New MS 400 today. She’s HOT!

[link]

It has the typical Husky 4 transfer port layout

Thats not typical Husq, that is world wide known 2-stroke development. It goes way beond chainsaws.
So does the benefits of stroke versus diameter, torque and wide range versus high end narrow bandwidth improved power.
So you can have an alround saw that have great torque and a wide bandwith, or a specialized saw that is improved in power - but at a specific rpm.
That is the cost.

 

[bwalker]

Thats not typical Husq, that is world wide known 2-stroke development. It goes way beond chainsaws.
So does the benefits of stroke versus diameter, torque and wide range versus high end narrow bandwidth improved power.
So you can have an alround saw that have great torque and a wide bandwith, or a specialized saw that is improved in power - but at a specific rpm.
That is the cost.

Circa 1970's.
I remember adds in the late 80's for Aaen 10 port snowmobile cylinders. 3 exhaust ports, 6 transfers and a huge intake port.
Liger cr500 cylinders I believe have 6 transfers 3 exhaust and 2 aux transfers/boost ports and a cavernous intake.
I don't know what the bore vs stroke ratio of Husky vs. Stihl saws are. But I do see that Stihl held onto transfers fed through the piston for way to long.

 

[link]

Circa 1970's.
I remember adds in the late 80's for Aaen 10 port snowmobile cylinders. 3 exhaust ports, 6 transfers and a huge intake port.
Liger cr500 cylinders I believe have 6 transfers 3 exhaust and 2 aux transfers/boost ports and a cavernous intake.
I don't know what the bore vs stroke ratio of Husky vs. Stihl saws are. But I do see that Stihl held onto transfers fed through the piston for way to long.

Yeah, but the 460 is yeat to overcome by power to weight if you consider a big bore cylinder.
That said, the stroke has a direct impact on the tourque / wide range operating range - versus acceleration and top end power.
Long stroke = allround saw, short stroke = snappy and hi end power.
I'm not a proffessor at Harward, but that is physics in a nutshell.

 

[bwalker]

Yeah, but the 460 is yeat to overcome by power to weight if you consider a big bore cylinder.

There is more to it than advertised HP. Back when I was logging I would take a 372 over a 460 any day of the week. The 372 felt lighter even though the specs suggested the 460 was slightly lighter. The 372 also was better balanced and vibrated much less. Plus superior filtration. To me the power was a wash. And what about the 75cc version of the 372? Also the Dolmar 7900 beat both in power to weight.

 

[link]

Well the guys around here use the 661 for milling, they have it on a Logosol aluminum rail so they dont need to hold it up with their left hand like I do.
They keep it running at full tit, it makes nice cuts. But if you where forcing it through the log - it might be better with a Husq, it would not make the fine cuts though.
I would be happy with either one, because I know just how to use it. - The saw I use the most is a 26cc Echo top handle. The land owner gets all the fun work.
The miles of top branches of the trees and to carry it to the pit - thats the real hard work. A 24 inch bar is just a momentary funny experience.

 

[Parkerpusher]

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?

Both saws wore 24”. I think both cut at the same speed, but it’s easier to keep the husky in the sweet spot due to what feels like more torque over a much wider range of rpm. Power band on the Stihl felt narrow, as soon as you left it, ir wasn’t hard to bog it down. But saws cut great today. I wasn’t disappointed in the 400 at all, I didn’t really have any expectations. Just super happy with my 562 still.

 

[Parkerpusher]

There is more to it than advertised HP. Back when I was logging I would take a 372 over a 460 any day of the week. The 372 felt lighter even though the specs suggested the 460 was slightly lighter. The 372 also was better balanced and vibrated much less. Plus superior filtration. To me the power was a wash. And what about the 75cc version of the 372? Also the Dolmar 7900 beat both in power to weight.

Back to back the 562 feels every bit as powerful, and lighter. The books say that’s backwards, but I don’t care. 562 didn’t give up one inch today. Other than a bark box on the Stihl and a muffler mod on the 562 both saws stock and will stay that way.
The husky is broke in, I’m sure the 400 has more to give when it wakes up too but I don’t think it will change the overall feel for where the power is and isn’t.

 

[link]

At 24" I would think a 70cc would have adequate power, at 28" thats stretching it.
I liked my Dolmar 7910 at 20", thats 79cc. I could bury that bar in wood and have an instant respond at the throttle.
A 60+ cc the saw is at 20" max 24" in my book, thats plenty power. Why would you want a saw running at its limit or beond ?
You want plenty power, at 60 to 70 cc a 20" will give you exactly that. 70+cc will grant you access to the 24" - 28" realm.
A 70cc saw at 28" is a poor mans saw, it will not have a persuasive power buried in wood.
That is my opinion, but you have the opportunity in this free world to dissagree.

 

[Parkerpusher]

At 24" I would think a 70cc would have adequate power, at 28" thats stretching it.
I liked my Dolmar 7910 at 20", thats 79cc. I could bury that bar in wood and have an instant respond at the throttle.
A 60+ cc the saw is at 20" max 24" in my book, thats plenty power. Why would you want a saw running at its limit or beond ?
You want plenty power, at 60 to 70 cc a 20" will give you exactly that. 70+cc will grant you access to the 24" - 28" realm.
A 70cc saw at 28" is a poor mans saw, it will not have a persuasive power buried in wood.
That is my opinion, but you have the opportunity in this free world to dissagree.

It’s really just the user and how a saw is used and for what.

when I had a 372 it wore a 28” and it was happy. I have a 20” on a 50cc and wouldn’t put that short a bar on anything bigger unless it was just for fun.

 

[bwalker]

At 24" I would think a 70cc would have adequate power, at 28" thats stretching it.
I liked my Dolmar 7910 at 20", thats 79cc. I could bury that bar in wood and have an instant respond at the throttle.
A 60+ cc the saw is at 20" max 24" in my book, thats plenty power. Why would you want a saw running at its limit or beond ?
You want plenty power, at 60 to 70 cc a 20" will give you exactly that. 70+cc will grant you access to the 24" - 28" realm.
A 70cc saw at 28" is a poor mans saw, it will not have a persuasive power buried in wood.
That is my opinion, but you have the opportunity in this free world to dissagree.

I agree. Especially in hardwood.

 

[user 122190]

It’s really just the user and how a saw is used and for what.

when I had a 372 it wore a 28” and it was happy. I have a 20” on a 50cc and wouldn’t put that short a bar on anything bigger unless it was just for fun.

I agree. No. 1 is can the saw oil the bar? No. 2 know your saws limits. Which means if the longer bar gets bogged up on big wood, back off slightly. You don't need to put leverage on a smaller saw. Let the sharp chain do its thing, in its time. If time is short, go get the bigger saw and have at it.

 

[bwalker]

Both saws wore 24”. I think both cut at the same speed, but it’s easier to keep the husky in the sweet spot due to what feels like more torque over a much wider range of rpm. Power band on the Stihl felt narrow, as soon as you left it, ir wasn’t hard to bog it down. But saws cut great today. I wasn’t disappointed in the 400 at all, I didn’t really have any expectations. Just super happy with my 562 still.

Try taking the bark box off and modding the stock outlet.
Tree Monkey claims from outlet exhausts kill torque and I tend to believe what he says.

 

[link]

It’s really just the user and how a saw is used and for what.

when I had a 372 it wore a 28” and it was happy. I have a 20” on a 50cc and wouldn’t put that short a bar on anything bigger unless it was just for fun.

I would love an Ms400, if I needed a bigger saw I would prefer the light weight and easy handling.
I would use a 20" because I dont need anything more, thats a 40" cutting capability.

 

[Parkerpusher]

24”, to me, felt perfect on the 400. I’m only going to put the 28” back on it when a can get the saw to oil better, and if I know the day will be mostly poplars and pines.
As much as I like the 562 I ran the 400 most of the day just to keep getting used to it, I really do like it. I like the oddball displacement too for some reason.

 

[Parkerpusher]

Pictures, because why the hell not

 

[Parkerpusher]

I would love an Ms400, if I needed a bigger saw I would prefer the light weight and easy handling.
I would use a 20" because I dont need anything more. Thats a 40" cutting capability.

I agree with running what’s needed and no more.
A lot of the cutting I hope to do with the 400 is high stump and on a decent slope ranging from 20” to 40” diameter wood. It’s not always practical or very safe to cut from both sides because of the grade and the height of the cut, I prefer in my case to run longer bars and just not rush.

 

[link]

Its convenient to run long bars when felling, but the real guys make do with what they have at hand - that is what shows skills.

 

[Parkerpusher]

Its convenient to run long bars when felling, but the real guys make do with what they have at hand - that is what shows skills.

Amen to that

 

[link]

Not to say you are not one of the real guys, just to have that said for the record. I'm right here with my Echo 26cc top handle
Cheers

 

[Parkerpusher]

Not to say you are not one of the real guys, just to have that said for the record. I'm right here with my Echo 26cc top handle
Cheers

One day I might get there! Until then just fakin it till I make it and having a good time in the woods!