# Forest King Pro 37 ton splitter clearance



## thisoldgoat (Jan 21, 2018)

While I would never pay the full price for this unit, a price of under $900 is tempting. What do you think... good value or pass?

https://www.menards.com/main/outdoo...7-c-10115.htm?tid=-8135662736415043352&ipos=9


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 21, 2018)

Do you need one with that much capacity? If not I'd tend to find a 20 something ton for less $$...you can find em for 700 sometimes. To answer your question...that's an OK deal...not great, not bad.


----------



## thisoldgoat (Jan 21, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> Do you need one with that much capacity? If not I'd tend to find a 20 something ton for less $$...you can find em for 700 sometimes. To answer your question...that's an OK deal...not great, not bad.


Hi and thanks for the comment.  No, I was actually on the lookout for around 25 tons but I somewhat lost control when I saw the big discount. I'll have an up close and personal look at it but I suspect that I'll keep hunting.


----------



## Tar12 (Jan 21, 2018)

If your just splitting for yourself and not splitting monster stuff...I would pass and go for a smaller unit with a quicker cycle time...13 seconds is a long time...been there...I ran a smaller Speeco for a number of years...either a 22Ton or 25 Ton and didn't run into anything it couldn't split...served me well.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Jan 21, 2018)

I like it. At that price you could get the 4 year warranty.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Jan 21, 2018)

And the design seems to be improved over other units where the engine seems set back further to protect it from felling splits.

https://www.menards.com/main/outdoo...7-c-10115.htm?tid=-8135662736415043352&ipos=9


----------



## thisoldgoat (Jan 22, 2018)

Tar12, a few seconds doesn't seem like much to this novice but I imagine that when multiplied by hundreds of cycles they add up to some serious time.


----------



## thisoldgoat (Jan 22, 2018)

VirginiaIron, I took a look at it; it appears to be a well built machine.  The welds aren't terribly pretty but look substantial. I am not an expert, however, on evaluating such things so I could be all wrong!


----------



## Tar12 (Jan 22, 2018)

thisoldgoat said:


> Tar12, a few seconds doesn't seem like much to this novice but I imagine that when multiplied by hundreds of cycles they add up to some serious time.


It does indeed add up...I have ran everything from box store specials to 3 points to commercial splitters and processors...I burn and sell wood so time does matter to me..if your just taking care of yourself and you are not worried about it this unit will serve you well. Is there a slip on 4-way head available for this unit? That would be nice to have....


----------



## thisoldgoat (Jan 24, 2018)

Tar12, I would be splitting for my own use only. My time is not that valuable but I don't want to be twiddling my thumbs either. I'd be working solo most of the time so perhaps it would not be a huge issue.  They are not exactly flying off the shelf at my local store even at reduced price... maybe that tells me something as well. Thanks for the tips!


----------



## Tar12 (Jan 25, 2018)

thisoldgoat said:


> Tar12, I would be splitting for my own use only. My time is not that valuable but I don't want to be twiddling my thumbs either. I'd be working solo most of the time so perhaps it would not be a huge issue.  They are not exactly flying off the shelf at my local store even at reduced price... maybe that tells me something as well. Thanks for the tips!


13 seconds is like forever to me.. I also much prefer the wedge to be on the end of beam not the ram so you can slide a 4-way on your splitting wedge to increase production.This doubles production in easy run stuff and if you have knotty stuff you just slide it back off.


----------



## kevin j (Jan 25, 2018)

try before you buy. That looks like a backbreaker to me because the wheels are right in the operating area where you would stand so you have to stand further from the beam and bend over to reach the work area


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 27, 2018)

Too bad you don't have Rural King stores up there...they have the Black Diamond 25 ton on sale for $700, assembled, full of fluids, ready to go.
https://www.ruralking.com/logsplitt...064489703250564013927649155723901574353832553


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 3, 2018)

kevin j said:


> try before you buy. That looks like a backbreaker to me because the wheels are right in the operating area where you would stand so you have to stand further from the beam and bend over to reach the work area


I have one of these and the wheels aren’t in the way. Maybe it looks that way in the photo but you stand right up to the I-beam.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 3, 2018)

thisoldgoat said:


> While I would never pay the full price for this unit, a price of under $900 is tempting. What do you think... good value or pass?
> 
> https://www.menards.com/main/outdoo...7-c-10115.htm?tid=-8135662736415043352&ipos=9


I clicked on the link and it’s not listed for under $900 but for $999. I got one of these for $899 plus our 5% sales tax on a BF sale. I had a newer 22 ton splitter but I sold that in just hours and got one of these thinking they should handle the larger elm rounds I often split. If you bought someone else’s 37 ton splitter like Northern Tools you’d pay around $1700. But my 22 ton did split all of the maple and oak I ever had put on it jfyi....


----------



## thisoldgoat (Feb 4, 2018)

WiscWoody Menards had an 11% rebate in effect when I first posted. They now have another one going. If you click the link now it should reflect a price of $889 (plus applicable tax).


----------



## thisoldgoat (Feb 4, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> I have one of these and the wheels aren’t in the way. Maybe it looks that way in the photo but you stand right up to the I-beam.


How long have you had it and would you buy it again?


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 4, 2018)

thisoldgoat said:


> WiscWoody Menards had an 11% rebate in effect when I first posted. They now have another one going. If you click the link now it should reflect a price of $889 (plus applicable tax).


Oh ok, gotcha


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 4, 2018)

thisoldgoat said:


> How long have you had it and would you buy it again?


I think I’d buy another one for $900 but I haven’t used mine much yet. I got it on the Menards 3 day Black Friday sale they had in November. It’s not very fast though with a 13 second cycle time. I often short cycle mine though since it often doesn’t take a full cycle to split wood or I let the wedge go part way back then I stop it to the logs length. I was just on Craig’s List here and I see someone has bought a few of these and he’s trying to het $1300 for them. Good luck to him on that huh?


----------



## thisoldgoat (Feb 4, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> I think I’d buy another one for $900 but I haven’t used mine much yet. I got it on the Menards 3 day Black Friday sale they had in November. It’s not very fast though with a 13 second cycle time. I often short cycle mine though since it often doesn’t take a full cycle to split wood or I let the wedge go part way back then I stop it to the logs length. I was just on Craig’s List here and I see someone has bought a few of these and he’s trying to het $1300 for them. Good luck to him on that huh?


Yup, at that price I think they will be slow movers.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 4, 2018)

The only way I’d touch that splitter was if I bought a 4” cylinder to go with it.   Downgrade it to 22 tons with a 8 second cycle time.  You’ve got a motor, chassis and pump all ready to go.  

I found the 11 second cycle time on my original unit unbearable, I couldn’t even imagine waiting on a 13 second splitter.  That’s “blow your brains out” level frustration, for anyone who’s actually looking to stay awake while splitting.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 4, 2018)

Ashful said:


> The only way I’d touch that splitter was if I bought a 4” cylinder to go with it.   Downgrade it to 22 tons with a 8 second cycle time.  You’ve got a motor, chassis and pump all ready to go.
> 
> I found the 11 second cycle time on my original unit unbearable, I couldn’t even imagine waiting on a 13 second splitter.  That’s “blow your brains out” level frustration, for anyone who’s actually looking to stay awake while splitting.


With your new upgrade, how fast is your cycle time?


----------



## Tar12 (Feb 4, 2018)

VirginiaIron said:


> With your new upgrade, how fast is your cycle time?


If I remember correctly it was 8 seconds.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 4, 2018)

Thanks.. Eight seconds full stroke is pretty good especially if real world cycle permits 1/4-1/2 stroke to complete a split. My question was directed @ Ashfull. Ashfull suped up his splitter with a modification and I was curious what kind of cycle times he had.


----------



## Tar12 (Feb 4, 2018)

VirginiaIron said:


> Thanks.. Eight seconds full stroke is pretty good especially if real world cycle permits 1/4-1/2 stroke to complete a split. My question was directed @ Ashfull. Ashfull suped up his splitter with a modification and I was curious what kind of cycle times he had.


It was Ashful I was speaking of...


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 5, 2018)

For me it’s all about what I can afford and what I think is a reasonable amount of money to spend on my heating/wood equipment. I splurged on my two pro saws, one is a 390XP/26" that I got for $600 with a new jug and piston that has been ported and the other is a 562XP/20" that is also ported. After spending around $1900 on my two saws I really couldn’t see spending another fortune on a fast splitter. One thing that helps me justify my equipment costs is the wood up here can be found easily for free, this is my 7th winter of heating my large home primarily with free wood I’ve scrounged and I’ve harvested enough to sell around $250 of wood a year too, not much but it helps.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 5, 2018)

Yes, I timed it at 8 seconds, but I still need to check my engine RPM to make sure I’m hitting the spec’s 3600 RPM.  I suspect it’s not, and I might pick up another half second (as if I could time that accurate) by adjusting that.

Bottom line, I don’t really care about the numbers, but it’s much more pleasant to run now.  I used to get frustrated trying to hold big rounds up on the foot plate, while I waiting for that wedge to come down and “grab” the top of the round.  Likewise on full-cycling the machine for stringy stuff in horizontal mode.  Both issues have been since resolved to my satisfaction.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 6, 2018)

I looked at some splitters on CL tonight and now I don’t feel so bad about my slow 13 second splitter. Someone is selling a 15 ton Craftsman splitter with a waiting for it....waiting for it.... waiting for it.... 20 second cycle time lol.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 6, 2018)

I got the numbers from my Viking pump and from what I can tell it is only  3.3gpm which I find hard to believe. I called a rep yesterday and he referred to the pump as a "hi-low" pump and not two stage. I thought I remember the two stage process was the reason my father purchased the pump. Now you all have me thinking about installing a higher gpm pump. The pump is about 35 years old, and I have been happy with the speed- wait for it- 13 seconds for 29 inches.
That can't be right, can it? 4 inch cylinder/ 2 inch rod @ 3.3 gpm a little above idle? I thought it was at least 11-13 Gpm.
Can anyone help me confirm this?

Viking pump
 (G?)P(O?) 55014- C(or G?)
Ser 1872716

Edit: it doesn't seem like it cycles MUCH faster at full throttle and it seems consistent in power at the lower rpm.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 6, 2018)

VirginiaIron said:


> I got the numbers from my Viking pump and from what I can tell it is only  3.3gpm which I find hard to believe. I called a rep yesterday and he referred to the pump as a "hi-low" pump and not two stage. I thought I remember the two stage process was the reason my father purchased the pump. Now you all have me thinking about installing a higher gpm pump. The pump is about 35 years old, and I have been happy with the speed- wait for it- 13 seconds for 29 inches.
> That can't be right, can it? 4 inch cylinder/ 2 inch rod @ 3.3 gpm a little above idle? I thought it was at least 11-13 Gpm.
> Can anyone help me confirm this?
> 
> ...



On the road, so doing this in my head:

4 inch cylinder = .087 sq.ft.
3.3 GPM = 0.44 cu.ft./minute
29 inch travel = 4.83 ft. Round trip = 0.42 cu.ft. / round trip

0.44/0.42 = 1.04 minutes / round trip

An 11 GPM pump on a commercial splitter gives you 12 seconds round trip at 4.0 feet round trip.  Yours will be 3x less GPM and 20% longer round trip.  So, my rough numbers appear to be good.

Are you sure that pump’s not mis-labeled?  Maybe it used to say 13.3 GPM?


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 6, 2018)

All this talk about splitter power and cycle time has got me looking around to see what’s out there more and I found this monster on the TSC web page, a 40 ton model with a 9.5 second cycle time for $1700. I’m on my 3rd splitter now with the Forest King 37 ton being the best one so far. Maybe after some time I’ll keep an eye on this splitter and watch for sales or maybe call a few stores and see if they ever clear one of these out, maybe a returned unit or what not. We will see.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 6, 2018)

Ashful said:


> On the road, so doing this in my head:
> 
> 4 inch cylinder = .087 sq.ft.
> 3.3 GPM = 0.44 cu.ft./minute
> ...


The pump is about 35 years old and I couldn't find information on it. I think the tech meant 3.3 displacement and not 3.3 Gpm.  After looking around some of the (teen) pumps are near that displacement.

The only numbers are from the tag


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 6, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> All this talk about splitter power and cycle time has got me looking around to see what’s out there more and I found this monster on the TSC web page, a 40 ton model with a 9.5 second cycle time for $1700. I’m on my 3rd splitter now with the Forest King 37 ton being the best one so far. Maybe after some time I’ll keep an eye on this splitter and watch for sales or maybe call a few stores and see if they ever clear one of these out, maybe a returned unit or what not. We will see.


I found the 40/ 30 ton fast unit on youtube. I'm still looking for the fast 25.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 6, 2018)

Ashful said:


> On the road, so doing this in my head:
> 
> 4 inch cylinder = .087 sq.ft.
> 3.3 GPM = 0.44 cu.ft./minute
> ...



Thanks for the help. I thought it was in the teens, but I was real young then. So if I guess at 13gpm would a 16gpm make that much difference? I would need to change my main lines( not prohibitive) if I go to a 22.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 6, 2018)

VirginiaIron said:


> I found the 40/ 30 ton fast unit on youtube. I'm still looking for the fast 25.



Oh yeah, I forgot to say it’s a County Line brand. The 30 ton is a second slower than the bigger 40 ton unit but 30 ton would likely split even the toughest Elm I would put in it. I put a photo of it on my post too.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 6, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> Oh yeah, I forgot to say it’s a County Line brand. The 30 ton is a second slower than the bigger 40 ton unit but 30 ton would likely split even the toughest Elm I would put in it. I put a photo of it on my post too.


I do not know why there a no videos of the 2017/18 25 ton models yet.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 6, 2018)

VirginiaIron said:


> I do not know why there a no videos of the 2017/18 25 ton models yet.


Thanks for posting those 2 vids, the 2nd video was well made. EDIT: I just found this on the 25 ton unit but it’s a older model.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 6, 2018)

VirginiaIron said:


> I found the 40/ 30 ton fast unit on youtube. I'm still looking for the fast 25.


I spent some time shopping for a fast 22 - 25 ton unit, but the only thing I ever found in consumer grade was the Iron and Oak 19 or 20 ton (3.5 inch).  I used one of those on several occasions, and found they're just a little bit shy of the power needed to push thru larger rounds and anything knotty.  My 22 ton (4 inch) seems to be the sweet spot, about as light and fast as you can go, with just enough power to make it thru anything you put to it.

Unfortunately, all of the 4 inch cylinders offered on commercial splitters have 1/2" ports, which is the bottleneck in the system.  You're not going to push much more than 16 GPM thru 1/2 inch ports without pressure drop that negates the advantage of the larger pump.  My goal was a 22 GPM pump, and I sized my engine to that, but ended up having to settle on 16 GPM due to cylinder availability.

You can have a cylinder custom made with SAE-10 or 3/4" NPT fittings, but then you're into bigger money, and the sump line on my tank would have needed a large bung welded in... so 16 GPM seems to be the sweet spot.



VirginiaIron said:


> Thanks for the help. I thought it was in the teens, but I was real young then. So if I guess at 13gpm would a 16gpm make that much difference? I would need to change my main lines( not prohibitive) if I go to a 22.


Cycle time is inversely proportional to GPM, assuming all of the lines and engine are sufficient for the flow rate.  So, 16 GPM would be 23% faster than 13 GPM, if your lines, ports, and engine are sized appropriately to handle 16 GPM.

If you peruse my log splitter hotrod thread, I think I listed the line sizes required for 16 GPM and 22 GPM.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 7, 2018)

If you are building a splitter there are some 4.5 and 5" 24 and 30" stroke cylinders on eBay that I see have 17mm (11/16") ports. This place has a chart I’ll post. They show the 30" stroke. Ylinders here but they also have 24" ones with the same ports. I think the 24" cylinders were listed for $169 shipped to the 48.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 8, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> View attachment 222553
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, but the larger cylinder bore negates the increased port size advantage.  The 17mm port would allow a 22 GPM pump, which is 37% bigger than 16 GPM.  But a 5” cylinder would require 56% more GPM to move the same speed as a 4” cylinder, so it will be slower than a cheaper rig with the 4” cylinder and 16 GPM pump.

The 4.5” cylinder with 17mm ports might hit the sweet spot (would be ever so slightly faster) with a 22 GPM pump on a 400 cc motor, but cost would be a lot higher than just using the 4” cylinder most already own, and it would require welding larger ports into most commercial splitter hydro tanks.  Also, 400cc motors aren’t cheap.

It’s going to be hard to beat the bang / buck ratio of just going 16 GPM with a 300cc motor, on a 25 ton splitter you already own.

Edit:  you could go larger than 22 GPM on that 5” cylinder, but then you’re getting into real high dollar stuff, all around.  It’s a system, all components need to be sized to the next.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Feb 8, 2018)

Thanks Ashful. Since the pump isn't a 3gpm ill probably run it until it fails. Every once in a while I hear you guys talk about speed and wonder if I'm missing out on something. Right now I am satisfied and i truly do not want to make a job out of splitting since most times I split when I want to so I get extra enjoyment out of this process.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 8, 2018)

Ashful said:


> Yes, but the larger cylinder bore negates the increased port size advantage.  The 17mm port would allow a 22 GPM pump, which is 37% bigger than 16 GPM.  But a 5” cylinder would require 56% more GPM to move the same speed as a 4” cylinder, so it will be slower than a cheaper rig with the 4” cylinder and 16 GPM pump.
> 
> The 4.5” cylinder with 17mm ports might hit the sweet spot (would be ever so slightly faster) with a 22 GPM pump on a 400 cc motor, but cost would be a lot higher than just using the 4” cylinder most already own, and it would require welding larger ports into most commercial splitter hydro tanks.  Also, 400cc motors aren’t cheap.
> 
> ...


Ok, and let me guess.... your a engineer of some type but I guess it’s all simple math...like figuring out KWh’s and how much a appliance will cost to run but a tad more complicated. And like I said before I’m on a budget for my splitters so what I’ve been doing is moving up every few years. I started out with my generic maul type splitter, then I went electric for a few years, then to a slow 22 ton and now I’m on a new slow 37 ton machine. Maybe I’ll get a fast splitter in the future...


----------



## Ashful (Feb 8, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> I’m on a budget for my splitters so what I’ve been doing is moving up every few years. I started out with my generic maul type splitter, then I went electric for a few years, then to a slow 22 ton and now I’m on a new slow 37 ton machine. Maybe I’ll get a fast s-litter in the future...


Same here, we all impose some sort of budget on things like this, whether out of necessity or general frugality.

I used two cheap hardware store mauls, both of which I inherited with broken handles and re-handled myself, until my shoulders couldn't take it anymore.  Then I started augmenting my hand splitting with a once-yearly rented splitter, the fast-cycle 19 ton Iron and Oak I mentioned above (3.5" cylinder on a 16 GPM... that thing _moved!_).  I eventually broke down, both literally and figuratively, and bought my own splitter after about three years of that routine.  It was a slow (but inexpensive and reliable) Huskee 22 ton, based on the recommendations of several older forum members.

This summer, I decided it was finally time to upgrade it.  I spent more on the new vertical shaft engine than I'd have liked, but now I have the fastest 22-ton Huskee on the block, and for a heck of a lot less than what you probably spent on that 37 ton splitter!

I'm sure there are folks who need the extra capacity of a 37 ton machine, but not me.  If there's a log out there that my 22-ton splitter can't get thru, it must be such a gnarly twisted mess of a round that I'd not want it in my wood stacks, anyway.  I'd rather put those HP and GPM upgrades towards speed than extra unnecessary tonnage, any day!

What's the pump size on your new 37 ton rig?  If 16 GPM, I'd be looking to swap the 4" cylinder off the old 22 ton splitter onto the new 37 ton machine, that would be nice!  If it's 22 GPM, you could order a custom 4" cylinder with larger ports, and have us all beat!


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 14, 2018)

Ashful said:


> Same here, we all impose some sort of budget on things like this, whether out of necessity or general frugality.
> 
> I used two cheap hardware store mauls, both of which I inherited with broken handles and re-handled myself, until my shoulders couldn't take it anymore.  Then I started augmenting my hand splitting with a once-yearly rented splitter, the fast-cycle 19 ton Iron and Oak I mentioned above (3.5" cylinder on a 16 GPM... that thing _moved!_).  I eventually broke down, both literally and figuratively, and bought my own splitter after about three years of that routine.  It was a slow (but inexpensive and reliable) Huskee 22 ton, based on the recommendations of several older forum members.
> 
> ...


I finally got around to looking up my new splitters pump specs and that would be nice if it was a 22 gpm but not... it’s rated at 17 gpm and the bypass is set at 3850 psi. Like you say maybe someday in the next few years I’ll pick up a 4" cylinder for it and give it a try and see what it does.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 14, 2018)

WiscWoody said:


> I finally got around to looking up my new splitters pump specs and that would be nice if it was a 22 gpm but not... it’s rated at 17 gpm and the bypass is set at 3850 psi. Like you say maybe someday in the next few years I’ll pick up a 4" cylinder for it and give it a try and see what it does.



Mine is rated 16 GPM at 3000 RPM, so I’m getting roughly 19 GPM out of it at my engine’s 3600 RPM maximum.  It’s doing the job just fine for me.  I’d be hunting for a 4” cylinder to put on that bad boy, but I’ve been known to be impatient.


----------



## WiscWoody (Feb 14, 2018)

Ashful said:


> Mine is rated 16 GPM at 3000 RPM, so I’m getting roughly 19 GPM out of it at my engine’s 3600 RPM maximum.  It’s doing the job just fine for me.  I’d be hunting for a 4” cylinder to put on that bad boy, but I’ve been known to be impatient.


Lol, yeah there’s lots of competition here for the almighty dollar.... but I can see it happening sometime sooner or later. Stay tuned as they say.....


----------

