# fast splitter.. anyone use this type of splitter?



## jerseykat1 (Mar 2, 2011)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnqVeaKj23c&feature=related

seems to be splitting the wood up pretty quickly.


----------



## mywaynow (Mar 2, 2011)

Looks impressive with whatever they are cutting.  Don't think it would be very effective on nasty Pin Oak or Maple though.  What do you do when the splitter can't split what it started?  Looked them up and they are pricey too.  5.5 horse version is 2900, 9 hp is over 4k.  What was the kid doing behind the unit in the video?  Feeding the Hampsters running the engine?


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 2, 2011)

I've seen them many times. They do not impress me and I do not think they are any faster. It is all in technique. I've watched others splitting wood and just have to shake my head watching all the wasted effort and motion. I simply sit and split. Easy does it, and you can get lots done in a little time.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 2, 2011)

mywaynow said:
			
		

> Looks impressive with whatever they are cutting.  Don't think it would be very effective on nasty Pin Oak or Maple though.  What do you do when the splitter can't split what it started?  Looked them up and they are pricey too.  5.5 horse version is 2900, 9 hp is over 4k.  What was the kid doing behind the unit in the video?  Feeding the Hampsters running the engine?


As you can see in the video, if it can't split, you just disengage the lever and give it another shot.

They expensive because the mechanism that makes them work. The biggest advantages of the super-split style is that they require much less power (smaller engine, less fuel, easier to start etc), and they operate much faster. They automatically return once they get to the end of their stroke.





			
				Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> I've seen them many times. They do not impress me and I do not think they are any faster. It is all in technique. I've watched others splitting wood and just have to shake my head watching all the wasted effort and motion. I simply sit and split. Easy does it, and you can get lots done in a little time.


Seen them as in seen video? Have you ever used one?


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 2, 2011)

Don't need to use one myself as I can tell just from watching several videos on this thing that it is not what I want and not what most folks think it is. It will do nicely for some things but not for most wood burners. Also, bear in mind that in the video he probably has someone feeding him his wood. What if he had to get his own? It won't be in the same place all the time then. What about splitting harder to split woods? What about larger logs, etc.? No, I'll stick to the hydraulics.


----------



## roddy (Mar 2, 2011)

we have used them since 1995  still running the second model(first got ran over by a loader(volvo 90)  can say this splitter is very fast and goes thru anything(we do mostly hard maple and oak)   with a bit of planning you can keep this splitter in wood,but i dont know any splitter that feeds itself.we also modified the splitter knife and push plate so that we can double up on the wood,its goes thru no problem,and it can be moved easily,thrown in the back of a truck by one person.sorry,we dont sit when splitting,just our preference


----------



## mywaynow (Mar 2, 2011)

I don't like the potential of my hand guiding a log against a blindly located wedge either.  This video shows a guy hustling to split as much as possible.  Certainly can sell a splitter that way, but can also get a heck of an injury.  To each his own, I would not change my choice if I could.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 2, 2011)

Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Don't need to use one myself as I can tell just from watching several videos on this thing that it is not what I want and not what most folks think it is. It will do nicely for some things but not for most wood burners. Also, bear in mind that in the video he probably has someone feeding him his wood. What if he had to get his own? It won't be in the same place all the time then. What about splitting harder to split woods? What about larger logs, etc.? No, I'll stick to the hydraulics.


So admittedly you're making a statement about it's operation based upon videos that you've watched and you feel qualified to make a statement such as this, "I do not think they are any faster"?

Now that we've established that, we'll move on to the truth.

I don't know of any hydraulic splitter out there that can split wood that fast, the matter of feeding it and keeping splits clear of the splitter are moot points because you have to do that just the same with hydraulics. The main improvement is in cycle time. When splitting with hydraulic you patiently wait for the ram to move forward and split the wood, then you wait for it to move backwards to maneuver the split in place and repeat the process. That takes a lot of time, even a fast hydraulic cycle time of 15 seconds or so is ten times slower than this is. So how can it not be any faster?

The force applied by the flywheel on this splitter is magnitudes larger than the force of any hydraulic splitter I know of. The only different between the two is that one is an impact force and the other is a continuous force. The hydraulic splitter can continue powering through nasty crotches and y's, while the super-split may take a couple whacks. But the few times you have to hit piece multiple times still doesn't make the process take more time than hydraulic splitting on a whole.

For most people hydraulics splitters work great, and for the cost they really are great, but that doesn't mean they are superior. For higher production splitting a splitter like this just can't be beat IMHO.




			
				mywaynow said:
			
		

> I don't like the potential of my hand guiding a log against a blindly located wedge either.  This video shows a guy hustling to split as much as possible.  Certainly can sell a splitter that way, but can also get a heck of an injury.  To each his own, I would not change my choice if I could.


And that would be different with a hydraulic splitter? If you had a hydraulic splitter with a stationary wedge it wouldn't be any different than this. The only difference is this one moves much faster. If you got your hand in a hydraulic it's still going to do just as much damage, it doesn't matter how fast it is, you still can't react fast enough to stop a hydraulic splitter if your hand is in the way. I don't understand your concern.


----------



## nrford (Mar 2, 2011)

mywaynow said:
			
		

> Looks impressive with whatever they are cutting.  Don't think it would be very effective on nasty Pin Oak or Maple though.  What do you do when the splitter can't split what it started?  Looked them up and they are pricey too.  5.5 horse version is 2900, 9 hp is over 4k.  What was the kid doing behind the unit in the video?  Feeding the Hampsters running the engine?




 They are splitting oak and maple in this video!


----------



## lukem (Mar 2, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> For most people hydraulics splitters work great, and for the cost they really are great, but that doesn't mean they are superior. For higher production splitting a splitter like this just can't be beat IMHO.



For high-volume a hydraulic splitter with a multi-way wedge is probably the fastest.  One pass and you have 8 splits.  Hard to beat that.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 2, 2011)

lukem said:
			
		

> CountryBoy19 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A multi-way wedge isn't an equal comparison though. We're comparing speed of comparable setups hydraulic vs. inertial rack & pinion. You add a multi-way wedge to one you have to add it to the other.


----------



## bogydave (Mar 2, 2011)

Video made my back hurt. Saw him struggling, lifting & wrestling with large rounds. 
I sometimes have rounds that a 3" wide wedge don't break open on one pass, so
this type would add more work for me. If all I had was straight grained easy split wood, it would be fine,
but MN seem to throw me a tough round every now & then. 
But I'm never racing when cutting wood, I set a slow steady pace. My hydraulic works fine, vert & horizontal.
Back saving vertical mode  & cradle beam was the biggest reasons I went with 22 ton speeco.

Nice splitter video, could almost smell the wood being split 
Very fast ram speed just lower power. Trade-offs.
How does the price compare?


----------



## treehackers (Mar 2, 2011)

I used one of those super-splitters for a summer and yes they do cycle fast. You really need 2 people. The one think I liked was the gas usage - next to nothing. That being said, I then bought a 27 ton troy bilt hydraulic splitter. The were many reasons for the hydraulic opposed to the direct drive. One, I never had a round that I couldn't go through with the hydraulic. The super-splitter required a sledge to free the round several times. 

The absolute main reason for the purchase of hydraulic though was the horizontal / vertical option - period.

Lifting ALL the rounds onto the table of the super-split KILLED my back. Now I just kick the big rounds around with my foot and stand them up on the splitter plate while I sit.


----------



## mywaynow (Mar 2, 2011)

mywaynow said:
			
		

> I don't like the potential of my hand guiding a log against a blindly located wedge either.  This video shows a guy hustling to split as much as possible.  Certainly can sell a splitter that way, but can also get a heck of an injury.  To each his own, I would not change my choice if I could.


CountryBoy19:  "And that would be different with a hydraulic splitter? If you had a hydraulic splitter with a stationary wedge it wouldn't be any different than this. The only difference is this one moves much faster. If you got your hand in a hydraulic it's still going to do just as much damage, it doesn't matter how fast it is, you still can't react fast enough to stop a hydraulic splitter if your hand is in the way. I don't understand your concern."





The splitter I use has a stationary base, and the wedge moves with the hydrualics.  This is a major difference.  The wedge is visible and I dont have to guide anything with my hands.  My hands rotate the lever and scratch my but all at the same time a log is being split safely away from my limbs.  My concern clear now?  Sounds like your the salesman for this line?


----------



## Dieselhead (Mar 2, 2011)

not much room for error there......


----------



## WhitePine (Mar 2, 2011)

Just watched the video. I don't work that hard using a maul.   :lol: 

If that shaky jake splitting table is what they supply as standard equipment, I'm not impressed.


----------



## burntime (Mar 2, 2011)

I think it has plusses and minuses.  It does look faster but no verticle splitting.  Most of my splitting is horizontal but I would for sure be using a verticle splitter as I get older.  It does seem quite which is great!  I do not like the small pad though, too small for my liking.  I also think the control looks awkwardly high.  Looks like your hanging in and over it more with a high control.  I have a speeco 22ton splitter and will change the pumpt from 11 to 13 if it ever goes.  I think the full cycle time is 14 seconds if I remember right.  Thats the full stroke.  I rarely go thru the full stroke so it really is not much quicker when you look at that analogy.  I think the 13gpm pump will speed it up 20 percent or so just over 11 seconds.  I am lucky to get a quarter of the stroke on most oak and maple.  Thats something like 4-5 seconds.  Not sure how much power that has as well.  A smaller motor would be less powerfull is my guess.  Obviously the mechanics are different so maybe not.  I agree, the table looks a little chinsey.  Who knows, it may be the best thing since sliced bread!   :lol:


----------



## billb3 (Mar 2, 2011)

That would be a sweet set-up for two people 
great if you were rolling out of a pick-up.

even sitting I  have to be easy on my back
can't sit too long, either.


I'd worry about my fingers, too.
Probably just looks awful due to the camera angle.


Nice splitter.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 3, 2011)

mywaynow said:
			
		

> Sounds like your the salesman for this line?



Not at all, I'm just trying to make sure it gets a fair comparison. You can't compare apples to oranges and that is what people are trying to do.

You can't accurately compare a vertical hydraulic splitter to this.
You can't accurately compare a massive hydraulic splitter with an 8 way wedge to this.

I mean, come on, any Joe can get up an preach, "I've never seen this thing run before, but my cousin's $100,000 firewood process is faster." Well no chit it's faster... did you have to use a stop-watch to figure that out?

Make an equal, accurate comparison and then we'll talk .................................. with all the spare time left-over when we're done splitting with this one. 

This has a stationary wedge, it could just as easily have a moving wedge, but it doesn't so you can't honestly say, "But this is dangerous because this." If you compared it to any other hydraulic splitter with a stationary wedge the risk would be the same. In the interest of making an accurate comparison (if a person is trying to "compare" this to any other splitters) we have to compare this to something else with a single stationary wedge. Do you see the point now?


----------



## burntime (Mar 3, 2011)

If you like it then by all means get one.  It just does not look comfortable to me for one, or as versital as the regular splitter that goes horizontal and vertical.  Thats not bad, just not mainstream for a lot of people...


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Mar 3, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> mywaynow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They are expensive because they have a near monopoly on this type of unit. Rack & pinions are not expensive compared to hyd pumps,valves, cylinders, tanks, etc etc, Randy


----------



## wellbuilt home (Mar 3, 2011)

Ive been using a SS for 2 years now . 
 Ill tell you  It is wayyyyyyyy faster then the hydraulic splitter . 
 I have a 27 ton yard machine  and it is a good unit but its like watching grass grow compared to the SS . 
  I can throw a log on the table the size of a garbage can and it gets pushed thru in 2 seconds .
  If the log gets stuck at the end of the stroke , We just run a split thru and push it out in 2 seconds . 
  It looks dangerous but its hard to get your hand stuck . 
   I keep one hand on the pull lever  and the other on top of the log . 
   I pull the lever and lift my hand . 
   The SS could send a split flying  if you don't hold the wood  down . 
   We lift the logs with a skid steer  with a 1/2 cord box ,    we  1/4  or 1/2  the rounds    with the 27 ton yard machine when there cut , so the wood is small.
   The wedge is sharp and cuts thru  easy . 
    google  wolf splitter ,   its the same as the SS  smaller model .    I think it runs 1400 dollars . 
   With my  2 sons  we can cut   2  cord  a   hour with out pushing . 
   The work bench is at  a  perfect  height   and i can split for hours  and not feel it . 
     We split about 60 cord now   
     If i was sitting out buy the splitter the boys would bury me in splits  in a few minutes


----------



## dafattkidd (Mar 3, 2011)

WhitePine said:
			
		

> Just watched the video. I don't work that hard using a maul.   :lol:
> 
> If that shaky jake splitting table is what they supply as standard equipment, I'm not impressed.



This is how I feel about it exactly.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 3, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> Backwoods Savage said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is difficult to answer because it appears only one man knows the "truth!" 

I'd hate to have to actually use everything first before making up my mind whether I thought it was worth the price or was any good at all. No, most of us make lots of decisions without actually using something. Hey, I even made up my mind about my wife before I married her!

On the speed issue, yes, it is different with a hydraulic splitter. Speed causes more accidents! Looking at this another way too, it appears most folks compare the cycle time. That thing is indeed fast and I doubt anyone would really say any different. However, you can not compare it to the cycle time of a hydraulic splitter. That is, not on all types of wood. For example, for the past several years and for a few more most of the wood we split here is white ash. Would I use cycle time to determine how long it takes to split the logs? Absolutely not! The reason for this is that I very rarely will use the entire cycle. I can split a lot of wood using only a few inches of travel with the ram, so it takes a very little time to split a log; that is, it will split just as fast as it shows in that video. One more thing is that we split lots of kindling with the hydraulic splitter. This means approximately 1" x 1" pieces. I would not even attempt to do it with that machine! The reason is that you have to have your hands and fingers so close to the wedge. I like my fingers and if those are lost, they do not grow back.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Mar 3, 2011)

wellbuilt home said:
			
		

> With my  2 sons  we can cut   2  cord  a   hour with out pushing .



Having help seems to be the key here.  That cycle time doesn't do much for you if someone isn't feeding you.


----------



## JeffT (Mar 3, 2011)

The video that was posted was not the best representation of what this splitter can do.I have not used a S.S, but I would think about it if one popped up for a good price.Do a search on you tube and you will find some better vids.
As far as being a two man op that could go for any splitter.Having a splitter that will go vertical is defiantly a bonus for me.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 3, 2011)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> They are expensive because they have a near monopoly on this type of unit. Rack & pinions are not expensive compared to hyd pumps,valves, cylinders, tanks, etc etc, Randy



The rack and pinion isn't the only thing that makes this tick. You have massive fly-wheels that are pretty costly, bearing rollers, also the engagement, disengagement, and return mechanisms etc. I know it doesn't sound like much, but the little things add up. Look at how many bearing rollers there are, at $20 each that adds up. When you compare all of that it comes out more expensive than a hydraulic pump, valve, and cylinder.



			
				Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Would I use cycle time to determine how long it takes to split the logs? Absolutely not! The reason for this is that I very rarely will use the entire cycle. I can split a lot of wood using only a few inches of travel with the ram, so it takes a very little time to split a log; that is, it will split just as fast as it shows in that video.


But even using just a few inches of travel of the ram this is still faster. But that's only on the easy wood. So on easy wood the split times are maybe a little more equal, but on more difficult wood, where the full stroke would be needed for a hydraulic splitter this will blow it away as far as time goes.

Maybe I'm just too scientific for some people, but when you eliminate all other variables and look at cycle time, the hydraulic splitters are turtles and the SS is a rabbit, even if you're only using a few inches of the stroke.

Then you throw in all the other variables and IMHO, it comes out in a wash. This thing is light and sips gas, OTOH, it won't split the big nasty crotches etc. You gain some, you lose some, but IMHO, the biggest gain is that you can split everything else much, much faster than you can with hydraulics.

Just as a matter of curiosity, what is your average cycle time when splitting your ash? I don't want an estimated, "Oh a few seconds or so", I want to know what it actually is. I'd be interested in comparing it to full-cycle time on this splitter.


----------



## gpcollen1 (Mar 3, 2011)

Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Don't need to use one myself as I can tell just from watching several videos on this thing that it is not what I want and not what most folks think it is. It will do nicely for some things but not for most wood burners. Also, bear in mind that in the video he probably has someone feeding him his wood. What if he had to get his own? It won't be in the same place all the time then. What about splitting harder to split woods? What about larger logs, etc.? No, I'll stick to the hydraulics.



Many of us just move the splitter over next to the pile of rounds.  Nobody has to feed you logs necessarily...


----------



## Wallyworld (Mar 3, 2011)

I've had one for over 20 years, its split a ton of twisted red oak, maple, beech and whatever else I've burned. It will wear 3 guys out if its good splitiing and they won't keep up with getting and stacking. And I've never broken a hydraulic hose  :lol:


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Mar 3, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> Singed Eyebrows said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Flywheels are just big chunks of iron machined round, no high tech there or big cost, a rod,a lever, a pawl? no big cost there. I think the SS is a ripoff for what they cost to make. It looks to be a great machine however, Randy


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 3, 2011)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> Flywheels are just big chunks of iron machined round, no high tech there or big cost, a rod,a lever, a pawl? no big cost there. I think the SS is a ripoff for what they cost to make. It looks to be a great machine however, Randy


How much do you think the flywheels cost? Have you priced them?

Flywheels aren't as cheap as you think they are. They are large chunks of steel, steel isn't cheap no matter what shape it is or how easy it is to make it. Then add on all the small stuff, and the additional fabrication for the mechanism and voila, you're right up there in expenses.

If these things are so cheap to make then why aren't companies jumping in the market to make huge, sweeping profits off of them?

ETA, isn't it weird how everybody watches a video on these and then becomes an instant expert on them? "No, that can't possibly work as good as the video shows" "Mine will work better, especially if I modify it to work this way" etc etc. Yet every single person that has bought one of these says, "Man they are faster than it looks on video." "Mine even splits twisted tough pieces." Isn't it weird how everybody that has actually used one of these thinks it's a wonderful machine, and everybody that hasn't used one can't possibly believe that it works as advertised? How often do you see these for sale used? I think that by itself is a pretty accurate gauge of how happy the current users are with it's operation.


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Mar 3, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> Singed Eyebrows said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 First of all the flywheels are most likely cast iron not steel & this is easy to machine out of the blanks. Tell you what, you build a hydraulic pump & I'll build a flywheel & we'll see who gets done first. This is not a case of if these splitters work well, they sure seem to, it is about a very good idea that is being exploited IMHO. Why don't other co's step in & make them, one does & its either $1000 or $1500 cheaper, I forget. Because something works well does that mean it is worth any amount of money? Randy


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 3, 2011)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> First of all the flywheels are most likely cast iron not steel & this is easy to machine out of the blanks. Tell you what, you build a hydraulic pump & I'll build a flywheel & we'll see who gets done first.


It's pretty laughable if you really think that is a fair and accurate comparison. #1 we're comparing the cost of building an entire splitter, not the cost of an individual part, #2 we're not comparing how cheaply we can make these by building them ourselves.

If you really want to make a comparison, then lets do it. I'll build a hydraulic splitter, and you build one of these. You can fabricate your own parts but you have to track every cost involved, material costs, consumables (welding wire, torch gas etc), electricity, wear and tear on equipment, start-up costs for any equipment you have to buy to make those items. If you already own the the equipment then figure the real value of that equipment as a startup cost. In order to keep the comparison accurate and fair we're going to figure this as you just went out bought it all to start making these. Now, what wages does a fabricator welder make and what is the employer's overhead to employ that person? We can't forget that as an input cost. 

Now, are you going to buy/build a big sand-casting operation to cast your flywheels or are you going to buy them? Oh, you thought turning your own flywheels out of stock would be cheaper? How are you going to handle stock that big? How will you cut blanks out of plate steel 3" thick? Oh, so you decided to buy them now? Have you priced them yet?

I know for a fact that I'm going to buy my hydraulic pumps and cylinders. I can certainly make them myself if I had to, but it's much cheaper for me to buy them from a company that mass-produces them. I have a feeling its the same for your flywheels that are "so cheap".

Do you really want to do this? I grew up in a welding/fab shop so I have a pretty good idea what it's gonna take, and I can tell you right now that a splitter like that costs a whole lot more than you expect to build.


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Mar 4, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> Singed Eyebrows said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I think you are taking this a little seriously there. Wolf can build one of these around $1000 cheaper. I wonder why Wolfs flywheels are so much cheaper to produce? You can imagine all you want, no harm in that. You are going to have tough time convincing me that the mechanics of a SS costs more to produce than a hydraulic splitter, Randy


----------



## Wallyworld (Mar 4, 2011)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> CountryBoy19 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



LInk to a wolf splitter. They probably get their flywheels for India, almost everything cast now comes from India.

I will say this about SS, I've replaced cam followers under the carriage and replaced the engine(Briggs) in the years I've had mine and thats it.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 4, 2011)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> I think you are taking this a little seriously there. Wolf can build one of these around $1000 cheaper. I wonder why Wolfs flywheels are so much cheaper to produce? You can imagine all you want, no harm in that. You are going to have tough time convincing me that the mechanics of a SS costs more to produce than a hydraulic splitter, Randy


You're the one that wanted to try to compare the costs of producing a single piece of the splitter. I just presented you with the only accurate way to compare production costs.

BTW, you don't really deal with the financial end of any type of production/fabrication work do you? I can tell because you clearly underestimate how much it costs a business to employee a fabricator or welder. The billable rate on our welders and fabricators at work is $100/hr. Put 10 hours into fabrication on a splitter and you're up to $1,000 just in labor costs. There is a lot more on the SS that needs fabricated vs just purchased and welded together.


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Mar 4, 2011)

CountryBoy19 said:
			
		

> Singed Eyebrows said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I guess we are getting nowhere fast here CB, I don't want to run afoul of Hearth rules so have a good one, Randy


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 4, 2011)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> I guess we are getting nowhere fast here CB, I don't want to run afoul of Hearth rules so have a good one, Randy


Yeah, I quit too once I realize I'm wrong.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 4, 2011)

Last time I post on this one. 

First, I can not give you a time for cycle on our splitter as I have never taken an exact time for any size or any type of split...nor do I care. Speed is not something one should be looking at while doing this sort of work. Furthermore, I split wood only during March and April and this year that may have to take a back seat since I'm recovering from a total hip replacement. 

Finally, I hope you have registered with Craig being as how you for sure must be a dealer trying to sell these things. I really can't see anyone else getting so hyper over all the posts and your way of thinking. 

Well, you seem to be the only one that knows anything here so the rest of the thread is all yours. Thank you for your time. 


Oh, one last thing. That last post of yours being so sarcastic to Singed Eyebrows was totally out of place. That sort of thing is better posted on different boards.


----------



## CountryBoy19 (Mar 4, 2011)

Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Finally, I hope you have registered with Craig being as how you for sure must be a dealer trying to sell these things. I really can't see anyone else getting so hyper over all the posts and your way of thinking.


Lol, as I said already, I have no connection to this company or these splitters at all; I have zero to gain by supporting them. I actually learned something new about the company today, apparently the owner's name is Craig? I've just seen them work, and they truly are amazing/graceful pieces of machinery. Then, people, that have never run them, and have no idea about how much they cost to produce come along and try to proclaim that they aren't as fast as they look. That's a lie. And that the company is raping people on prices. I don't know anything at all about their exact cost of production, but I can tell you from experience that people are way underestimating the costs here. What is a guy expected to do? Do you expect me to lay over and let the nay-sayers blaspheme a company that isn't here to defend itself? I'll stand up for what I believe in, and I believe these splitters are much better than you're letting on to, and that the company is making much less profit than singed eyebrow claims.

Now, if somebody came along and said, "Yeah, I have one, and it's not all it's cracked up to be" then that person would get a little more credibility. But, do you really expect me to give you credibility when you've admittedly never run one, and you've never even timed your own splitting process, yet you try to claim that it's not any faster? If anybody believed a statement like that with no supporting evidence I'd call them gullible, but if a person believed a statement like that when there is a lot of evidence and first-hand testimonial to the contrary I would call them down right stupid. Sorry if that offends somebody, but that's the truth.



			
				Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Oh, one last thing. That last post of yours being so sarcastic to Singed Eyebrows was totally out of place. That sort of thing is better posted on different boards.


Lets face it here, it's clear that he was very adamant about his stance. I don't know very many men that are that adamant about their stance and then all of the sudden give up their stance without explanation or reason unless there is one exception. That exception being that they realized they were wrong, but didn't want to openly admit it. I've been around enough forums long enough to know that when somebody is discussing an issue like that, and then all of the sudden leaves the discussion with a cop-out for an excuse, the light-bulb just clicked and they're too ashamed to admit it.

Was I out of line saying that to him? Possibly
Was it the truth? Most likely yes


----------



## 3fordasho (Mar 4, 2011)

I don't have a Super Split but they seem to have their supporters.  A couple guys over on AS sure love their SS. I have to wonder why it is that if they're the best thing since sliced bread more manufactures have not gone after this style of splitter?  Everyone and their brother makes an hydralic splitter but only one or two make flywheel driven rack/pinion style.  The only thing I know for sure is I would have to find one and try it out before investing $2600 into one.  Anyone in southern/central Minnesota got one?  I've got some elm to try it out with...


----------



## Wallyworld (Mar 4, 2011)

3fordasho said:
			
		

> I don't have a Super Split but they seem to have their supporters.  A couple guys over on AS sure love their SS. I have to wonder why it is that if they're the best thing since sliced bread more manufactures have not gone after this style of splitter?  Everyone and their brother makes an hydralic splitter but only one or two make flywheel driven rack/pinion style.  The only thing I know for sure is I would have to find one and try it out before investing $2600 into one.  Anyone in southern/central Minnesota got one?  I've got some elm to try it out with...


$2600 or 1000, 1200,whatever a hydraulic unit  costs, there is your answer.


----------



## richg (Mar 4, 2011)

No thanks. At 48 seconds, he struggles with a big round and starts chucking off monster splits. Splitting wood is not a drag race.


----------



## mywaynow (Mar 4, 2011)

Somewhere there is a database with ratings on splitters; amputation ratings!  I am sure this one will make the top ten.  CB is definitely selling those things, just read the posts, long winded and continuously defensive.  If you want to split small ash or red oak, it may work fine.  Just watch your fingers!  Any thing big and gnarly and your going to be in trouble.  Wouldn't touch the thing!


----------



## wellbuilt home (Mar 5, 2011)

Imma tell you guys  , The SS is veryyyyyyyy fast . 
     It is a power tool  and if you stick  your finger in front of the wedge  it would drop off , and you will never feel  it .
   The ss will push any log you could lift  thru in  2 seconds. 
   The wedge is short  and if one hand is on the pull handle  and the other one is sitting on top of the log it is really very safe . 
   my  sons use it with out a problem . 
   As far as the money  , It is what it is  My SS was  $2450 door to door ,    A large commercial splitter cost 5/7000 + .
   The wolf looks ok for 1400  i just bought the SS because i would rather get a better splitter then save a few bucks .
                                                                                               Its only money      John


----------



## JeffT (Mar 5, 2011)

richg said:
			
		

> No thanks. At 48 seconds, he struggles with a big round and starts chucking off monster splits. Splitting wood is not a drag race.


Yea,that doesn't happen with a hydraulic splitter.


----------



## mliiiwit (Feb 10, 2012)

My background:  I grew up using hydraulic and manual splitting and have researched inertial splitters for about a week now.

My take on hyd. vs. inertial splitters and their proponents / detractors:  Read the quotes in BEGREEN's signature.  Anyone who has done their research and is still a dedicated detractor of inertial splitters / proponent of hydraulic splitters is either "mediocre-minded", "stupid", "obstinate", some combination of these 3, simply not concerned with speed of doing a task and the expenses of consumables and time spent on maintenance, or simply require some versatility not currently available in inertial splitters, i.e. vertical splitting.  If you are none of the above but consider yourself a "hydraulic splitter man", OPEN YOUR MIND and do a bit of research.  If you ARE one of the aforementioned, I hope you are of the latter persuasions and I personally have no problem with that as long as you don't off-handedly dismiss obviously better and more efficient means of accomplishing an end.  After all, a cruise in a model T or A is inarguably more romantic than one in a Prius.  However, I personally would choose the Prius over old technology for use as a tool.

Consider acquisition costs, operating costs and maintenance costs.  A new inertial splitter requires additional investment in fuel and possibly engine oil (or maybe an extension cord).  A hydraulic splitter requires additional investment in these items and hydraulic fluid.  I've read on this site of hundreds of dollars being spent for one fill of hydraulic fluid, which must be replaced periodically for best longevity of the machine.  An inertial splitter will occasionally require replacement of a relatively inexpensive wear plate (which could be fabricated by the owner rather than purchased as a ready-made part) and a few bearings which can be purchased after-market at considerable savings.  Hydraulic splitters will eventually require replacement of hoses and reseal of valves and cylinders or replacement of those components.  Inertial splitters will eventually require replacement of rack gears and pinion shafts, drive belts and rebuild or replacement of centrifugal clutches.  All recip engines will require regular maintenance and eventual overhaul or replacement.  These expenses are relative to engine size and workload, so are assumably higher on "brute-force" hydraulic machines than on lower-powered inertial machines.  All said, I can easily believe that total investment over the life of a machine would be no more than equal to, and probably considerably less, for an inertial splitter vs. a hydraulic splitter.  Not to mention the potential time savings to do the same quantity of work.

As I understand current offerings, the currently available inertial splitters are of higher "made and assembled in USA" value than hydraulic splitters.  THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ME AS IT SHOULD BE TO ALL U.S. CITIZENS, especially when quality is equal among products.  One (reportedly) Chinese-built inertial splitter did come on the market at a significantly lower price, but disappeared in short order due to quality issues (the Speeco inertial splitter sold through TSC).

Considering the simpler mechanical design, I also believe the averagely-inclined individual could build their own inertial splitter much more simply (and cheaper) from salvaged parts than they could a hydraulic splitter by using automotive flywheels, a push lawnmower-sized engine or electric motor, shorter main beam, belts and linkages vs. pumps, valves & hoses, bolt on pillow blocks vs. welded attachments, longer main beam, etc., etc. required for a hydraulic splitter.

I have elected to pay a premium for a US made, somewhat unproven wood burner from a very respected manufacturer to heat my home (Woodstock Progress Hybrid).  I also expect to either build my own inertial splitter (in true American spirit) or, at the least, to buy the "best-for-the-money" available US made unit (SS today, IMO) when I am ready to give up on manual splitting, which I don't expect to take long considering I"m approaching 50.

That's my $.02 worth (yeah, I know - I have a lot of that).

RO16

RO16 that I occasionally fire up out back o' my shack (on the patio) - my version of a cruise in a model A
WS PH expected next week - chimney and hearth are ready.
Small supply of seasoned, locally-harvested (my own yard) oak & pecan.
Mac 3200 - easily starts on Stabil-ized gas after 2+ years not running.
Cheapo splitting maul, 5 lb sledge & splitting wedgel & a Fiskars splitting axe for the easier pieces
POS free boxwood that I experiment with out back o' my shack
Impressive (to me) homemade woodgas cookstove of another's design but with my modification.


----------



## Bigg_Redd (Feb 10, 2012)

jerseykat1 said:
			
		

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnqVeaKj23c&feature=related
> 
> seems to be splitting the wood up pretty quickly.




I'm faster than that with my ax.  Also looks like very easy splitting Wester Red Cedar.


----------



## EJL923 (Feb 10, 2012)

My buddy has one, it is definitely fast.  However, it is only as fast as you can work.  You can get extremely tired very fast working at that rate.  Fatigue leads to injury.  Another thing is i have had many times as well as people i am working with where an anvil moving that quick would have taken my hand off.  The whole speed and fatigue thing doesnt seem safe to me.  Just personal experience with it.  My buddy has also complained of wear on the rails.


----------



## JeffT (Feb 10, 2012)

I've seen lots of vid's on the super split and would love to have one.That said I will cruse along with a hydro. unit until one becomes available in my price range(used or new).


----------



## woodsmaster (Feb 10, 2012)

Just heard the other day of a guy who had one and returned it. Not sure If it was the same brand but it was the same style.
He said it was great for the easy splitting stuff, but sucked on the Knotty stuff. He said the wood wouldn't split and would get stuck on the wedge. He then had to use a sledge hammer and pry bar to get it off. He said it was a real pain in the a$$.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Feb 11, 2012)

I just watched that video again, or at least part of it. Just have to laugh watching the guy and I guarantee he was working twice as hard as I do when splitting wood. Nuff said there. For sure there will be followers and I have no problem with that but why do they always have to sound like they are defending the machine? Must be because so many really do not like the looks of how they work and it appears many also do not like the price.


----------



## Wallyworld (Feb 11, 2012)

3 guys can't keep up with my Super Split, whether its better than any other kind of splitter I don't know but I know its a simple mechanism and I inherited the one my dad bought 25 years ago. I've replaced cam followers on the carriage, the motor, a cheap Briggs has been replaced, BTW its 3.5 hp and will run for hours on a tank of gas. It came with an electric motor on it and still split well.Greased the pillow blocks, replaced the belt once(in its life). I'll guarantee its split some of the gnarliest red oak you've ever seen, also some of the biggest diameter oak you've ever seen. Some of which we had to split with a maul and wedges as we couldn't lift it whole. It won't split every piece in one shot, you just pull the lever again, seeing as the cycle time is 2 secs or so, you can hit quite a few times and still be ahead of a hydraulic unit.
If production is what you're after, you can get it with a SS.


----------



## JeffT (Feb 11, 2012)

Wallyworld said:
			
		

> 3 guys can't keep up with my Super Split, whether its better than any other kind of splitter I don't know but I know its a simple mechanism and I inherited the one my dad bought 25 years ago. I've replaced cam followers on the carriage, the motor, a cheap Briggs has been replaced, BTW its 3.5 hp and will run for hours on a tank of gas. It came with an electric motor on it and still split well.Greased the pillow blocks, replaced the belt once(in its life). I'll guarantee its split some of the gnarliest red oak you've ever seen, also some of the biggest diameter oak you've ever seen. Some of which we had to split with a maul and wedges as we couldn't lift it whole. It won't split every piece in one shot, you just pull the lever again, seeing as the cycle time is 2 secs or so, you can hit quite a few times and still be ahead of a hydraulic unit.
> If production is what you're after, you can get it with a SS.


Wally I have not used one personality but have friends that do and they say the same thing.If you don't think it will split a gnarly piece of wood you are mistaken.


----------



## wkpoor (Feb 11, 2012)

This thread is exactly the reason for GTGs. Everbody has a different idea about something. Getting everyone together in the same place irons out the misconceptions about machines and practices. A splitter GTG would allow people to truely see what machines can do what and what methods are best for different people. I've held mini GTGs with splitters but a SS was never there. So I can't really comment on them.


----------



## ClassicSWC (Feb 11, 2012)

The video was impressive... to a point. Unless you are a world class weight lifter, can you keep up with that machine for an hour or two or four to make it worthwhile? Sorry, I never bought into the "I need a .375 Superwhizzbangmangleum" when a .30-30 does the job just as well. Heck, I guess if you really wanted to be fast, pile your rounds on a few sticks of dynamite. That'll do the trick. LOL Not that I'm an expert, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.


----------



## 3fordasho (Feb 11, 2012)

A few comments that a single person can't keep up with the super split.. I don't care.  My hydralic can't keep up with me and that's the problem.  My only concern with the SS is will it split the wood that "I" need to process...    Still need to find one local and try it out.  I still have not found a video of one splitting american elm.  I don't need it to split a ugly knarly elm knot, but it needs to handlle 12-18" american elm rounds.


----------



## Dune (Feb 11, 2012)

Went to a Super Splitter demo yesterday. 
Machine: dragged from the woods behind defunct tree service. No guards. Wedge crudely welded so as to be twice as tall. No table. Motor from junk snow blower.

Motor: 5 hp missing recoil and air cleaner. Choke inoperative. Started by rolling splitter flywheel.

Operator: Short, overweight and dirty. A regular Cape Cod dunebilly.  (no, it wasn't me. I am tall, overweight and dirty)

Operation; After vigorously rolling the flywheel, one mild curse, one shot of ether, a few more rolls and she's running.  Select a fair size red oak round.

Casualy balance round on slide with one hand, pull lever with other hand. 
Quickly grab remainder of round, reposition, pull handle.  

Splitter does work very well and IS INDEED FAST.  My issue with this is that the speed of the machine somehow prompts the operator to try to keep up, as witnessed in the OP vid.

Commentary of operator; " see I am not standing here waiting (hand motions indicating activation of hydraulic valve) ..... then waiting for it to retract...(hand motions indicate reversal of piston). 

"You should build one of these" (he has seen my electric mega splitter, yes it is slow, but I use it for stuff his toy couldn't touch, the stuff he is spltting I do with the fiskars)
I countered with Countryboys comments about too much machine work, easier to buy hydraulic components (?) ( Country Boy is right about this anyhow, not that I agree with him in general)

And, (in reponse to my comment that it must work well with two people running it (sorry sisterhood, I told you he was a dunebilly) "I don't let her run it. (turns to wife..."you would lose these running that..(holds out fingers) " I don't let her run any machinery (as she drops a couple buds into the electric coffee grinder) ..."what are you making for dinner tonight?"  Wife, "give me some money and I'll decide when I get to the store."


----------



## andybaker (Feb 11, 2012)

Does seem to work fast.  I couldn't have though.  I need the verticle option also.  Often I get huge rounds that there is no way I could lift them.


----------



## Wallyworld (Feb 11, 2012)

Why would a machine make me keep up with it? I go at my pace which as time has gone on is slower and slower. I don't spend all day splitting wood. I split some, pile some and I'm done until another day. I rarely spend more than few hours doing wood on any given day. I don't find it enjoyable, its a chore that has to get done, best done in small increments, I have to go to work the next day and I can't be broken  
As far as parts are concerned I'm in  rural maine and I can find parts, If I can anyone can.


----------



## richg (Feb 11, 2012)

I'd rate it as an epic failure. He's only splitting rounds that can be lifted onto a splitting table which negates a lot of the stuff you pick up in scrounging. He lets go some splits that are so big you'd need a white phosphorous grenade to get them to light. He's moving at a speed that can't be maintained for long and is clearly made for a video. "Vince with slap chop here, you're gonna be in a great mood all day cause you're gonna be slappin your troubles away".


----------



## wkpoor (Feb 11, 2012)

Some guys want speed and some don't. I think most of the splitters on the market are a tad on the sow side which is why I did my own. It is possible to have a hydraulic splitter that will approach the SS speed but still have power to get through the narlies. Mine is close to 4sec full cycle time with oil up to temp but I don't have to run it that way. If I'm feeling energetic sure or if I'm getting tired I just throttle back to a pace I'm comfortable with.


----------



## 3fordasho (Feb 11, 2012)

richg said:
			
		

> I'd rate it as an epic failure. He's only splitting rounds that can be lifted onto a splitting table which negates a lot of the stuff you pick up in scrounging. He lets go some splits that are so big you'd need a white phosphorous grenade to get them to light. He's moving at a speed that can't be maintained for long and is clearly made for a video. "Vince with slap chop here, you're gonna be in a great mood all day cause you're gonna be slappin your troubles away".





I have a horizontal/vertical splitter.  99.5% of the time it's in the horizontal mode.  The few times I've used it vertically it was very un-ergonomic.. ie a pain to use. 
I'd rather noodle those large rounds to liftable sizes.


----------



## Hogwildz (Feb 11, 2012)

I used to run A SuperSplitter all the time in the 80's when I worked for a landscaper. He was a dealer and rented the one we had out on occasion.
The S.S. will blow the doors off a hydraulic any day of the week as far as speed and production. It is fast, very fast., especially if you run it all the time and have the experience using it behind you. I would go as far to say it would even give a hydraulic with a 4way competition, it is that fast.
I did come across a few I had to repeat cycle through to get it through, and I have also gone through that with the hydraulic also.
It is very sippy on gas. As far as needing two ppl, you don't but sure two always makes things nicer. If I had the cash, I would buy one I like them myself that much. But I don't, so I bought my neighbor's hydraulic one.
I am happy with what I have and the price was right. 
As far as the operator trying to keep up, that is absurd IMO. It only engages as fast as you pull the handle, so if you can't coordinate one hand with the other in what your doing, you have other problems, or simply this may not be the machine for you.
I have used the S.S., hydraulics, and electrics, and if I had the money, I would be all over the S.S.
That's just me, other have their own preferences.
As far the the redneck with the beat up one, I myself would make it right before I used it. 
If you have used it and don't like it, that is cool, as everyone knows what works best for them, and different folks like different things.


----------



## ScotO (Feb 11, 2012)

i agree with Hogwildz....I have never used one, but I know I would love to be able to afford one.  I could bust up the giant rounds small enough with my maul to put them on that table.  I would love the speed factor, and the fact that it is frugal on gas consumption.  I just can't drop that kind of jingle on one.  I particularly like this one.  Hell, it's only ONE HORSEPOWER!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFeR8Qlkrfg&feature=related


----------



## Hogwildz (Feb 11, 2012)

Scotty Overkill said:
			
		

> i agree with Hogwildz....I have never used one, but I know I would love to be able to afford one.  I could bust up the giant rounds small enough with my maul to put them on that table.  I would love the speed factor, and the fact that it is frugal on gas consumption.  I just can't drop that kind of jingle on one.  I particularly like this one.  Hell, it's only ONE HORSEPOWER!!
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFeR8Qlkrfg&feature=related



LMAO, and the plus side is you get some added free fuel nuggets at the end of the conveyor belt in a nice tidy pile.


----------



## Lumber-Jack (Feb 11, 2012)

Scotty Overkill said:
			
		

> i agree with Hogwildz....I have never used one, but I know I would love to be able to afford one.  I could bust up the giant rounds small enough with my maul to put them on that table.  I would love the speed factor, and the fact that it is frugal on gas consumption.  I just can't drop that kind of jingle on one.  I particularly like this one.  Hell, it's only ONE HORSEPOWER!!
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFeR8Qlkrfg&feature=related


That was great!  It needs to be posted in The Green Room.


----------



## wkpoor (Feb 12, 2012)

3fordasho said:
			
		

> richg said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Finally someone who agrees with me. +1


----------



## wkpoor (Feb 12, 2012)

Hogwildz said:
			
		

> I used to run A SuperSplitter all the time in the 80's when I worked for a landscaper. He was a dealer and rented the one we had out on occasion.
> The S.S. will blow the doors off a hydraulic any day of the week as far as speed and production. It is fast, very fast., especially if you run it all the time and have the experience using it behind you. I would go as far to say it would even give a hydraulic with a 4way competition, it is that fast.
> I did come across a few I had to repeat cycle through to get it through, and I have also gone through that with the hydraulic also.
> It is very sippy on gas. As far as needing two ppl, you don't but sure two always makes things nicer. If I had the cash, I would buy one I like them myself that much. But I don't, so I bought my neighbor's hydraulic one.
> ...


People who sell firewood say they like to have an SS and a hydraulic. Both have their place.


----------



## ScotO (Feb 12, 2012)

wkpoor said:
			
		

> People who sell firewood say they like to have an SS and a hydraulic. Both have their place.


I agree 100%.  Already have the hydraulic, now if I could just talk the wife into letting me buy the SS....... ;-)


----------



## ScotO (Feb 12, 2012)

Carbon_Liberator said:
			
		

> Scotty Overkill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I may buy a draft or Belgian, and one of those treadmills.....I can think of dozens of uses for it.......lol.....


----------



## tymbee (Feb 12, 2012)

Wasn't at all impressed with the video myself (what's up with wobbly table ??) but in reading some of the favorable reviews from those with first hand experience I'll keep an open mind accept that if it works for you, that's all that counts.

BUT the one big "flaw" IMO is something that I didn't see anyone else mention. Having spent hundreds of hours operating hydraulic splitters where the the ram pushes the wood through a wedge (the type seen in the video) and the other type where the wood is stationary and the splitting wedge is on the end of the ram itself, I'm of the opinion that the latter kind (splitting wedge on the end of the ram) is MUCH preferable. 

With the wood moving through the splitting wedge, you have to retrieve each and every piece that needs a finer split. Easy to see what an effort was required to do this in the footage. Multiply that by the amount of wood being split and the time/effort is not insignificant. 

Must be especially inefficient when the wedge gets stuck. You'd have to either wrestle or pound it off, or push it through with another piece ending up with even more effort required to retrieve and resplit. 

If the wood is stationary and the ram does the splitting, no stuck pieces. Or rather if it does stick, the return action pulls it free. Large pieces that need to be resplit just flop over (in my case on the log tray) and all you need to do is roll them back in position to split. 

But hey, if sheer speed is you thing and you have wood as straight as shown here and a couple of energetic workers to streamline the workflow, I bet this thing kicks butt.


----------



## tymbee (Feb 12, 2012)

tymbee said:
			
		

> Wasn't at all impressed with the video myself



Ok, of I may reply to my own reply, here's one of several videos which make a much better case for this splitter. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V95e-sMQTL8

I stand by my previous comments, but to me at least it's now more clear in this and some of the other videos out there where those with favorable reviews are coming from.


----------



## wkpoor (Feb 12, 2012)

That is another vid showing a SS splitting what looks to be very easy to split wood. Not knocking the SS at all I just want to see or use it for myself on the stuff I split. With my hydraulic running at 4 sec cycle time and possibly not a full stroke needed to split that kind of wood I'm most likely that fast myself. But I am burning more fuel to do it.


----------



## Dune (Feb 12, 2012)

No doubt the table makes a big difference. Without the table the operator puts a lot of energy into coraling the unsplit part of the round.


----------



## Hogwildz (Feb 12, 2012)

wkpoor said:
			
		

> That is another vid showing a SS splitting what looks to be very easy to split wood. Not knocking the SS at all I just want to see or use it for myself on the stuff I split. With my hydraulic running at 4 sec cycle time and possibly not a full stroke needed to split that kind of wood I'm most likely that fast myself. But I am burning more fuel to do it.



I have split some gnarly stuff with the S.S. back then. And you can also stop the cycle and send it back at any time., But it goes so fast, it usually is not necessary.
My old boss would have log trucks bring in tons of pole length at a time, and the S.S. would go through it as quick as the operator would let it.
Worth the money? If you have the cash, yes definitely. Do I have that cash laying around? No. But if I did, I buy one in a heartbeat.
His didn't ahve the table, but Didn't miss what I didn't have, Don't have a table for my hydraulic either, and really don't feel the need for it. Just a personal preference.
As far as vertical splitting, never did it. I have lifted some huge sstuff up there, in years to come I may not be able to, but I can always wedge them in 1/2 when that day comes, or build a lift kit.


----------

