Husky 268

[redline4]

I have a 268xp crank.
It's currently in an aftermarket case.
You can have it for the price of getting it to you.

I ordered the old style 266 crank which is part number 501 52 84-01 fingers crossed it will work.

 

[redline4]

 

[JT78]

I have a 268xp crank.
It's currently in an aftermarket case.
You can have it for the price of getting it to you.

Thank you sir, I've got one ordered if it doesn't work I will message you.

 

[Spike60]

I'll give the full lecture later, but a clear and accurate picture really needs these service documents.

 

[Spike60]

Sorry if I come off like a hard ass with this parts lecture. Gave much the same speech to my buddy Walt last week. Lol

IPL research in and off itself, can cause a lot of confusion. Especially if it's done on 3rd party sites like Jack's, parts tree, whatever. I get that if it's the only source available, it seems worth a shot. Works for some stuff, but not for something like this. And filling in the blanks with your imagination is a crap shoot.

One of the problems is that IPL's aren't issued for every model year. Husky doesn't really think in terms of model years to begin with. This is all done according to serial number breaks. On the newer IPL's, serial number based changes are often listed. But not with this older stuff. You can see that simply looking at the year on an ID tag isn't gonna tell the whole story.

Only with these service documents can you get the what, when, why, and how of the changes. Nice too that they also show all the little parts you might not think of until you try and finish the project. Also notice that every model in the family doesn't get the change at the same time. Equivalent Jonsered models probably lagged a few months for these same changes. Every service document for Husky is in the data base somwhere. But I think only dealer accessible. Jonsered stuff is real spotty.

Making it even more entertaining is that a 30-40 year old saw may have parts on it that don't really belong there. We all try to make things work with what we have. So, again referring to this SB, throwing that older coil on a newer saw might introduce that back fire problem.

 

[Stump Shot]

Splains why that 272xp of mine blew its muffler to smithereens years ago.
I also noticed that the new IPL listings have a lot of new IPL's by serial number breaks added to them. For example, near forever the 272 had only two, now there's a whole bunches of them listed.
Aftermarket listing lead a fella to think all the modules are the same and fit everything that looks like it.
Which probably just makes things that much worse.
Thanks Bob

 

[Spike60]

Other thing you see a lot of are new part numbers due to a supplier change. Common with coils. When you think about it, how many suppliers from 35 years ago can we expect to still be here? On the old stuff, you often don't learn of this until you try to order the part. At that time, it will supersede to the new number. The new IPL's are managed electronically, and such part numbers can be changed.

But it's still confusing in either direction if you have no way to cross reference or explain the change. If you only have the old number and no one can tell you anything but the new number, it's natural to wonder if the dang thing is going to work.

The 272 is still being made down in Brazil, so I'd expect that the newest IPL'S for them ought to be the same format as any of the 500 series saws.

 

[JT78]

Sorry if I come off like a hard ass with this parts lecture. Gave much the same speech to my buddy Walt last week. Lol

IPL research in and off itself, can cause a lot of confusion. Especially if it's done on 3rd party sites like Jack's, parts tree, whatever. I get that if it's the only source available, it seems worth a shot. Works for some stuff, but not for something like this. And filling in the blanks with your imagination is a crap shoot.

One of the problems is that IPL's aren't issued for every model year. Husky doesn't really think in terms of model years to begin with. This is all done according to serial number breaks. On the newer IPL's, serial number based changes are often listed. But not with this older stuff. You can see that simply looking at the year on an ID tag isn't gonna tell the whole story.

Only with these service documents can you get the what, when, why, and how of the changes. Nice too that they also show all the little parts you might not think of until you try and finish the project. Also notice that every model in the family doesn't get the change at the same time. Equivalent Jonsered models probably lagged a few months for these same changes. Every service document for Husky is in the data base somwhere. But I think only dealer accessible. Jonsered stuff is real spotty.

Making it even more entertaining is that a 30-40 year old saw may have parts on it that don't really belong there. We all try to make things work with what we have. So, again referring to this SB, throwing that older coil on a newer saw might introduce that back fire problem.

So this coil.is the older coil what your saying is that I need to buy a coil as well. I already ended up having to buy a bunch of other parts for this saw. I will do it right cause it's not my saw it's a friend's that owns and runs a tree service. Thanks for the heads up but still sucks that I now have to dump more money into parts I hate to keep telling him that it's gonna cost more but I guess it is what it is.

 

[JT78]

Alright so I ordered a coil too but not the OEM Husqvarna as most were close to 100 bucks and he didn't want to pay that much. So I got an aftermarket one for 18 bucks.

 

[Spike60]

Hard to say JT. Says you shouldn't do it, but due to "possible" backfiring when starting. I'd see how it runs first.

 

[JT78]

Hard to say JT. Says you shouldn't do it, but due to "possible" backfiring when starting. I'd see how it runs first.

I already talked to him I will run the new coil but give him the old one back to keep.

 

[Spike60]

Yeah, that sounds good. $100 coil blows the budget and then some on a job like that.

 

[Czed]

Sorry if I come off like a hard ass with this parts lecture. Gave much the same speech to my buddy Walt last week. Lol

IPL research in and off itself, can cause a lot of confusion. Especially if it's done on 3rd party sites like Jack's, parts tree, whatever. I get that if it's the only source available, it seems worth a shot. Works for some stuff, but not for something like this. And filling in the blanks with your imagination is a crap shoot.

One of the problems is that IPL's aren't issued for every model year. Husky doesn't really think in terms of model years to begin with. This is all done according to serial number breaks. On the newer IPL's, serial number based changes are often listed. But not with this older stuff. You can see that simply looking at the year on an ID tag isn't gonna tell the whole story.

Only with these service documents can you get the what, when, why, and how of the changes. Nice too that they also show all the little parts you might not think of until you try and finish the project. Also notice that every model in the family doesn't get the change at the same time. Equivalent Jonsered models probably lagged a few months for these same changes. Every service document for Husky is in the data base somwhere. But I think only dealer accessible. Jonsered stuff is real spotty.

Making it even more entertaining is that a 30-40 year old saw may have parts on it that don't really belong there. We all try to make things work with what we have. So, again referring to this SB, throwing that older coil on a newer saw might introduce that back fire problem.

What was Walt's final iteration of his old man saw last week?
Lol

 

[Spike60]

What was Walt's final iteration of his old man saw last week?
Lol

Can't say. We're going to do something along the lines of guys in their 60's running 60cc saws. Can probably do 70cc in our 70s. 80s in our 80s doesn't sound appealing though.

 

[Czed]

Can't say. We're going to do something along the lines of guys in their 60's running 60cc saws. Can probably do 70cc in our 70s. 80s in our 80s doesn't sound appealing though.

Sold my last 394 today
It's no fun packing the big displacement saws through the woods anymore

 

[JT78]

Sold my last 394 today
It's no fun packing the big displacement saws through the woods anymore

That's sad I like the big older saws. I will have a hard time parting with my 797 and my 395.

 

[Czed]

That's sad I like the big older saws. I will have a hard time parting with my 797 and my 395.

Nah
I've got a mike lee ported 288 and like 25/30 other 70cc+ saws
I'll live

 

[Stump Shot]

Other thing you see a lot of are new part numbers due to a supplier change. Common with coils. When you think about it, how many suppliers from 35 years ago can we expect to still be here? On the old stuff, you often don't learn of this until you try to order the part. At that time, it will supersede to the new number. The new IPL's are managed electronically, and such part numbers can be changed.

But it's still confusing in either direction if you have no way to cross reference or explain the change. If you only have the old number and no one can tell you anything but the new number, it's natural to wonder if the dang thing is going to work.

The 272 is still being made down in Brazil, so I'd expect that the newest IPL'S for them ought to be the same format as any of the 500 series saws.

What it looks like from the consumer end.

 

[Spike60]

One more good one to share, and the one that cured me of the guess work approach. All of those, "it must have been, they had to be thinking, it was probably," statements that precede throwing something out there and hoping it's correct.

The Tomos built 66 was offered here for what, maybe 4 years? Always thought it was little more than a 50mm 61. There's no way there would be more than 1 top end for that thing, right? Mine has the same top end as the 268OP, and I thought that was it. Discussion with another member found that his earlier saw had a different kit. 50mm, apparently open port. But with a 162/266 intake block and not the 61 intake. Never seen one myself and don't know it was ever used anywhere else, or who the supplier was. Started playing the IPL game, and got the usual foggy picture. Typed in SB, 66 and there it was. What, when and why.

 

[Stump Shot]

One more good one to share, and the one that cured me of the guess work approach. All of those, "it must have been, they had to be thinking, it was probably," statements that precede throwing something out there and hoping it's correct.

The Tomos built 66 was offered here for what, maybe 4 years? Always thought it was little more than a 50mm 61. There's no way there would be more than 1 top end for that thing, right? Mine has the same top end as the 268OP, and I thought that was it. Discussion with another member found that his earlier saw had a different kit. 50mm, apparently open port. But with a 162/266 intake block and not the 61 intake. Never seen one myself and don't know it was ever used anywhere else, or who the supplier was. Started playing the IPL game, and got the usual foggy picture. Typed in SB, 66 and there it was. What, when and why.

View attachment 363916

Probably is all we'd have Bob, if it weren't for you! It ain't easy being cheesy!
I had a Tomos 66 come through here once, it had a closed port 266 top end on it, don't know if that's stock or someone tossed it on there. I actually owned one of these 66's when I was in my early 20's, bought it from a pulp wood cutter, was a good saw for me. I finally tired of a buddy begging me to buy it and down the road it went.
Also have seen a 266 with a metal fuel tank, only one I've seen other than the spare tank in my stasharoo.

For the heck of it, I typed in 503511503 to see what came up and this is the models the site said the flywheel fit.