455 vs 353

[spike60]

"[That customer has almost entirely moved to the 455/460. Which kind of leaves the 359 as the unwanted child in my store. Serious guys will go for the 346 and 357 and continue to ignor the 359.]"

Spike, let me know when you have to start discounting those 359's. I'll gladly take one of your hands! Have you had any issues/or complaints on the 455 from customers yet? A friend of mine has one & likes it but I haven't ran it against my 359 yet. The 2 455's I've seen had 18" & 20" bars w/ 3/8" pitch. Do you think they would perform better with shorter bars and or .325" chains? 3/8" just seems borderline for a saw that makes 3.4 hp but maybe the new x-torqx makes up for that.

Sorry outdoor, I already did that! They weren't moving and I didn't want them in paid inventory at the end of the year.

To answer your other questions: No complaints from anyone on either of the 400 series saws yet. One guy did drop something on his back handle and break it. The parts were not expensive, as the back handle is NOT part of the fuel tank, but it was a bit of a project.

Your 359 should pretty much embarass your friends 455. While I am very impressed wth the 460, I don't think that much of the 455. Like I said in the other post, the gain from one to the other is more than you would expect, and for the small differance in price, seems like a no-brainer to me. I agree with you that 20" 3/8 is stretching it with the 455. But the 455 will continue to sell because Husky gets so much mileage from the word "Rancher". It's amazing; people come in to buy the "new Rancher" and they are less likely to be concerned with CC's and such than most shoppers. I'll suggest that for $30 more they can have the big brother 460. 3/4 will go for the 460, but the other 25% will say, "no, I want the Rancher". As long as they are happy....

 

[spike60]

That isn't really surprising, the 359 in stock form has never been really impressive, and it wasn't meant to be either, I believe.....

...but I still would take it any day over a plastic cased 460 with a bit less power.

I was appalled by the ungainly and heavy 455 when it first appeared at my dealer....

You really should take upon you to steer those costumers back to the 359, but I guess that Husky wouldn't want you to......

Hi Troll;

My first reaction to the 455 wasn't exactly positive either. It was: "They've got to be kidding. This thing weighs a ton."

And when we first saw them, one of the things we said was that they should put a bigger cylinder on it that would be more in line with the size and weight of the saw. And we figured they would have more than one model in the 400 series at some point.

The reason the 359 isn't selling is that there are so many saws in the catelog. Think of a ladder with the rungs being too close. Some of the rungs get skipped when you climb it. And in my store, the 359 is the one that's getting skipped. As I said, the serious guys go for the 346 and 357, or the 575, and the less serious cutters are going for the 400's. Where weight is more of an issue than power, they of course look at the 353 and 350.

 

[MAG58]

If you read the power specs from Husqvarna for 359, it's the Cat version 3.9hp, and if you read the power specs from Jonsered 2159, it's the no Cat version 4.1hp and they don't sell many Cat version over here, cos you have to pay more for that

 

[spike60]

If you read the power specs from Husqvarna for 359, it's the Cat version 3.9hp, and if you read the power specs from Jonsered 2159, it's the no Cat version 4.1hp and they don't sell many Cat version over here, cos you have to pay more for that

Well, like I was saying about specs........... I checked through the catelogs today and the 359 has had the 3.9 power rating since it was introduced in 2002, and did not change when the E-tech version came out. And the current Jonsered catelog lists the 2159 WITH the cat at the same 4.1 that you mentioned. So, another question is why are 2 indenticle saws rated differently? Also of note, the 359 is rated at 13,500 and the 2159 at 13,800. I guess we can only put so much faith in the specs we are given.

 

[blis]

Well, like I was saying about specs........... I checked through the catelogs today and the 359 has had the 3.9 power rating since it was introduced in 2002, and did not change when the E-tech version came out. And the current Jonsered catelog lists the 2159 WITH the cat at the same 4.1 that you mentioned. So, another question is why are 2 indenticle saws rated differently? Also of note, the 359 is rated at 13,500 and the 2159 at 13,800. I guess we can only put so much faith in the specs we are given.

the pre e-tech muffler is restricting also, so theres your .2hp...

 

[SawTroll]

If you read the power specs from Husqvarna for 359, it's the Cat version 3.9hp, and if you read the power specs from Jonsered 2159, it's the no Cat version 4.1hp and they don't sell many Cat version over here, cos you have to pay more for that

The power ratings have allways been that way - cat, or no cat.

KWF/DLG test reports put them both at the same max power, 2.9 kW - which could be either 3.9 or 4.0 hp, but not 4.1....

My theory is that the differense in published specs are mostly (or just)marketing.....