SawTroll

The 235/236/240 likely are the worst saws Husky ever offered for sale - stay away! They are cheaply made by Poulan (one of many factories around the world that is owned by Husky). Much worse than the Poulan made 36/41, 136/141 and 137/142 saws - those actually were decent for their price.

The 72dl bars in .325 really are just over 17", even though they are called 18" - so the difference discussed here is much closer to 2" than to 3", as the 64dl 15" ones are true 15" bars. My personal choice on 50cc saws are the 66dl 16" ones (that really are just a tad over 15 1/2"). I can't explain why the 2dl longer 16" bars feel so much more "right" than the 15" ones to me - they just do, surprisingly often. With other mounts, and in 3/8", the difference between 15 and 16" bars are larger than with the "small Husky" ones. For some odd reason 16" bars aren't common at all in the parts of Europe that I know much about - something that also is reflected in the heading of this thread. Does anyone have any idea why it is that way?

Rob, something is up with the listing of Cannon bars - I just saw that the Cannon H1 mount is listed for a "small Husky"/K095 mount saw (346xp, 16"). That is of course not correct, it should be the C1 mount. H1 is "large Husky"/D009. I didn't check any other applications - but one obviously wrong listing is bad enough, and telling me that more may be messed up?

There is nothing wrong with testing the options, and don't forget the .325x8 option.

A small 7-spline 3/8"x7 is Oregon #18720, Husky #504 52 30-02.

3x8"x7 will of course produce a higher chain speed out of wood than .325x7 - but .325x8 would about even that out. Both the larger sprockets will give the resistance from actual cutting more "arm" to work with though, against the torque of the saw - meaning that the rpm and chain speed will drop faster in wood. There really is only one way to find out what works best in a given situation, and that's the obvious one.

Maybe not, but it doesn't really help, as conditions vary locally, and even if you stay at the same spot.

There are a lot of factors that influence how the carb should be set, so if a "factory setting" is correct where and when the saw is sold, it is pure luck. The dealer has to retune the saw at the point of sale, and the owner needs to retune as conditions (temp, air pressure, humidity and fuel) change. The alternative is AutoTune.

The 501SX has a somewhat decent power to weight ratio, mainly because it is light for a 50cc saw, it isn't a particularly strong one. The 450 is a total dud in that department.

A 1970 Jonsereds Raket 621 (the first year they were made), that still is doing its job well, and was well ahead of its time back then. Neither Husky nor Stihl were close in that class of saws back then, their saws were much heavier and clumsier, and didn't have Nikasil plated cylinders. The only down-side of the 621 was that it has an inboard clutch, so it could have been even better if it had an outboard.

The 562xp is available with both in the US (xpgw) - except that it isn't about "full wrap", but so-called 3/4 wrap (it doesn't go under the powerhead, just on both sides and of course the top). I dislike the somewhat "plasticy" look of it, but each to their own. The wrap handle isn't offered for the 560 though, which is just as well in my opinion. You can of course fit the handle of the 562xpgw on a 560xpg, if you really want to.

To the original question, skip chain usually is stupid, unless the bar and wood is far too large for the powerhead. Typically it is a US PNW thing, where the trees usually are large fast-grown softwoods, and chip clearance is a bigger issue than cutting speed. Then they may be useful in a pinch, if you have to put a much longer bar than normal on a saw. Cutting always will be slow though, about 33 % slower than full comp, minus whatever more rpms will make up for. If the bar and wood is way too large for the saw you may end up on the bonus side - but if so it is evidence that you used a way too small saw for the task.

I always get worried when I see a Stihl designation with a "C" suffix on it, as it usually means that the saw has some unwanted "feature" on it, possibly the "toolless" chain tensioner in this case? That has nothing to do with the issue at hand though, that's a fairly common issue when one case halv is replaced, regardless of brand. If the cylinder gasket isn't flexible enough to solve it, there is a real issue, and the "higher" side may need to be ground down.

Looks like a genuine Chinese fake! It isn't one of those that are actual close looking copies, but somewhere between that level and the ones that doesn't look like what the "pretend" to be at all.

I prefer Oregon LPX to Stihl RS/RSC - but only by a slight margin. Actual comparisons indicates it is slightly faster (both new, filed two strokes), and it is enough smoother to notice. My comparisons of cutting speed was made in .325 .058 (1.5 mm), and anything but .063 puts Stihl chain at a disadvantage with regular .325 and 3/8" chain, as all gauges cut the same kerf as .063. This isn't the case with Oregon, where .058 (and .050, which isn't common anywhere but in parts of the US with such chain) cuts a slightly narrower kerf. That said, in 3/8" I happily use Oregon LP/LPX, LGX, and Stihl RSC/RS - the differences in performance is negligible in practical cutting. Still, the LPX is smoothest, and likely fastest as well (never timed it in 3/8").