Not by a large or wide margin. They are close enough to each other it makes no sense to own both. What the 400 can't handle it's time to jump up to the 90+ cc range.
Stihl 400 cm specs
- Thread starter ferris076
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
17% is a pretty decent margin considering it’s only got 8% more displacement
Where did you find the MS462 torque spec?
I'd love to know where he pulled that spec out as well. Stihl released the torque data with the 400vs the 362 when they debuted the 400. Other then hp specs 4.0(5.36hp) vs 4.4 (5.9hp)I've never seen the torque spec for a 462 that was published by stihl. Back in 2020 there was a guy that had a 462 up against a few other "70"cc saws, but the 400 wasn't out then.
My first hand running of my 400 with my cousins 462 is there isn't enough of a difference to justify the $300.00 price difference. Wich ironically my 400 replaced my 562xp, because of the parts issues, he liked my 400 but could only come up with a 462. Both bought within months of each other and have seen similar use. His farm being a 1/4 mile away we often get to run the saws together and use them pretty interchangeably. I've also been down this snail trail with my logging friends 572xp. Yep its a little faster, but in thay case it's a lot heavier. Last time I helped him on a job, he kept picking up the 400, leaving me to run my 390xp in the bigger wood.
Irregardless, and to the point, till your in big wood, ie over 28"+ it's a minimal difference between the two, and at that point I'm still dropping either in favor of a larger saw, which most end up doing as a 70ish cc saw with a 28"+ bar is a slow. Painful thing to deal with in anything but soft woods. I've pretty much faithfully said the 400 is tanked with a 24" and the 462 is tanked at 28". Most guys run 20" on both and it's a slight nod to the 462. Beyond that, it's 660/390xp time.
My first hand running of my 400 with my cousins 462 is there isn't enough of a difference to justify the $300.00 price difference. Wich ironically my 400 replaced my 562xp, because of the parts issues, he liked my 400 but could only come up with a 462. Both bought within months of each other and have seen similar use. His farm being a 1/4 mile away we often get to run the saws together and use them pretty interchangeably. I've also been down this snail trail with my logging friends 572xp. Yep its a little faster, but in thay case it's a lot heavier. Last time I helped him on a job, he kept picking up the 400, leaving me to run my 390xp in the bigger wood.
Irregardless, and to the point, till your in big wood, ie over 28"+ it's a minimal difference between the two, and at that point I'm still dropping either in favor of a larger saw, which most end up doing as a 70ish cc saw with a 28"+ bar is a slow. Painful thing to deal with in anything but soft woods. I've pretty much faithfully said the 400 is tanked with a 24" and the 462 is tanked at 28". Most guys run 20" on both and it's a slight nod to the 462. Beyond that, it's 660/390xp time.
I could never find Stihl Inc. specs for the 462. 4.8 is more than the 572XP.
I have both, so I'm just curious where the specs came from.
I have both, so I'm just curious where the specs came from.
I'd hazard a guess, but I'd get banned for saying it......
For whatever it's worth, 4.1nm= 3 ft lbs 4.8 =3.5 ft lbs....
I've ran a 462, but only made a few cuts with it. It may be slightly faster than a 400, but not by much. The 400 is lighter, more compact and just handles better.
And as you noted a 70cc is maxed out in hardwood at 28". Really I would never run a bar longer than 20" on a 70cc in hardwood. And if the wood was big I would hop up to a 390 or the like.
I bought the 400 when my 462 got stolen and no 462's were available. As other mentioned not a whole lot of difference. Weight being the reason I pick up the 400 most of the time. I do a lot of noodling and the 462 has a bit of an edge over the 400 with the Hexa chain on it.
Well, just buy a 500I.
Kwf test report
Attachments
Kwf in Germany
Attachments
It's a shame Stihl Inc. does not produce test results for their own products.
I see you asked the forum for these results in April of 21 along with those of the 572XP.
Do you have the KWF results for the 572XP?
I did manage to find this chart made from the kwf test reports
Attachments
Interesting.
I wonder if the 462 numbers were for the Gen 1 or Gen 2 saw.
I glanced at MS460. I never realized my 460's were a torque beast like listed.
I guess in the end it's all a set of numbers that provide a guide line for us to debate.
Thanks for the info.
Torque curve width matters alot more in regards to how a saw feels in the cut than peak numbers.
Totally agree.
Which is a concept lost on most when it comes to porting saws. Fat and flat wins the day and guys like @huskihl get this.
FWIW, by no means do I dislike a 462, if I could have gotten one I would have grabbed that. They are excellent saws, I was very surprised by the 400, even more so once my cousin got his 462 a few months after I got the 400.
