MY 262XPG is back in my hands again!

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Boskaerm

ArboristSite Guru
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
956
Reaction score
111
Location
Ringsted, Denmark
Little over a year ago, I bought THIS 262XPG ! the saw started and ran just fine, and after some cleaning up it looked quite good!
BUT, when i checked it out, I noticed some scoring on the piston, at the exhaust side! In some kind of panic reaction, I bought a 365, and sold the 262XPG to a colleague!

He was very happy with it, and it seemed to work just fine!

Over the last 9-10 months, I have regretted selling this saw!

3 months ago, I bought a Jonsered 2065, that I really didn´t need, since I have the 365!

Well, My colleague would like a big saw, or a saw with bigger potential, so I said we could swap it, so I dot the 262XPG, and he got the 2065, with the possibility to upgrade to a 372 (or 372 BB) P/C.

Here are some pics of it, I have done nothing to it yet! The saw is equipped with a Oregon .325, 0.58 gauge. 78 DL, 20" bar.

This time I will do it right! pull the jug to see what´s inside! check the fuel lines, since it smells of gas! And have a look at the AV mount´s, since it seems a bit loose.
View attachment 204192View attachment 204193View attachment 204194View attachment 204195View attachment 204196
 
How does the 262 compare powerwise to the 365? If I remember right, the 262 was rated slightly higher in hp than the 365 according to specs. I am glad you got your saw back.
 
You sir should be sentenced to fifty lashes for letting that saw go in the first place. I got lucky and traded a member a PM800 for a 262 recently. Very nice saws indeed.
 
You sir should be sentenced to fifty lashes for letting that saw go in the first place. I got lucky and traded a member a PM800 for a 262 recently. Very nice saws indeed.

I know, but guess that we all, at some point in our life, has done something, without thinking it through! :hmm3grin2orange:
Lucky for me, I got the chance to make up for this one... :smile2:
 
204192d1319453532-262xpg-1-jpg

204193d1319453533-262xpg-2-jpg

204194d1319453535-262xpg-3-jpg

204196d1319453539-262xpg-5-jpg

Any more thoughts of selling that saw, and Ill see to it that you are BANNED! :D
 
How does the 262 compare powerwise to the 365? If I remember right, the 262 was rated slightly higher in hp than the 365 according to specs. I am glad you got your saw back.

As far as the specs:
262XP: 4,8 HP, 5,5kg PHO
365: 4,6 HP, 6,0kg PHO

Specs are based on memory, but pretty sure of the HP specs! And the weight specs are never true anyway! But the 262XP is noticeable lighter than the 365/372XP chassis.
 
As far as the specs:
262XP: 4,8 HP, 5,5kg PHO
365: 4,6 HP, 6,0kg PHO

Specs are based on memory, but pretty sure of the HP specs! And the weight specs are never true anyway! But the 262XP is noticeable lighter than the 365/372XP chassis.

The hp specs are fine, but you are a bit of on the weight ones - it should be 5.8kg for the 262xp, and 6.1 for the original 365 (and 362xp) - but I believe some late 365s were on the 372xp case, and heavier.
 
The hp specs are fine, but you are a bit of on the weight ones - it should be 5.8kg for the 262xp, and 6.1 for the original 365 (and 362xp) - but I believe some late 365s were on the 372xp case, and heavier.

I care most about the HP specs! Not that I don´t find the weight important, I really do, but the weight specs are never true, at least that´s my experience with most saws!

If the HP specs are true, is harder to prove/unprove!
 
I care most about the HP specs! Not that I don´t find the weight important, I really do, but the weight specs are never true, at least that´s my experience with most saws!

If the HP specs are true, is harder to prove/unprove!

When the German DLG test lab tested the 262xp (late production), they found the weight spec to be true, and the power spec a slight understatement (they "found" 3.6 kW/4.9 hp).

This is of course just another indication, and not conlusive evidence......
 
Back
Top