The Husky 42/42 special/242/246 thread

[Spike60]

It is very hard to beat these little guys at their intended application, the weight and balance combined with the huge RPM make them extremely productive when you are using them for the right job. Bucking up hardwood for firewood definitely isn't it however

But they can be, as long as the material you are cutting isn't too large. The reality is that a huge amount of firewood is cut with homeowner saws in this displacement range. 440's, 445's 340/345's before them, on back through the 021/023/025 Stihls, and 44cc Jonny 450/455, just to mention a few of a long list. People don't want to spend the money on larger saws and often consider saws in the upper end of the consumer segment like the 455 Rancher as too big and heavy.

If you're going to work with saws in the mid-40cc range, this 242 family is far and away the best of the bunch. I got a picker load of hard maple dropped off last month. Most of it is in the 8" to 12" range. Beyond 12" I'll want a larger saw, but a 242XP can handle 3/4 of that pile.

 

[5000+]

I liked the 246 better than the 242.

 

[82f100swb]

Absolutely, having cut my teeth running these saws, pretty much all of the other mid 40cc class saws I have ran, especially modern homeowner ones have left me completely dissapointed, knowing what Husky was able to do with the same displacement all those years ago.
They aren't the magic saws that some people let the internet hype make them out to be, but set up properly and in wood suited to them they do shine.
I will never understand the homeowner marketing logic of let's put the biggest bar possible on this saw and make it have no chance of performing like it should. Nonetheless they sell them like that every day.

I tend to run my 246 more than my 242, but I have a very nasty ported 026 that I usually grab first unless it's a heated handles kind of day. I would love to port the 242 or 246, but I don't trust my own work quite enough at this point to dive into a cylinder that isn't easily replaced.

 

[Tor R]

But they can be, as long as the material you are cutting isn't too large. The reality is that a huge amount of firewood is cut with homeowner saws in this displacement range. 440's, 445's 340/345's before them, on back through the 021/023/025 Stihls, and 44cc Jonny 450/455, just to mention a few of a long list. People don't want to spend the money on larger saws and often consider saws in the upper end of the consumer segment like the 455 Rancher as too big and heavy.

If you're going to work with saws in the mid-40cc range, this 242 family is far and away the best of the bunch. I got a picker load of hard maple dropped off last month. Most of it is in the 8" to 12" range. Beyond 12" I'll want a larger saw, but a 242XP can handle 3/4 of that pile.

totally agree, Bob.
I use 242 more then any other saws I own, even on super light work where I thought my Stihl MS 201 would be the one for me. 242 is just as short and the distance between the handle bars is a tad shorter on 242.

I liked the 246 better than the 242.

I love em both, everyone speak about the 242 but the 246 has to be one of the most under rated saws ever.

 

[CJ Brown]

I got a box of parts yesterday, including a nice 246 cylinder and a nos oem piston/ring, so the 246 will live again! I am dying to get into the 246 but I have 3 saws in pieces on the bench now and I'm not starting a 4th.

 

[82f100swb]

That's why I have boxes and shelves... LOL
I try not to have more than one saw on the bench at a time, one of many habits formed wrenching for a living.

 

[Spike60]

Saw bench at the store is really only big enough for one job at a time. And I don't like to have uncompleted jobs floating around the shop. We only work on Husky/Jonsered and it's rare that we don't have the parts to complete a job on it's first trip to the bench. Workshop at home has a larger bench, so I've got 2-3 going on out there at any given time. But they're not in the way of the "next job", and a week could go by without me even going out there.

Just rebuilt a 246 yesterday for a customer using a Tecomec 242 top end. Got a few of those from Tilton before they closed. I guess there's some of them still floating around from different sources. Tried to get away with a hone and ring on the original, but even with a quick light hone that Gilardoni cylinder actually got worse. Could feel it as soon as I got it back together.

 

[CJ Brown]

I have a work bench and a work table and had 4 saws in pieces 2 weeks ago. I just sold one and have one 365 reassembled but needs testing before it sales, and that leaves 2 more 365s half assembled and waiting on parts. And of course my 288 just sits there - shoved aside so I can get some saws assembled and sold. The saw fund was empty so priorities...

 

[Spike60]

Think you guys will find this interesting. I have a copy the Spring 1998 Husky price list here in front of me. It was the last time these saws appeared and they were both listed as "discontinued-while supplies last". The 42 was already gone; only the 242 and 246 were listed.

These saws were definitely not on the cheap side. Especially the 242, which is a big jump from the 246. But even the 246 was up there; not just an open port consumer saw on that chassis. Here are some prices of both the 242 and 246 as well as some other models for comparison. All prices are as listed with a 16" bar.

242-$589
246-$429
254-$559
257-$429
262-$629
272-$649
45-$259
51-$309
55-$349

 

[wcorey]

That's strange that a 242 was more than a 254, as well as the 246 and 257 being the same.
Maybe 'supply and demand' adjusted pricing?
I have a '98 catalog and nothing in the 242 family is in it.

 

[Spike60]

That's strange that a 242 was more than a 254, as well as the 246 and 257 being the same.
Maybe 'supply and demand' adjusted pricing?
I have a '98 catalog and nothing in the 242 family is in it.

Makes sense since they were being phased out. 365/372 isn't in the 2020 catalog either.

 

[82f100swb]

I do remember dad negotiating pretty hard on the 242 I have. He wanted an XP not an XPG(something he quickly discovered he actually did want after the fact) and the dealer who he hadn't dealt with previously was trying to lean him towards a 254 because "it was a better deal." The 242XPG was in stock on the shelf, and dad needed a saw right away. Dad's history with 254's other than the last one which I have was 2-3 burned down a season as he made them spin 242esque rpm for limbing....
If I remember right he ended up getting the 242xpg for the price of a standard 242xp. The 246 came from the same dealer, and dad had no issues paying the extra for the heated handles that time around....

 

[CJ Brown]

Hard to believe a 242 was $160 more than a 246, when they are almost the same saw. Cleared some space today and started cleaning some parts on my 246. I didn't want to start into another saw, but it kept calling my name and I just couldn't resist.

 

[CJ Brown]

Did some more disassembly and cleaning today on the 246. Discovered the oil pump is seized solid so I will have to get a new oil pump. Taking a few pics along the way and will post some up as I make a bit more progress.

 

[Tor R]

Think you guys will find this interesting. I have a copy the Spring 1998 Husky price list here in front of me. It was the last time these saws appeared and they were both listed as "discontinued-while supplies last". The 42 was already gone; only the 242 and 246 were listed.

These saws were definitely not on the cheap side. Especially the 242, which is a big jump from the 246. But even the 246 was up there; not just an open port consumer saw on that chassis. Here are some prices of both the 242 and 246 as well as some other models for comparison. All prices are as listed with a 16" bar.

242-$589
246-$429
254-$559
257-$429
262-$629
272-$649
45-$259
51-$309
55-$349

Thanks Bob, awesome information.
Back in those times Husqvarna could price the 242 that high and sell bunches of them, 242 had no competition.
Price vs Perfomance, 246 had to be the best purchase in it's time.

Did some more disassembly and cleaning today on the 246. Discovered the oil pump is seized solid so I will have to get a new oil pump. Taking a few pics along the way and will post some up as I make a bit more progress.

There is two different oil pumps Chris, the one they used with bronze worm gear and the later as you have. They changed this around 1992. Ain't a big problem as we can dremmel the old oil pump to fit the new style worm pump gear.

 

[beaglebriar]

Got this little gem from Clint a while back. Finally took a look at it this morning. I'm pretty sure all it needs is the fuel system gone through. Bore is perfect,fires on prime. Anyone have the part number for the fuel line tank grommet??

 

[Spike60]

580 457 501 Same as the 51/55 and a host of others.

 

[Tor R]

They had two different fuel hoses, depend on what type tank it is, # 580 457 501 came around 1992.
If you have the old type tank you can use the fuel tank bushimg as they used on 262, # 503 735 801 and use fuel hose 580 457 501.
Most of the times I use the bushing so I can use same hose on them all.
If you dont have a 501 at home DJ, just use a 346 hose, its a tad longer but it doesnt mather.

 

[jakeshi]

My beater and shelf queen. Really nice running saws.

 

[beaglebriar]

580 457 501 Same as the 51/55 and a host of others.

They had two different fuel hoses, depend on what type tank it is, # 580 457 501 came around 1992.
If you have the old type tank you can use the fuel tank bushimg as they used on 262, # 503 735 801 and use fuel hose 580 457 501.
Most of the times I use the bushing so I can use same hose on them all.
If you dont have a 501 at home DJ, just use a 346 hose, its a tad longer but it doesnt mather.

Thanks guys, Parts are ordered.