Nik's Poulan Thread

[3000 FPS]

THOSE 4 cc's are HUGE!!!
The 4400 will spank the 4000 AND the 245 resoundingly!

A couple of years ago Brad Snelling ported a 245 and it ran really well. When put to the test against my stock 4200, the 4200 beat the ported 245 soundly.
Now, lest anyone think I'm trashing the 245, nothing could be further from the truth.
I love the 245 and it is one of the very few saws that I am still looking to add to my collection.
For power to weight, the 245 is still in the hunt after all these years, but brute power doesn't always compare favorably to power AND chain speed.
Andyshine77, Fatguy and I did an impromptu test a few years ago on one of my 4200s and the saw tach'ed out at 10,500 out of the cut. It lost 100, yes that's right ONE HUNDRED, rpm's in the wood!!!
With a 28-32 inch bar, I believe the 245 will get a lot closer to the speed of the 4400 but I don't think the 245 will ever out cut the 4400.
JMHO
And yes, I compare the 4200/4400 vs. the 4000 or 245 to the difference in a 400 small block and a 396 big block. The 396 may have less displacement, but there is simply no comparison in the power.


Mike

Wow that is impressive. Only 100 rpm's drop in the wood. You have really got my attention now.

 

[Eccentric]

THOSE 4 cc's are HUGE!!!
The 4400 will spank the 4000 AND the 245 resoundingly!

A couple of years ago Brad Snelling ported a 245 and it ran really well. When put to the test against my stock 4200, the 4200 beat the ported 245 soundly.
Now, lest anyone think I'm trashing the 245, nothing could be further from the truth.
I love the 245 and it is one of the very few saws that I am still looking to add to my collection.
For power to weight, the 245 is still in the hunt after all these years, but brute power doesn't always compare favorably to power AND chain speed.
Andyshine77, Fatguy and I did an impromptu test a few years ago on one of my 4200s and the saw tach'ed out at 10,500 out of the cut. It lost 100, yes that's right ONE HUNDRED, rpm's in the wood!!!
With a 28-32 inch bar, I believe the 245 will get a lot closer to the speed of the 4400 but I don't think the 245 will ever out cut the 4400.
JMHO
And yes, I compare the 4200/4400 vs. the 4000 or 245 to the difference in a 400 small block and a 396 big block. The 396 may have less displacement, but there is simply no comparison in the power.


Mike

I agree with you 100% Mike (as I usually do). My guess is that the Brad ported 245 would also 'lessen the gap' if both saws were running 8-pin rims (if they weren't already). The 245 is still too limited by port design and a few other factors (compared to the 4200/4400) though. Did Brad disable the governor on the 245's carb? Is there discussion (and hopefully video) of his ported 245? I'd like to see that. I thinkin' about having a certain 1911 packin' chimp here work his magic on a 245 or 306 for me sometime after he does another old reed valve saw of mine.

 

[3000 FPS]

I agree with you 100% Mike (as I usually do). My guess is that the Brad ported 245 would also 'lessen the gap' if both saws were running 8-pin rims (if they weren't already). The 245 is still too limited by port design and a few other factors (compared to the 4200/4400) though. Did Brad disable the governor on the 245's carb? Is there discussion (and hopefully video) of his ported 245? I'd like to see that. I thinkin' about having a certain 1911 packin' chimp here work his magic on a 245 or 306 for me sometime after he does another old reed valve saw of mine.

That would be interesting to see also.

 

[Eccentric]

I had a similar experience with the 200/300 series crank seal I ordered from Sears a few months ago and never received. Got the tractor parts I ordered, but not the seal (and I almost ordered a bunch to have on hand and distribute amongst the group here). Gonna contact Sears AGAIN right now. Ordered the damn thing in April, and the status on that part (530001936) is STILL "Part has been processed in the system, but status from the supplier is not yet available". If you look up the part numbers for the seals (this one, and 530019042), the system sez they're in stock (so you can order them). Glad I didn't tie up a buncha money in seals I'll probably never get. Something told me to reduce the quantity of seals (to 1) before submitting the order. Glad I listened to that something. I only have $5.49 or so tied up right now....:bang:

Just got an email response. Looks like I got through to somebody. Let's see what happens....

Dear Mr. L.:

We are so sorry that the seal on order number XXXXXXX has not been
received and for the inconvenience this extensive delay has caused.

Upon review of your order, we show the part has not shipped and the
vendor has not provided an estimated ship date.

Mr. L., currently, the vendor is closed at this time. We will
contact the vendor on Monday, July 30, and respond to your inquiry via
email or phone within 3 business days. We apologize for any
inconvenience this delay may cause.

Please know that we are not taking this matter lightly and will do our
best to resolve this matter in a timely manner.

We appreciate your willingness to take the time to provide feedback on
our performance. Feedback such as yours helps us identify gaps or
opportunities in our processes that drive customer dissatisfaction and
we are committed to continually improving your experience. Sears
PartsDirect aims to consistently deliver the highest quality goods and
services possible and we hope we have the opportunity to prove that to
you in the future.

If we can be of additional assistance with any of your parts needs,
please contact us at [email protected] or call us at
1-800-4MY-HOME (1-800-469-4663).

We appreciate your business and thank you for choosing Sears.

Linda M.
Sears PartsDirect
[email protected]
1-800-4MY-HOME (1-800-469-4663)

Original Message Follows:

Message: I need to know why I haven't received my 530001936 seal
yet. I ordered this part over three months ago.

"Part has been processed in the system, but status from the supplier
is not yet available." is the status info I get from the computer
system. Incredibly, if I search for this part in the partsdirect
system, it is STILL listed as in stock (so others can order it and
tie up their money I guess).

This is unacceptable. THREE + months with no contact or updates?
Really? When I worked for Sears Service in the 1990's this sort of
thing would have NEVER been allowed to happen. I realize that I have a
small amount of money tied up here, but that's not the issue. I
almost ordered seveal seals (as I have several chainsaws to
restore), but changed the order quantity to 1 before submitting my
order. I'm glad I did, or I WOULD have a large amount of money tied
up with no satisfaction.

Please resolve this matter ASAP.

 

[XPLRN]

THOSE 4 cc's are HUGE!!!
The 4400 will spank the 4000 AND the 245 resoundingly!

A couple of years ago Brad Snelling ported a 245 and it ran really well. When put to the test against my stock 4200, the 4200 beat the ported 245 soundly.
Now, lest anyone think I'm trashing the 245, nothing could be further from the truth.
I love the 245 and it is one of the very few saws that I am still looking to add to my collection.
For power to weight, the 245 is still in the hunt after all these years, but brute power doesn't always compare favorably to power AND chain speed.
Andyshine77, Fatguy and I did an impromptu test a few years ago on one of my 4200s and the saw tach'ed out at 10,500 out of the cut. It lost 100, yes that's right ONE HUNDRED, rpm's in the wood!!!
With a 28-32 inch bar, I believe the 245 will get a lot closer to the speed of the 4400 but I don't think the 245 will ever out cut the 4400.
JMHO
And yes, I compare the 4200/4400 vs. the 4000 or 245 to the difference in a 400 small block and a 396 big block. The 396 may have less displacement, but there is simply no comparison in the power.


Mike

Thanks sooo much Mike for taking the time to share that great 4200 story here!!

I've decided to start working on the 4400 and I'll be in contact regarding the 245A......do you still have the hommie??

 

[Eccentric]

Thanks sooo much Mike for taking the time to share that great 4200 story here!!

I've decided to start working on the 4400 and I'll be in contact regarding the 245A......do you still have the hommie??

I hope Mike ends up with a 245A soon.

 

[wendell]

Probably have to be my age or older to remember shifting 3 on the tree.

:surrender:

To pass driver's ed we had to take the school's pick up with 3 in in the tree and drive up to this steep stretch of gravel road at some railroad tracks, stop and get going without spinning the tires.

 

[Eccentric]

My '66 Ford Bronco that I drove in HS had a 3 on the tree. Wish I still had that rig....

 

[XPLRN]

Our 1962 Ford Falcon station wagon currently has a "three on the tree" shifter.

When I win the Lotto I'm going to put a T-5 behind it!! :msp_thumbsup:

 

[tilenick]

I suppose you could even go back further. I can remember driving my grandfathers 1953 Ford F-250, or my uncles 59 & 66 F-100, 3 speed on the column. Probably have to be my age or older to remember shifting 3 on the tree.


Gregg,

I am 32 and I drove one once it was hard to drive, thought it was an automatic, the boys had fun with that one
Nick.

 

[XPLRN]

245A Decals

Yes, you can still take them. I'll send them on to the fellow who makes the stickers and bar stencils. I would still like a couple sets, and they're probably some more guys, here, that would like a set, or two......

Trying to get caught up on things I said I'd do. One of those was the photo-documentation of the 245A decal(s) for you. I'm telling you the closer up I got on the clutch cover decal the more "age" was showing!! The air filter cover decal is just ............gone.....but I did get what I could there. Also took one of the underneath side of the air filter cover where there is a great shape decal.......probably don't need that one.

 

[XPLRN]

Poulan 245A, 3400, 4400 size comparison pictures

I really liked Mike's description of the 4400 being a 'Big Block' compared to a 4000/3400 'Small Block' . Modifiedmark had also given some excellent verbal descriptions of the differences between the 245A, the 3400/4000 and the 4200/4400 saw models.

After thinking about it I decided to get some visual size comparison between all the three of the saws I've been talking about recently. Here are the results of my newly acquired visual size understanding of three different Poulan saws.

 

[rms61moparman]

I agree with you 100% Mike (as I usually do). My guess is that the Brad ported 245 would also 'lessen the gap' if both saws were running 8-pin rims (if they weren't already). The 245 is still too limited by port design and a few other factors (compared to the 4200/4400) though. Did Brad disable the governor on the 245's carb? Is there discussion (and hopefully video) of his ported 245? I'd like to see that. I thinkin' about having a certain 1911 packin' chimp here work his magic on a 245 or 306 for me sometime after he does another old reed valve saw of mine.

Ask and ye shall receive!

Poulans at GTG - YouTube

The ported 245 is at about 1:40 or so.
Both of the 4200s in this video are mine.
The first log is a petrified piece of Hickory or Elm.
The other log is a cottonwood I believe.



Mike

 

[XPLRN]

Stock 4200's ???

Ask and ye shall receive!

Poulans at GTG - YouTube

The ported 245 is at about 1:40 or so.
Both of the 4200s in this video are mine.
The first log is a petrified piece of Hickory or Elm.
The other log is a cottonwood I believe.



Mike

Thanks for posting that video.....GREAT visual on cutting comparisons!!
Were the 4200's stock or ???

 

[XPLRN]

Poulan 245A, 3400, 4400 weight comparisons

So I posted up the visual size comparison pictures between the three saws that I'd been talking about recently. Then I got to thinking about the weight differences. Recently I ran across a nifty little luggage weighing device that has a nylon strap and metal clip that goes thru luggage handles to lift and weight one's luggage. I guess with the airlines clamping down on luggage weight something like this helps you figure it out while packing!! I had used it to figure out USPS shipping weight on a tool heading to the East coast and the device reading was within a couple of ounces of the USPS scales when I took the 28 lb. package in for shipment. Sooo I decided to use it to do a weight comparison on the Poulan saws. Now all these are just powerheads w/o the b/c as seen in the earlier visual size comparison pictures.

Here is the 245A, it had about 3/4 full fuel tank and about 1/4 full on the bar oil. I seem to remember a great 245A restoration picture by Modifiedmark showing a dry weight of 13.5 lbs. IIRC;

Here is the 3400, it had about 1/2 full fuel tank and about 1/2 full of bar oil. Acres Internet shows 13 lbs., 8 ozs. in their specifications listing ;

Here is the 4400.......it didn't have any fuel in it and less than 1/4 full on the bar oil. I DID find out one potential reason why it stopped running for the previous owner. The fuel line where the fuel filter attaches had given up the ghost and the fuel filter was laying in the bottom of the tank by it's lonesome. It will be getting a new fuel line first off and see what happens from there with getting it running again!! Acres Internet shows 16 lbs., 8 ozs. in their specifications listing.

 

[hemiyota]

Aren't the dogs on the Wico flywheel on backwards? They are certainly opposite to the way the ones on my Homelites are positioned:taped:

Lee

Can you post a pic of how the springs and dogs are positioned on your flywheels?

 

[rms61moparman]

Thanks for posting that video.....GREAT visual on cutting comparisons!!
Were the 4200's stock or ???

Sorry XPLRN,

You must have missed my prior post!:msp_sneaky:

THOSE 4 cc's are HUGE!!!
The 4400 will spank the 4000 AND the 245 resoundingly!

A couple of years ago Brad Snelling ported a 245 and it ran really well. When put to the test against my stock 4200, the 4200 beat the ported 245 soundly.
Now, lest anyone think I'm trashing the 245, nothing could be further from the truth.
I love the 245 and it is one of the very few saws that I am still looking to add to my collection.
For power to weight, the 245 is still in the hunt after all these years, but brute power doesn't always compare favorably to power AND chain speed.
Andyshine77, Fatguy and I did an impromptu test a few years ago on one of my 4200s and the saw tach'ed out at 10,500 out of the cut. It lost 100, yes that's right ONE HUNDRED, rpm's in the wood!!!
With a 28-32 inch bar, I believe the 245 will get a lot closer to the speed of the 4400 but I don't think the 245 will ever out cut the 4400.
JMHO
And yes, I compare the 4200/4400 vs. the 4000 or 245 to the difference in a 400 small block and a 396 big block. The 396 may have less displacement, but there is simply no comparison in the power.


Mike

 

[a. palmer jr.]

Sorry XPLRN,

You must have missed my prior post!:msp_sneaky:

I don't know about the newer Chevy 400 small blocks but the older ones had 389 cu. in. if I'm not mistaken. I think they just called them 400s because 389 was already taken by some other company.

 

[rms61moparman]

I don't know about the newer Chevy 400 small blocks but the older ones had 389 cu. in. if I'm not mistaken. I think they just called them 400s because 389 was already taken by some other company.

Not sure what older ones you are talking about but the 400 small blocks I'm familiar with had a 4.125 bore and a 3.750 stroke.
That works out to 400.992 on my calculator.
I do know that the bore and stroke changed a little throughout the years, but I didn't think it was ever that much.
The 400 was, to the best of my knowledge the only engine size made by all of the GM divisions(except Cadillac) AND Ford and Chrysler.
They were great for hauling old Poulans around.
(That will serve to keep us on topic)


Mike

 

[dce1843]

I don't know about the newer Chevy 400 small blocks but the older ones had 389 cu. in. if I'm not mistaken. I think they just called them 400s because 389 was already taken by some other company.

All the 400 sbc have the same bore and stroke. I belive you are probley thinkn of the 396 and the 402. The 402 was a .030 over 396 that was introduced in 1970 to replace the 396. Even though it was now a 402 some chevys sported 400 badges.