Best year for the 390?

I like the earlier higher thicker seat. My 78 cr390 would haul my 300lb butt anywhere I wanted to go even on one wheel. The 38mm forks held up. My point is I hardley rode my 250's after I started riding the 390's. It's the need for speed. I think the 390 and the 86/87 - 400/430 were the best engines Husqvarna ever made.

They were 35mm and they were/are flimsy, especially in '79-'80 when the travel got above 11". The 40mm forks are a massive improvement in stiffness.

Thanks for all the info...."Auto" sez the 77, 78 have sharper steering...but you guys are saying all the years are the same frame wise except for the swingarm??? So why do the earlier ones turn better? And can the 40 mm forks be put on any of the years?

From '79-'82 the geometry is the same, and the frames are essentially the same, the only differences are the mounts for the side panels and seats and lower shock mount on the swing arm which changed to the side mount in '81. The '77-'78 are similar to each other but are an older generation of frame, other than the upper shock mount and steering head angle they are basically the same as the '75-'76 frame. They do have sharper steering head angles than the '79-'82 but its not something to dwell on in my opinion, with proper setup the '79-'82 chassis will turn just fine. '78-'80 will easily accept the 40mm forks because they have the tapered bearings, the '77 can be adapted to it but it is not just a straight parts swap like the '78+.

My 78 with it's 18" rear wheel will cut under any 79 and up 390 in a turn.Like I said,what kind of riding are you going to do.

they work better as well..still look pretty correct too

The 77- 78 models have 28 degree steering rake angle, the 79- 83 have 30 degree rake. With the lower stance of the earlier models, and sharper steering rake, the handling would be a bit different, in theory at least.

auto got some fork stick up happening there...

Sure do,and the front end sticks like glue in a turn and still stable on the straights.You do realize there 40mm forks.They are a bit longer than the 35mm forks that came off that frame.

When you set a Husky up like auto's bike, even the 30.5 degree 79-82 bikes, they will turn VERY good. People that say Huskys dont turn have never ridden one set up correctly like his. I take that a step further for my '81-'82 WRs and I put CR length shocks on them which jacks up the rear end. On my XC/CRs I shorten both ends to 11" like Husky did with the Bigelow brothers bikes which accomplishes basically the same thing. When you set one up like that it will turn with anything. Every time people ride one of my bikes they cant believe how good they turn. The 18" rear wheel doesnt have much to do with it though because the OD of the 17" and 18" wheel/tire combo is the same, although in some conditions the stiffer shorter sidewall of the 18" might help.

The 1977 360 Auto and all WRs were carried over 1976 models so they had 32° rakes while the only 29° frames were on the 1977 were CR only. It went across the board for 1978 where CR,WR. & Auto had 29° but the OR introduced in 1978 was the start of the 30.5° rake that carried on until the 1984 cut to 28.5°

slipping the forks through a bit on the 84 makes a big difference to its turning

Are those the stock gas Girlings?

Really appreciate all the opinions. It has helped me allot. Like I said, I'm well versed in the nuances of my Mag as I've restored it from the ground up, but the 390 is Greek to me. I'm leaning toward a 78. My local husky expert John told me I get a little more suspension travel each year, but ultimately about 11 inches is ideal. Sounds like the 78 has that. I will be racing it once a month in the local vintage races, plus may replace my modern KTM with it for the occasional desert or trail foray. The sharper steering of the 78 is a plus, but, on my best day I'm a mid pack intermediate, so I'm sure I would not be able to push the bike to its full potential. Thanks folks!

There 78 Ohlins.They were black that year with a sticker "Ohlins made for Husqvarna"

From '77 and up the transfer ports were larger. The 390 engine is a beast with a much broader, larger power band. I love the power of the 390. She can do anything with a twist of the twistie. Plenty of power from the bottom to the top. Get it, you will get use to it I did.

I liked the higher seat of the older frame, more comfort if you were sitting, but more standing up when flying. The last of the early 80's case had larger transfer ports. The 250cr and 390's ran much better. Anyone of the 390's would make us smile.

One upgrade that was done if you look at the 80's cr390 in the pic above I'm not sure what year the tranny was upgraded to the larger splined output shaft. I'm not sure if there was a problem or not with the smaller output shafts. In my four 390's they were newer and older in the mix it never broke anything. Maybe someone here will chime in with more facts.

The 78 Cr 390 had 10" travel on both front and rear then went to about 12" both ends starting in 1979 . Had a 78 cr390 that somebody else wanted more than me , gone in the middle of the night . Wish I still had that bike .