Stihl 462 or 500i??

[Dan Maynard]

I know its not the question but , as you have used 372s before did you not consider trying a 572 ?

Have a look at YouTube outinthewood , he's done a few videos with 572 and 500i, seems to prefer the 572 for felling work.

I think others have said the 462 is almost like a husky so maybe the 572 and 462 are somewhat comparable? Not used a 462, I bought a 461 just before they came out and I don't suppose I'll ever wear it out.

[Stubby]

2 hours ago, Dan Maynard said:

Have a look at YouTube outinthewood , he's done a few videos with 572 and 500i, seems to prefer the 572 for felling work.

I think others have said the 462 is almost like a husky so maybe the 572 and 462 are somewhat comparable? Not used a 462, I bought a 461 just before they came out and I don't suppose I'll ever wear it out.

I think the old saying that a Stihl has more mid range grunt and a Husqvarna more out right top end is being eroded away with the modern offerings . as you say each manufacturer has filled in the bits that weren't so good and now they are very similar .  

[The avantgardener]

The 462 is a very good saw, very Husqvarna like in its pick up/chain speed, and light. On paper the 500i edges it on speed but has 10cc more grunt so will run a bigger bar, it is juicey though. I tried the 462 and 572 together, I bought the 572 in the end because it just handled so well and feels so much more solid. The 500i is a good saw, puts a smile on your face every time you pull the trigger, I am still not convinced on its service life as a flat out forestry saw though, only time will tell.

[drinksloe]

Cheers folks.

Dunno if really helped sort off backs up everything I've heard about the 500, just a beast off a saw.

But the lifespan and fuel scares me when ur a long walk into the woods. Bad enough carrying wedges etc and esp a jack if u need 1 without carrying 2 cans everywhere.

 

Still really fancy the 462, was hoping/expecting the 500 to be way dearer so making my decision easier..

 

Aye to be honest stubby I bought my last 372 after the 572s came out, didn't really need it at time but thought they're wil likely be teething problems with the new saw.

I'm quite old fashioned and still like old proper saws with carbs.

Heard quite a few bad reports from lads with 5 series huskies, bloody great to run when going well thou.

Despite owning mainly huskys I think they've lost there way a wee touch now compared to Stihl.

Got offered a 2nd hand 572 recently which had done very little but just too much cash for it being 2 year old.

Trying to buy another old immaculate 372 off a lad proper pre ex torq saw so fairly bomb proof

 

Does any company make 7.5 litre combi cans???

Mibbee a market for it, can mind the days finishing a can and home time ??

[drinksloe]

Dunno why but Cannae delete that smiley thing or write after it.

 

U can't take the p*** to much thou, still got to do a half decent shift in.

Mibbee doing 7.5 ltr would be a decent ammount.

Ur putting some timber on deck if emptying that in a shift.

[Dan Maynard]

I was thinking about the fuel earlier, if you run a 500i hard and it uses an extra 2.5litres per day that's 50 litres petrol and 1 litre 2T oil per month, say 70 pounds. 12 months, that's £840 or the cost of the saw.

Will it have earned you £840 more in what you felled? Need to factor in the extra time walking about to get fuel.

Strikes me in domestic arb the fuel consumption is irrelevant, and the light weight a bonus if climbing, so the 500i is brilliant..

[The avantgardener]

17 minutes ago, Dan Maynard said:

Strikes me in domestic arb the fuel consumption is irrelevant, and the light weight a bonus if climbing, so the 500i is brilliant

This, I suspect is where the 500i really was made for. Dismantling large stems without having to haul a 660 up there.

[spuddog0507]

49 minutes ago, The avantgardener said:

This, I suspect is where the 500i really was made for. Dismantling large stems without having to haul a 660 up there.

this could be interesting 500i is light yet loads of power so does that make it a better or worse saw to use in a tree ? i would say a worse saw as if your on spikes and a lanyard round the tree it makes getting out the way a little difficult and the 500 is a very aggresive saw and in the wrong hands it could be deadly   faster chain speed lighter saw just the right recipe for greater kick back,

[drinksloe]

2 hours ago, Dan Maynard said:

I was thinking about the fuel earlier, if you run a 500i hard and it uses an extra 2.5litres per day that's 50 litres petrol and 1 litre 2T oil per month, say 70 pounds. 12 months, that's £840 or the cost of the saw.

Will it have earned you £840 more in what you felled? Need to factor in the extra time walking about to get fuel.

Strikes me in domestic arb the fuel consumption is irrelevant, and the light weight a bonus if climbing, so the 500i is brilliant..

 

Very interesting, amazing how it mounts up.

Althou with forestry not so much the cost but the practicalities off carrying 2 combi cans into a wood everyday/2nd day.

 

Most forestry companies if ur in front off a harvester ur on by day nowadays, not an awful lot off piece work. We'll atleast locally.

So would u get a pay rise over another cutter running a 462 or 572?

Also be interesting how much extra timber u do put on deck with it over the course of a day. 

Let's face it both 462 and 572s are cracking saws and put plenty timber on the deck also.

 

To be honest u could argue rates should be a lot higher when u see some of the gadgets/tools some buy various jack's from 700- 2.5k, wedge jack's plus impact drivers, not cheap.

Lot of cash for a SE cutter to be expected to lay out often with no real thanks

[MattyF]

I’m not often in the woods but have been felling beech on there final thin this week , some of the trees are around 3ft all are double cuts on a 18” bar any way, I’ve been drifting between the 400cm and 462 and a 550 for snedding , have not once felt the need to pick up the 500i and to be honest the 462 is faster in unknotted timber anyway,500i just seems to have loads or torque for dressing out buttresses but is slower in an average cut, heavier and drinks fuel.