Husqvarna TE 310 2012 vs. Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Husqvarna TE 310 2012

Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Overview - Husqvarna TE 310 2012 vs Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Husqvarna TE 310 2012

Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Technical Specifications Husqvarna TE 310 2012 compared to Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Husqvarna TE 310 2012

Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Husqvarna TE 310 2012

Husqvarna FE 350 2016

Engine and Drive Train

Bore	Bore	83 mm	Bore	88 mm
Stroke	Stroke	55 mm	Stroke	57.5 mm
Compression Ratio	Compression Ratio	12.9	Compression Ratio	12.3
Starter	Starter	Kick	Starter	Kick
Transmission	Transmission	Chain	Transmission	Chain
Cylinders	Cylinders	1	Cylinders	1
Strokes	Strokes	4-Stroke	Strokes	4-Stroke
Displacement	Displacement	297 ccm	Displacement	349.7 ccm

Suspension Front

Front suspension	Front suspension	Upside-Down telescopic fork	Front suspension	Upside-Down telescopic fork
Brand	Brand	Marzocchi	Brand	WP

Suspension Rear

Brand	Brand	Marzocchi	Brand	WP

Brakes Rear

Type	Type	Disc	Type	Disc

Dimensions and Weights

Front tyre width	Front tyre width	90 mm	Front tyre width	90 mm
Front tyre height	Front tyre height	90 %	Front tyre height	90 %
Front tyre diameter	Front tyre diameter	21 inch	Front tyre diameter	21 inch
Rear tyre width	Rear tyre width	120 mm	Rear tyre width	140 mm
Rear tyre height	Rear tyre height	90 %	Rear tyre height	80 %
Rear tyre diameter	Rear tyre diameter	18 inch	Rear tyre diameter	18 inch
Wheelbase	Wheelbase	1,495 mm	Wheelbase	1,482 mm
Seat Height	Seat Height	963 mm	Seat Height	970 mm
Dry Weight	Dry Weight	111 kg	Dry Weight	109.2 kg
Fuel Tank Capacity	Fuel Tank Capacity	7.2 l	Fuel Tank Capacity	9.5 l

Pros and Cons in comparison

Husqvarna TE 310 2012

Unfortunately, our editors did not test this model.

Husqvarna FE 350 2016

The universal bike from Husky, it can do practically everything. And as something in between the 250 and 450, it combines the advantages of both models. It has also become somewhat stronger in 2017 and is now more comparable to the 450 in terms of responsiveness.

Probably the fastest machine on any special stage

great balance between easy handling and good performance.

Clearly more aggressive than the FE250 and therefore also more energy-consuming