390xp versus 395xp in depth

[Brent Nowell]

wow their are some finer details between these two saws that make it hard to clarify what each was actually designed to do, at least this is how I perceive the issue.

Looking for a good killing saw down the road, it’s gonna be either the 390 or 395 just some small differences between the two that make it hard to choose. Power to Weight ratio is almost identical for both saws and I’ve listed what I thought was Petra any info for milling

These numbers are pulled right from the husqvarna website
390xp
With 20” chain 6.5hp@9600rpm
Weight is 16.1lbs
Power to weight ratio is .40lbs per hp
Oiler pumps out a max of 24ml per min
Onboard clutch

Now the 395
With 20” chain 7.1hp@8700rpm
Weight is 17.4lbs
Power to weight ratio is .40 hp per lb
Oiler pumps a max of 20ml per minute


I don’t understand for a saw that’s recommended for milling and longer bars (395xp) it has the outboard clutch but an Oiler that doesn’t pump out as much as the 390 that recommends smaller bars??
Is the 395 an older design than the 390?
The one thing that makes me consider a 390 for killing in the oiled, but then I don’t like seeing an inboard clutch for such a task.

Basically I’m asking for your opinions on the issue and what saw really is the better choice for killing and why?

 

[sw oh logger]

wow their are some finer details between these two saws that make it hard to clarify what each was actually designed to do, at least this is how I perceive the issue.

Looking for a good killing saw down the road, it’s gonna be either the 390 or 395 just some small differences between the two that make it hard to choose. Power to Weight ratio is almost identical for both saws and I’ve listed what I thought was Petra any info for milling

These numbers are pulled right from the husqvarna website
390xp
With 20” chain 6.5hp@9600rpm
Weight is 16.1lbs
Power to weight ratio is .40lbs per hp
Oiler pumps out a max of 24ml per min
Onboard clutch

Now the 395
With 20” chain 7.1hp@8700rpm
Weight is 17.4lbs
Power to weight ratio is .40 hp per lb
Oiler pumps a max of 20ml per minute


I don’t understand for a saw that’s recommended for milling and longer bars (395xp) it has the outboard clutch but an Oiler that doesn’t pump out as much as the 390 that recommends smaller bars??
Is the 395 an older design than the 390?
The one thing that makes me consider a 390 for killing in the oiled, but then I don’t like seeing an inboard clutch for such a task.

Basically I’m asking for your opinions on the issue and what saw really is the better choice for killing and why?

What type of timber--hard or soft wood, and where? What length of bar and chain--how much cutting time on the saw on a regular basis? 395 is heavier duty although 390 is certainly not a light saw! I own and use both a lot, in hardwoods, cutting timber, and the 395 will cut bigger trees with a longer bar for a longer period of use, although the 390 is great also.

 

[blsnelling]

There's a big difference between the 390 and 395.

Think of the 390 as a powerful all around saw, like an oversized 372, very nimble and great handling.

Think of the 395 as a heavy duty workhorse, built like a tank, and similar in weight and handling. The 395 is one of the strongest saws out there.

 

[Brent Nowell]

What type of timber--hard or soft wood, and where? What length of bar and chain--how much cutting time on the saw on a regular basis? 395 is heavier duty although 390 is certainly not a light saw! I own and use both a lot, in hardwoods, cutting timber, and the 395 will cut bigger trees with a longer bar for a longer period of use, although the 390 is great also.

It would be hard and softwood, for me right now I know I don’t probably need something this big, but I know I will down the road and I don’t want to outgrow a saw, it’s just too much money to replace down the road. Something like this would be a one time purchase where I don’t buy another saw again unless it breaks.
When you say heavier duty what exactly does that mean?
I have seen countless threads and a few videos about the 395 being one of the best chainsaws ever made, it’s hard to rule it out to buy when people say this

 

[blsnelling]

The 390 is one of my very favorite saws. I prefer it over the 395. It really depends on your use.

 

[sw oh logger]

It would be hard and softwood, for me right now I know I don’t probably need something this big, but I know I will down the road and I don’t want to outgrow a saw, it’s just too much money to replace down the road. Something like this would be a one time purchase where I don’t buy another saw again unless it breaks.
When you say heavier duty what exactly does that mean?
I have seen countless threads and a few videos about the 395 being one of the best chainsaws ever made, it’s hard to rule it out to buy when people say this

Brent, as Brad said above, it's just heavier built--has bigger, more aggressive bump spikes from the factory, in my opinion filters better than the 390 to some degree in bad conditions ie. dust and snow; for a big saw and an older design it is a very smooth handling saw --doesn't seem to be as hard on your hands from heavy use. However, for smooth, quick response at a higher rpm the 390 is hard to beat for all- round use. It does not have quite the torque that the 395 has, but revs quick--Brad always said it was like a 372 on steroids! If you don't log all the time,full-time in hardwoods, the 390 with it's inboard clutch is going to be a great all round choice.

 

[Brent Nowell]

Awesome thank you for your input!!!

No one has mentioned anything about the Oiler flow between the two in which I’m guessing it’s probably a moot point the extra 4mls a minute.

 

[sw oh logger]

Awesome thank you for your input!!!

No one has mentioned anything about the Oiler flow between the two in which I’m guessing it’s probably a moot point the extra 4mls a minute.

Brent, I've never had any problem with either one, nor noticed any real difference--both saws oil very well in dry hardwoods, I only use a 28" bar/chain combo at longest, dry hardwood can be a problem sometimes, but I've not had any issues there.

 

[rngrchad]

I got a 390 in my quiver, bought new in 98’ although she doesn’t see much use compared to 346/372 it is an absolutely enjoyable saw to run when I do. I’ve nrver run a 395, but if something tragic happened to this 390 I would replace it with same thing. I’m not positive but I think the 390Xp hasn’t suffered the xtorq (not that xtorq is bad)redesign yet like the current 372? Can anyone confirm?

Edit* I run 105 drivers with skip cutters on .050 and it oils fine in all conditions.

 

[blsnelling]

I’m not positive but I think the 390Xp hasn’t suffered the xtorq redesign yet like the current 372? Can anyone confirm?

Correct

 

[rngrchad]

Correct

So essentially today’s 390 is the same saw as it was back around 1998?

 

[Chainsaw Jim]

Awesome thank you for your input!!!

No one has mentioned anything about the Oiler flow between the two in which I’m guessing it’s probably a moot point the extra 4mls a minute.

The 390 has more chain speed and will need a little more flow.

 

[Brent Nowell]

So essentially today’s 390 is the same saw as it was back around 1998?

It def does not have xtorque

 

[Brent Nowell]

The 390 has more chain speed and will need a little more flow.

That now makes sense thank you!

 

[andy]

I would choose the 390xp from this pair... for "killing"
Especially If you have falling to do I would choose an inboard clutch.

I had a bar pinch to the point I had to remove a powerhead and leave that pinched bar and chain in a log.
If the clutch was outboard It would have not been possible.
As it was inboard, I was able to pull the powerhead and put another bar and chain on to rescue the pinched one.
It only has to happen once for it to be worth it.

If you're going to mill a lot, go up to the 3120xp as it's only about $200 more than 390xp or 395xp from Chainsawguy here in our classified.
You'll get those $200 and then some back in added lifespan from the extra cubes.
I've started milling with a 3120 where I used a 90cc saw prior... it's a night and day difference in the short term... the long term will be even more rewarding.

 

[Brent Nowell]

Lol spell correct “milling” not killing.
Again I appreciate the input, up here the 3120 is another 400$ !!!

 

[andy]

Oh ok.. typo

Here is that 3120xp add anyway.
Even if it's a $400 difference it's worth it imo.
FWIW, I could never find a 395xp for less than $1150 (Baileys so plus tax and shipping for me added another $150) so if you find one for $1000 that seems like a deal.
https://www.arboristsite.com/commun...0-chainsaw-powerhead-1399-usd-shipped.304052/

I can't tell you how big of a difference the big saw makes milling.
Pretty surprising.
My trees here are pretty big though. Most rips are 24-35+ inches in Fir and Cedar.
I suppose smaller trees might not make as much difference.

 

[Brent Nowell]

Oh ok.. typo

Here is that 3120xp add anyway.
Even if it's a $400 difference it's worth it imo.
FWIW, I could never find a 395xp for less than $1150 (Baileys so plus tax and shipping for me added another $150) so if you find one for $1000 that seems like a deal.
https://www.arboristsite.com/commun...0-chainsaw-powerhead-1399-usd-shipped.304052/

I can't tell you how big of a difference the big saw makes milling.
Pretty surprising.
My trees here are pretty big though. Most rips are 24-35+ inches in Fir and Cedar.
I suppose smaller trees might not make as much difference.

They will be smaller trees, they just don’t get that big here in Alberta. I like the idea of the inboard clutch, but felling will not be the primary purpose of the saw.

Finally there is only a pound and a bit of weight difference between the 390 and 395 which isn’t a huge deal, but it’s more than 5lb difference for the 3120/..
For the size trees here I don’t know if I can’t justify the price and weight of the 3120.

Again I appreciate your input

 

[Ozhoo]

That front bar tensioner on a 395 blows balls. I understand why it's stronger but what a pain in the stern.

 

[andy]

That front bar tensioner on a 395 blows balls. I understand why it's stronger but what a pain in the stern.

It is if you're used to side tension. I was.
Now that I've used the front tension for a few chain changes, I'm pretty happy with it... so much more leverage and no wincing from hoping it won't break..
After having one of the side tensioners in a ms661 break while using it normally... talk about PIA.
Easy to replace but killed the day and destroyed all confidence in that system.