Displacement differences , ect ? 565 , 572 Husqvarna

[Tramp Bushler]

Hello ;
Every manual I have found says the 565 and 572 saws have the same 71 cc displacement.
Is that really the case or is it just repeated mis typed ?

If they are the same displacement. What is the actual difference and why is there different power numbers ?  
I was very impressed with my 572. And got a great deal on a 565 with 1 tank ran through it. $600.00 w/20" b+c.
Thanks in advance

[Big_eddy]

The 565 has a few less of the XP goodies and doesn't have the crank stuffers the 572xp does. Same chassis, same displacement, just a few differences so a bit less power. Like the 545/550 and 555/562 twins.

[Tramp Bushler]

What are. Crank stuffers ? 
 When I test ran the 565. I noted that it didn't Scream like the 572 did . ( Once the 572 would warm up )  otherwise I didn't notice much difference. But then when I test ran it, it only had a little 20" bar, full skip chisel chain And a 7 tooth sprocket. 
 I run 8 tooth on 70+ cc saws and up if running a 32" or shorter bar. 
 I was very happy with the saw. 
 I would post up a pic but don't have strong enough cell service for the upload. 

[weimedog]

Crank stuffers are about primary compression by making the crank case volume less. Theoretically should help power especially up in the RPM's. But also the 565 has a few other little things different, the design may cost less on the price sheet but its design ends up being a very pleasant saw to run. It's design moves the "power band" to a lower RPM and has the feel of a wider power band even if it's not as snappy ( throttle response ) or as powerful at peak RPM's as the 572. Result is a saw where the feel allows me to hog into wood and as the RPM's come way down before the chain stalls....makes it easy to "adjust" and adapt at the expense of some power.

I have both. I like my 565 and did a LOT of work in hard wood with a 28inch B&C which it easily pulled. One of the easiest saws to adapt to I have experienced. Did a lot of video coverage on that saw starting with blocking a 30inch plus hard maple with a 28 inch bar... it's just a solid saw and will perform well for a person not into fads and online experts selling their concept of what's best.

To get my 572 to where I like it as much as my 565 ( Yup, read that again if you are questioning ) I bumped the compression to around 165-170 psi with a thin gasket, popup piston, and also tweaked a couple of other things. That gave it the "flexibility" where it pulls down into the lower RPM "smoothly", w/o a quick drop off in the power band like the 565 does stock with the longer bars. AND it has more overall power as well. So from a "hobby" perspective I now like the tweaked 572 more, but can't honestly say it's a better saw for the work I do had I left it stock. Both are excellent, and both have their place in my humble opinion. Most "Pro's" would op for the 572 for the snappier throttle response and have the skill to keep that saw in it's sweet spot power wise.

[Spike60]

I hate agreeing with the guy that wrote the last post, cause it's more fun to argue with him, but that's a really good and thoughtful analysis. There's a lot to be said for "feel" and personal preference that is of course subjective, and therefore unacceptable in the typical online narrative where "numbers" are generally the dominant criteria for forming opinions. (I just won the 2023 run on sentence award). Power band is something that doesn't get talked about as much as it ought too. More than simply how much power, WHERE the power is in the RPM band has a lot to do with how a saw feels. And an operator's preference for that feel may easily be at odds with all of the cant and cookie racers out there. But ya oughta run a saw that YOU like, right?

How many saws have we picked up where we really just like how they run and feel? Good power, where we want it. The ability to push on it, vs concern about keeping the revs up. Weight. Acceleration and throttle response. (My 2153 and 242xp have no equals for me in that metric. And I have just about every Jonny and Husky ever made)

So, while it's fine to seek opinions, in the end it's best to go with your own preferences. Weight and tossability for me are as Important as power. I do a lot of work with 50cc saws, where Walt wouldn't even have on on the truck. Right or wrong isn't part of the discussion any more than you'd go into a restaurant with someone and tell them they are ordering the wrong dinner. Enjoy the saws YOU like and don't get pinned down buy the online experts.

Next post will cover the same displacement for different models. This one's already waaaaay too long.     :D

[barbender]

 I may have said this before, but I used to follow motocross when I was a teenager. Me and my buddies really got a kick out of the "hit bikes" that we rode around gravel pits. Hit bikes are the ones that are just dead on the bottom, but you get up to a certain rpm and they just take off! Yamaha Banshee 4 wheelers are probably the most egregious examples of that I ever rode, the power band was like a light switch when the power came on. 

 I remember reading several magazine articles back then, where the writers got to try out a Pro rider's works bike. Now these guys could get anything, and have the engine tuned however they wanted. But what typically stood out in those articles was that those bikes made smooth power. Which makes them easy to ride. Well I'm of the same opinion with chainsaws. The ones that make smooth power are easier to run. I'll take a smooth power delivery over a pipey ripper every day. 

 

[joe_indi]

"Both the 572 XP and 565 are in the 70cc engine class, but the 572 XP is specifically designed for clients who require more power in the forestry segment. For users who don't need quite as much power and more maneuverability, the 565 may be best."

(from an article on the net)

Husqvarna debuts newest chainsaws

[Tramp Bushler]

Thank you All ! 
 So it appears I accidentally stumbled onto what I prefer ! 
 The Only thing I did not like about my 572 was the way it seemed to fall on its face when I would dog in or fill the bar. 
 My 460 Stihls would strongly out grunt it. 
 But my goodness was it Fast. As fast as my hopped up 044s from the early 90s. Speed like a 242 Husky has. 
 And the general handling and of course the heated handles and carb. 
 I originally thought the 565 would be comparable to a 266. Which I've cut over a million bf of timber with with 32" bars and full skip chisel ground chisel. 
 But it seems the 565 should be more comparable to the 371 and 372.  
 Happy day ! 
 Putting in bar full face cuts with a saw that falls down on the grunt is kinda sad ! 

 I'll be running it mostly with 28" bars as here in the Interior we do 80% of our limbing walking on the ground. Whereas in S.E. Ak. We do 80% walking on the felled tree or blowdown. So a short bar works ok here. 
 For those that have cut with both, how do they (565) compare with the 372 or 2172 ? 
 As a side note, I'm really enjoying my 2172 .  Took me a day to start getting used to how it wants to be started. 
 But we're getting to be friends now. 

[Tramp Bushler]

My Avatar  here is a 60" Sitka Spruce stump that I fell with a stock 372 , 8 tooth drive sprocket. 32" Oregon. 3/8 63 ga Stihl RS chisel ground chisel semi skip. It took me around 4 1/2 minutes to fall it.  Had to babysit it around a bushy western Hemlock , then stop that swing and bring it back a few feet so I could hit my lay 100 feet out  which was less that 6 feet wide. Big rock on one side and a 4' spruce stump on the other side. Worked beautifully. 
  All that to say. I'm very comfortable and capable with a power band similar to a 372. 

[Spike60]

First chassis to use the same displacement approach was the much loved 365 and 372 when they went from the original designs. The only difference is the presence of divider on the inside of the transfer port cap to bring things down a little bit. Prior to that the 365/2165 used the 48mm top end which is hugely underrated. Again, IMO, due to intelligent saw discussion being somewhat polluted by online discussion. 

If ya don't mind a little more history, the 2mm difference between models was shared with many chassis going back a ways. In one way, it's easier to understand what's going on with the Jonsered models as we're not hampered by whether or not there's an XP label on the saw. 630 Super is certainly every bit a pro saw as the 670. As was the 2165/2171 and 2166/2172. Thing is though, that Jonsered could get away with changing the model numbers, whereas Husky couldn't possibly let go of "372". The strength of that model number will likely never be duplicated by anything else, so the marketing folks wisely stayed with it. 

Marketing has a lot to do it this as well, and it's not a bad thing. Why not offer more than one model on a given chassis vs having to design every single saw from the ground up? Other than just price the different models are geared a little more towards users with different needs. In some cases, expected bar length has something to do with it with the junior models directed towards those who are less likely to run longer bars. And as well discussed here, the power band thing is real. 

The above ramble holds true for pretty much all of the different saws in this size range as port variations are small, and in most cases designed to maintain speed vs volume. (That'll get a lot of the port grinders all worked up). 

Things get a little cloudy when get into the smaller displacement saws of the 200 and 300 series where there was some crossover into what we'd call homeowner territory. But now with the 545/550 and 555/562 even in the smaller saws they are all pro models. Homeowner saws are all separated by the plastic case and clamshell monikers. But there was one chassis.........to be discussed at another time. 🙄 

[Tramp Bushler]

That is all Great information!! I Really appreciate it and your time writing it up !
It's like the 266/268/272.  I had at least 2, 266s and I had 1, 272. I guess I liked and I did use the 272. But for some reason it just wasn't all that into it ! Had I known about cutting about a 3/4" square out of the top cover , on the left side of the devider between the jug and the carb box. I probably would have liked it a lot more. Nice clean air filter and all that. It worked wonders with the 288s. Then Husky started doing it from the factory. AWESOME.
I got bummed on Jonsereds with the 2083. That thing was kindof a turd. And I cut a bunch of timber with it. Finally it got wrecked when a big red cedar root wad dropped free of the log , but a sliver slab grabbed the chain , drove the dogs into the tree and broke the main case.
I had been hoping it was just a bigger P+C version of the 475 Poulan Pro/Partner. Which was a good and could be Hot little saw.  But. Alas ☹️
I agree that the 372 is something of a sacred # for Husky !
The best one for me was the Western with the 75cc p+c.
But the 71cc was fine also
Very much wish they still made that saw !!!

[Tramp Bushler]

I'm really looking forward to picking up the 565 in a couple weeks. And the Western kit for it. ( Full wrap, falling dogs and large clutch cover. ! I wonder is the ignition can be swapped with the generator and put heated handles and carb on it ?

[Spike60]

Haha, bet you had the 2083II, and not the original 2083. The II version was a detuned 2077. They did the same thing with the 2054. The II version was lame, and also less displacement. Not sure how they got away with that nonsense. 

2077/2083 was a poor substitute for the 830/930 to begin with IMO. They should have upped the 670 to a 52mm top end as was done with the 268-272. I have one I built for myself a couple years ago. Dubbed it the 672Super.   

[Tramp Bushler]

 

 

 

[Tramp Bushler]

At the moment it's just a short bar half wrap. But it will be getting the Western kitted out and will probably live most of its life with a 28 " bar. 
 Unless I can find reduced weight 30" bars for it. 

[Spike60]

Congrats on the saw. 

See a nice track drive snow thrower sitting there waiting for the weather to change in a few months. Those things are great on steep grades. Not just for the obvious climbing, but they resist running away from you on the way down. 

[Tramp Bushler]

That is at the dealers in Fairbanks. 
 Would love to have one for the homestead. But just for paths around the house. It's 6/10 the mile from my house to the gravel road that gets plowed semi regularly in the winter . 83 K20 is my old plow truck. Often it is too light duty. I need a 2 ton dump truck with a V plow and a wing plow to keep pushing the banks back.