MS462 vs MS500i

[Absolution]

Semi skip on a 36 yes full skip isn’t needed on a 36 on the 500. What the 500 reminds me more of is a 064 will it handle as long of a bar power wise yes oiling no. The 66 series is more on bat with a 395 but lacking big time in the grunt and oil departments for a good true comparison.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If someone would make a decent semi skip besides Oregon I would use it.

And yes huskies in general oil way better than Stihl.

 

[Skeans1]

If someone would make a decent semi skip besides Oregon I would use it.

And yes huskies in general oil way better than Stihl.

In square Stihl does, myself I prefer Oregon chain but I’m grinding every chain in the evenings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Absolution]

In square Stihl does, myself I prefer Oregon chain but I’m grinding every chain in the evenings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not in 404 =\.

I've been really surprised with the archer which I buy in 25ft rolls

I've also recently ordered a 100ft roll of that 3/8 low pro from farmertec for the top handles.
It's alittle bit agressive off the roll. The teeth seem as hard as my Stihl chain so if the straps hold up it's probably going to be a better deal than the archer.

Downside is they only have full house.

The biggest problem I had with Oregon and the teeth seemed soft as hell for the price you pay.

 

[Skeans1]

Not in 404 =\.

I've been really surprised with the archer which I buy in 25ft rolls

I've also recently ordered a 100ft roll of that 3/8 low pro from farmertec for the top handles.
It's alittle bit agressive off the roll. The teeth seem as hard as my Stihl chain so if the straps hold up it's probably going to be a better deal than the archer.

Downside is they only have full house.

The biggest problem I had with Oregon and the teeth seemed soft as hell for the price you pay.

View attachment 288570

Here’s a good question why 404?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Absolution]

Here’s a good question why 404?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is me taking two steps out of my garage.
Soil doesn't exist it's sand. The hardwood is usually fine but the pine especially after a hurricane is covered in sand and embedded in the bark.

The question of why not just us semi chisel.

That I answer good question. I guess I was recommend to try it liked the performance to how to teeth hold up. The price difference wasn't that much and I pretty much now have all my saws converted to it except the top handles of course.

Edit: another thing to note. If you don't mow after the rain you are basically working in a dust cloud. It sucks. Only place I've lived where you wait for the rain so you can mow.

 

[MustangMike]

I have 2 ported 462s (MOFO and MMWS). They both run very strong, are lighter than a 440 or a 500i, the air filters stay cleaner and they sip less fuel (especially than the 500).

So, I would have to be running over a 28" bar in hardwood quite a bit before I would choose a 500 over one of them.

The 462s are my "go to" saws for most stuff, and if I encounter larger wood I have my ported CFB Hybrid, MOFO 460, MoparMyWay 661 and numerous worked 660s.

IMO, just the reduced time in filter cleaning and refills will make the 462 more productive than a 500i in most circumstances.

I also like the lightning fast throttle response, especially when you do some limbing with them.

If I did not have my other larger saws I would probably want a 500, but right now I just don't have the appetite for one. I simply don't need that size saw frequently enough.

 

[huskihl]

I have 2 ported 462s (MOFO and MMWS). They both run very strong, are lighter than a 440 or a 500i, the air filters stay cleaner and they sip less fuel (especially than the 500).

So, I would have to be running over a 28" bar in hardwood quite a bit before I would choose a 500 over one of them.

The 462s are my "go to" saws for most stuff, and if I encounter larger wood I have my ported CFB Hybrid, MOFO 460, MoparMyWay 661 and numerous worked 660s.

IMO, just the reduced time in filter cleaning and refills will make the 462 more productive than a 500i in most circumstances.

I also like the lightning fast throttle response, especially when you do some limbing with them.

If I did not have my other larger saws I would probably want a 500, but right now I just don't have the appetite for one. I simply don't need that size saw frequently enough.

Mike, if you had the 500 I believe you would be trying to support your reasoning for owning that as well.

It’s a chainsaw, if you like it, buy it

 

[MustangMike]

I won't disagree with you Kevin, but I did evaluate the pros and cons of both before picking, and the 462 did have the advantage of being available first.

However, for what I do, I think it was the better choice. Others may have different circumstances that would benefit from a different choice.

I think my biggest let down with the 500 was that the fuel injection did NOT make it more fuel efficient! If it had, that would have been nice.

 

[Absolution]

I won't disagree with you Kevin, but I did evaluate the pros and cons of both before picking, and the 462 did have the advantage of being available first.

However, for what I do, I think it was the better choice. Others may have different circumstances that would benefit from a different choice.

I think my biggest let down with the 500 was that the fuel injection did NOT make it more fuel efficient! If it had, that would have been nice.

I've heard about it improving. I'm wondering if the computer will lean it out later in its life. I've only had about 6 gallons though mine.

 

[huskihl]

I won't disagree with you Kevin, but I did evaluate the pros and cons of both before picking, and the 462 did have the advantage of being available first.

However, for what I do, I think it was the better choice. Others may have different circumstances that would benefit from a different choice.

I think my biggest let down with the 500 was that the fuel injection did NOT make it more fuel efficient! If it had, that would have been nice.

I think you made the right choice also. Someone made a comment last night that agreed with what I’ve been saying all along. The 500 was made for longer bars, where the 462 is a perfect 20” firewood saw

 

[av8or3]

I have both. Both ported. The 462 (and the 261) are the saws I reach for now. The 500i is an awesome torque monster that likes long bars. The 462 is as fast as the 500i in firewood. The 500i will run away from the 462 in big wood. If you’re still stuck on a 20” bar the 462 (or the 261) is the saw for you. 500i uses more gas than the 462. This has all probably been said but I just got here.

 

[andyshine77]

I won't disagree with you Kevin, but I did evaluate the pros and cons of both before picking, and the 462 did have the advantage of being available first.

However, for what I do, I think it was the better choice. Others may have different circumstances that would benefit from a different choice.

I think my biggest let down with the 500 was that the fuel injection did NOT make it more fuel efficient! If it had, that would have been nice.

The fuel use on the 500i is not a big deal, and some are blowing it out of proportion.

 

[Infinitejest]

I think a tank goes a little quicker because the control module doohickey eats up some of the space that would be fuel tank on any other saw.
But it's not huge, about the same run time to a tank as a ported 461. I use the same amount of gas to get through the day.
The 500 definitely makes a lot of stumps in a tank.

 

[Stihl Potlicker]

I have 2 ported 462s (MOFO and MMWS). They both run very strong, are lighter than a 440 or a 500i, the air filters stay cleaner and they sip less fuel (especially than the 500).

So, I would have to be running over a 28" bar in hardwood quite a bit before I would choose a 500 over one of them.

The 462s are my "go to" saws for most stuff, and if I encounter larger wood I have my ported CFB Hybrid, MOFO 460, MoparMyWay 661 and numerous worked 660s.

IMO, just the reduced time in filter cleaning and refills will make the 462 more productive than a 500i in most circumstances.

I also like the lightning fast throttle response, especially when you do some limbing with them.

If I did not have my other larger saws I would probably want a 500, but right now I just don't have the appetite for one. I simply don't need that size saw frequently enough.

my buddy out in Cali has been using his 500i with max-air filter, cutting wood from all the fires and he hasn't changed out or cleaned his filter in months. He is see how long till she blows, but he says it Stihl runs and runs lol

 

[av8or3]

I have both. Both ported. The 462 (and the 261) are the saws I reach for now. The 500i is an awesome torque monster that likes long bars. The 462 is as fast as the 500i in firewood. The 500i will run away from the 462 in big wood. If you’re still stuck on a 20” bar the 462 (or the 261) is the saw for you. 500i uses more gas than the 462. This has all probably been said but I just got here.

I’d like to add that by saying the 462 is more suitable for firewood only means it’s the more suitable of the two. It can and should be regarded as a pro fallers tool. Because it is.

 

[Absolution]

I think a tank goes a little quicker because the control module doohickey eats up some of the space that would be fuel tank on any other saw.
But it's not huge, about the same run time to a tank as a ported 461. I use the same amount of gas to get through the day.
The 500 definitely makes a lot of stumps in a tank.

Sadly I think the tank is either the same size or larger than the 462. If you notice on the 500i they've extended the tank under saw more than other models.

 

[MustangMike]

I don't own a 500i, so I was just echoing what others (multiple users) said about fuel consumption.

I now see some other persons reporting that the fuel consumption is not so bad.

Perhaps there is some variation from saw to saw.

 

[Absolution]

I don't own a 500i, so I was just echoing what others (multiple users) said about fuel consumption.

I now see some other persons reporting that the fuel consumption is not so bad.

Perhaps there is some variation from saw to saw.

Mine definitely drinks compared to the 372. It's more along the lines of my 660 with it's low intake in fuel consumption.

 

[Skeans1]

I don't own a 500i, so I was just echoing what others (multiple users) said about fuel consumption.

I now see some other persons reporting that the fuel consumption is not so bad.

Perhaps there is some variation from saw to saw.

It’s not much different then a 390 Husky just lighter to pack all day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[andyshine77]

I don't own a 500i, so I was just echoing what others (multiple users) said about fuel consumption.

I now see some other persons reporting that the fuel consumption is not so bad.

Perhaps there is some variation from saw to saw.

It drinks more, but it's not like a huge amount. The fact it will handle a 8 pin with a 28" bar in hardwood would likely make up any efficiency issue, not to mention it's very light for the power. The 500i also seems to use a bit less fuel the more time it gets on it, they may be a tad rich until fully broken in.