Husqvarna XP Saws, 246,254,262,266... your opinions?

[Den]

I've owned a few Husqvarna's.
Currently own one Husqvarna... a 162SE which is a fantastic saw.
But never owned any XP series of Husqvarna and kind of have the desire to pick one up. Of the models listed, what do you folks think of them? XP 246, 254, 262, 266.
1) Performance?
2) Parts availability?
3) Magnesium crankcases?
4) Are these models pro-sumer or pro saws?
5) Any known flaws/ weak points with any of them?
6) Electrical system issues at all?

I'm thinking the power to weight ratio on the saws I listed would be very good. As I get older, light weight, high rpm saws are more and more attractive to me.
As a side note, I listed my Pioneer 650 for trade in the trading post, and added XP series saws to the list of saws I'd like to get.
Thought somebody might have one that needs repairs that they want to trade.

Den.


.

 

[brad ruch]

If you have a 162se now you have a xp.just in that time era SE was what's now XP.those series parts have become a little hard to find expecially new.all of them are pro saws.husqvarna don't sell most of those parts anymore.aftermarket parts for them yes some.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Scandy14]

I have a 246 I would, ah, possibly part with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tor R]

Out of those you listed, 246 is very troublesome to get/find parts for. That said, its still possible to find parts, just alot work.

 

[Cantdog]

All good saws. Just some herder to find parts for.....266 is heavier...the 262 is the lightest and hottest of the listed saws. 254 is a less performing saw on the same chasse ...though it still is a remarkable performer...just less displacement. Most consumable parts for the two families are still available. perhaps not P&C kits, but gaaskets/seals etc are....the 262 is the highest performing of the 50cc class you mentioned and the 266....though is an excellent saw.....there are much more powerful saws in that 60cc family, like the 268XP and 272XP......there is also the regular 268 which is not an XP saw...though again not a bad saw just a 68cc open port saw.....actually basically the same saw as the 66.

 

[Huskvarna hotellgäst]

Despite making many great saws, Husqvarna have done a hatchet-job on their naming conventions.

In the 1970s, all saws with 3 or more digits were pro saws.
So 162 was superceded by 266, 154 by 254, and 'XP' was just a marketing label.
Then things got less straightforward.
Following the pattern, the 262 should've been called either 362 or 163; the 272 should be 372. Then the semi-pro 66 became known as 268 in some markets, alongside the 268XP...and as the saying goes, the system was broken

 

[Husky Man]

The 266XP is the only saw in your list that I have any experience with, I bought my 266XP new in '91, and it has earned it's name "Old Reliable", Excellent saw, but I'm not parting with it, That saw made a Husky believer out of me.

IMO, you can't go wrong with a well cared for 266XP


Doug

 

[Huskybill]

The 266SE I used for firewood. It’s one of the best reliable Husqvarna chain saws. But there’s the 266XP plus the 268/268XP also. These saws are on the mid of the cc class. There’s no replacement for displacement. But these are fine with a 16”/18” bar for me anyway. When the trees got bigger the 2100 was waiting in the wings saying put me in the wood boss. Lol when the trees got smaller the all metal 240SG was used. I don’t over work the smaller cc saws with big bars. My three saws covered it all. If I had to pick just one the 266 is it.

Note, these newer smaller cc saws are capable of handling longer bars but I’d still go by staying within the specs.

 

[Den]

Great advice.
At one point I tried to sell/trade my 162SE, I'm glad the guy decided he did not have the cash on hand to buy it

 

[Huskybill]

We kind of side stepped the 162se it’s another great saw. I just replaced my 266se that I sold decades ago. I’ll never part with them again. Do you think these new smaller, more hp powerhouse high tech saws of today will last as long as the huskys of yesteryear?

 

[Czed]

Out of those you listed, 246 is very troublesome to get/find parts for. That said, its still possible to find parts, just alot work.

Hi tor

 

[Czed]

I've owned a few Husqvarna's.
Currently own one Husqvarna... a 162SE which is a fantastic saw.
But never owned any XP series of Husqvarna and kind of have the desire to pick one up. Of the models listed, what do you folks think of them? XP 246, 254, 262, 266.
1) Performance?
2) Parts availability?
3) Magnesium crankcases?
4) Are these models pro-sumer or pro saws?
5) Any known flaws/ weak points with any of them?
6) Electrical system issues at all?

I'm thinking the power to weight ratio on the saws I listed would be very good. As I get older, light weight, high rpm saws are more and more attractive to me.
As a side note, I listed my Pioneer 650 for trade in the trading post, and added XP series saws to the list of saws I'd like to get.
Thought somebody might have one that needs repairs that they want to trade.

Den.


.

I know a little about these saws have ran
257/262/266/268/272/281/288s since the 80s
The finest saws I've ever owned.
I've been through the 3 series and even some stihls and went back to the 2 series.
Running ported 266 and 268s mostly now.
I have a 268 and 272 out getting ported by
zoo city saws.
Porting really wakes these saws up.
Parts availability is very good
On the 268/272
the 266 top covers are scarce
As well as the two piece ignition system
But there still is some to be had
Here and there.

 

[Den]

Czed touched on some of the information I was looking for, with respect to scarcity of top covers and two-piece ignitions on the 266 XP.

 

[Huskybill]

We’re up to the 181/288 now? These are a tad longer power head over the 266/268/162/262’s. But mean like a junk yard dog if there tuned correctly.
Lighter than the big block 480/ 285/298/2100/2101’s the 181/288 low top cover to me are more nimble doing firewood. It was a pleasure to run anyone of these saws cutting firewood.

 

[burnses]

I have run a 266xp and some 61's different but similar....the 266 was nice but has some heft to it and the av is not as good as the 262....as stated above the 2 piece ignition stuff is out there but getting older....I have a 261 I built to a 262 ....nice saw strong for sure and with a big av spring in the front and I think a little easer to get parts for ...I say try to find a 262 that someone dosent think is made of gold...

good luck

 

[dustinwilt68]

My favorite of all the saws listed is the 254, it gets overlooked because of the 262, but realize the 254 is a full pound lighter then the 262, although they are made on the same chasis the handlebar, top cover and cylinder are all shorter. Ported they are just plain nasty, and keep up w well ported 346s. I have owned all the saws on your list and still have a 262 as well, but my pick is the 254.

 

[Cliff R]

My favorites in the bunch are the 268XP and 272XP. They have more power than the other listed and take the large mount bars. The 262XP is legendary with the Husky crowd but despite being close on paper it will not cut with the 268XP/272XP with 20" or longer bars on it.

They do have a "smoother" power band and a bit more "ergonomic", and are also excellent saws and still highly sought after today........Cliff

 

[Huskvarna hotellgäst]

I've owned a few Husqvarna's.
Currently own one Husqvarna... a 162SE which is a fantastic saw.
But never owned any XP series of Husqvarna and kind of have the desire to pick one up. Of the models listed, what do you folks think of them? XP 246, 254, 262, 266.
1) Performance?
2) Parts availability?
3) Magnesium crankcases?
4) Are these models pro-sumer or pro saws?
5) Any known flaws/ weak points with any of them?
6) Electrical system issues at all?

I'm thinking the power to weight ratio on the saws I listed would be very good. As I get older, light weight, high rpm saws are more and more attractive to me.
As a side note, I listed my Pioneer 650 for trade in the trading post, and added XP series saws to the list of saws I'd like to get.
Thought somebody might have one that needs repairs that they want to trade.

Den..

First thing. Your 162SE is really no less an XP than a saw with "XP" on its top cover or starter housing.
Following up my previous post, "XP" stands for Extra Power. It was first used not to differentiate between pro and semi-pro models, but to promote sales of the 67cc 266 when it replaced the incredibly successful and popular 61.5cc 162.

1) Performance? All perform well, even compared to current models.
2) Parts availability? I believe there are problems getting tank/handle assy for 254 and carb screws and air filters for 246/254. Don't know about 262. 266 should be the easiest.
3) Magnesium crankcases? Yes to all.
4) Are these models pro-sumer or pro saws? All pro.
5) Any known flaws/ weak points with any of them? Collecting or occasional use? No.
6) Electrical system issues at all? 266 is same as 162. 254 & 262 interchangeable with 40, 50, 154, 268, 272 ignition.

My pick? 254. I've used a 262 and I loved it but for sheer sleeper-value, it's the 254 for me. That saw looks like a kitty-cat....but roars like a lion!

Strengths:
Straightforward design. Goes together like Lego.
Parts commonality with 50, 51, 55.

Weaknesses:
Hard to pull over without decompression valve.
A/V not as smooth as today's saws.
Pumps oil at idle (later models have clutch drum driven oiler).

That said, without knowing exactly how older it is you're feeling a 242 or 246 will be easier to handle and still have stunning performance for its size.

 

[Den]

Not to hi-jack my own post but... since the very first Husqvarna saw was made decades ago, to the most recent modern day Husqvarna chain saw, which models had a separate fuel tank that was not siamesed as part of the crank case?
Essentially, which models had either a separate plastic bladder for the fuel tank, or a metal fuel tank independent of the crank case or handle assembly?


.

 

[Huskvarna hotellgäst]

Not to hi-jack my own post but... since the very first Husqvarna saw was made decades ago, to the most recent modern day Husqvarna chain saw, which models had a separate fuel tank that was not siamesed as part of the crank case?
Essentially, which models had either a separate plastic bladder for the fuel tank, or a metal fuel tank independent of the crank case or handle assembly?

Too many variables to be answered simply...but I'll try.

If we start in the early 1970s, Husqvarna in Huskvarna only made professional saws. The 140, 163 and 180 had the fuel tank & rear handle as a rubber-isolated separate cast metal assembly.

When Husqvarna decided to make the semi-pro 'Practica' 40 and 61 they followed suit, derived as they were, from the 140 and 162.

When the dipped their toe into the farm saw market in the '80s, they took the Partner 500 parts list and turned out the 50, again following the pro and semi-pro pattern. It was only when they followed up the 50 with the 40 that a saw that a Husqvarna saw with the the fuel tank integrated with the crankcase (in this case, fibreglass & aluminium reinforced polyamide) was allowed to leave the building.

AFAIK, all pro saws today have separate vibration isolated fuel tank and rear handle.