iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

Husqvarna 372xp Original Edition vs. 372xp Current Edition "X-Torq" Saws.

Started by weimedog, February 25, 2018, 11:12:37 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

weimedog

Hey I haven't had to do much of anything on 572's either, but have a LOT of time digging through 550's and 562's.

Don't really need the plug to swap parts from one "set up" and running saw to another with the 572's. The only time you need the plug is if you buy a new carb/ ignition set and it needs to be flashed once.  BUT I like my old junk pile builds, its what I do; so I get it. But like I said.... I can't build an argument that defines the old saws I like as a better solution for a pro than the 572's. I'm all ears if some one can. I can't. As much as I want to rationalize my choice on saws being OE's ...its down to I like them, not that there is a technical reason that makes any true sense. :) For me that's enough so how can I argue a different choice for someone who got to the same place? And if you have a dealer who will plug in for cheap, you can learn a lot about your operation and the saws' health that is sometimes really valuable. I do hear horror stories of dealers who charge $100 bucks to bless you with their system & knowledge....have rip offs in every business. I'm certain there are dealers out there where u can send the carb/ignition set both to get the "report" and have them flashed for a reasonable charge if folks are in the Alaska out back set.
Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

Real1shepherd

Once you get versed in working on saws....nothing wrong with duplicating the same model and/or stocking up on parts. If that model works for you and you really like it, you don't need ten other models to get work done.

There's a lot to be said for favoring a few models and just stocking up. How many times in here, have you read where someone really regretted getting rid of so-and-so model saw(s)?

I remember making a 'safety' box of parts that could fail on my pro Huskies and 98% of the time something in that plastic, waterproof box would save the day. If a crummy takes you up to a job site, there's no 'tailgate' to work off....you're on your own. I still have stuff packed and ready to go.....never seem to get away from that mentality.

Kevin

O.R.Birr

Swapping cranks on 372's.  If you swap a 372XP crank into an XT saw, you'll need to order the piston pin bearing with it because the bearing is bigger on the 372XT.  The 327XP bearing is 12mm id, 15mm od and the 372XT is 12mm id and 15.8mm od.

weimedog

Another little clarification is I assumed ONE ( there are others I am sure ) of the reasons the X-torq concept was purchased and developed from a Japanese design concept was about emissions. Just my assumption as I don't have insight to their thought process. A little more straight air added at the right place at the right time allows for a more complete combustion of the unburnt gases before exiting to the atmosphere. And the 372 X-torq was a design to allow that technology to be grafted onto the old 372 cases and saw "package" to extend the look & life of that series with minimal changes to the rest of the saw, at least that's my assumption as why else would that be intentionally done to a saw as well developed as the OE version? The market reception for the designed from the bottom up X-torq 575 had something to do with this as well is a speculation of mine as they went over like a led balloon around here. Observant folks will recognize the 575/576 had an early version of the transfer port & intake layout now familiar with the 550/562 and now 572. Fact is the XT has been sold and developed to the point they are solid saw anyway whether I like the OE's better or not. 

The divided intake allowed the saw to look externally similar enough to the OE many to this day think a 372 is a 372 without understanding the magnitude of the design changes. SO why I designate them ( it just me ) as OE and XT versions.

One of the mods I have done over the years is to "gut" the intake divider. For me originally is was to allow the gas/oil mix to wash therefore lubricate the back half/intake side of the piston as I would see more wear there on the ones I was tearing down. Kept that out of the video's for a while then finally after that became a standard approach rolled out the concept. Funny thing ( guess it depends on your humor ) was with the early ones, the PTO side bearing pockets often went before the shinny intake side of the piston took out a top end , for that matter not sure I have seen a X-torq top end fail. Ever.

So why continue doing that? Because the other benefits of that approach that began to be demonstrated like better idle characteristics and combined with some other mods better power. The down side is fuel usage.

And with the newer 372 X-torq's  Husqvarna evolved other things that make the news ones run quite well stock as delivered taking away one of the primary reason I did that modification. 

I still do that mod on the hobby X-torq's as combined with some other changes it makes for a really strong saw. Back to the Farmertec/Huztl XT. For those who want to get into the cylinder grinding game on the Aftermarket clone 372 variant's, the XT version probably is the best place to start as you can pull the transfer caps and get to the upper transfers with a dremel tool. BUT those clones will not last as long tweaked. Not that it matters. And they won't last as long as the OEM variants regardless what s done to them.
Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

weimedog

Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

O.R.Birr

Does anyone know about ignition module differences?  I've seen an ignition for sale on hlsupply that starts with part #588 for the X-Torque.  They list for $20 more than the XP version.  I spoke with a Husky dealer that said the X-Torque has a digital module while the XP has something else.  
Meanwhile, I used a cheapo ignition for an XP and it ran fine for several months.  Anyone have any light to shed on sparko-matic thingamicbobber.

Spike60

Oh boy. If I didn't have a business to run, I would happily spend the whole day correcting the many errors and misconceptions in this thread.  :)

What a lot of people, (including my best friend), struggle with is that the original 372 has and is still being produced, along with the XT version. Most of the changes and updates to the chassis over the years since the XT's came out apply to BOTH versions of the saw. There are obviously exceptions, like the piston change to the XT's in early 2011. But for the most part, the changes were the usual updates/improvements to a saw chassis that is on the market for a bunch of years. Many misconceptions are derived from having a 2004 OE and a 2018 XT in front of you and referring to the differences as OE vs XT. They are more properly identified simply as differences between older and newer versions of a long running chassis. Even that run of bad cases 7-8 years ago was shared with the OE's. IPL's can be misleading if you do not have access to what numbers a part may have superseded to. There are a hilarious number of crankshaft part numbers over the years. But there is only one crank available for the entire chassis whether you want one for a brand new 372XT or a 2002 362 XP. It's just so easy to draw the wrong conclusion if you don't have the whole picture in front of you.

For example, they do not use a different needle bearing as posted here. That needle bearing is the same for for a bunch of saws going back to the 61's and includes other chassis like the 359 and 576.

Ignitions do get complicated. There have been plenty of coils since they went away from the non limited coils way before the XT ever arrived. Due to the OE and XT having different no load RPM ratings, that has necessitated different coils throughout the years of concurrent production. (and different length plug wires) To answer OR's question, both "current" coils are digital advance curve items. The XT coil also has an updated start curve that corrects the "misfire" that could occur when using the deco valve. There's so much more going on with coils now besides spark or no spark. The original large radius non limited coil is still available for guys that want it. It's kind of still being use in the 455/460, and although it will work in a 372, technically it's for the small radius flywheel models like the 346 and 357. The newest 372 OE coil is great, if you want to pay for it, ($125!), but the XT coil works great on an OE saw. Just need to be careful that the longer wire doesn't short out on the cylinder fin.

Not saying I'm the smartest guy in the room, (that could be Walt, though it pains me to admit it :)). But I have access to all of the service bulletins and IPL updates, (and actually read them), and frequently have conversations with senior tech people in both the US and Sweden. So, I'll just say a little better informed than most guys. And I couldn't count the number of these saws, both orange and red, that have gone back and forth over my counter in the last 20 some years. But to say these saws are "completely different designs" is "completely wrong".  8)
Husqvarna-Jonsered
Ashokan Turf and Timber
845-657-6395

Tacotodd

Bob, and to think, Walt (I think) speaks very highly of you. If he didn't, he wouldn't have you to conduct his different "saw college" videos.

Just MY impression, and humble opinion. I just like his videos, and a few other peoples as well.

I could give them some mention, but this probably isn't the place for that.
Trying harder everyday.

Spike60

I'm speaking highly of him as well here. He'll get the humor, even though you didn't. We've been needling each other over these 372's for years.  :D

And I certainly disagree with plenty of guys, not just picking on Walt.  Just tons of bad info out there on these saws. And the aftermarket saws only add to the confusion. 
Husqvarna-Jonsered
Ashokan Turf and Timber
845-657-6395

Tacotodd

10-4, you are correct (I didn't get the humor of it, but now I do). I always enjoy you 2 giving each other "the business" over the saw world stuff. After all, it's highly educational and informative.

I'll take my lumps like a man and don't mind it, when I deserve it! Case made and humble acceptance of them. 

Always good to see you here Bob!
Trying harder everyday.

Spike60

Husqvarna-Jonsered
Ashokan Turf and Timber
845-657-6395

Tacotodd

Trying harder everyday.

weimedog

Quote from: Spike60 on January 07, 2021, 02:55:45 PM
Yeah, he likes to stir it up and then laugh at my reaction.   :)
::)  LOL

I did get the "nudge" ;D....so I'll bite; here goes:

But they are different designs. The very definition of a design defines all the bits and pieces. A 365 OE vs. 372 OE has minimal differences and since they are in the same "class" or "family" of saw, we say that and acknowledge they are different. They even have a different set of part numbers for the 48mm cylinder and related pieces....hence a different model in the same "class" or chassis of saw. Similar enough in cylinder "design" with the closed quad ports and all we can rationalize that THEY are the same "design" but they really aren't...they even can use the same carburetor :) Right??
THEN the 575 came along, then the back lash...then the 372 X-Torq after the OE was designated to be discontinued.
The entire X-torq concept is a different design than the more conventional 372 OE's two stroke designs before it.  Not only from the the new cylinder design and balance issues introduced  by that goofy tall piston with the big channels in the side to help it "Strato" to the taller plastic to accommodate that taller system. It's like saying as car models change that the design remains the same. Maybe in the marketing world trying to sell a model number its true, but in reality a 2000 era Dodge Durango , is rather different than the subsequent model, a different design. :) A "Hemi" is a "Hemi" right? Try swapping part from a 5.7 to a 426! Try stuffing a 50mm X-torq piston into a 372 OE cylinder. Any one think the Suzuki RM250 of the 1990's is the same design as the RM250 of the 2000's? Same model evolved into a different design.
Same thing. To maintain a "model" recognition the 372 number will live on another couple of years, but only a sales person would rationalize how its the same design saw as the 371 or quad port 372's prior to 2010 because some parts swap and they look the same :) Who does that really matter? And why would it matter? Husqvarna trying to sell into the really strong "372" market as that saw was well "designed" and many just want a new one. So why not "design" a new saw using as much as possible from both the parts bin AND look and feel with the same model to till that field. Good business. Doesn't make it the same "design".
It's like the argument over on face book where a dude is trying to argue a Husqvarna 394 is the same saw in Orange as a Jonsered 2095.... same concept some parts carry over, does that mean they are they same "design"? Of course not. And in my old world if a part had a different drawing number, it was a different design by the very definition as the drawing of a part was the design.

And I didn't even use the "NYLON" snag ....:)

How is that? :) :D ::)
Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

Real1shepherd

The 394 is more like the 2094.....and the 395 is more like the 2095. But....the stroke of the 2094 and 2095 is lower in the case than the 394 & 395. That makes them actually quite different and not completely swap-able with parts.

So....the Jonsered saws in these examples are not exactly the same as their orange counterparts. Other Jonsered saws were identical to Husky except for the tanks and handles.

Kevin

weimedog

I have the 2094 and most of a 2095, Work on the 395 series pretty frequently. Different design saws that as I mentioned might share a part here and there. The Husqvarna ( in my most humble opinion ) with its gas tank / handle as a modern saw has is a generation ahead of the Jonsered with the bar oil and gas in the cases....very little actually crosses between the two.
Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

Spike60

Pretty good my friend.

But, I was getting ready to watch a movie. Do I have to win this debate tonight, or can it wait until tomorrow? :)

Briefly, same saw, different top end and intake. Bottom end the same, as all changes over the years were received by BOTH OE and XT designs as the saws were, and are, produced concurrently. It's not all about the cylinder in my book. Granted, the cylinder is "completely different", but NOT the rest of the saw. It's not the current HEMI we both have vs the old 426, it's our HEMI vs the 6 cylinder that is available in the same, and current, chassis.

But really, old vs new and OE vs XT are 2 "completely different" discussions, and we are kind of bleeding the 2 together and likely causing some confusion. (with us as well as anyone reading our drival) Remember the 16 fin vs the 20 fin flywheel deal? :)

Husqvarna-Jonsered
Ashokan Turf and Timber
845-657-6395

Tacotodd

Yeah, I'm going with this same type of discussion with my Husky dealer right now. Even though he has been to their "school" it's sad when someone off of the street is now showing him just a few of the things that I have learned from over on this site.

And it's funny what he calls me as far as well received names. He and I both know that they are in fun, but unless you know our background with each other, then you'd think that we were at each others throats! He learns from me and I buy from him. How's that for a symbiotic relationship? Because we both have fun and learn from each other!

Before I got into chainsaws, I used to sell him car/truck/heavy equipment parts and pieces. Now I buy a bunch of saw stuff from him. Now we have just swapped who is on what side of the counter. That's how life goes. But we both like it. He never beat me up on prices and I don't beat him up. I know that he has bills to pay and I enjoy hanging out there. He even feeds me occasionally for lunch.

Life is good!
Trying harder everyday.

weimedog

Quote from: Spike60 on January 10, 2021, 08:28:40 PM

Briefly, same saw, different top end and intake. Bottom end the same, as all changes over the years were received by BOTH OE and XT designs as the saws were, and are, produced concurrently. It's not all about the cylinder in my book. Granted, the cylinder is "completely different", but NOT the rest of the saw.
Top end, Carb, Intake Boot, Filter Holder, Choke Lever, all new designs. The Taller designed Top Cover, Handle bar, Chain Brake Handle...LOOK the same but are DESIGNED for the 1/2 inch taller X-torq cylinder. Kind of like the mustang's trying to get back to the "retro" look from the 60's. Just a different body.

And true some of the new parts retro back...like different ignition that rev limits at 13300 instead of the 13500 or more required to best setup the OE 50mm different designed cylinder, Can even blend the "different" carb to the OE's. Different choke level...different crank can be argued as an upgrade. But it's more because like the 51.4's they aren't building the OE spare parts if the XT's are "good enough", or like with the similar looking covers the BIGGER new versions are so much larger they easily encompass the older parts, BUT there is a huge gap between the cylinder and top cover because that new cover was DESIGNED for the taller X-torq cylinder. And may effect cooling and air flow across the smaller cylinder that wasn't designed in concert with that now taller cover. Things like the flywheel where an actual upgrade to address cooling issues, but the top coves & things weren't concieved in that upgrade spirit, they were "designed" for a new cylinder concept called X-Torq.

Wow start adding it up there isn't a lot that hasn't been "updated" ( changed, designed to be the XT vs. OE ). And to most the "heart" of a piece of power equipment is how it burns gas/air to make power, and that is the cylinder design....which is completely different between the XT and OE. :)

I think it would be fun to try and list the parts that are the same. Not the cases! They will accommodate the OE but were DESIGNED for the longer flange of the XT....so lets try that direction. What parts are the same?
Oil pump & hoses ( NOW different with Latest design), worm gear, chain brake parts, Pull start, Flywheel, Seals NOT bearings :), Spark plug? Decomp? , That support plate or bracket under the carb. Tank handle, Throttle trigger and assembly... side cover. And then how many of those retro of OTHER saw models..like Bar oil mechanism & chain brake stuff to the 385/390's, decomp. Using Spikes logic the 390 is now the same design and same saw as the X-torq. :) Because I can "blend" these and other things like the pto side cover, ignition, even carb if ur clever back to a 385/390.

What this is goes along with the argument how many hairs does it take for u to loose before you are considered bald? Bob's saying because the X-torq and OE 372 use the same screws, have the same model number and look the same, they are the same SAW. I'm saying that even though they are similar and have the same model number they are different designs. Back to the RM250 analogy. I would say we are well past the "hair lose" stage and approaching the bald point.


:) We are making progress...:) ALL in fun I hope or I would stop in an instant.
Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

weimedog

Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

weimedog

Husqvarna 365sp/372xpw Blend, Jonsered 2171 51.4mm XPW build,562xp HTSS, 560 HTSS, 272XP, 61/272XP, 555, 257, 242, 238, Homelite S-XL 925, XP-1020A, Super XL (Dad's saw); Jonsered 2094, Three 920's, CS-2172, Solo 603; 3 Huztl MS660's (2 54mm and 1 56mm)

Thank You Sponsors!