Mutual admiration club????
The OP wanted opinions and I will probaly get hung out to dry by the Homlite XL and SXL mutual admiration club .
. Here goes nothing . I am not trying to step on any toes either.
I have had many of these saws over the years and have never been impressed with any one of them. What is the big deal about these saws anyway ???? They are so incredibly average, don't cut all that great just so so and is nothing to brag about, most of them won't run right or perform the way a good saw should work. If you come across one that comes close to working good it is a rare find because most of them suffer from bad bearings, sloppy cranks, crank seal problems, and bad carburation along with ignition problems. Most of these saws are not worth the time and parts to fix because there are so many of them around and as a rule don't have much of a resale value.
I will give these old Homelite XL some credit. Considering the abuse some of them go through they will manage to still start and run to some degree. They are also good for first time saw tinkerers
I probaly stepped on a few toes but this is just my opinion of the XL. Sorry if it is a bit on the negative side.
I will confess I have some in my junk pile and a couple on display that do run but they have a clearing bow bar and a regular bow bar on them and are basically conversation pieces or for when I get a wild hair to cut some wood with a bow.
I was going to mention that Mark but I decided to let it go. I just thought it would be best to not come down too hard on the saw.
Chain, get your hands on a GOOD running 360 Pro Homelite. I guarentee you will throw rocks at that XL and see what I am talking about. The 360 and the XL are about the same vintage and engine displacement. The 360 was a very advanced saw for it's time and still rivels many of todays saws with it's speed , torque and anti-vib mounts . I can get one of these saws up and running good with no problems compared to the XL's. The 360 is a much more complicated saw to work on but is worth it to me
I have no idea what a new 360 cost back in the day, nor do I have a clue about the XL . I am assuming the 360 was alot more because of the pro features and the XL was more of a consumer type saw.
If you look at today's e-bay prices both saws bring about the same money in average condition . I would buy the 360 before the XL.
Wow did you ever miss the mark. These saws INTRODUCED the "average" (meaning they set the standard for a lightweight, reliable, powerful 'smaller' saw in an era when chainsaws were BIG, HEAVY, and SLOW)
back in 1963. Nobody, especially the Euros had ANYTHING comparable at that time. The North American manufactures got competing (and often quite 'similar' looking) models out in a hurry. This was the first saw with the "new" Oregon 3/8" pitch chain and the Tillotson HS carburetor.
"Don't cut that great just so so and nothing to brag about"? Really? No they're not a 346XP/550XP/whateverwhizbangwondersaw, but they WERE designed decades earlier, and DO cut just fine. Without the XL-12/SXL series, there would be no lightweight wondersaws. The saws you've come in contact with were probably clapped out, abused saws that don't owe anybody anything................having put hundreds of cords of wood in the trucks. The 'faults' you describe are ALL issues that would plague ANY saw that had been ran for decades, with indifferent maintenance (common for these saws). I used nothing but a Super XL-12 (3.55ci, but with the single reed manifold and no AO pump) to cut many truckloads of wood. Got a nice '70s SXL-AO after that and cut many more truckloads of wood with it. Legions of others have done the same. They're reliable, and pull the chain around the bar and through the wood just fine. There's a reason why this design was built/sold for over 30 years.
The 360 is NOT a design from the same time period as the XL-12 series. It also wasn't "advanced" compared to its competition (unlike the XL-12 when it was released). Yes the SXL-AO and XL-12 were still being produced when the 360 (with "pro" written on it) was introduced, but were now lower price-point saws that were still being sold and produced because they had a stellar reputation as a reliable workhorse. These saws weren't receiving any more 'updates' or 'advancements' (meaning no R&D time/money), as they design was around 15 years old at the time of the release of the 360 and had more than paid for itself. Only minor changes to things like ignition systems, and some changes to lower production costs (such as the cheaper manual oiler plunger setup on the 1980's and later saws) were done. Of course the SXL-AO saws outlived the 360 by a wide margin, being produced through 1994 or so. The 360 had been dead for close to 15 years by then, and had been replaced by another 'advanced model' (the 410) which also fell by the wayside while the SXL-AO continued on...
My experiences with the 360 don't mirror yours. I'd consider it "average" at best (no way would a 360 ever make me wanna "throw rocks" at my XL-12 series saws). They have more RPM's to be sure, but I find them lacking in torque. I much prefer my XL-12 series saws, 10-series Macs (especially my 70cc variants which weigh no more than a 360), Poulan 306A, and Poulan 3400 to a 360 by a LONG shot. All of those saws can be had cheaply in my local area EXCEPT the 360, which always seems to be listed for stupid prices..............probably because they say "pro" on 'em. The cinderblock PM610 series Macs are in the same boat with those 360's in my area for some reason. No thanks...
I've never experienced the fuel boiling issue that sometimes happens with these saws (and other saws with fuel tanks in close proximity to the crankcase, such as the SX-925, Poulan 361, Pioneer 1200, etc). Read/heard other people's accounts of it however. I have experienced it with an SXL-925.
Nobody here was saying these saws were superior performers over any and all chainsaws. They were just relating their positive experiences with these models. Why does that garner the "mutual admiration club" crapola? Your negative opinions of these saws seems to come from handling roached old warhorses...
How bout that!
Must have been the base model.
The XL-12 was always the "base model" of the series. Manual oiler only, smaller displacement (3.3ci), and single reed (except for late XL-12's that had the pyramid reed setup). In 1965 when Homelite released the XL-Automatic and Super XL-Automatic (as an 'updated model' to the XL-12) they did sell them with the manual oiler 'blockoff' deal in the rear handle. Not sure why. In one of the early IPL's I have there's a part number for the 'kit' of parts needed to add the manual oiler to these saws. I wish we could do that with modern AO-only saws. The majority of the 1967 or so and later Super XL-Automatic and SXL-AO labeled saws had both manual and auto oilers from the factory.
