stack up against a stock 361 in timed cuts? I'm about to buy a 60cc saw soon and although I've been Husky guy I'm leaning towards the 361. It seems that nobody is all that impressed with the 357 and getting ahold of an unmolested used 262 for less than the price of a new saw is getting tougher. I hate to say it but Husky really dropped the ball on the 60cc saw when they ditched the 262.


----------



## blsnelling (May 22, 2008)

SawTroll said:


> That is right - but it annoys me when people weights two used saws that probably have same gunk in them, with different bars, and _maybe_ not the same amount of fluids, on a bathroom weight - and conclude that it is the end of story about the empty powerhead weight........:censored:



So who cuts with an emtyp power head with no bar? These saws were setup ready to go cut wood, the only way a saw can be used. 

I'm really not trying to make an enemy here.


----------



## MO-Iron (May 22, 2008)

*261 muffler mod*

I love my old 261 and the thought of more power is very appealing. Can one of you coach me on how to best modify the muffler for best performance.
Thanks in advance!


----------



## SawTroll (May 22, 2008)

blsnelling said:


> So who cuts with an emtyp power head with no bar? These saws were setup ready to go cut wood, the only way a saw can be used.
> 
> I'm really not trying to make an enemy here.




You are not, but the only fair weight comparisons is clean and empty powerheads, without cutting attachments, as anything else bring a lot of varieties into the picture.....


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 22, 2008)

spike60 said:


> Hey, that wasn't me, as the above post clears up.



Sorry Spike, my memory is not what is used to be.


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 22, 2008)

SawTroll said:


> You are not, but the only fair weight comparisons is clean and empty powerheads, without cutting attachments, as anything else bring a lot of varieties into the picture.....



Sorry Troll but Mr Snelling is right on this one. What does it matter if the Stihl power head weighs less, but the Stihl bar weighs more so the whole thing evens out? When the saws are in the woods is what matters, not what the spower heads weigh on paper towels on the floor of a perfectly clean shop floor.

Brad knows what he is doing, and if he says both saws were full of fuel and oil then they were. Also both saws look pretty clean, not "full of gunk".

Sorry buddy, I know you REALLY want the 361 to weigh a half pound less, but gravity does not cease to exist around the 361, contrary to its reputation


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 22, 2008)

MO-Iron said:


> I love my old 261 and the thought of more power is very appealing. Can one of you coach me on how to best modify the muffler for best performance.
> Thanks in advance!



Start at the beginning of this thread and read


----------



## blsnelling (May 22, 2008)

HUSKYMAN said:


> Sorry buddy, I know you REALLY want the 361 to weigh a half pound less, but gravity does not cease to exist around the 361, contrary to its reputation



Sure about that? You ARE talking about the 361!


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 22, 2008)

woodheater said:


> So how does the stock 357 stack up against a stock 361 in timed cuts? I'm about to buy a 60cc saw soon and although I've been Husky guy I'm leaning towards the 361. It seems that nobody is all that impressed with the 357 and getting ahold of an unmolested used 262 for less than the price of a new saw is getting tougher. I hate to say it but Husky really dropped the ball on the 60cc saw when they ditched the 262.



I have never seen ONE complaint from a 357 owner about power or performance. Its a great saw.


----------



## woodheater (May 23, 2008)

HUSKYMAN said:


> I have never seen ONE complaint from a 357 owner about power or performance. Its a great saw.



I searched around and couldn't find much info on the 357 at all. With specs so close to the almighty 361 you would think somebody would be raving about one? I am not opposed to buying a 361 if its a better saw but I already own all huskies and its nice to standardize the fleet if possible. Has anyone ever ran a 357 stock for stock against a 361? It seems the weight is so close that it wouldnt matter much. Its all about performance now......


----------



## SawTroll (May 23, 2008)

woodheater said:


> I searched around and couldn't find much info on the 357 at all. With specs so close to the almighty 361 you would think somebody would be raving about one? I am not opposed to buying a 361 if its a better saw but I already own all huskies and its nice to standardize the fleet if possible. Has anyone ever ran a 357 stock for stock against a 361? It seems the weight is so close that it wouldnt matter much. Its all about performance now......



When the competition was the MS360 and not the 361 - there were lots of "rave" rewiews on the 357xp here. 
Search, and go back to 2003 or 2004.......


----------



## HUSKYMAN (May 23, 2008)

woodheater said:


> I searched around and couldn't find much info on the 357 at all. With specs so close to the almighty 361 you would think somebody would be raving about one? I am not opposed to buying a 361 if its a better saw but I already own all huskies and its nice to standardize the fleet if possible. Has anyone ever ran a 357 stock for stock against a 361? It seems the weight is so close that it wouldnt matter much. Its all about performance now......



There is at least five years worth of threads on the 357XP, I suggest you try different search parameters. Sometimes the 361 can be had a little cheaper than the 357XP, especially since Husky no longer sells online. I would handle them both and get whichever you think feels better in your hands, you wont be disappointed with either saw. The reason the 361 is a good runner is because its designed like a Husky. Performance wise they are about the same


----------



## SawTroll (May 23, 2008)

HUSKYMAN said:


> There is at least five years worth of threads on the 357XP, I suggest you try different search parameters. Sometimes the 361 can be had a little cheaper than the 357XP, especially since Husky no longer sells online. I would handle them both and get whichever you think feels better in your hands, you wont be disappointed with either saw. The reason the 361 is a good runner is because its designed like a Husky. Performance wise they are about the same




Exactly!

The 361 engine has more in common with the Husky xp ones, than with the traditional 2-channel Stihl engines.


----------



## spike60 (May 23, 2008)

SawTroll said:


> Exactly!
> 
> The 361 engine has more in common with the Husky xp ones, than with the traditional 2-channel Stihl engines.



Oh my God, what's happening here?


----------



## hornett224 (Jul 1, 2008)

*i can't see how you can argue with bsnelling.*

he is 100% right.what is the point on an empty powerhead?

the 357 and the 361 are so close it isn't funny.the only deciding factors on which one to purchase are..................

dealer location and the Husky has better fuel and bar oil caps.


----------



## StephieDoll (Mar 7, 2009)

*Thanks Spike*

Just want to say thank you for the posting. My friends 261got fried last year. I just got done rebuilding using Bailey's piston and cylinder. Drilled out the muffler as well but did not do the clutch for now. He was grinning from ear to ear when he laid it into some walnut today.
Thanks again.

Steph


----------



## XrynoX (Dec 14, 2010)

i know this is an old thread, but will the 261 really be the same as a 262. or is it still just a 261 trying to be a 262?

thanks


----------



## Trigger-Time (Dec 14, 2010)

XrynoX said:


> i know this is an old thread, but will the 261 really be the same as a 262. or is it still just a 261 trying to be a 262?
> 
> thanks



Am sure if Spike says so, it will be!



TT


----------



## XrynoX (Dec 14, 2010)

right on, thats what i wanted to hear
thanks


----------



## Jack_Shaft (May 15, 2011)

PES+ said:


> I need to look.....but I think I will do a 359/2159 to 262 conversion.......more updated


 
Did you ever pursue this? 261/262 builders are getting harder and harder to find, but 359's are common and have the more updated Husky chassis, two-point mounted brake handle, etc. 

I am very curious as I am trying to build a 262XP now and I'm having fits finding parts.


----------



## SawTroll (May 15, 2011)

XrynoX said:


> i know this is an old thread, but will the 261 really be the same as a 262. or is it still just a 261 trying to be a 262?
> 
> thanks


 


Trigger-Time said:


> Am sure if Spike says so, it will be!
> 
> 
> 
> TT



It will be, if you change what Spike said - basically change the piston, muffler and clutch (+ some decales)! :msp_smile:

The number plate will still reveal what it originally was though, if the model number and/or the product number is on it.


----------



## ncfarmboy (May 15, 2011)

Let me know what 261/262 parts you are looking for I may have it. I'm not a dealer but I have more Husky saw parts than my closest dealer. I also have other 200 series saw parts. 

Shep


----------



## Jack_Shaft (May 15, 2011)

Jack_Shaft said:


> Did you ever pursue this? 261/262 builders are getting harder and harder to find, but 359's are common and have the more updated Husky chassis, two-point mounted brake handle, etc.
> 
> I am very curious as I am trying to build a 262XP now and I'm having fits finding parts.


 
To answer my own question the answer is no, not a chance - the 262XP top end will not bolt up to the 359 bottom end.


----------



## barnyard (Sep 16, 2011)

New guy here, but have a blown 261 I was gonna rebuild and someone pointed me here.......definately gonna do this conversion, THANKS!


----------



## cus_deluxe (Sep 4, 2014)

First post on this site, and yes i know its an ancient thread just wanna do a little testing testing 1,2,3


----------



## Perfect Harvest (Apr 15, 2017)

spike60 said:


> Yeah, I forgot about that. The 262/262 block is 503544161 and the 257 is 503832502. The gaskets are probably different also, but I didn't check.



Hi, I know this is an old thread, but does this part # tell you that this is a 261/262xp intake? Part #503544101 I'm doing the conversion from a 257. Thanks!


----------



## cus_deluxe (Apr 16, 2017)

Haha wow, my first post on this site is the last post before yours. Yes, that is the right part #.


----------



## Perfect Harvest (Apr 16, 2017)

Haha! Took over 2.5 years but someone finally replied to your testing 1,2,3. Thanks for not taking nearly as long to get back to me! Thank you, I already have an oe cylinder, I'll order the manifold while I have access to a good used one and when then time comes all I'll need is a Metor piston.


----------



## Perfect Harvest (Apr 16, 2017)

Just realized the 2 posts prior to mine went unnoticed. This thread has been dead for a month shy of 6 years lol.


----------



## cus_deluxe (Apr 16, 2017)

Yep no problem. Great saws and a very worthwhile upgrade


----------

