Husqvarna 455 Rancher Chainsaw

[dfkrug]

If you consider your self and experienced saw user, your doing yourself an injustice by using new "safety chain" The older full chisel (now called pro chain) cuts is SO much quicker. I can easily out cut my friends saw 2:1 with my 039 and full chisel chain.

Steve, I imagine that that pro chain has lower anti-kickback nubs. Have you
tried grinding those down on conventional chains so your chain is more
aggressive? I see that some chain has cutting teeth on every other link and
some chain has less cutters. That would make a difference, too.

 

[schmism]

Steve, I imagine that that pro chain has lower anti-kickback nubs. Have you
tried grinding those down on conventional chains so your chain is more
aggressive? I see that some chain has cutting teeth on every other link and
some chain has less cutters. That would make a difference, too.

yes i keep my kickback nubs (those flat barb in front of the tooth) in spec. and i will have to confess my buddy was useing his "large" poulon that came stock with every other tooth missing on the chain. (you know its really a powerful saw if you remove every other tooth )

But even my own saw, i have an old full chisel chain and a new "box" round corner "safety chain" the safety chain still cuts considerably slower. The amount of force that goes into cutting is significantly different also. The difference between really having to set a bar tooth and put effort into rolling the saw into a log , vs letting the saw weight and sharp chain do the work for me.

Chaps, dont forget the chaps!

 

[dfkrug]

But even my own saw, i have an old full chisel chain and a new "box" round corner "safety chain" the safety chain still cuts considerably slower. The amount of force that goes into cutting is significantly different also. The difference between really having to set a bar tooth and put effort into rolling the saw into a log , vs letting the saw weight and sharp chain do the work for me.

So the "safety chain" has the rounded cutters and "full chisel" are the
squared off cutters?

 

[Waynebro]

I recently purchased a 455 Rancher (not the 455e) wanting a step up from my little Echo 18 and being as its the largest model sold at the local Harry Homeowners superstore. Being times are hard these days I first tried the Poulan Pro 20. It was a nice saw and I felt cut better than my Echo 18 inch through the big hardwood oaks that dot my lot, but the plastic toolless chain tensioner seemed cheap to me, and turned out I was right. At least in my case. I had used it twice to fell and buck some midsized 20 inch oaks when on the third use the tooless chain tensioner snapped when I accidently got the bar pinched slightly. Once it was broke the chain would no longer tighten. Turns out its a somewhat common complaint with these saws, even though Stihl apparently pioneered the technology. So when I went first to look at the Husky 455 Rancher I was shown a 455e, with the toolless chain tensioner and I said, "oh no, not again". Fortunately I found buried in the back a 455, which still uses the standard bar nut and tool method, which to me seemed to always work well, so I went ahead and snatched it up.

So far I love this saw. I'm disappointed that a saw this heavy won't take a 24 inch bar per manufacturers recommendations but I am not disappointed with this saw. I paid 379 for mine, and for the money it seems to be just a really great midsized saw. Starting it is incredibly easy, hot or cold. I thought my little Echo started easy but this thing is a one pull wonder. It's a little heavy for it's bar size but I find the weight a plus as it makes you pay attention to what you're doing more than a lighter saw, which I tend to get too relaxed with. What I really love about this saw is the cutting power. I didn't think going from a 46cc engine (on my Poulan Pro 20) to a 55cc engine would be a huge difference but it was. It effortlessly breezed through all the larger hardwood trunks I threw at it, and I do mean breezed through. It tooks mere seconds to go through 20 inch and larger oaks and just seemed to run better than my little Echo (which is a good saw). So far its been a great saw, so based on the other reviews in here I'd say you're going to be very happy with it.

As for the 455e with the Toolless Chain Tensioner I can't say whether or not it works ok, but I'm sure it's probably fine, but for me the 455 with the standard chain tensioner was a great buy.

 

[dfkrug]

I'm disappointed that a saw this heavy won't take a 24 inch bar per manufacturers recommendations but I am not disappointed with this saw.

First I heard of that. I specified the 24" bar w/ 2 chains when I bought
mine from a dealer on Ebay who sold tons of saws. I have many logs
that are as much as 36" in diameter, and I much prefer single-cutting the
smaller 18-24" logs (mostly oak, bay, maple). A 20-in bar wasn't cuttin'
it, so-to-speak.

The 455 Rancher (no "e") has worked perfectly. Uses lots of fuel, however.

I think I will try grinding down the anti-kickback nubs on the chain to make
it cut even faster.

 

[Waynebro]

First I heard of that. I specified the 24" bar w/ 2 chains when I bought
mine from a dealer on Ebay who sold tons of saws. I have many logs
that are as much as 36" in diameter, and I much prefer single-cutting the
smaller 18-24" logs (mostly oak, bay, maple). A 20-in bar wasn't cuttin'
it, so-to-speak.

The 455 Rancher (no "e") has worked perfectly. Uses lots of fuel, however.

I think I will try grinding down the anti-kickback nubs on the chain to make
it cut even faster.

Interesting. If you check out Husky's website and documentation the 20 inch bar is the max that saw's supposed to take, which may explain your accelerated fuel consumption. Engine has to work harder to turn the larger chain. Of course a dealer will tell you (and sell you) anything, but the manufacturer is where you'd usually want to go for the actual specs and recommendations. But if you're saying it works for you perhaps I'll have to throw a 24 on it and see how it runs. I'm going to call Husky and see what they say but if they say its ok then you just may have saved me 700 bucks for a bigger saw. Thanks.

 

[Egon]

If in doubt put on the longer bar and use a chain with less cutters or whatever the thingy's that do the cutting are called.

 

[Waynebro]

If in doubt put on the longer bar and use a chain with less cutters or whatever the thingy's that do the cutting are called.

Well I'll have to disagree with that recommendation. A larger bar means a slower turning chain and a bar bigger than the engine was designed for can mean a poor and even dangerous cut. Kickback occurs much more frequently when the chain is not turning at optimal speed. For a good clean cut you want a faster cut, so a smaller bar means a faster cut hence a better, safer cut.

 

[Egon]

Thats why you use a chain with fewer cutters. It's also gona take longer to cut.

 

[Waynebro]

Fewer cutters at a slower speed means less cutting surface in contact with the wood. Less cutters may increase the chains speed slightly (due to less friction and being lighter) but it will not increase it sufficiently for an improperly sized bar. Sorry, still disagree with your recommendation.

Right bar for the right motor means the right cutting speed and the right cutting speed is crucial to;

A. Safety (less chance of kickback)

B. Performance

C. Increased life of your chainsaw (due to not overtaxing the engine)

 

[Egon]

Well the chain speed definitely makes sense. But by properly reducing the number of cutters and the amount they bite you may end up with a system that require less power that that originally on the saw.

 

[Waynebro]

Well the chain speed definitely makes sense. But by properly reducing the number of cutters and the amount they bite you may end up with a system that require less power that that originally on the saw.

Well I guess I'm confused as to the benefit there. The only reason for increasing the size of the bar would be to cut a larger diameter trunk. And that means you want more power. You're suggesting reducing the number of cutters to increase the bar size while maintaining the same size motor. While in some circumstances that may be plausible the reasoning behind it is lost on me. You will have naturally more space between cutting surfaces over a larger bar, which also will be travelling naturally slower, or struggling to meet the speeds of a smaller chain, and that means less cutting occuring as well as working a smaller engine harder to match or come close to matching the speeds obtained on a smaller bar and chain with more cutting teeth. So I guess I fail to see the performance benefits there. Other than you can use your smaller, cheaper chainsaw to do work designed for a larger more powerful chainsaw.

I see a savings benefit, perhaps, (unless you burn out your smaller saw prematurely due to overworking it on timber it was never meant to cut) but I see no performance benefits. Even if you match the speed of the saw prior to increasing bar size you'd still have more distance between cutting surfaces meaning less cutting occuring over the same period of cutting time. So it would seem that while you could cut a larger trunk the performance hit would offset this benefit, not to mention likely overburdening your motor.

So while I'm confident it can be done, I can't see a good reason for doing it, other than perhaps to save money in the short term. But I guess if all you have is the one saw and cannot afford a larger one yet need to cut larger size trees then I suppose I could see it but I prefer a fast quick cut and that usually equates to the right sized bar for the motor.

 

[Egon]

The benefit may be being able to cut the odd larger diameter stuff without having to buy another saw. And yes the cutting time will be longer but using the proper chain there should be no extra load on the engine.

 

[Waynebro]

The benefit may be being able to cut the odd larger diameter stuff without having to buy another saw. And yes the cutting time will be longer but using the proper chain there should be no extra load on the engine.

The reduced number of cutting teeth less the number of additional teeth provided by the extra length of the chain on the larger bar would still equate to less cutting surface hence less wood displaced per revolution of the chain. That means more engine revolutions to cut the same piece of wood that could be cut in less time and with less engine revolutions when fitted with the proper sized motor for the bar. More engine revolutions for the same work means reduced engine life for the head fitted with the oversized bar. So as I said in my last response, other than the benefit of not having to purchase the correctly matched engine for your bar in order to cut larger timber I can't really see any advantages to using an oversized bar per the manufacturers recomendations.

By the way, I'm sure it works for those who know what they're doing, particularly with custom made chains that displace more wood per pass than other chains, particlarly the crappy anti-kickback chains. But my recommendation would always be if you can afford it, always buy the right sized mount for the bar.

 

[Timark80]

I was looking at craigslist in Pensacola FL.
Brand new 455,never had gas in it for $300.
If I didn't own a Stihl 025 already I'd be checkin it out.

 

[dfkrug]

I just checked my user manual and it says the standard bar length is 13",
and the recommended bar lengths are 13-20".

As for using the 24" bar, there will clearly be more friction, and the engine
may be asked to work harder if the full bar length is being used on a
particular cut. However there are other variables that also affect how hard
you work the engine: how many teeth (as mentioned), the depth of the
anti-kickback nubs, what kind of wood being cut, if you are putting any
weight on the saw, etc.

When I use the saw, I am trying to be attuned to whether or not the saw
is bogging down. It has plenty of power, in my experience, with some to
spare. I rarely am using the full 24" of bar, and I feel that there is enough
power available to go with a more aggressive chain. The fuel consumption is
high compared to my small saw, but probably normal. I am certainly wasting
the Rancher's power (and fuel) if I don't make it work harder. BTW this EPA
II engine (CARB-approved) does not put out much smoke, either.

As a slight aside, I was adjusting a friend's Stihl FarmBoss the other day and
I noticed that it had no compression release like the Husky. It's chain oiler
had stopped working, but I adjusted it to max and got it going again. He
paid a good bit more than I did for my Rancher.

 

[Egon]

More engine revolutions for the same work means reduced engine life for the head fitted with the oversized bar.

With this statement in mind should one only purchase the largest head available.

Please remember the suggestions for a longer bar are not for mainline use. Only for those times when a little extra length can be utilized. The Long bar does not always have to stay attached to the saw. Maybe it can be used only when required.

For the two saw's I have, Husky 55 and Husky365 I have bars that range from 13 inches to 24 inches in length. There are also some different types of chain. Different bars/chains get used for different purposes.

 

[Waynebro]

With this statement in mind should one only purchase the largest head available.

Of course not and that was never suggested in any of my responses. What I did say was one should purchase the "correct" head for the bar length, and since the 455 as has been pointed out in here is designed for a 13-20 inch bar then 13 to 20 inches would be the correct bar size for that head.

When you exceed manufacturers recommendations for bar length, you overtax the engine. If you cheat that by reducing the number of cutting teeth coming into contact with the wood you will increase your chance of kickback and reduce the overall life of the engine because it will take you longer to cut the same amount of wood compared to if you had you used the correct head for your sized bar.

 

[Wayne County Hose]

I'm confused about something. I'm not being a wiseguy here, I guess I just don't get it, but how does a longer bar slow the chain down? The sprocket turns the same speed whether there is a 2" or 20" bar so the chain speed should stay constant, that is in feet per minute which would dictate cutting speed. I realize that a longer bar would mean less revolutions per minute, but that is only because it is going around a longer bar. Since the speed of the sprocket is constant, the speed of the chain should be constant. So the cutting speed should be constant regardless of bar length. Am I missing something?

 

[Egon]

Am I missing something?

No you are not.

When you exceed manufacturers recommendations for bar length, you overtax the engine. If you cheat that by reducing the number of cutting teeth coming into contact with the wood you will increase your chance of kickback and reduce the overall life of the engine because it will take you longer to cut the same amount of wood compared to if you had you used the correct head for your sized bar.

Well for sure the correct head is always the way to go but for that odd cut are you saying one should not use a longer bar?

And for that odd cut the larger head can get pretty expensive can it not?