Stihl 361 vs. Husky 359

[jokers]

pg 2

The succession of saw builders that I went through on this site alone is First, Dennis Greffard who I like and at the time I thought the gains he was getting were the best you could do on a woods saw. There are still Greffard saws out there in the hands of experienced users like RBtree who are very happy with them so I don`t think I misrepresented him or his saws. Then with full knowledge of Dennis, who attributes alot of his knowledge to Ken Dunn, I had Ken build me a 372 which is just a wicked saw by the account of anyone who has run it. Unfortunately my timing to have Ken build me any more saws didn`t work out, but if Ken were back in the game I would recomemmend him also. Have you had Dennis or Ken build you a saw?

Then because of all the hoopla concerning a certain "builder" from Pennsylvania and personal e-mails from that person himself telling me how he builds saws that will leave Dennis in the dust, I had him build me one. That saw left me disappointed just as the one I had run earlier by him, what was I thinking?, as does the other saw built by him that I bought from the original owner. Three saws, three disappointments. Then there are well documented quality control issues with this builder, ask Ben Walker, and does the "builder" step up and make it right? No, he forces Ben to go public before he honors the original deal of 100% satisfaction, and then he accuses Ben of sabotaging his own saw. Have you had the Power Porter build you a saw?

Meanwhile I went to a GTG where several of Ed`s saws were available for me to run. Every saw there was a woods saw that was running plain pump gas and making cut after cut to show that they aren`t hybrid "boy racer" saws. I was an instant convert and like I said, have not had a bad saw from him yet. Consider this Brad, I have probably $10K invested in saws modified by Ed, done over the last year. Do you think that I would keep going back to him if I was in any way unhappy? I`d modify my own saws first, which I have in the past. Ed`s saws are better, plain and simple. I also have gotten to know Ed quite well and consider him a good friend.

Now regarding this alledged Husky bias that I have, I admit that I think Husky was top of the heap for the past few years because they have several models that have better real world power, better antivibe, and better air filtration just to name a few factors, but I also own Two 026s(sold one this summer) Four ms260s, an 036, Two ms460s, Two 361s, sold an MS280(which I frequently recommend over the 290/310) that I owned for about six months to a friend this summer, an ms180 which I picked over the little Huskies, and an 019T so please explain the bias that I apparently have against Stihl?

If you are referring to my lack of enthusiasm for getting involved in all the Dolmar hype, don`t forget that I have a 7900 that I bought new from Jeff and ultimately had Ed modify, and which I`ve had alot of positive things to say about, and I also have a 5100 coming this week? Maybe I`m not leading the cheer squad on this one because I haven`t had a chance to run one and I am exasperated at the trouble necessary to get one. I`m also sceptical that it is going to be the 346 slayer that so many Dolmar dealers are claiming it is.

I think that you need to clarify and support your attack on my credibility Brad.

Russ

 

[Simonizer]

Hi Simon,

So you are telling me that you have seen a high failure rate with the 359? Isn`t the 359 essentially the same as the 357 with the exception of the plastic crank "full lobes", piston and cylinder so wouldn`t you in effect be saying that the 357 has a higher than normal failure rate? I find this very interesting because I have no knowledge of quality or durability issues with this series of saw.

The only reason that I brought up the feature for feature comparison between the two saws is that I am unaware of any quality or durability issues with the 357/359 and couldn`t imagine what you based your opinion on. I never said that the 361 isn`t a fine saw, infact you can find statements on this site made by me that are almost adoring of the 361, just that for the money, I think better deals exist.

I think that since you broached the issue of durability problems regarding the 359,it would be appropriate for you to reference failure trends and rates for us to become better informed and for you to support your statements. This seems fair doesn`t it?

Russ

I was refering to irritating failures, not catastrophic ones like we see on the 353. I didn't mean to throw mud at the 359, by all accounts it is a fine saw, unfortunately is competes with the MS361 and loses. Husqvarna parts are ridiculously expensive, I had to replace a thermostat on a heated, full-wrap 385XPGW yesterday. $116.63 retail for the part. Check out the price difference between a 385 XPGW and a 385 XPG. It is around $72.00 CAD. However, retail on the separate components is > $400.00. Things like this bother me.

 

[eric_271]

???? Russ, remind me to never spar with you. Hey if you aint happy with your new 5100 when you get it give me a shout.

 

[jokers]

Hi again Simon.

You keep bringing up interesting points like this one

I was refering to irritating failures, not catastrophic ones like we see on the 353.

What sort of catastrophic failures are you seeing with the 353?

This statement leaves me a little puzzled

I didn't mean to throw mud at the 359, by all accounts it is a fine saw,.....

in light of your previous statement

In this displacement range however, you are comparing probably the best Stihl saw ever made to a mediocre saw from Husqvarna.

when the original question was buy a 361 or 359? It`s not like you can say that the mediocre saw that you were referring to was the 136.

I don`t agree with this statement either

I didn't mean to throw mud at the 359............unfortunately is competes with the MS361...

The 357xp competes with the 361 and they are pretty much a dead heat IMO. The 359 can be had for a solid $200-$300 less than the 361 in the US. I understand that things may be different on your side of the border, but if price is not an issue, the 361 and 357xp are pretty evenly matched.

Husqvarna parts are ridiculously expensive,....

I understand that Husky parts in Canada were out of line on price until very recently, but if this is an issue with the 359, isn`t it also an issue with all other Huskies? So then that would make Stihl a superior brand? You can say it, you like Stihl saws better.

It seems that it would be more honest and objective to just say that you like Stihl better rather than trying to rationalize the issue. It`s no biggie, even Canada is a relatively free country.

Russ

 

[ehp]

parts for husky are very costly up here but Stihl are every bit as much or more just like the saw prices. I like the 361 alot , it is a real good saw but when stock they are nothing to brag about ask Jokers at the one GTG I had up here we ran his stock 361 against a red max 621 that was brandnew never had gas in it and it pretty much was a dead heat but if you counted down to the hundreds of a second the 621 was a couple faster.
The question was to get a 361 or a 359 and my answer was you can get a ported 359 for the cost of a stock 361, sure stock a 359 is not much but a little porting and they really come alive and cut there cutting time in just about half.
AS far as them being a junk saw we have heard this before on here and they will not to port very well believe me they are every bit as good of a saw as any. I have more 359's out there than any other saw that I port and alot around home here , ZERO problems so far none nothing and quite a few have alot of hours on them.

 

[buck futter]

Ed,
can you describe the difference between the cranks of the 357 and the 359. Also they are the same in most regards I have a 357 that is missing afew parts and I was thinking of getting a 359 and putting the 357 jug and piston on it. Is this a good Idea? and if I did this and wanted more power can I send the piston and jug from the 359 to you for a woods mod and have it shipped back to me to reassemble, or is the 357 a better candidate?

Thanks,
Lucky

 

[jokers]

Hi Lucky,

I can`t speak for Ed but what I would do based on experience with both saws mentioned by you and with Ed is to part out the 357, unless you really want to have a saw that says XP on the side, and start fresh with the 359. From what I`ve seen it looks like the modified 359s are running right with the 357s and if you play your cards right selling the 357, you will end up with a minimal investment in the 359.

I haven`t torn into a 359 or 357 but from what I understand, the difference in the cranks is that the 357 has plastic lobes attached to the crank with metal bands to reduce crankcase volume where the 359 does not. Apparently this is a non-issue if the 359 is modded properly. The 359 is a real sleeper saw when modified properly.

Russ

 

[SawTroll]

Test results

According to independed test results from DLG/KWF the specs/performance of the 359 and 361 are a bit more different than you get the impression of, reading this tread so far.
It seems that most comparisons are between modified saws, where the 359 really shines - but that may not be relevant for the average user.

Test results for unmodified saws:
Husky 359; max power 2.9 kW, max torque 3.3 Nm, pwr head weight 5.8 kg.
Stihl MS 361; max power 3.4 kW, max torque 3.7 Nm, pwr head weight 5.6 kg

Even though the US 361 puts out .1 kW less than the tested European version, the 361 should easily outperform the 359 when both are stock.

If that isn't happening, please try to explain why!

 

[bwalker]

The 361 in stock form is pretty doggy. I dont know about a stock 359 because I have never ran one.

 

[jokers]

According to independed test results from DLG/KWF the specs/performance of the 359 and 361 are a bit more different than you get the impression of, reading this tread so far.
It seems that most comparisons are between modified saws, where the 359 really shines - but that may not be relevant for the average user.

Test results for unmodified saws:
Husky 359; max power 2.9 kW, max torque 3.3 Nm, pwr head weight 5.8 kg.
Stihl MS 361; max power 3.4 kW, max torque 3.7 Nm, pwr head weight 5.6 kg

Even though the US 361 puts out .1 kW less than the tested European version, the 361 should easily outperform the 359 when both are stock.

If that isn't happening, please try to explain why!

Sawtroll,

I believe that the point of several posters in this thread is that for the same money, a guy could have a stock 361 or a modified 359 that will eat the stock 361 for breakfast.

The 361 and 357 are comparable when stock, just as you would expect from reading the specs. They are both more powerful than a stock 359, no surprise there. The irony is that while both the 357 and 361 are great when modified, the 359 is atleast their equal when modified and it`s still $200-$300 less.

Russ

 

[ehp]

Lucky I will try and take some pictures of the cranks, I have 2- saws a friend gave me to make 1 out of, the 357 has a broken crank notsure how he did it but from what he tells me he was limbing with the saw wide open and he hit the chainbrake , broken the clutch off . they 2 saws are stock and will stay that way cause they do have alot of time on them

 

[kf_tree]

357 crank

 

[kf_tree]

pic with caps off

ed any idea how a 357 would run if you split the case and pulled the crank caps off?

 

[jokers]

pic with caps off

ed any idea how a 357 would run if you split the case and pulled the crank caps off?

I`ve thought of doing this myself. or how about putting the ported 357 topend on a 359 base. I know that the guy from PaKy claims that he already did this and it didn`t work out but his other work doesn`t inspire confidence in me either.

Russ

 

[kf_tree]

my 357 is well broken in now so we'll see how it does against the 359's.

 

[ehp]

Thanks Ken for the pictures, I am going to pull the caps off the alcohol 357 to get more air into the crankcase like the 359, I hope your 357 is ready for those 359's cause there should be 6 to 8 of them at the GTG

 

[Simonizer]

pic with caps off

ed any idea how a 357 would run if you split the case and pulled the crank caps off?

I would speculate, lethargic. You will lose transfer velocity, your brake mean effective pressure will drop almost linearly with the percentage increase in crankcase volume. I think you will end up with a very "peaky" saw with lower torque than the stock machine. But then again,... I don't know stuff about things.

 

[ehp]

you see Simon you are thinking like someone reading a book, no what will happen is you can but more air into the crankcase plus fuel and make more horsepower , your rpm's will stay the same but your torque will increase by alot. And how come if we take the caps off the 357 you said it will make it a peaky saw, the 359 is the same bottomend without the caps and is a real torque saw . The last 3 GTG's have been won by 359's .

 

[Simonizer]

you see Simon you are thinking like someone reading a book, no what will happen is you can but more air into the crankcase plus fuel and make more horsepower , your rpm's will stay the same but your torque will increase by alot. And how come if we take the caps off the 357 you said it will make it a peaky saw, the 359 is the same bottomend without the caps and is a real torque saw . The last 3 GTG's have been won by 359's .

I have a hard time believing this. If the cylinder is ported to suit this application I may be more inclined to accept your claims. Keeping crankcase volume to a minimum is instrumental to providing efficient transfer. The book thing makes me laugh, I probably started pulling wrenches before you did. Learned how to TIG weld in 1979, Journeyman mechanic in 1989.

 

[bwalker]

Simon, your train of thought in regards to crankcase volume and HP is ala 1963! Increasing volume typicaly has the effect of making the torque/power curves broader with a very minimal loss in peak HP. And this is in a book BTW.
You might want to get a copy of Gordan Blairs excellant book or A.G. Bell's for that matter. Either would help you get a better grasp on why low crankcase volumes and high transfer velocitys are not always a good thing.