New Husqvarna 346XP Yikes

[North West Farmer]

When heading into the woods for falling and bucking I utilize nothing less than something with a 36 inch bar with plenty of power to pull the load in a full depth cut. Take a 24 inch rig in for possibly cutting loose a bound saw or light limbing. This little fella also works o.k. for cutting up fire wood to throw in the truck when you go home.

I don't like falling trees with a larger diameter than the cutting length of the bar, although I will admit there have been times when I have done that rather than going back to lug out whatever saw I have at the time carrying a 48 inch bar. If the tree is bigger than 48 inches it is not usually part of a second growth production falling show so I just take my time and choose the saw that will be the easiest to handle and work the tree down carefully using cross over back cuts and lots of wedges and plates as needed for control. At my age, if the tree needs to be jacked off of the stump, I call in an experienced faller that is really good with the large girth trees and enjoys dealing with them.

I highly recommend not taking on big trees with a smaller saw. That practice pushes safety limits and if you are not accustomed to utilizing multiple cross over back cuts it is very easy to loose control and end up with a barber chair situation, if not something worse. Falling always involves unknowns. That's why some very experienced fallers will put a line on those tough ones and pull them off the stump for safety and control.

Enjoy your chainsaws and always be careful out there!

Nick, North West Farmer

 

[JimR]

When heading into the woods for falling and bucking I utilize nothing less than something with a 36 inch bar with plenty of power to pull the load in a full depth cut. Take a 24 inch rig in for possibly cutting loose a bound saw or light limbing. This little fella also works o.k. for cutting up fire wood to throw in the truck when you go home.

I don't like falling trees with a larger diameter than the cutting length of the bar, although I will admit there have been times when I have done that rather than going back to lug out whatever saw I have at the time carrying a 48 inch bar. If the tree is bigger than 48 inches it is not usually part of a second growth production falling show so I just take my time and choose the saw that will be the easiest to handle and work the tree down carefully using cross over back cuts and lots of wedges and plates as needed for control. At my age, if the tree needs to be jacked off of the stump, I call in an experienced faller that is really good with the large girth trees and enjoys dealing with them.

I highly recommend not taking on big trees with a smaller saw. That practice pushes safety limits and if you are not accustomed to utilizing multiple cross over back cuts it is very easy to loose control and end up with a barber chair situation, if not something worse. Falling always involves unknowns. That's why some very experienced fallers will put a line on those tough ones and pull them off the stump for safety and control.

Enjoy your chainsaws and always be careful out there!

Nick, North West Farmer

Great information Nick about using wedges and the like to fell trees. I also do not cut trees down unless my bar is bigger than the tree. There have been a few rare exceptions to that which was when I didn't have a saw with a 36 inch bar on it. We used a long cable attached to the tree with a come along to make sure it went where we wanted it to go.

 

[LD1]

There certainly are limits and exceptions and everyones comfort level is different, but I personally have no reservations about dropping a 32 or 36" tree with a 24" bar. But you have to know where to cut, and more importantly, when to make those cuts.

I have felled MANY trees bigger than my bar.

Its not the size of the saw that matters, rather how you use it:laughing:

 

[defed]

while it would be ideal to have a bar bigger than the tree, i don't plan on actually dropping FULL trees that are 40" in diameter. the silver maple in question needs to come down in pieces, so it would be just 10' of truck. the cottonwoods i want to take down might be 30" diameter, where i feel a 20" bar should be adequate. they are in wide open areas, so i can drop them in which ever direction will be easiest.

 

[DarkBlack]

The saw does just what it is supposed to do, that is cut wood at high rpm's. Any saw when pushed will slow down. Let this little saw cut the way it is supposed to and it will do just fine. Most of us have a bigger saw for cutting bigger trees.

You are not the first poster to over-hype the 346. I've seen it some years ago on another forum. You opened up your post saying it's "like a chainsaw on steroids"., '"can't be bogged down etc..."That I just don't get. It's 3.7hp at 9,600 rpm's- that's it. 14.7k is no load ( meaning no torque available ).
Every saw in the XP lineup gains a better power to weight ratio ( excluding the newer X-torque models, and the 3120 ) The next model up the 357xp has 4.4hp at the same 9,600rpm, and has a better power to weight ratio.

 

[JimR]

Some years ago the 346xp was not the same saw that it is today. It was a less powerful saw. Yes, I still say that this little saw is like it is running on steroids. I shouldn't have said that it can't be bogged down. I can bog down my 372XP and my 395XP if I really wanted to. I've owned many Husqvarna saws over the years. Model 50's and a few 55's. None of these saws compared to this 346XP. I've also onwed a 262XP and 362XP. This 346XP is lighter than the 50's and 55's that I owned.



QUOTE=DarkBlack;2973484]You are not the first poster to over-hype the 346. I've seen it some years ago on another forum. You opened up your post saying it's "like a chainsaw on steroids"., '"can't be bogged down etc..."That I just don't get. It's 3.7hp at 9,600 rpm's- that's it. 14.7k is no load ( meaning no torque available ).
Every saw in the XP lineup gains a better power to weight ratio ( excluding the newer X-torque models, and the 3120 ) The next model up the 357xp has 4.4hp at the same 9,600rpm, and has a better power to weight ratio.[/QUOTE]

 

[Bluegill2]

The 346xp is not being "over hyped" here.

It's just that it is the best 50cc saw ever made...

Oh, and I've been running one since early 2001, (OE 45cc) have many, many hours on it. Got another 346xp (NE 50cc), a 357xp, 562xp, 359, and a highly modified 75cc 365...

 

[LD1]

I think that the 346xp is a POS. Underpowered, heavy, turd. Just a total crap saw. Heck, a 42cc poulan wild-thing will out cut one of these "best 50cc saws ever".

 

[LD1]

Dont take that seriously. I am just trying to balance out the "over-hype" and get back down to just a normal "pro" saw. All "pro" saws have great power to weight and cut MUCH faster than similar sized "homeowner" versions. Yes, the 346 is a good saw. But so are all the XP's, and all the pro stihls, and all the pro dolmars, etc.

 

[JimR]

I think that the 346xp is a POS. Underpowered, heavy, turd. Just a total crap saw. Heck, a 42cc poulan wild-thing will out cut one of these "best 50cc saws ever".

ROLMAO, I almost spit my breakfast out while reading this one. Thanks for the good laugh early in the morning. Let's add a little more humor to this . Poulan Wild Thing, you make my wood sing.

 

[Bluegill2]

Dont take that seriously. I am just trying to balance out the "over-hype" and get back down to just a normal "pro" saw. All "pro" saws have great power to weight and cut MUCH faster than similar sized "homeowner" versions. Yes, the 346 is a good saw. But so are all the XP's, and all the pro stihls, and all the pro dolmars, etc.

Got to agree with ya there man.

Just talkin 50cc saws here... I like the weight and feel of the ms260, but the 346 has more zip, much better filter and better balance. Stihl missed the mark with the new ms261, nice saw, but too big and bulky for a 50cc. Dolmar 5100 is nice but they have had problems.

I have a good friend with a 7900 and a 120. They are very Nice saws!

 

[Bluegill2]

You are not the first poster to over-hype the 346. I've seen it some years ago on another forum. You opened up your post saying it's "like a chainsaw on steroids"., '"can't be bogged down etc..."That I just don't get. It's 3.7hp at 9,600 rpm's- that's it. 14.7k is no load ( meaning no torque available ).
Every saw in the XP lineup gains a better power to weight ratio ( excluding the newer X-torque models, and the 3120 ) The next model up the 357xp has 4.4hp at the same 9,600rpm, and has a better power to weight ratio.

There is a reason for the "Hype". Ya have to spend some time with a 346xp to get it.

The 357xp is a fine saw. I have one, but the advertised weight specs are wrong, at 12.1 lbs. It's closer to 13 lbs. Husky beefed up the crank case shortly after production was started. The more power does show itself in larger wood, but under 18" or so, I'll take the 346xp any day.

The old edition 346 1999-2007 was 45cc and 14.7k no load rpm. Late 2007 the new edition 346 came out with 50cc, lower rpm and more torque. I still like the old one, but the newer one does have a wider power band.

 

[Car Doc]

Wildthang! If ever there was a cheesy sales gimmick its putting 18-20" bars on 40cc saws they all do it and they cut but cut pretty slow. :laughing:

I like a 16" tops on a 50cc saw and 70cc up for 20" but I like the saw doing the work not me ymmv as always. my .002

 

[LD1]

Got to agree with ya there man.

Just talkin 50cc saws here... I like the weight and feel of the ms260, but the 346 has more zip, much better filter and better balance. Stihl missed the mark with the new ms261, nice saw, but too big and bulky for a 50cc. Dolmar 5100 is nice but they have had problems.

I have a good friend with a 7900 and a 120. They are very Nice saws!

Does that happen to be a 120si by chance. or even just a 120s. Those were both 68cc's (the plain jane 120 is only 60). And if so, has he ever let you run it??

For 1980's technology they are SUPER impressive. At 68cc, I dont think there is even a saw made that will out cut a good running (not worn out yet) 120si, that is under the 70cc mark. Just a very good and impressive all around firewood saw. Actually the 116si and 120si are probabally my favorite two saws of all time

 

[Bluegill2]

Does that happen to be a 120si by chance. or even just a 120s. Those were both 68cc's (the plain jane 120 is only 60). And if so, has he ever let you run it??

For 1980's technology they are SUPER impressive. At 68cc, I dont think there is even a saw made that will out cut a good running (not worn out yet) 120si, that is under the 70cc mark. Just a very good and impressive all around firewood saw. Actually the 116si and 120si are probabally my favorite two saws of all time

On the 120, I'm not sure. Feels stronger than most 60cc saws I've run, so I bet it is a 120si.

He also has a larger, newer Dolmar, I believe 90cc+. That thing is a hog and very strong, but more saw than I'd want to use, or need.

 

[DarkBlack]

There is a reason for the "Hype". Ya have to spend some time with a 346xp to get it.

The 357xp is a fine saw. I have one, but the advertised weight specs are wrong, at 12.1 lbs. It's closer to 13 lbs. Husky beefed up the crank case shortly after production was started. The more power does show itself in larger wood, but under 18" or so, I'll take the 346xp any day.

The old edition 346 1999-2007 was 45cc and 14.7k no load rpm. Late 2007 the new edition 346 came out with 50cc, lower rpm and more torque. I still like the old one, but the newer one does have a wider power band.

Oh no... I get it.. I don't think you get it.:licking: Even if you are right about the 357 being 13lb instead of 12.1. It would still have a better power to weight ratio, and it cranks at the same 9,600 rpm. I think you're imagination is ff a bit. Then you add on the wight of the bar and chain which is a static increment, and the power to weight ratio just improved for the larger saw. Sorry. Unless, just maybe, there's some magical power the 346 has that defies science measurement?

And yes, the 372 has a better power to weight ratio than the 357. I guess the 346 must seem like you grabbed the alligator by the tail if you are used to 46cc wood sharks? I just don't get all exited about 3.7hp. Maybe we just found a power tool near the bottom of a manufacturer's model linup that has some magical power that even the manufacturer is unaware of.

 

[Bluegill2]

Oh no... I get it.. I don't think you get it.:licking: Even if you are right about the 357 being 13lb instead of 12.1. It would still have a better power to weight ratio, and it cranks at the same 9,600 rpm. I think you're imagination is ff a bit. Then you add on the wight of the bar and chain which is a static increment, and the power to weight ratio just improved for the larger saw. Sorry. Unless, just maybe, there's some magical power the 346 has that defies science measurement?

And yes, the 372 has a better power to weight ratio than the 357. I guess the 346 must seem like you grabbed the alligator by the tail if you are used to 46cc wood sharks? I just don't get all exited about 3.7hp. Maybe we just found a power tool near the bottom of a manufacturer's model linup that has some magical power that even the manufacturer is unaware of.

No, I got it a long time ago. I've been running saws since 1976, firewood, logging, clearing. When I got the first 346xp in 2001, it changed the way I thought about small saws. I have larger saws when needed, but most of the time a 346xp is all I need, or want to run. The 357xp is a fine saw (I own one), but it's right at 2 lbs heavier. The bar and chain on the 357 are heavier than the bar and chain on the 346, so the ratio changes in favor of the 346. Remember I own both.

There's a lot more to these saws than what the specs say... Some saws are just more fun to run than others.

 

[DarkBlack]

No, I got it a long time ago. I've been running saws since 1976, firewood, logging, clearing. When I got the first 346xp in 2001, it changed the way I thought about small saws. I have larger saws when needed, but most of the time a 346xp is all I need, or want to run. The 357xp is a fine saw (I own one), but it's right at 2 lbs heavier. The bar and chain on the 357 are heavier than the bar and chain on the 346, so the ratio changes in favor of the 346. Remember I own both.

There's a lot more to these saws than what the specs say... Some saws are just more fun to run than others.

I could debate that you could put on whatever bar chain you want on either saw, but I won't unless you really want to....
But... me being of a science inspired mind, yes, please tell me what this one single little particular saw has/does that Husqvarna's measurement do not capture. Does it run on crytonite while the rest of the linup runs on gas? Is it's 3.7hp at 9.7k more power than the 4.4hp at 9.7k of the 357?
Chain pulling through wood. Yup that's it. I don't see a lot of room for magic. In fact if the engine revs higher you have to put a smaller circumfrence drive hub to get the chain speed at optimum.
Does it have a wider torque band than the bigger saws? Take your time answering...

 

[Bluegill2]

I could debate that you could put on whatever bar chain you want on either saw, but I won't unless you really want to....
But... me being of a science inspired mind, yes, please tell me what this one single little particular saw has/does that Husqvarna's measurement do not capture. Does it run on crytonite while the rest of the linup runs on gas? Is it's 3.7hp at 9.7k more power than the 4.4hp at 9.7k of the 357?
Chain pulling through wood. Yup that's it. I don't see a lot of room for magic. In fact if the engine revs higher you have to put a smaller circumfrence drive hub to get the chain speed at optimum.
Does it have a wider torque band than the bigger saws? Take your time answering...

Man, I'm not saying the 346xp will out cut a larger xp saw (it will out cut some larger homeowner saws).

It's a fast cuttin 50cc saw, it's lighter, it's smaller, it's extremely dependable, it balances and handles very well. And my back doesn't hurt as bad at the end of the day.

I just usually don't need a larger saw. But like I said, I have a 357xp, a 562xp, a 372xpw wearing 365 plastic when I do need a larger saw.

I don't know how to be any clearer. Ya need to run one to understand I guess?

 

[defed]

i don't know what darkblack is after....if he doesn't like the saw, he doesn't have to buy one. this isn't the only place i've read rave reviews about the 346. i've only seen a few negatives anywhere when i was searching for info on which one i was going to get.

for me, it was between the 346 and stihl 261. i liked the feel of the 346 better. it cost nearly $100 less. the stihl has more torque, which i would have liked, but if i didn't like the way the saw felt in my hands, what good was it?

for me, the only other saw i've owned is a poulan pro 3816. it never really left me yearning for more power, so even if the 346 has less torque than other 50cc saws...it had to be, at the very least, as powerful as my old poulan. so far, i find it to be quite a bit more powerful...which i guess it SHOULD be.

i only have a few complaints about it, but most of those are not performance related.