been getting parts to keep my two 820 going and was at a old dealer that i know that closed a few years ago and he had 7 saws 1 820 3 920 and 3 930 supers .all turn over had chain brakes i got pistons jugs nos carb boots,i have parts to build 2 930 s with nos parts .i left with a truck load of parts and saws,going back for the rest soon.there is still stuff out there
8) I have seen a few big J-reds but they weren't well known here, very few dealers.
He shoots, he scores!
Got a little more than what you needed for your 820, eh? Great haul, and make sure you go back and get that second load. Real good saw family. Love that chassis. There are no parts other than finds like you've run into here, so you're probably all set to keep running these things as long as you'll be cutting wood. :)
Pictures please!
Can't beat that...get what you can to keep 'em running.
Heard horror stories of old J'red dealers in rural NA going to the dump with truck loads of NOS parts......those stories keep me up at night.
Kevin
I've only worked on one J-red in my lifetime and it was some 49 cc model which impressed me for a 3 cuber .It was something simple like a carb rebuild and a choke linkage not closing .It's just another brand in this area that had no dealers .
this man was small dealer but sold a lot of things lawn mowers saws snowblowers,loggers were there for everthing because he took care of you. he knew if your saw didnt run you didnt work.if the parts were in the shop, you went home running.tilton eqiupment was 25 miles away so he got it fast.i got 2 670s from him in the mid 80s loved those saws.i was dealer for tilton in the 80s for chains and bars files that stuff.he still has saws all over in building many makes it would take couple days to see it.i am lucky he only has let me in to pick.i will get more soon as he called and found more 930 parts.i might have to saw lumber too build a place to pile things.
This whole subject goes back decades and has evolved .At one time names like Dolmar ,Partner, J-red made quality products and some so well the now 40 year old products operate as good or better than what's built today .Those now over the years have been absorbed by larger companies and for all intents have became collectors or restorers stock and trade .There are still a few of us that do that kind of stuff rather than argue about what kind of mix oil or brand gasoline is used or how to spit polish a machine so it's nice and tidy .Parts however are getting harder to find for those older machines .So you either figure out what can be substituted or the machine is relegated to the shelf forever and eventually ends up in a land fill .
The 920 was a strong running saw and had one of the strongest handle bar setup for anti vibration.
A design Partner shared with them.
Partner actually gets credit for that nice handle design. On the Jonny 900's, it was a big improvement over the mount muncher set up on the 910.
Parts for defunct brands are hit and miss. All of these brands had at least some dealers that did a decent job with the line and may be a good parts score like this one. If they didn't toss them in the dumpster one day to make some room. Dealers are less likely to do that anymore, as the internet allows continued sale of those parts long after the walk in sales have fizzeled out. If you've got the time to do it that is. :)
Decades ago Easy Rider magazine had a special addition that listed what fits what Harley and what could fit with alterations .With that in mind I'm not aware if anything has ever been done regarding what could be interchanged across brand lines on chainsaws .So if any of that is done it comes from personal experimentation and then only to what is shared info .
Quote from: drlewis on November 21, 2021, 03:15:31 PM
this man was small dealer but sold a lot of things lawn mowers saws snowblowers,loggers were there for everthing because he took care of you. he knew if your saw didnt run you didnt work.if the parts were in the shop, you went home running.tilton eqiupment was 25 miles away so he got it fast.i got 2 670s from him in the mid 80s loved those saws.i was dealer for tilton in the 80s for chains and bars files that stuff.he still has saws all over in building many makes it would take couple days to see it.i am lucky he only has let me in to pick.i will get more soon as he called and found more 930 parts.i might have to saw lumber too build a place to pile things.
Life is good for some vintage saw owners with 'connections'! Get everything you possibly can for the old J'reds. You can always sell parts down the road to the rest of us....lol.
Kevin
Quote from: Al_Smith on December 20, 2021, 05:49:11 PM
Decades ago Easy Rider magazine had a special addition that listed what fits what Harley and what could fit with alterations .With that in mind I'm not aware if anything has ever been done regarding what could be interchanged across brand lines on chainsaws .So if any of that is done it comes from personal experimentation and then only to what is shared info .
Jonsereds was a company that shared MANY parts in their models over the yrs. Very few of their modern ported saws were proprietary designs. It's just good business and engineering.
Those of us that run threads about Jonsereds, know what fits what. A lot of it was borne out of necessity since the factory quit supporting original saws as early as the late 80's.
Electrolux Group AB took over Jonsereds around '78 and moved production over to the Partner plant...which they also bought. The 910 was the last 'true' Jonsered engineered pro saw. After that, they were influenced by Partner and Husky....then Husky alone. Eventually, Husky pulled free from Electrolux.
The 's' at the end of Jonsered is a debated topic. In early 910 ads, it was still on, but later dropped. One thing for sure;after the 910, it was never used again. I don't know if it was a battle between Electrolux and the old Jonsereds staff, or what
Kevin
Quote from: Spike60 on December 20, 2021, 07:56:22 AM
Partner actually gets credit for that nice handle design. On the Jonny 900's, it was a big improvement over the mount muncher set up on the 910.
Parts for defunct brands are hit and miss. All of these brands had at least some dealers that did a decent job with the line and may be a good parts score like this one. If they didn't toss them in the dumpster one day to make some room. Dealers are less likely to do that anymore, as the internet allows continued sale of those parts long after the walk in sales have fizzeled out. If you've got the time to do it that is. :)
Agree with the parts finding debacle. But even with the Internet, some old Canadian dealers found it easier to just haul NOS parts to the dump, rather than selling parts online.
If you talk to loggers that used all three of the 900 series saw, most preferred the 910. Personally, although the handle on the 920/930 is sturdier, I think it's a bloated whale. Jonsereds had a 'kit' that you put on the 910 handle that beefed it up. I actually have one as they were sold.
Yeah, the handle on the 910 was problematic. But then, if you get your bar stuck in a cut, pulling hard on the handle is usually not the best route to take.
Kevin
For Jonsered collectors there are "officially" 3 groupings of saws. First are the original pre-elux saws called "pure" Jonsereds back here in the east. Pure in the sense that Jonsereds was still it's own independant company. 621, 70E, 49SP, 90. And like Kevin said, the 910 was the last saw introduced before the company was bought.
The 3rd group is called "shared" and generally refers to any saw that was little more than a re-labled Husky. 2171 and such on up to the end with the 2253 and 2260 being the last 2 Jonsered chassis introduced.
The 2nd group is the tough one as there were a lot of saws that had what we'd call mixed blood in them as the blending of the brands was taking place. We call them "true" or "actual" Jonsereds that are not merely relabled Huskys. These are saws like the 920/930 that were updates to the 910 chassis. (a lot of them), 455/535. There were some shared models during this period, but they were Partners, not Huskys. 490/590, 2077/2083 and the 2045/2050. There's some debate as to where the 625/630/670 land as they had some differences that make them more than simply red versions of the corresponding Huskys. The very last chassis to be introduced that was completely unique to Jonsered was the 2051/2054/2055. It looks more like a Partner than a Jonny, but by this time, elux was folding the Partner and Pioneer brands together, soon to be joined by yellow Poulans.
For a short time, Poulan Pro dealers had a pretty interesting catalog to sell from. Some decent saws from all three brands all under one roof. Thems were the good old days, huh?
I always considered my 2094 as kind of a unique dawg. Most think it's just a rebadged Husky 394. But it's not.....in addition to the usual handle/tank differences, its stroke is more down in the case than the 394. Tank is mag, recoil is stout etc. Very serious J'red saw and differs from the 2095.
Plus, it's the newest saw I own....lol. I was trying to find a decent Husky 394 example and wound up with the unique 2094. I even have the workshop manual for the 394....I was so sure I was going to buy one.;D
Kevin
Yup. 2094/2095 share just a few parts with the 394/395, but they are a unique Jonsered chassis. Those starters had to be strong because the 94 didn't have a deco.
2094 arrived at pretty much the same time as the 2055 chassis. 2051 might have actually beaten it, giving "last saw" honors to the big guys. I'd have to look at old price lists to be sure. Could have a fun discussion about which saw replaced what model and covered what market segment. The 2077 and 2094 came out at the same time when the 930/930 went away. The 2094 moved up the displacement ladder, and the 2077 and then 2083 had to fill the gap between it and the 670. Eventually the 2186/2188 soldiered on as the top Jonny until the end.
Only takes a few minutes to sum this stuff up, and have them all in the basement on the shelf. But can't lose sight of how many years are involved. A good chassis is often on the market for 20+ years, with a few model variations along the way. Look how much time the 2100 and then 395 have been out, and now the 585/592 are just around the corner.
Yeppers....not having a decomp suited me just fine.....I might have plugged it anyway. 8)
That's so true about the 2100/2101 thing(and others) and 20yr runs for models. My only beef is Husky(and others) not continuing to support models with parts. Seems like some companies make an arbitrary time line when they quit making parts for models while other companies continue making parts if there is a demand.
Hard to put a saw on the shelf when everything works perfectly and it does everything you want it to..............
Kevin
spike this sounds about like trying to sort out autocars from whites gmcs and volvos!
i personally feel like i can see the husky 61 as the root of the 372-395. like they all morphed out of the 61s bosom. the SBC of orange saws. i havent run one in a while but had fun building a few.
The 1100 morphed into the 2100....the 394 morphed from the discontinued 2101 and the 395 morphed from the discontinued 394.
Not sure how you figure the 61 into any of that?
Kevin
Just seemed that way from all the boxes of scrapyard old huskys ive piddled with trying to rescue saws. figuring out the model numbers and interchangeability in my basement by trial and error. 61s came out before i did.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/43722/75851E7E-DF39-49BA-92A6-09529F1DB217-877-000000C7873D04CD_zpsd91afb68.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1528475367)
The Husky 61 is a homeowner quality saw. As sturdy and long-lived as it is, I don't see it as the 'bosom mother' bearing the Husky pro saw series that I mentioned earlier. The 1100CD was the bosom mother of those saws.
Kevin
Youre being a little snooty on Christmas kevin. I didnt say bosom mother, wasnt born in the 50s and never seen the west coast or these big pro saws sold there.
My bad for being ignorant. Please forgive me, i never saw an XP in the two digit series era to differentiate pro from homeowner.
Quote from: Real1shepherd on December 25, 2021, 01:08:10 AM
The Husky 61 is a homeowner quality saw
Kevin
I own or have owned 61's, 272's, 285cd, 288's, 380, 395, and a 2100cd. The 61 may not be a large displacement saw but I would never consider it a homeowner class saw.
Quote from: mike_belben on December 25, 2021, 08:40:32 AM
Youre being a little snooty on Christmas kevin. I didnt say bosom mother, wasnt born in the 50s and never seen the west coast or these big pro saws sold there.
My bad for being ignorant. Please forgive me, i never saw an XP in the two digit series era to differentiate pro from homeowner.
Not meaning to be snooty. You made the claim that the 61 was the bosom mother of the 372-395 saws. I don't see it that way with the Husky pro saws I know related to the 395, is what I was saying. I gave you the evolution of those saws.This has nothing to do with being an Christmas Scrooge, so don't go there and turn this into the tired trope of west coast versus everyone else, please. You're better than that.
'XP' in the beginning of its use meant extra power which came from a hotter module spark for wet west coast conditions(you could buy a regular 2100CD module or the 'XP' module designation). That's straight gospel from a regional west coast Husky rep in the late 70's. The term morphed later into meaning much more for their line.
@Chet;I was being a little too hard on the venerable 61. Homeowner, rancher, firewood, technically small pro saw. Tough as nails.
Kevin
Thanks for the history.
It seemed to me the open transfers was the only thing that made them cheaper to manufacturer than a 72cc. If i remember right all sorts of top end parts swapped around from 61, 66, 268, 72, 272. It been ten years and i cant recall anymore.. I had a few index cards thatre long gone after the move.
Quote from: mike_belben on December 23, 2021, 03:44:39 PM
spike this sounds about like trying to sort out autocars from whites gmcs and volvos!
i personally feel like i can see the husky 61 as the root of the 372-395. like they all morphed out of the 61s bosom. the SBC of orange saws. i havent run one in a while but had fun building a few.
No editing, just bolding. Im not making any claims to know. Its just what seemed reasonable to me to conclude by taking junk apart long after half the folks on the assembly lines were probably in the grave. I dont think what i said was out of line or unreasonable but thanks for the quick correction.
You guys don't stop arguing, there ain't gonna be any presents for either of ya.
Most chassis all had a first model to hit the market when they were introduced. 1100 was the first of what became the 2100/2101/298 family.
On the 61 family, first one out of the gate was the 162SE; definitely a pro saw. Followed shortly by the 61. 1977/1978? This chassis went up tio 1997 when the 272 and 670 Champ finished their runs and were replaced by the 372/2171 chassis.
To me it never works too well when trying to use today's pro/homeowner yardstick to measure saws from 40 years ago. On the funny side, everybody gets insulted when their saw is called a homeowner saw. And a lotta guys just don't get it if they state that a 365 isn't a pro saw but the 372 is, when they share 99% of their parts. Some say it about the 565 and will probably say it about the 585 when it comes out cause it doesn't have an XP label on it.
Way back when didn't homeowner mean the saws that you'd buy at K-Mart? Husky and stihl used terms like Rancher and Farm Boss and such that are still being used, but those early saws can't possibly be thrown in with what are today called homeowner saws. They sure make a lot of junk today though. 235's and MS170 type stuff are what has taken over for the low end market these days. But the upper end of their plastic case saws are pretty decent.
What was driving this years ago was simply an attempt to spawn several models from a common chassis and save some engineering costs while filling out the catelog with different models at different price points. On the Jonsered trio, the catelog would say the 625 was great for firewood, the 630 was great for pulpwood cutters, and the 670 was great for timber fallers. They gotta stick something in there along side the pictures, right?
Wouldn't see that on the big cube saws of course, cause it'd be kind of silly to come out with some kind of 99cc Homeowner Saw on the the 2100 chassis. But there'd be more parts out there for sure. What is the legal requirement for supporting a product? 10 years? After that a company looks at the business case to continue parts support. If the demand is there, then why not fill it? "They just want to sell you a new saw" doesn't apply to folks running the parts departments. But what usually happens is they sell out the parts for however long the inventory lasts, often way more than 10 years. But when it dries up, the party's over.
Hope everybody has a great Christmas today. :)
What I read was: ".....i can see the husky 61 as the root of the 372-395."
Just trying to clarify, not argue.
Kevin
Quote from: Spike60 on December 25, 2021, 10:39:05 AM
You guys don't stop arguing, there ain't gonna be any presents for either of ya.
Most chassis all had a first model to hit the market when they were introduced. 1100 was the first of what became the 2100/2101/298 family.
On the 61 family, first one out of the gate was the 162SE; definitely a pro saw. Followed shortly by the 61. 1977/1978? This chassis went up tio 1997 when the 272 and 670 Champ finished their runs and were replaced by the 372/2171 chassis.
To me it never works too well when trying to use today's pro/homeowner yardstick to measure saws from 40 years ago. On the funny side, everybody gets insulted when their saw is called a homeowner saw. And a lotta guys just don't get it if they state that a 365 isn't a pro saw but the 372 is, when they share 99% of their parts. Some say it about the 565 and will probably say it about the 585 when it comes out cause it doesn't have an XP label on it.
Way back when didn't homeowner mean the saws that you'd buy at K-Mart? Husky and stihl used terms like Rancher and Farm Boss and such that are still being used, but those early saws can't possibly be thrown in with what are today called homeowner saws. They sure make a lot of junk today though. 235's and MS170 type stuff are what has taken over for the low end market these days. But the upper end of their plastic case saws are pretty decent.
What was driving this years ago was simply an attempt to spawn several models from a common chassis and save some engineering costs while filling out the catelog with different models at different price points. On the Jonsered trio, the catelog would say the 625 was great for firewood, the 630 was great for pulpwood cutters, and the 670 was great for timber fallers. They gotta stick something in there along side the pictures, right?
Wouldn't see that on the big cube saws of course, cause it'd be kind of silly to come out with some kind of 99cc Homeowner Saw on the the 2100 chassis. But there'd be more parts out there for sure. What is the legal requirement for supporting a product? 10 years? After that a company looks at the business case to continue parts support. If the demand is there, then why not fill it? "They just want to sell you a new saw" doesn't apply to folks running the parts departments. But what usually happens is they sell out the parts for however long the inventory lasts, often way more than 10 years. But when it dries up, the party's over.
Hope everybody has a great Christmas today. :)
Husky and Jonsereds were classic about 'stretching' their pro saw/use designations. Like the 49sp....that venerable design is considered by most to be a 'pro saw', but it really wasn't. Ran and held up like one though...great design. Versus the 621 which was truly built(and priced) like a tank/pro saw. Like you said, a lot of it was just advertising/marketing.
I always considered the Husky 298 a 'homeowner saw'....lol. To this day, I have no idea what they were thinking when they made that beast. No manual oiler and a cheap recoil assembly.....everything else a 2100.
The legal requirement for auto parts in the US used to be about 15yrs? I'm not sure there was anything required for chainsaws......seemed to me more or less an honor system. In reality, Electrolux Group AB probably back then looked at parts sales and the bean counters decided.
Kevin
Quote from: Spike60 on December 25, 2021, 10:39:05 AM
You guys don't stop arguing, there ain't gonna be any presents for either of ya.
. :)
Too late already got mine. Heated socks and walkie talkies so i can tell the gopher what to fetch me next and keep mileage off the socks! ;D
Merry Christmas gents
I don't have a horse in this race so first I'll first just say Merry Christmas .That said no matter where you are on the internet there is always an "expert " albeit not all are authoritarian in their presentation .So then you have a choice either ignore it or use the actual ignore function then you don't have to listen to it .I've exercised that last option on many places .I have seen so many web forums go to the dogs when they just turn into a place to argue and I would not take a party in having this one do the same .However with Jeff at the helm I'd bet a dollar to a donut that will never happen . ;)
Merry Christmas everyone!
Two saws that originally became the biggest development for today's saws.
The 61.5cc Husqvarna 162SE introduced in Sweden and Finland 1975.
The 68cc Stihl 042 in 1976.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20211225_141932.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1640465306)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20211225_144622.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1640465306)
While I only own a few Husqvarnas ,281,2100CD plus two trim saws I think 235 or something like that .I do however have one 042,two 048 ,one 038 av and two 038 magnums and one 028 Stihls .They all share the same design and from my perspective are good solidly built dependable saws as are the Husky's .
It may be a point of debate but from my perspective saws of about the same displacement will have about the same amount of power no matter who made them .That said from a collector/ restores stand point the less popular brands in this day and age are much more difficult to find the parts for . Most of the "brand loyalty " thing is like the Ford Chevy thing .Goes on forever .
@HolmenTree (https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php?action=profile;u=11589) ; was hoping you'd jump in here Willard.
I guess the deal about some markets seeing a saw a couple years before others isn't all that new, right? (2 more weeks til the 592's arrive) I suppose in order to say a saw was a big improvement, you have to look at what preceeded it. For the 162, that would be the 163/263 and their 77cc brothers the 180/280/380? Most of these saws are ultra rare around here. I have a nice 280, clean 480, and a good A77, but it has to be 25 years since I've seen either of the 62cc saws. I like that 280; nice power in a compact package, (for it's day). But that's just me playing on the firewood pile 50 years later. Not the same as being "in the game" and forming an opinion when the saws were current models and seeing large numbers of them in pro use as these saws preceed my involvment in the industry.
You on the other hand, if I've done the math right, were running saws when these models were current. :) That makes you the only one here who may have some real world experience with these saws. Not like I'm trying to make you feel old, cause I'm 2 years older than you.
Confusing amount of models back then due to updates, different ignitions and such. Today they probably wouldn't be given completey different model numbers. The basic chassis endured for a long time, but some of the model numbers were only around 3-5 years, making each one all the more rare.
???
Thanks Bob you made many good points there.
,
The Husqvarna 162 was the very first of the modern saw design we have today. The older 163 was still quite ancient compared to the 162.
The Stihl 042 introduced after the 162 was as ancient as the the 163 as the photos show with the fuel /oil caps within the same tank.
It wasn't until about 1980 when the 61cc 038AV was introduced with the more modern design with separate tanks.
First pic 1974 Husqvarna 163
2nd pic 1976/'77 Stihl 042
3rd pic 1975/'76 Husqvarna 162SG with heated handles.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20211226_160921.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1640556715)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20211226_160857.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1640556715)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20211226_160832.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1640556716)
Advertisement from September 1976
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20170119_113755.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1484856069)
And it was interesting that Jonsereds used separate front and rear oil/fuel tanks in the 1970's but designed to them together in the 1980's, then later separated them again.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21589/20211226_165729.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1640559353)
Interesting points about how models are designated / described, Spike makes good point about the 565 which I'm sure gained the Pro tag after it was introduced to market ? the 585 was launched with that tag from go and as I've been running one for over 2 months now it is without doubt a pro saw so it makes me wonder at the marketing logic of the non "XP" tag, the cost is not so removed from the 592 XP . I had a 592 delivered a couple of days ago so interested to see the XP difference ?
The saws are so similar these days that the XP's could almost be called the "factory modified" version. Price spreads vary in different markets, but I've found a $100 spread to be where the junior model will start to move.
Willard, there's a none too subtle message in that 1976 ad for the 162. Bit of a shot across the bow at Jonsered and Partner. :)
That fluids in the crankcase thing went back and forth but Jonsered seemed to hang on to it the longest. The 2054/2055 used it up until the late 90's. Oxidation/corrosion in the fuel tank was the common worry with most of them. On the Husky side they saw some value in getting the fluids out of the case and away from the heat. But then realized that the heat was actually beneficial for the bar oil, so back in the case it went in future designs.
Thanks for the pic of the 163 from 1974; the year I graduated high school. LOL
Well there is a big source of my misinformedness. Thats a word right?
The oldest two huskys ive encountered were a 45 and a 61. And from there the numbers all went up but i never had anything in the 1xx range. It went from xx to 2xx to 3xx for me so i just assumed ot was like bobcats number system. The series then the size.
I have no idea why husky started with 1xx then went to xx then to 2xx
I never knew there was a 162 and dont see why they went backwards in number to a 61. If im understanding it right. Ive never seen a saw timeline pictorial so its just what ive tried to piece together in my head #1 and theyre just tools so i dont really care that much #2. If the thing runs i will use it someday.
Let's not forget the Husky 65 and 77 :) :)
Husqvarna dates back to the middle ages .Of course before chainsaws were even thought of .Imagine that from arms and armor for mounted knights to sewing machines ,chainsaws and heaven only knows how many other items .
In this market the players have changed .What used to be Homelite and McCulloch is now Husqvarna and Stihl for the most part .Others such as Poulan ,J-Red, Partner ,Pioneer ,Dolmar became absorbed by others .The great mystery of attempting to restore some of these brands is finding the parts that might work in place of OEM .It's rather challenging at times to say the least .