Husqvarna 435, strato charged?

[Cliff R]

Well, guess I didn't do enough reading. I checked the 435 over the other day and noticed that it has a two bbl carburetor. I also read a few blurbs here and there that it may be using a strato-charged engine?

That certainly appears to be the case, based on a little research I did this morning between emails.

Husqvarna doesn't reference the strato-charged deal on thier website, or in any other published literature I could find. It appears that they bought or aquired the technology, at least that's what this statement indicates:

"Husqvarna completed its acquisition of the outdoor power products operation within Komatsu ... Units are powered by Komatsu Zenoah's Strato-Charged engines, etc"

Anyhow, I find it interesting that Husqvarna would start using the technology and not advertise it?

I'm also wondering if the Husqvarna 435/435-e/440-e share the same/similiar engine as the Redmax GZ-4000?

So far I am really liking this saw, it runs a LOT better than the 9000rpm/ 2.2 hp rating Husqvarna labels it with on their website. No idea at this point as to how well the new engine is going to hold up in long term service, but this little saw has quickly replaced the CS-370 and CS-400 in my line-up!.....Cliff

 

[nikocker]

+1

So far I am really liking this saw, it runs a LOT better than the 9000rpm/ 2.2 hp rating Husqvarna labels it with on their website. .....Cliff

I totally agree Cliff - - it's a great little saw!

Al

 

[Cliff R]

I'm impressed enough so far to do some timed cut testing against my Shindaiwa 488, and the Husqvarna 51 and 55. It smoked the Echo CS-370 and CS-400 the other day!......Cliff

 

[nikocker]

That's Cool!

Cliff - Here's a post I made two days ago after using the my 435 for thinning over the weekend. Of the 35 trees we thinned my son did about 20 with the 346 and I did about 15 with the 435. Both HE and the 346 are faster than me!! ha ha ha
http://www.arboristsite.com/showpost.php?p=1527598&postcount=19

Al

 

[Cliff R]

Similiar assessment here, PLENTY of power and speed for the weight, long term service....who knows at this point?....But I'm sure going to find out!......Cliff

 

[spike60]

Cliff;

Husky doesn't just use the the "strato-charged" term. They call all of their strato saws "X-TORQ".

The 435 is a nice little saw, and I just ordered a few more. BTW, there is a June 1st price increase on a few of the smaller saws and the 435 will be going up $20. (Only 3 other models are going up, 235, 445, and 455)

 

[Taxmantoo]

I'm also wondering if the Husqvarna 435/435-e/440-e share the same/similiar engine as the Redmax GZ-4000?

The GZ400/4000 and my Ryobi 10532 are rated at 2.45hp. The label on my Ryobi says 40cc (no fraction given), certified for 2006 California emissions under engine family -6HCPS.
Mine was mfg 5-3-06, so it's three years old already. No wonder the new ones are gone and refurbs are getting scarce.
The sticker on the 435 says 40.x cubic centimeters, right?

 

[Sawdustmaker]

They call it X-Torq technology...

 

[Cliff R]

The sticker on the 435 says 40.x cubic centimeters, right?

Correct, just under 41cc nearly as I can remember.

They give the 435 and 440-e different power ratings. It's the same engine but someone posted that the part number for the piston is different.

I'm impressed enough with mine that it has quickly found a place beside my Husqvarna 55 as my 2nd favorite saw. I'm hoping it holds up to the type of cutting I do here? If so, I'll be grabbing another one and will sell the CS-370 and CS-400 Echo's.

Our local dealer told me the other day they have sold around 25 model 435's, and so far no engine troubles with any of them. He also told me that he "fattens" them up on the "H" speed screw just a bit before sending them out, doing some test cuts in logs he has out back of the shop. We talked about this for a few minutes, he's a pretty smart tech, and has very few problems with the saws he sells......Cliff

 

[spike60]

I took a look on the dealer site, and both the 435 and 440e have the same part numbers for P&C and piston assemblys. They also use the same carb, so how they get different power ratings is anybodys guess. Would have made more sense to me if they had used 440 and 440e model numbers like they have on the 450/450e and 455/455e. It's not 35cc, so why call it a 435?

 

[weimedog]

My 440e is a really nice little saw...looks to me as if the only difference seems to me price and power rating.

 

[Taxmantoo]

Is the power rating on the 440e lower?
Does it have a more restrictive muffler?

 

[Cliff R]

No, the 440-e is rated at 2.4hp, the 435 at 2.2.

Still conflicting reports as to how it has more power. I do remember someone saying that the only difference they could find by looking at the part numbers of the respective components was that the 440-e uses a different piston in the same basic engine.

Anyhow, if it's got more power, I've got to try one out, as the 435 is very impressive for 41cc and not modified in any way.......Cliff

 

[nikocker]

Yeah that's our information buddy Saw Troll.

No, the 440-e is rated at 2.4hp, the 435 at 2.2.

Still conflicting reports as to how it has more power. I do remember someone saying that the only difference they could find by looking at the part numbers of the respective components was that the 440-e uses a different piston in the same basic engine.

Cliff

He commented that he found that difference in the IPL for the 435/440.
He mentioned it here:
http://www.arboristsite.com/showpost.php?p=1493039&postcount=35

Al

 

[Gizzard]

I took a look on the dealer site, and both the 435 and 440e have the same part numbers for P&C and piston assemblys. They also use the same carb, so how they get different power ratings is anybodys guess. Would have made more sense to me if they had used 440 and 440e model numbers like they have on the 450/450e and 455/455e. It's not 35cc, so why call it a 435?

Also, as Nikocker mentioned earlier in post from Troll the 2008 IPL for 435, 435e, and 440e lists cyl for all as 504735101, the piston for 435 & 435e as 502625001 and the piston for 440e as 502625002.

Now the 2009 IPL is up on site and cyl for 435, 435e, and 440 is same 504735101, but piston is now listed as same for 435, 435e, and 440e as 502625002.

Early this year when this was being tossed around the 2009 IPL was not available.

 

[Cliff R]

So now we really don't know for sure exactly why the 440-e has a higher rating?

It seems to me that Husqvarna is a bit evasive with these saws as far as advertising and supplying potential customers with accurate information about them.

First, the box clearly states 37cc. Right on the saw it says that it's 41cc. The website lists all three at 41cc, but the 440-e having .2 more HP.

I hate guessing about things, but there may have been a 37cc version to be dubbed the 435 in the works at some point, then maybe they decided for simplicity/cost savings to just use the exact same engine in all 3 saws?

It appears that the 435 is nothing more than a version of the 435-e/440-e that doesn't have the quick tool-less chain tightening feature, and whatever other feature(s) would be found on saws with the "e" after the number.

They also rate the engine at 9000rpm's, but it revs easily to at least 13,000rpms, and from what I can tell doesn't have rev limiter. Ya, I know that the 9000rpm rating is not the "no load" speed/rpm, but I can tell you for certain this saw LOVES high rpm's, and is not comfortable when you lug it down real hard.

I'm also curious at this point if Husqvarna's association with Redmax has them using any of their engines, or visa-versa. It wouldn't surprise me a bit, if we find out at some point that the GZ-4000 has the same engine as the 435/440-e Husqvarna. One would just think that simply taking the strato-charged technology and then designing/building another 41cc saw/engine would not be nearly as cost effective as simply using an engine that is already being produced?......Cliff

 

[Evan]

i dont know anything about them but you guys are makn me want one for a small pack around camping saw. and theyre fairly inexspensive

 

[spike60]

So now we really don't know for sure exactly why the 440-e has a higher rating?

It seems to me that Husqvarna is a bit evasive with these saws as far as advertising and supplying potential customers with accurate information about them.

First, the box clearly states 37cc. Right on the saw it says that it's 41cc. The website lists all three at 41cc, but the 440-e having .2 more HP.

I hate guessing about things, but there may have been a 37cc version to be dubbed the 435 in the works at some point, then maybe they decided for simplicity/cost savings to just use the exact same engine in all 3 saws?

It appears that the 435 is nothing more than a version of the 435-e/440-e that doesn't have the quick tool-less chain tightening feature, and whatever other feature(s) would be found on saws with the "e" after the number.

They also rate the engine at 9000rpm's, but it revs easily to at least 13,000rpms, and from what I can tell doesn't have rev limiter. Ya, I know that the 9000rpm rating is not the "no load" speed/rpm, but I can tell you for certain this saw LOVES high rpm's, and is not comfortable when you lug it down real hard.

I'm also curious at this point if Husqvarna's association with Redmax has them using any of their engines, or visa-versa. It wouldn't surprise me a bit, if we find out at some point that the GZ-4000 has the same engine as the 435/440-e Husqvarna. One would just think that simply taking the strato-charged technology and then designing/building another 41cc saw/engine would not be nearly as cost effective as simply using an engine that is already being produced?......Cliff

I think confused/disorganized more than evasive. Last year when these saws came out, there was a lot of dealer material with conflicting information. Retailer manual, fall saw program, hangtags, dealer web site, and also the boxes as you mentioned. None of these things were in agreement at first. I think you might be right about the original idea was that there would be two displacements.

These saws are not Red Max engines. The only Husky products so far that have Red Max engines are the back pack blowers.

 

[Cliff R]

Good info, thanks. At least Husqvarna took the technology and is running with it. The mystery is still how the engines are different to get .2 more HP out of the 440 vs the 435's? At the user level it really doesn't matter, the 435 has PLENTY of power for the size/weight of the saw.

I'm not easily impressed these days with new stuff, having for the most part avoided anything new until recent years. Now that I'm retired once and on my second career being self employed, I have more time to feed my chainsaw addiction......Cliff

 

[Evan]

could the power difrence be in the muffler?