New MS 400 today. She’s HOT!

[Parkerpusher]

My 400 has about 10 gallons through it now.
It was hot right outta the box.... every time I cut with it I end up with a big grin on my face! it's just plain flat hot even in stock form, and it's so light I quit using my 50cc saws cause there doesn't seem to be any point when a 67cc saw is only slightly heaver and has way more power!
I'm running a 20 inch bar, not having any oiling issues at all, I don't see it having any trouble with a 24" or 28" bar.

I have a lot of small cleanup and trimming work this week. Normally would use my 550xp for that, but I’m going to stop in the morning and get a 20” bar for the 400 and use it this week for everything just to try it out. It does feel really light, i might not be reaching for a 50cc anymore who knows.

 

[user 122190]

I have a lot of small cleanup and trimming work this week. Normally would use my 550xp for that, but I’m going to stop in the morning and get a 20” bar for the 400 and use it this week for everything just to try it out. It does feel really light, i might not be reaching for a 50cc anymore who knows.

My ms261 runs a 20" 3/8 B&C real well. The 400 is going to be a beast with the 20. Consider a skip tooth chain for bigger grins.

 

[SAWMIKAZE]

Played around with it a little this morning. There’s really nothing about how it cuts, balances feels or looks that suggests 28” is too much. If it were a husky it would be a recommended max length I’m sure. Oiler fix it is

I think it has the balls for 28" but it's gonna beat the hell out of the A/V with long bars.

I think when they designed it they should've given it a stiffer/tougher A/V system. It's the same as a 362 in that aspect. They should've given the oil pump more capacity too. But these guys have it covered as far as upgrading the pump.

 

[bwalker]

I think it has the balls for 28" but it's gonna beat the hell out of the A/V with long bars.

I think when they designed it they should've given it a stiffer/tougher A/V system. It's the same as a 362 in that aspect. They should've given the oil pump more capacity too. But these guys have it covered as far as upgrading the pump.

A 28" light bar would weigh about the same as a 20" and wouldn't tax the AV mounts as much. However, the operator is responsible for taxing the AV system the most.
The saw I believe is better off with a 20" in hardwood and a 24" in softwood.

 

[Parkerpusher]

I think it has the balls for 28" but it's gonna beat the hell out of the A/V with long bars.

I think when they designed it they should've given it a stiffer/tougher A/V system. It's the same as a 362 in that aspect. They should've given the oil pump more capacity too. But these guys have it covered as far as upgrading the pump.

Hadn’t thought of that

 

[Ranger-692]

The 400 is the fastest revving saw I’ve ever owned. Just sounds awesome. From the last firewood mission:
View attachment IMG_1531.MOV

 

[Parkerpusher]

The 400 is the fastest revving saw I’ve ever owned. Just sounds awesome. From the last firewood mission:
View attachment 967021

throttle response is instant!
What length bar do you run?

 

[Ranger-692]

throttle response is instant!
What length bar do you run?

24”(Stihl calls it a 25”), all my cutting is either Doug Fir or lodgepole

 

[SAWMIKAZE]

The 400 is the fastest revving saw I’ve ever owned. Just sounds awesome. From the last firewood mission:
View attachment 967021

It's like that on a 462 and 500i as well.

 

[SAWMIKAZE]

8" light bar would weigh about the same as a 20" and wouldn't tax the AV mounts as much. However, the operator is responsible for taxing the AV system the most.
The saw I believe is better off with a 20" in hardwood and a 24" in softwood.

Go run it with a 28" for a few months and see how it feels after.

It's a shame they built a saw with the power for a 25-28" bar but can't oil it.

I view it as a 20" bar firewood saw.

I know it's a "to each their own" thing but a 462 feels about the same in the hands if you aren't a ***** with a built in weight detector and can oil and carry a 25"-28" bar commercially no problem.

 

[bwalker]

Go run it with a 28" for a few months and see how it feels after.

It's a shame they built a saw with the power for a 25-28" bar but can't oil it.

I view it as a 20" bar firewood saw.

I know it's a "to each their own" thing but a 462 feels about the same in the hands if you aren't a ***** with a built in weight detector and can oil and carry a 25"-28" bar commercially no problem.

The oiling issue is easy to fix with HO oiler guts. I've done this on mine before I ever ran it.
As for the differance between the 400c and the 426. There is a size and weight differance. I compared them side by side before I bought the 400c. The 400C also feels more flickable than the the 361 it replaced even though its slightly heavier going buy the specs.
I have no desire to run a 28 on that size saw.

 

[SAWMIKAZE]

The oiling issue is easy to fix with HO oiler guts. I've done this on mine before I ever ran it.
As for the differance between the 400c and the 426. There is a size and weight differance. I compared them side by side before I bought the 400c. The 400C also feels more flickable than the the 361 it replaced even though its slightly heavier going buy the specs.
I have no desire to run a 28 on that size saw.

You shouldn't have to "fix" the oiler on a saw that has the balls to pull a longer bar. They should've just put a 461 oil pump in it considering it's basically the same pump and bolts right in. I've put just the HO bolt in 2 of them already, they definitely need it.

I don't feel the difference between them..but that's a personal thing.

 

[bwalker]

You shouldn't have to "fix" the oiler on a saw that has the balls to pull a longer bar. They should've just put a 461 oil pump in it considering it's basically the same pump and bolts right in. I've put just the HO bolt in 2 of them already, they definitely need it.

I don't feel the difference between them..but that's a personal thing.

I don't disagree, but sadly most Stihl saws are like that these days.

 

[Parkerpusher]

Tomorrow I will explain what I’m trying to accomplish with this saw and maybe you will understand my goal, or have advice a different direction.

 

[Parkerpusher]

Following up…
My cutting is 3 different things usually, the first two being similar as far as saws needed: Reidential removals and low impact logging for timber to saw for customers. For these jobs usually use the 550xp and 390xp.
The third type, and the cutting I’m hoping the 400 will work for, is different. I cut for a one man excavation company clearing steep mountain lots for new home construction. I get paid either for time or in timber, if there’s timber there I want. At first I used the same 550/390 setup to fell, buck and limb at a pace that didn’t require the grading contractor to get out of his excavator and run a saw. Everything has to be high stumped. To keep pace, and since the terrain doesn’t allow for a second saw to be kept close by, I hardly ever used the 550 just processed everything as he moved logs and grabbed and piled brush with the 390. By the afternoon, felling a tree on a slope up at shoulder or neck height with the 390 is rough.
I tried for a while with a 372 as a one saw deal but it wasn’t what I was looking for, and sold it once I bought a 562xp. The 562 is what I currently use as my one saw for days of cutting like this, and it works great I love it.
I got the 400 really just to try out a Stihl… besides my 201t I’ve never owned a pro model. Some of the white pines and poplars are plenty big and a 28” bar is the sweet spot.
So far the 400 feels good, although it seems to make its power up high and doesn’t have the low down grunt my 562 has, but I just need to get used to it. Not trying to replace my 562, we’ve bonded pretty well. Just wanted to try a new flavor.

 

[Parkerpusher]

Back to back with the 562 after new bars and chains on both, I still love the 562. More grunt down low and harder to stall out, usable powerband seems much wider. 400 was not any quicker by feel and harder to keep in the sweet spot.

 

[link]

Back to back with the 562 after new bars and chains on both, I still love the 562. More grunt down low and harder to stall out, usable powerband seems much wider. 400 was not any quicker by feel and harder to keep in the sweet spot.

So if I get you right, the 400 is snappy and fast with a 20" bar and plenty of power in that realm, but the Husq 562 manages a 24" better?

 

[bwalker]

Take this for what its worth. Given similar displacements a Husky saw will almost always outcut a Stihl and have more grunt doing it. Guys will swear up and down a Stihl has more torque. They don't.
The problem is certain areas of the country have almost zero Husky support beyond box stores. In my town in MT the only place to buy a pro model husky is from Shiptons farm store and they have zero service and most importantly stock zero parts.

 

[link]

Take this for what its worth. Given similar displacements a Husky saw will almost always outcut a Stihl and have more grunt doing it. Guys will swear up and down a Stihl has more torque. They don't.
The problem is certain areas of the country have almost zero Husky support beyond box stores. In my town in MT the only place to buy a pro model husky is from Shiptons farm store and they have zero service and most importantly stock zero parts.

But then again perhaps the Stihl does have an advantage on snappyness and fast cutting at high rpm - it does make sense doesnt it ?
You dont get both snappiness and fast cutting at high rpm - and tourque with a wide operating range at the same time. Physics...

 

[bwalker]

But then again perhaps the Stihl does have an advantage on snappyness and fast cutting at high rpm - it does make sense doesnt it ?
You dont get both snappiness and fast cutting at high rpm - and tourque with a wide operating range at the same time. Physics...

No, not really. Stihl in many cases has found a way to both have less torque and be less snappy as you put it.
With the older Stihl saws like the 260,360,440,460,660 one look at the antiquated port arrangement and it's pretty clear why. Husky was a generation ahead with the 346,357,372 and 390.
I haven't much expierance with the newer Stihl saws that where introduced after the 361 came out. Stihl tried with the 361 to build a saw like a Husky. It has the typical Husky 4 transfer port layout. However the botched it by putting the most choked up muffler ever on it. As a result they were turds in stock trim. The 261 and 362 where likewise turds compared to the 550 and 562.
As for the 400c. The one I have feels pretty dang good, but I haven't got enough time on it to form an opinion yet. It's just been too damn cold to cut much.