What was it about the 262 that made it so great? I had one (Got stolen) and didn't have anything to compare it to. I did love it though and still miss it.
Joe
Joe
Why the 262xp?
- Thread starter Joseph W Santora
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Huskybill
Addicted to ArboristSite
A local logger used a 262xp for felling. Great cutting saw he always told me. Rock solid reliable. It’s 3.8/62 cc’s.
He told me to park the boat anchor(2100) and get a lighter saw like his. My dealer suggested a 266SE. It’s 4.1/67.7 cc. The 2100 was benched when I got the 266. But for pulling a 24” bar in hardwoods the 2100 was unmatched.
If you want another 262 and willing to go a tad bigger I’d suggest a 266se, a 266xp, 268, 570 there all 4.1/67 cc. Almost the same saws on steroids. For a middle sized saws these stock can hold there own.
He told me to park the boat anchor(2100) and get a lighter saw like his. My dealer suggested a 266SE. It’s 4.1/67.7 cc. The 2100 was benched when I got the 266. But for pulling a 24” bar in hardwoods the 2100 was unmatched.
If you want another 262 and willing to go a tad bigger I’d suggest a 266se, a 266xp, 268, 570 there all 4.1/67 cc. Almost the same saws on steroids. For a middle sized saws these stock can hold there own.
In it's day the 262XP was at the top of the pile for the CC's and not just in power/cutting speed. It has good ergonomics, anti-vibe, etc.
What I do not like about it not using the large bar mount so I can swap bars/chains freely with my larger Husqvarna saws.
I had one for quite a while in excellent condition, but seldom used it. I bought an Echo CS-590 and 600P instead, and ground them up vs beating on the 262XP.
About 10 years ago now I did a timed cutting test against the 600P. The 600P was just a tad faster on every test, but they were not using the exact same bar/chain. The 262XP was set up with an 18" bar 68 tooth count and Oregon full chisel and the 600P had a 20" bar 70 tooth count with the same Oregon full chisel chain....FWIW......Cliff
What I do not like about it not using the large bar mount so I can swap bars/chains freely with my larger Husqvarna saws.
I had one for quite a while in excellent condition, but seldom used it. I bought an Echo CS-590 and 600P instead, and ground them up vs beating on the 262XP.
About 10 years ago now I did a timed cutting test against the 600P. The 600P was just a tad faster on every test, but they were not using the exact same bar/chain. The 262XP was set up with an 18" bar 68 tooth count and Oregon full chisel and the 600P had a 20" bar 70 tooth count with the same Oregon full chisel chain....FWIW......Cliff
You answered your own question.
sunfish
Fish Head
Very good saw. I had one for awhile, but sold it as I prefer a ported 357xp. And parts for the 2 series are getting hard to come by.
Derf
Addicted to ArboristSite
It introduced a number of improvements that made it ahead of its time. Husqvarna started using spring AV to isolate vibrations instead of rubber bushings to dampen them. Air injection pre-filtering was first used on the 262xp. Also it had the first snap-lock air filter cover.
It was also an animal! Of the saws on the same platform, the 254, 257, 261, the 262 was a factory hot rod. It was just a small saw package that could run with the big dogs. That made it ideal for both felling and limbing.
That and the fact that there was no real replacement for the saw when the 2-series was discontinued and replaced by the 3-series (the 357xp was an upgrade to the 254xp) meant it was valued for a long period of time and helped create “legendary” status because for a long time there was nothing better.
It was also an animal! Of the saws on the same platform, the 254, 257, 261, the 262 was a factory hot rod. It was just a small saw package that could run with the big dogs. That made it ideal for both felling and limbing.
That and the fact that there was no real replacement for the saw when the 2-series was discontinued and replaced by the 3-series (the 357xp was an upgrade to the 254xp) meant it was valued for a long period of time and helped create “legendary” status because for a long time there was nothing better.
262xp is kinda legend round my end. Mine is 1997. Super light, nimble. Real clean lines, love those saws for its shape.
But. Wouldn't call it overpowering, there is lots of plastic in its construction (hence the weight), Anti-vibration system was surpassed.
She's an old lady, but feisty.
But. Wouldn't call it overpowering, there is lots of plastic in its construction (hence the weight), Anti-vibration system was surpassed.
She's an old lady, but feisty.
The 262 is one of my favourites but the fuel tank has always been too small. That was my only criticism when I got my hands on a pre-production sample in the late 1980s. It took the 154 concept to it's likely reliable performance limit, the improvement process shedding (almost inevitably) some of the purity of that design.
@Huskybill I think I know what you mean about the 266/268 but component-wise they're not "Almost the same saws on steroids." About the only parts in common between a 262 and a 266 are the main bearings, a few bolts and the spark plug. I wouldn't want anyone to think they could use one as spares for the other.
@Huskybill I think I know what you mean about the 266/268 but component-wise they're not "Almost the same saws on steroids." About the only parts in common between a 262 and a 266 are the main bearings, a few bolts and the spark plug. I wouldn't want anyone to think they could use one as spares for the other.
Why?; because it's an old(-ish) saw that competes favourably with anything built today wrt handling and power. Also, it is a very simple construction that is easy to diagnose/repair in the field, which was a necessity at the time for all machinery. It has decent antivibe. Also, it's incredibly nice looking. 
There are many excellent saws from the 80's and 90's that have never yet been surpassed from a practical standpoint.
There are many excellent saws from the 80's and 90's that have never yet been surpassed from a practical standpoint.
It does seem to go through a tank of fuel very quickly, as noted. It never occurred to me that this was due to being a 60cc saw with a 50cc size fuel tank...I thought it was just very thirsty.
buttercup
Addicted to ArboristSite
Yeah, I'm looking forwards to see how that works out on my future aftermarket 272 re-production with a 56,5mm bore cylinder
