# Kinetic vs hydraulic



## saewoody (Mar 23, 2017)

I'm beginning to consider a splitter and really like the idea and speed of the kinetic splitter.  Ive been using my generous neighbors 22T Huskee splitter for a few seasons for several cases of beer at a time. 

I've read as many threads as I can on the forum, but a lot of the ones specific to kinetic splitters are older, and I am hoping that maybe there are some more recent thoughts on them. 

I will be splitting at least 5+ cords per year. I feel like I am doing a lot of standing around while I am waiting for the hydraulic splitter to get through a log. I usually am splitting about 16" long rounds. I will split as large a round as I can get up on the splitter, which can be 24" or larger sometimes. Anything I can't get up on the splitter I will split with a maul or wedge until I can get onto the splitter. I don't generally split vertically because I prefer to stand. Also, I scrounge the vast majority of my wood, so it is not always the prettiest, straightest wood. 

So ultimately, I would like to hear people's thoughts/ experiences on kinetic vs hydraulic. And I am wondering if anyone has ever gone with a kinetic splitter and realized it was worth it, or wasn't advantageous over a hydraulic. 

Thanks for any advice in advance. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ashful (Mar 23, 2017)

My take-away, although I don't own one myself, is that kinetic splitters make a great second splitter.  The reason I say this is that hydraulic splitters, while slower, will get through anything.  Kinetic splitters are much faster, but do poorly with anything that's not straight and clean.  If you have a hydraulic to back it up, where you can do the gnarly stuff, then a kinetic splitter will get through the majority of your work much more quickly.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 23, 2017)

Seems like a logical point.  However, about the toughest wood I have ever run through my splitter is sycamore, which I don't think I will ever get again. I actually had to flip it over and finish the split from the other side.  I have seen videos of a kinetic splitter go through that with two hits.  That is still much faster than what I experienced with the hydraulic splitter. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ashful (Mar 23, 2017)

Then you might be a good candidate for one.  The other argument some have against them is safety, but I own many machines less safe than a kinetic splitter, so I'd not let that be a deciding factor.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 23, 2017)

Ashful said:


> Then you might be a good candidate for one.  The other argument some have against them is safety, but I own many machines less safe than a kinetic splitter, so I'd not let that be a deciding factor.



Good point. There is seemingly always a push to legislate common sense and intelligence!  The new kinetic splitters seem to be a two hand operation so that you are forced to keep that second hand away from the piece being split. I would actually prefer a one handed operation. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jazzberry (Mar 23, 2017)

I have never tried a kinetic but I can say I don't have a wish for anything faster than my hydraulic. Tradeoff for speed is danger and my son and I have been known to drink a beer or two when splitting wood.


----------



## Easy Livin’ 3000 (Mar 23, 2017)

saewoody said:


> I'm beginning to consider a splitter and really like the idea and speed of the kinetic splitter.  Ive been using my generous neighbors 22T Huskee splitter for a few seasons for several cases of beer at a time.
> 
> I've read as many threads as I can on the forum, but a lot of the ones specific to kinetic splitters are older, and I am hoping that maybe there are some more recent thoughts on them.
> 
> ...


Watch your fingers!


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 23, 2017)

How much you wanting to spend? I have ran both.There are hydraulic splitters with 6 sec cycle times..The kinetic wins hands down for speed in easy wood. Try running hedge or elm on a kinetic and its worthless. It will not replace the brute force of a  hydraulic splitter. I scrounge a lot myself and follow a logger around cleaning up tops.I turn down nothing. Only a hydraulic splitter will meet my needs. I run a 4 and 6 way wedge head on it and as a result 4 to 6 pieces are the end result for each stroke of the rams 10 second cycle time with out worrying about maiming myself.If you have not ran a kinetic I strongly suggest you seek one out and run it first...Everything considered...I wasn't impressed after running one. Don't misconstrue as they certainly have their place if all you will ever split is cherry hand picked stuff.


----------



## jotul8e2 (Mar 23, 2017)

Some hydraulic splitters are very slow while others are much faster.  Anyone who can work solo and is impatient with a 10 second cycle is moving pretty fast.  Mine is about 12 seconds and it is plenty fast for me.

Faster = more expensive, though.


----------



## jetsam (Mar 23, 2017)

I personally don't 'get' kinetic splitters unless you burn 15 cords a year, or you process firewood commercially.

Anything the kinetic splitter can do, I do with my maul.  Anything they can't do is what the hydraulic splitter is for.

If I had a kinetic splitter, I do not think I would use it, because I am trying to be kind to my back these days.  Might save some time, though.


----------



## cableman (Mar 24, 2017)

What about those dual cycle splitters? 
http://www.braveproducts.com/logsplitters/brave20tondualsplit.html


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 24, 2017)

Do a search here. Lots of posts about the good and bad. I'm also guessing many of the nay sayers have never run one.

I love my Super Split but I don't scrounge for wood. Maple, ash, beech and red birch is what's growing near me.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 24, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> Do a search here. Lots of posts about the good and bad. I'm also guessing many of the nay sayers have never run one.
> 
> I love my Super Split but I don't scrounge for wood. Maple, ash, beech and red birch is what's growing near me.



I did start off by reading a lot of older posts,  but they are getting to be several years old at this point. I am hoping to hear from people that have run both types of splitters and are familiar with the pros and cons of the kinetic splitters. 

Thanks for all the replies so far. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 24, 2017)

saewoody said:


> I did start off by reading a lot of older posts,  but they are getting to be several years old at this point. I am hoping to hear from people that have run both types of splitters and are familiar with the pros and cons of the kinetic splitters.
> 
> Thanks for all the replies so far.
> 
> ...



That's odd. Kinetic splitters were recently covered about a month ago. I've run both. I was not looking to get away with spending the least amount of money possible. I buy better stuff knowing it holds its value over the long haul. Try and buy a used Super Split. I couldn't find any when I was looking.

Anyway, I've rented hydros a few times and my back hurts just looking at them being so low. 
I looked at Timberwolf splitters but did not run one. I have known about SS for many years as a friend owned one over 30 years ago and see them in commercial use by both serious wood burners as well as wood cutters. They are so simple. No hoses, fittings, pumps, oil, filters, ect.

For me personally my time is valuable. Standing over a painfully slow unit would drive me insane when I got better things to be doing in the spring and fall like fishing or hunting. If I was a roadside wood hunter taking whatever I could put my hands on for heat I might thing otherwise on a SS. As it stands now, my crap gets burned in the firepit but my wood guy doesn't bring much of it. I have 14 acres of woods and when I cut anything off it I'll leave the crap behind because you can't stack it worth a damn. 

Would I buy a cheap Made in China anything? Not if I can help it. SS is made in Mass with casting parts from NH. The SS has done everything I've asked it to. I have no regrets on spending the money on it and the TW was going to be in the same 3K ballpark. Some people buy Harbor Freight tools and others buy Snap On. It all boils down to what you want and how much your willing to spend on it.


----------



## TreePointer (Mar 24, 2017)

jotul8e2 said:


> Some hydraulic splitters are very slow while others are much faster.  Anyone who can work solo and is impatient with a 10 second cycle is moving pretty fast.  Mine is about 12 seconds and it is plenty fast for me.
> 
> Faster = more expensive, though.



You make a good point.  It's not fair to say all hydraulic splitters are "fast enough."  I've used rental splitters with annoyingly slow cycle times (> 15s), and I hated them.    There are even some times I wish my 35-ton Huskee (15s) were faster.  If I had to buy one today, I'd shoot for something around 10s or faster...or a Super Split.


----------



## blades (Mar 24, 2017)

I have a hydro unit - fast enough for me- but I anit no spring chicken anymore- and no matter the type of splitter unless you are just going to leave the splits in a pile or trying to sell it speed isn't all its cracked up to be.  kinda like the guy driving at break neck speed that  you pull next to at every light when you have not exceeded the speed limit. My splitter will split just about anything and as I work alone it fast enough to keep me jumping as most are. Hydro units are very simple and petty much problem free. Kinetics well lots more to get fouled up- racks, gears, springs. My motor, pump, love joy,  and ram are 17 years old Replaced a couple hoses over the years nothing I could not source local.wore the valve out once so far. Actually everything  on it can be sourced local. Min 4 cord a year but I have put up three times that once in awhile.


----------



## DodgyNomad (Mar 24, 2017)

jetsam said:


> I personally don't 'get' kinetic splitters unless you burn 15 cords a year, or you process firewood commercially.
> 
> Anything the kinetic splitter can do, I do with my maul.  Anything they can't do is what the hydraulic splitter is for.
> 
> If I had a kinetic splitter, I do not think I would use it, because I am trying to be kind to my back these days.  Might save some time, though.




When I was younger, I had looked at the kinetic splitters because I've always been a rush rush rush kind of guy who tries to maximize efficiency on work tasks.

But, after looking at them and really paying attention to the time and motions, I feel that I'm plenty fast enough using my 22 ton Speeco.  I honestly feel that I couldn't process any more wood SAFELY over the course of a few hours than I do now.

The key is not wasting motion, and keeping busy while you're splitting. In my case, here's the real time savers:

I have marked on the outside edge of my splitter cradel a yellow paint line where 17" is on the return stroke, so I'm only bringing the wedge back 1" beyond the length of my bucked firewood, as I cut everything to 16".  Not wasting time returning the wedge too far ends up saving time and wasted motion in both directions.

I've hand filed my wedge edge so that it's fairly sharp, as it's really just a slow speed axe or maul, but I didn't change the geometry of the wedge.  I noticed quite a difference when splitting big, gnarly oak rounds, as my wedge had a few imperfections in it from the factory, and was a bit rounded on the leading edge. Machine splits more quickly and with less effort, which should help the life of it.  I also filed down the nut and bolt that hold the splitter to the ram, as they were making contact with the wood and causing additional friction and drag.

I only run the splitter as far down as is absolutely necessary to when the log is split, then hit the return lever.  As the ram is retracting, I'm removing and placing my split in the wood rack, or trailer, or in the bucket of my loader, or tossing it on the pile depending on where I'm at and putting another log on the wood splitter as the ram is still retracting when possible.

In addition, I have a log catcher mounted on my splitter, which I think is an absolute must.  As I'm returning the ram to the 17" mark, I'm quickly putting another bucked round or 2 depending on the size, and one on the cradle so they are right there and ready to be split.

I've paid attention to how far the ram normally travels before the wood is split and I hit the return on the detent valve, and it's usually right around 10" or so, give or take an inch or two depending on how straight or big the round is that I'm splitting.  So the ram is normally only traveling 10" each way and I try to keep it moving and doing work as often as possible.

When you factor in things like where you place your splitter at the start of your job, where your wood source is located, and if you have someone helping you stack or feed your supply, I feel like my splitter is fast enough to keep up with me, especially after an hour or so. 

I don't feel like there's much to be gained by going with a different type or faster wood splitter, to me the speed of the entire job relies on the overall efficiency of the operator.  I haven't officially timed how long it takes me to split a full cord of wood, but having a faster wood splitter isn't going to increase my productivity substantially.   Location of the trees I'm cutting, the time it takes me to fell the standing wood, then buck it up, then put it in the bucket of my front end loader or on a trailer and get it back to my woodpile is probably where there's more time to be made up in my case.  So having a powerful saw, with the sharpest chain humanly possible, and tools like having a couple of good log jacks, speeds up my time in the woods.  I run big, fast saws that throw big chips, and so I feel I gain time with all those things. 

In the grand scheme of things, there is some, but not a ton to be gained if you're handling your wood as efficiently as possible from start to finish by speeding up the wood splitter, at least in my case working alone.  Not to mention that hydraulic will go through anything I can throw at it, can be put upright to split vertically on great big stuff that I can't safely lift, and is much more reliable in the long run.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 25, 2017)

jotul8e2 said:


> Some hydraulic splitters are very slow while others are much faster.  Anyone who can work solo and is impatient with a 10 second cycle is moving pretty fast.  Mine is about 12 seconds and it is plenty fast for me.
> 
> Faster = more expensive, though.


Most here balk at the $1k price of an 11 second hydraulic.  All the 6 second hydraulics I know will set you back over $2200 for 22 tons, and more for more.  I'm not arguing against 'em, just pointing out you gotta pay to play.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 25, 2017)

Thanks for all the helpful input. It has been helpful.  Any thoughts on a 2 way splitter like the Harbor Freight version?  I know it's probably not the highest quality, but it has good reviews. It won't be as fast as a kinetic, but there is no time wasted on the return, and it is hydraulic so it should get through most of whatever gets thrown at it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 25, 2017)

Get on youtube and you should be able to find a review on it.


----------



## kennyp2339 (Mar 26, 2017)

I would love to have a kinetic splitter, but I just can imagine trying to work up a 30" diameter piece of knotty red oak or maple. I'd also be suspicious of any company that imports there castings (particularly the fly wheels from China)
With that said, for 3k you can get an iron & oak 26ton fast speed hydro that can either be vertical or horizontal, cycle time is 8 sec from cradle to cradle. There's no waiting around with that splitter.


----------



## Gboutdoors (Mar 26, 2017)

I looked at both and bought a 22 ton Ariens for $1000.00. As others have said it's what you like and how you work. I find it fine with a 12 sec. cycle time.

I work alone and have my system set up that works for me.





I go from tree




To trailer




To splitter




To stacks all in the same day. No down time no rush no stress. I don't think for me anyway a Super Split would make any difference at all. Other than $2000 and that my friend buys a lot of toys or BEER.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 26, 2017)

Tar12 said:


> Get on youtube and you should be able to find a review on it.



I have watched many of them.  I was considering one of them before I stumbled across the kinetic splitters. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## saewoody (Mar 26, 2017)

Gboutdoors said:


> I looked at both and bought a 22 ton Ariens for $1000.00. As others have said it's what you like and how you work. I find it fine with a 12 sec. cycle time.
> 
> I work alone and have my system set up that works for me.
> View attachment 196487
> ...



That looks like an nice efficient operation!  I'm curious what you are using to cover your stacks. It's hard to tell from the pics. Thanks for your input. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Archer39 (Mar 26, 2017)

As someone who owns both (husky 22t and a dr rapid fire 28pro) I can tell you that there is no comparison between the two. When it comes to speed the kinetic wins hands down. The rapid fire cuts the time almost in half. The type of wood I split is similar to yours where I don't go after the huge stuff or the really ugly stuff. If is ugly, it gets left in the woods. It's not worth my time or effort. Any one who says they don't think it would speed up there splitting processe has not used a kenitic splitter or are blind to what a kinetic offers over a traditional hydro unit.

If the amount of time you spend splitting wood is a concern get the kinetic unit. If there are a few pcs a year it just won't split burn them in a firepit or throw them back in the woods. I work a full time job and own my own business so time with my wife and son are more valuable to me.


----------



## Gboutdoors (Mar 26, 2017)

Archer I am not blind and have used a Super Split many times. A fellow worker has had one for years and use to sell 30-40 cords a year. Just because it works for you does not mean it is for every one.

I wonder how many hydro units are out there in use and how many kinetic units. 

I run my own business also and have for 30 years and spend lots of time with my wife of 42 years and our twins.

I don't by wood and never will but I don't think those that do are wrong or blind to the fact that free is far better.

Ok rant over have your self a great day.


----------



## Jazzberry (Mar 26, 2017)

+ Quote

Kinetic would not work in my area after thinking about it due to the size of the wood we have here. Would have to be able to split it vertical.


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 26, 2017)

Jazzberry said:


> View attachment 196501
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That looks pretty straight grained. If you attack it on a SS starting in the middle you're right. It will buck and fight. However, working it from the outside edges in might really open your eyes.
I've split some stuff I could barely pick up.


----------



## Jazzberry (Mar 26, 2017)

_That looks pretty straight grained. If you attack it on a SS starting in the middle you're right. It will buck and fight. However, working it from the outside edges in might really open your eyes.
I've split some stuff I could barely pick up._


Sounds good. You come over and pick that 48" diameter 400 pound mofo up and put it on the table for me ok?


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 26, 2017)

That does not look like a 48" diameter log.


----------



## Jazzberry (Mar 26, 2017)

Just measured my splitter and its 46" out to out on the tires so its not much off if any. Lets call it 3'6'' to be safe and its 19" thick.  And that is not the largest trees around here we run into. Its all you can do to tip them up and roll them around let alone throw it on a horizontal splitter. We hardly  ever get stuff as small as the size you need for a SS.


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 26, 2017)

Jazzberry said:


> Just measured my splitter and its 46" out to out on the tires so its not much off if any. Lets call it 3'6'' to be safe and its 19" thick.  And that is not the largest trees around here we run into. Its all you can do to tip them up and roll them around let alone throw it on a horizontal splitter. We hardly  ever get stuff as small as the size you need for a SS.


Thats the reality of my world as well.They will run from 36in to 5 feet plus across.I routinely get tops that the butt end will run 2.5ft to 4ft across.Even after they are quartered or I load them onto the splitter with the log lift they are some heavy muthers you are not picking up. A kinetic would not survive this environment very long at all. I realize this is extreme but it is to demonstrate whats necessary for a take all home firewood mentality.I think the OP will be fine with a kinetic splitter as long as he is aware of its limitations.


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 26, 2017)

I know many professional wood cutters. They could not give that wood away for free. Have a friend who took a 10 wheeler load of 3-4 foot diameter wood a few years ago. He pushed it into his own woods with his Case 580.


----------



## jetsam (Mar 26, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> I know many professional wood cutters. They could not give that wood away for free. Have a friend who took a 10 wheeler load of 3-4 foot diameter wood a few years ago. He pushed it into his own woods with his Case 580.



Tell 'em to bring it over! That stuff is why I even have a splitter.  I still do little stuff and straight-grained stuff with the maul to be nice to my back.


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 26, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> I know many professional wood cutters. They could not give that wood away for free. Have a friend who took a 10 wheeler load of 3-4 foot diameter wood a few years ago. He pushed it into his own woods with his Case 580.


I will take it all! Your friend was a foolish man indeed...it makes excellent firewood and lots of it...the right equipment and its a piece of cake..The one tree alone was a 2 years supply of premium burr oak 
	

		
			
		

		
	





	

		
			
		

		
	
 firewood....


----------



## Jazzberry (Mar 27, 2017)

_



Bad LP said:



			I know many professional wood cutters. They could not give that wood away for free. Have a friend who took a 10 wheeler load of 3-4 foot diameter wood a few years ago. He pushed it into his own woods with his Case 580.
		
Click to expand...

_

3' is the perfect size for me. I wish all my stuff was 3'  I get loads of big pine dropped in my back yard for free with many over 4' thick. That pic shows one at or near 4' and I handled it by myself. I would need my son to roll it in our trailer but getting it to the splitter and splitting it was pretty easy for me. (Im 62 years old) I do a lot of double cutting with my 064 and a 36" bar. The guy you are talking about obviously doesn't have a tilting splitter or he would not be throwing good wood away.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 27, 2017)

Jazzberry said:


> 3' is the perfect size for me. I wish all my stuff was 3'  I get loads of big pine dropped in my back yard for free with many over 4' thick. That pic shows one at or near 4' and I handled it by myself. I would need my son to roll it in our trailer but getting it to the splitter and splitting it was pretty easy for me. (Im 62 years old) I do a lot of double cutting with my 064 and a 36" bar. The guy you are talking about obviously doesn't have a tilting splitter or he would not be throwing good wood away.


I split a lot of big stuff, to the tune of 10+ cords, some years.  I don't turn any of it away, but I think it's stretching a bit to say 3' is a great size.  I have split as much as 5 cords in a full day, when working with 12" - 16" diameter rounds on a horizontal splitter.  When I get to the big stuff, I slow down to less than 2 cords per day, and I hurt a lot more the next day.

Many threads here on how I process the big'uns.  Slab them, then walk the slabs onto the vertical splitter.  I've not found a more efficient way, but it will never match the speed of straight 12" rounds, especially if one has access to a kinetic splitter.


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 27, 2017)

I guess this large diameter wood falls into the category of "one man's trash is another man's treasure". Professional loggers, truckers, wood mills and most homeowners don't want that crap either. Must be spoiled.


----------



## jetsam (Mar 27, 2017)

Huge stuff is more work, but it burns the same. I tend to get a lot more slabs than wedges out of it too, which is mildly convenient. (I can't explain this... you'd think that if I preferred slabs I'd just split everything into slabs, but my brain is  conditioned to do wedges with the maul. Any forestry psychologists in the house?)


----------



## jetsam (Mar 27, 2017)

Ashful said:


> I split a lot of big stuff, to the tune of 10+ cords, some years.  I don't turn any of it away, but I think it's stretching a bit to say 3' is a great size.  I have split as much as 5 cords in a full day, when working with 12" - 16" diameter rounds on a horizontal splitter.  When I get to the big stuff, I slow down to less than 2 cords per day, and I hurt a lot more the next day.
> 
> Many threads here on how I process the big'uns.  Slab them, then walk the slabs onto the vertical splitter.  I've not found a more efficient way, but it will never match the speed of straight 12" rounds, especially if one has access to a kinetic splitter.



When you say that you slab them for splitting, you mean you noodle huge rounds into smaller pieces for easier manhandling?


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 27, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> I guess this large diameter wood falls into the category of "one man's trash is another man's treasure". Professional loggers, truckers, wood mills and most homeowners don't want that crap either. Must be spoiled.


Things must be a lot different in small wood land...my best friend works full time as a professional logger and routinely cuts large wood for buyers and mills unless it has a obvious void in it. If the void is hidden and they cut it down and it can't be sold then I get it! They are indeed another mans treasure! The vast majority of it is used as pallet wood.They cut a lot of it...I know this as fact as I process a lot of the tops and have helped skid these big mutters out.It is a large portion of their business.They have to be cut into 8ft lengths in order to be able to manage them.Do I prefer big trees? Hell no I don't! But I am set up to take care of anything that comes my way...


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 27, 2017)

Ashful...in a perfect world all I would ever cut would be 16 -20 in stuff...you can flat stack it up in a hurry!


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 27, 2017)

Saewoody are you any closer to figuring out what you need?


----------



## woodhog73 (Mar 27, 2017)

I always cut big and heavy wood. I only cut oak on my property because that's what I have and well most would agree for BTUs oak is one of the best. My sizes are mostly around the 2 foot to 4 foot around give or take a few and always atleast 60 feet tall or taller.

I only have a 22ton splitter. It usually splits what I put on it. In hindsight a bigger splitter might have been useful for oak I generally don't have issues with a 22 ton. Even my 24 inch white oaks cut to 16 inches are too dam heavy to lift. Anyways I don't lift those rounds there is something about working smarter not harder.

I noodle. In half. Or in quarters if I have to. I have a Stihl 056 and 661 that is more than up for the task. I tuned my 056 rich for it. My 661 tunes itself  I then tow those rounds from my woods to my splitting area with a 4 wheeler and a small trailer. It's a slow process. Labor of love and desire for free heat.


----------



## Jazzberry (Mar 27, 2017)

In pine I like it bigger but my big stuff is dropped near my splitter in my backyard which has a slight slope to the woodpile. Chasing stuff out in the woods I would only tackle big wood if my trailer could be parked conveintly downhill. On level ground rolling one 3' round vs 4 or more smaller rounds is easier. Plus you get to sit longer and move less per the amount of wood. I think the wood is better for burning on bigger stuff also.


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 27, 2017)

Tar12 said:


> Things must be a lot different in small wood land...my best friend works full time as a professional logger and routinely cuts large wood for buyers and mills unless it has a obvious void in it. If the void is hidden and they cut it down and it can't be sold then I get it! They are indeed another mans treasure! The vast majority of it is used as pallet wood.They cut a lot of it...I know this as fact as I process a lot of the tops and have helped skid these big mutters out.It is a large portion of their business.They have to be cut into 8ft lengths in order to be able to manage them.Do I prefer big trees? Hell no I don't! But I am set up to take care of anything that comes my way...



OK I get it.

Your tree is bigger than my tree. It's not the size that counts. It's how fast you can split it up.

You're also happy with a hydro and I chose a Super Split made in the USA and locally in New England.


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 27, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> OK I get it.
> 
> Your tree is bigger than my tree. It's not the size that counts. It's how fast you can split it up.
> 
> You're also happy with a hydro and I chose a Super Split made in the USA and locally in New England.


Its not about a pissing match my friend...the OP titled the thread Kinetic vs Hydraulic searching for pros and cons of each. Its really that simple.As I have stated before he will probably be better served getting a Kinetic splitter for his situation. If I had a choice? All I would cut is small wood and a Kinetic splitter would be in my arsenal...its all good.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 27, 2017)

jetsam said:


> When you say that you slab them for splitting, you mean you noodle huge rounds into smaller pieces for easier manhandling?


Yep.  Noodle 6" slabs off, walk 'em over to the splitter (like you'd move a filing cabinet), and whack 4" pieces off.  Perfect 4" x 6" pieces of timber.


----------



## heritageguy2005 (Mar 28, 2017)

I highly recommend the ariens 22 ton hydraulic. It's small enough to wheel around by hand and it has split everything I've ever thrown at it. I don't think the kinetics are that great for tough and gnarly wood which we all deal with. I personally just prefer the power of hydraulics.In all reality, the handling of the  wood is the most time consuming. I know the kinetics are fast but I can still only do so much.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 28, 2017)

I like watching them on YouTube. Dont the gears and rod wear out pretty quickly?


----------



## Bad LP (Mar 28, 2017)

VirginiaIron said:


> I like watching them on YouTube. Dont the gears and rod wear out pretty quickly?



There is a rack, a pinon and the pinon shaft. I haven't heard anything about people wearing them out but I do run high pressure grease on the rack. It is all rather slow moving. Think of an arbor press on its back. The Chinese stuff was busting teeth and I don't know about the DR but the DR and the SS are very close to each other in cost at the end of the day.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 28, 2017)

Another factor folks should keep in mind, in reference to the fast cycle hydraulics (eg. 6 second Iron and Oak, mentioned earlier), is that the faster hydraulics can have much less power than their slower brethren.  I used the 22-ton 6 second I&O many times, and stalled it in knotty stuff numerous times, but I've never stalled or stopped my much slower 22-ton 11 second Huskee.  It takes more horsepower and torque to drive those high-volume pumps to the same pressure you get out of a 11 gpm pump.

triptester has already traveled this road, so need for me to completely re-state it here: https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/new-huskee-22-ton-cycle-time.128296/


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 28, 2017)

Ashful said:


> Another factor folks should keep in mind, in reference to the fast cycle hydraulics (eg. 6 second Iron and Oak, mentioned earlier), is that the faster hydraulics can have much less power than their slower brethren.  I used the 22-ton 6 second I&O many times, and stalled it in knotty stuff numerous times, but I've never stalled or stopped my much slower 22-ton 11 second Huskee.  It takes more horsepower and torque to drive those high-volume pumps to the same pressure you get out of a 11 gpm pump.
> 
> triptester has already traveled this road, so need for me to completely re-state it here: https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/new-huskee-22-ton-cycle-time.128296/


On my homemade splitter, when I removed one of my 3/8 hoses I found the hose only had about a 1/16" opening in both fittings. I have a two stage 11gpm? pump and I was happy with the cycle time. But now that I am renovating the splitter I think I will remove that restrictor hose and see how much faster it is.


----------



## jetsam (Mar 28, 2017)

Ashful said:


> Another factor folks should keep in mind, in reference to the fast cycle hydraulics (eg. 6 second Iron and Oak, mentioned earlier), is that the faster hydraulics can have much less power than their slower brethren.  I used the 22-ton 6 second I&O many times, and stalled it in knotty stuff numerous times, but I've never stalled or stopped my much slower 22-ton 11 second Huskee.  It takes more horsepower and torque to drive those high-volume pumps to the same pressure you get out of a 11 gpm pump.
> 
> triptester has already traveled this road, so need for me to completely re-state it here: https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/new-huskee-22-ton-cycle-time.128296/



That was a bit of a surprise to me when I was shopping for splitters. I had a chance to get a slightly banged up DHT 27 ton at the same price as a new DHT 22. Sounded great, but after a little research I wound up going with the 22 (because they're the same pump and engine, and it's cheaper to add a log catcher to the 22 than it is to put a new cylinder on the 27 to get cycle times back down where I wanted them).


----------



## jetsam (Mar 28, 2017)

Some spec sheet numbers from DHT, because they show the differences in cycle time between different cylinder, pump, and engine sizes.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 28, 2017)

Tar12 said:


> Saewoody are you any closer to figuring out what you need?



Well I have certainly gotten some good information and points for both sides of the argument.  I appreciate all the info everyone has contributed. I believe I will have an opportunity in the near future to try out a super splitter due to a generous offer from somebody here on the forum!  That will certainly help me to make a decision.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 28, 2017)

saewoody said:


> Well I have certainly gotten some good information and points for both sides of the argument.  I appreciate all the info everyone has contributed. I believe I will have an opportunity in the near future to try out a super splitter due to a generous offer from somebody here on the forum!  That will certainly help me to make a decision.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There isn't a better way than to try a product! Find some of the nastiest stuff that you encounter and give it a whirl! I hope it works for you...I wish I had access to enough small stuff...I would have one myself!


----------



## woodhog73 (Mar 28, 2017)

You could always splurge for a $200 dollar Gransfors Bruks maul. Ya that's right $200 for a splitting axe / maul. It goes as fast as you can swing it.

I'm getting old. Closer to 50 than 40. But if I HAD to I could still hand split faster than any splitter around. So could 90 percent of the readers on this forum. Put a 24 inch round inside a car tire on the ground, get me real angry, and there ain't no splitter on the planet that's gonna destroy that 24 inch round faster LOL 

Now it might not be good for you though. I recommend having good health insurance and a good chiropractor if you choose this direction.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 28, 2017)

woodhog73 said:


> You could always splurge for a $200 dollar Gransfors Bruks maul. Ya that's right $200 for a splitting axe / maul. It goes as fast as you can swing it.
> 
> I'm getting old. Closer to 50 than 40. But if I HAD to I could still hand split faster than any splitter around. So could 90 percent of the readers on this forum. Put a 24 inch round inside a car tire on the ground, get me real angry, and there ain't no splitter on the planet that's gonna destroy that 24 inch round faster LOL
> 
> Now it might not be good for you though. I recommend having good health insurance and a good chiropractor if you choose this direction.



I grew up splitting by hand, but my parents burned maybe only 3 cords per year.  When I got back into wood heating six years ago, I went back to splitting by hand, and really enjoyed it at first.  But the 10 - 14 cords per year I was trying to split caused me all sorts of shoulder trouble.

I still enjoyed splitting by hand, so I settled into a routine of splitting as much as I could by hand, and then renting a splitter once per year to play catch up.  That was still beating me up, so I eventually broke down and purchased my own splitter.  

Now, maybe type or three years later, my shoulders still have not recovered 100% from the abuse I put on them those few years, and I'm not sure they ever will.  You only get one body to destroy, and I'd rather cause that damage via more pleasurable pursuits.


----------



## jetsam (Mar 28, 2017)

Ashful said:


> Now, maybe type or three years later, my shoulders still have not recovered 100% from the abuse I put on them those few years, and I'm not sure they ever will.  You only get one body to destroy, and I'd rather cause that damage via more pleasurable pursuits.



I actually find that splitting the easy stuff by maul causes me less pain than lifting all those rounds up onto the splitter (or crouching in front of it in vertical mode).  I split nowhere near what you do (maybe 6 cords last year, but it'll be more like 3/yr once I am done playing catchup and have a few years laid in).

Agreed that I need all those parts to work for fun stuff!


----------



## woodhog73 (Mar 28, 2017)

Ashful said:


> But the 10 - 14 cords per year I was trying to split caused me all sorts of shoulder trouble.



You must be heating with wood full time or close to it ? That's a lot of firewood to process by hand. No way at my age would I attempt to hand split 10 plus cords of hardwood a year. No doubt a splitter was / is worth it's weight in gold in your case.

I only burn roughly 2 cord a winter. So I'm ok with slow splitters. However 2 other family households heat with wood in my immediate family and we harvest in a good year 20 cords of oak, maple, and birch and in some years over 30. Thanks to the families farm and it's thirsty outdoor boiler which will consume a cord a week in the coldest temperatures .  But I only help them cut I don't split for them. They use a power take off splitter attached to one of the farm tractors and it splits pretty fast. Not sure how fast but much better than my little 22 ton


----------



## Ashful (Mar 28, 2017)

woodhog73 said:


> You must be heating with wood full time or close to it ? That's a lot of firewood to process by hand.


lol... are you new here?  j/k

My house is not what one would call "efficient".  I was previously burning 6 - 8 cords of wood per year, offset by 1000 - 1400 gallons oil, plus running two heat pumps.  I was splitting 10 - 14 cords per year, trying to get 3 years ahead, at that usage rate.

With my new stoves and burning habits, I it looks like my usage may be lower in the future.  We will see!


----------



## saewoody (Mar 29, 2017)

woodhog73 said:


> You could always splurge for a $200 dollar Gransfors Bruks maul. Ya that's right $200 for a splitting axe / maul. It goes as fast as you can swing it.
> 
> I'm getting old. Closer to 50 than 40. But if I HAD to I could still hand split faster than any splitter around. So could 90 percent of the readers on this forum. Put a 24 inch round inside a car tire on the ground, get me real angry, and there ain't no splitter on the planet that's gonna destroy that 24 inch round faster LOL
> 
> Now it might not be good for you though. I recommend having good health insurance and a good chiropractor if you choose this direction.



I always think to myself that I would like to split most of my wood by hand, but I know I can't "run" nearly as long as a splitter can!  That and my wife says I'm crazy to even think about it. And I do get concerned about how it might break down the body over time. 

It's kind of like when I bought my house 13 years ago and came home with a brand new reel push mower for the nearly 1/2 acre lawn. I figured I was 25 years old and that would help keep me in great shape. My wife said I was crazy and talked me into returning it and getting a modern mower.  Well I did, and even that took close to 90 minutes to mow the lawn if I was bagging. I quickly upgraded to an old 36" commercial walk behind mower. Cut my mowing time in half!  The idea of staying in shape is great. Actually accomplishing what you want/need to as quickly as possible is even better. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 29, 2017)

Got over hand splitting in 1988 and bought that spllter. Now at age 70 I credit it for me being able to be age 70.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 29, 2017)

And cycle times only impress me if they are slow. The reason I still have two hands.


----------



## TreePointer (Mar 29, 2017)

I enjoyed hand splitting when I was younger and felt good after the workout.  I did reach a point in which the time saved using an hydraulic splitter was more valuable to me than the workout.  Fast forward years later--after a separated shoulder, rotator cuff surgery, and one elbow injury (all from other activities), a power splitter is just plain smart.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 29, 2017)

BrotherBart said:


> And cycle times only impress me if they are slow. The reason I still have two hands.


You haven't seen my hotrod splitter thread?  I'm working up plans to upgrade your Huskee 22-ton.  Currently debating 6 inches per second vs. 8 inches per second, and the horsepower / physical motor size implications.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 29, 2017)

woodhog73 said:


> You could always splurge for a $200 dollar Gransfors Bruks maul. Ya that's right $200 for a splitting axe / maul. It goes as fast as you can swing it.
> 
> I'm getting old. Closer to 50 than 40. But if I HAD to I could still hand split faster than any splitter around. So could 90 percent of the readers on this forum. Put a 24 inch round inside a car tire on the ground, get me real angry, and there ain't no splitter on the planet that's gonna destroy that 24 inch round faster LOL
> 
> Now it might not be good for you though. I recommend having good health insurance and a good chiropractor if you choose this direction.


I recently felled some small/medium sized dead standing trees and it was nice to take the maul and split them in no time. It was certainly faster than my splitter.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 29, 2017)

Ashful said:


> You haven't seen my hotrod splitter thread?  I'm working up plans to upgrade your Huskee 22-ton.  Currently debating 6 inches per second vs. 8 inches per second, and the horsepower / physical motor size implications.



Do you have a link?


----------



## Jags (Mar 29, 2017)

One of my often repeated comments on this forum...
The time to get a splitter is BEFORE you wreck yourself.
I do value a timely splitter.  My big boy runs a big bore (5") and I do find myself waiting for the return stroke fairly often. Currently splitting a batch of hackberry that requires full stroke for each split (stringy). Yes - I wish my splitter had a faster stroke, but not looking for one that slams the wood into the wedge.  I believe there is a happy medium somewhere in there, but that might be different for each person due to the variables in what is being processed.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 29, 2017)

Jags said:


> One of my often repeated comments on this forum...
> The time to get a splitter is BEFORE you wreck yourself.
> I do value a timely splitter.  My big boy runs a big bore (5") and I do find myself waiting for the return stroke fairly often. Currently splitting a batch of hackberry that requires full stroke for each split (stringy). Yes - I wish my splitter had a faster stroke, but not looking for one that slams the wood into the wedge.  I believe there is a happy medium somewhere in there, but that might be different for each person due to the variables in what is being processed.


Have you shopped 3-stage pumps, or thought about paralleling up multiple 2-stage pumps with the required reliefs between them, to get 3 or 4 speeds?


----------



## Ashful (Mar 29, 2017)

VirginiaIron said:


> Do you have a link?


Started as me shopping for something faster, but quickly turned to some math on upgrading what I already own:
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/fast-cycle-vertical-splitter.161493/#post-2170268

I will post a full bloody thread on the thing, if I end up doing this.  I'm currently leaning toward 22 GPM, which should give me 7 second cycle time.  I could go faster, but one does wonder about liability if you build the fastest splitter on earth, and it ends up hurting someone.  At 7 seconds, I'm right in the middle of the pack on the best fast-cycle commercial hydraulic splitters.


----------



## Jags (Mar 29, 2017)

Ashful said:


> Have you shopped 3-stage pumps, or thought about paralleling up multiple 2-stage pumps with the required reliefs between them, to get 3 or 4 speeds?


Naa - no need for the complications.  A 28GPM pump on a 5" bore will have similar (if not slightly faster) cycle times as a 22 gpm pump on a 4" bore.  About perfect in my eyes.


----------



## blades (Mar 29, 2017)

Hydro speed is all about how fast you can fill and empty the cylinder- biggest short circuit is a lot of the cylinders commonly used are 1/2" ports.   My valve is 3/4" ports  so somewhere in the future if when the cylinder goes it will be replaced by a 3/4" port cylinder-  I am sure there is a whole lot of math figures to arrive at the possible decrease in time of ram travel. Likely doesn't amount to much but it also takes one more restriction point out.  Yep I know the output of the pump with its 1/2" port is finite ( in this case  11gpm on a 8hp briggs). I all ready have HI-flow fittings.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 30, 2017)

Ashful said:


> Started as me shopping for something faster, but quickly turned to some math on upgrading what I already own:
> https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/fast-cycle-vertical-splitter.161493/#post-2170268
> 
> I will post a full bloody thread on the thing, if I end up doing this.  I'm currently leaning toward 22 GPM, which should give me 7 second cycle time.  I could go faster, but one does wonder about liability if you build the fastest splitter on earth, and it ends up hurting someone.  At 7 seconds, I'm right in the middle of the pack on the best fast-cycle commercial hydraulic splitters.



I am hoping that my second modification will take care of the 40-50 inch rounds if/when I get them


----------



## jetsam (Mar 30, 2017)

VirginiaIron said:


> I am hoping that my second modification will take care of the 40-50 inch rounds if/when I get them



You don't always need massive force to split big stuff. I split plenty of 36"+ stuff with a maul- just start taking chunks off the outer perimeter.  I honestly prefer the maul for big stuff if it's reasonably straight grained- saves a lot of the lifting and heaving that makes my back sad.

A big branchy crotch will get the splitter, though. I try to find a weak spot and split it in half so it's more maneuverable first, then whack the halves down into  stove sized chunks (usually smallish ones, since a lot of that stuff winds up being odd shaped).


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 30, 2017)

jetsam said:


> You don't always need massive force to split big stuff. I split plenty of 36"+ stuff with a maul- just start taking chunks off the outer perimeter.  I honestly prefer the maul for big stuff if it's reasonably straight grained- saves a lot of the lifting and heaving that makes my back sad.
> 
> A big branchy crotch will get the splitter, though. I try to find a weak spot and split it in half so it's more maneuverable first, then whack the halves down into  stove sized chunks (usually smallish ones, since a lot of that stuff winds up being odd shaped).


My second mod does not have anything to do with massive force- just convenience and ergonomics.


----------



## jetsam (Mar 30, 2017)

VirginiaIron said:


> My second mod does not have anything to do with massive force- just convenience and ergonomics.



I should think about that myself. A practical log lifter and log catcher would get me using the splitter  lot more than I do, but I'm not sure what that would look like. (I still need the splitter to be easily portable.)


----------



## blades (Mar 30, 2017)

a small jib Crane type arrangement works well with a set of tongs ( kinda pricy) or  choke strap


----------



## DodgyNomad (Mar 30, 2017)

If I was younger, I'd look more seriously at a kinetic.  I can hardly keep up with my hydraulic after an hour or so.  I wear out before it does, that's for sure.


----------



## DodgyNomad (Mar 30, 2017)

The other problem I saw first hand when we used a kinetic years ago was it wouldn't go through the big gnarly stuff.  Sometimes you had to go at it a bunch of times, sometimes it just wouldn't go through at all.  I wish the ram heads were larger, as well as the wedge on the kinetics, because we had big oak rounds that were fighting us the entire time with the kinetic.  

I think they're fine in smaller, finer grained woods, but the one we used was pretty noisy and rattly, and I wasn't that impressed with the build quality.   Looked like something that would wear out much faster than the hydraulic speeco I currently have.


----------



## saewoody (Mar 30, 2017)

DodgyNomad said:


> The other problem I saw first hand when we used a kinetic years ago was it wouldn't go through the big gnarly stuff.  Sometimes you had to go at it a bunch of times, sometimes it just wouldn't go through at all.  I wish the ram heads were larger, as well as the wedge on the kinetics, because we had big oak rounds that were fighting us the entire time with the kinetic.
> 
> I think they're fine in smaller, finer grained woods, but the one we used was pretty noisy and rattly, and I wasn't that impressed with the build quality.   Looked like something that would wear out much faster than the hydraulic speeco I currently have.



Thanks for the thoughts.  I'm going to try one out this week, so I will see how it works out. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 30, 2017)

jetsam said:


> You don't always need massive force to split big stuff. I split plenty of 36"+ stuff with a maul- just start taking chunks off the outer perimeter.  I honestly prefer the maul for big stuff if it's reasonably straight grained- saves a lot of the lifting and heaving that makes my back sad.
> 
> A big branchy crotch will get the splitter, though. I try to find a weak spot and split it in half so it's more maneuverable first, then whack the halves down into  stove sized chunks (usually smallish ones, since a lot of that stuff winds up being odd shaped).


Although I have more than enough splitter power...I find myself leaving this big crotchy stuff right where it lays and noodle those bad boys up into 8-10 in squares instead of trying to split them down because as you have discovered you wind up with a mess..just not worth the effort. I put those squares in a separate stack as it takes longer to season them out but oh so worth it!


----------



## jetsam (Mar 30, 2017)

Tar12 said:


> Although I have more than enough splitter power...I find myself leaving this big crotchy stuff right where it lays and noodle those bad boys up into 8-10 in squares instead of trying to split them down because as you have discovered you wind up with a mess..just not worth the effort. I put those squares in a separate stack as it takes longer to season them about but oh so worth it!



Those crotches are where the BTUs are hiding! I don't noodle them because it's slow to do that many cuts in big oak and maple, but I do bust 'em up and use every bit.   I do get some slabs out of the gnarlies, then  I split the big irregular pieces down into small irregular pieces. There's always room for some odds and sods at the end of a load.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 30, 2017)

jetsam said:


> Those crotches are where the BTUs are hiding! I don't noodle them because it's slow to do that many cuts in big oak and maple...



If that's not an excuse to buy a bigger saw...


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 30, 2017)

jetsam said:


> Those crotches are where the BTUs are hiding! I don't noodle them because it's slow to do that many cuts in big oak and maple, but I do bust 'em up and use every bit.   I do get some slabs out of the gnarlies, then  I split the big irregular pieces down into small irregular pieces. There's always room for some odds and sods at the end of a load.


You got that right about the BTUs! They burn and burn! Had a guy call me up wanting to know if i wanted some oak? Well sure...then he proceeded to tell me it was pretty big stuff...told him that wasn't a problem. I get there and meet the man and we walk back to the woods...he forgot to tell me the part about all of the relatives and friends cutting all the gravy...lol...all that was left was monster crotch pieces!  He saw the look on my face and said he wouldn't blame me if I didn't want or couldn't handle it...i turned to my son and said go get the truck we have some work to do...we spent 3 solid days in there noodling those suckers! Talking about heavy wood! It was several years before it was ready to burn but it lasted close to 5 years cause I only burned that stuff on the coldest nights...would I do it again? NO! That was serious work!


----------



## Tar12 (Mar 30, 2017)

Ashful said:


> If that's not an excuse to buy a bigger saw...


It was the excuse I used to justify a new 660..makes noodling a piece of cake!


----------



## VirginiaIron (Mar 31, 2017)

Here is a nice video with a SPEECO Brand (looks like Dirty Hands) and some stringy wood. 

The guy says he has a bad back and he is using it mostly on vertical, which is best if you do not have a loader or lift. But working in that position all day long, in my opinion, is a killer for me. This is where a lift and table would be nice to have.

Now, I'd love to have this kinetic one   with my loader bucket full of wood so I do not have to continually move to the pile and feed it. Although, this size log and larger is just as easy to split with a maul but you constantly have to set up the rounds for splitting. A man, in this country doesn't usually have one pair of shoes, so, should a man have more than one splitter? My mod will basically be two in one, but maybe I'll add a kinetic to the list.

EDIT: If you look closely at the preview image frame, you can see another splitter in the lower right frame. Proof that a man or woman should have more than one splitter.


----------



## rowerwet (Mar 31, 2017)

saewoody said:


> Thanks for all the helpful input. It has been helpful.  Any thoughts on a 2 way splitter like the Harbor Freight version?  I know it's probably not the highest quality, but it has good reviews. It won't be as fast as a kinetic, but there is no time wasted on the return, and it is hydraulic so it should get through most of whatever gets thrown at it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I burn 6 or so cords a year,  all split with the predator from harbor freight.
No issues with reliability,  and easy to start.
It takes two adults to keep up with the output of this thing. One to split and one setting up the rounds within reach and then stacking the split pile.
If you go for a kinetic, you need three people to keep the flow going, four if they aren't young and fit. I used a super split years ago in college, we could process many cords of wood a day with three people, any less and you are stopping to clear the splits.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 31, 2017)

rowerwet said:


> I burn 6 or so cords a year,  all split with the predator from harbor freight.
> No issues with reliability,  and easy to start.
> It takes two adults to keep up with the output of this thing. One to split and one setting up the rounds within reach and then stacking the split pile.
> If you go for a kinetic, you need three people to keep the flow going, four if they aren't young and fit. I used a super split years ago in college, we could process many cords of wood a day with three people, any less and you are stopping to clear the splits.


If you were renting the splitter, and therefore had some vested interest in "keeping up with" it or achieving it's maximum output, you are correct.  For those who own a splitter, keeping up with it to get the most out of the splitter is less critical.  However, even a one-man operation will always benefit from a faster splitter, and not repeatedly waiting 12 seconds (times a few thousand cycles per day) for a slow hydraulic splitter to cycle thru a single split.


----------



## rowerwet (Apr 1, 2017)

Ashful said:


> If you were renting the splitter, and therefore had some vested interest in "keeping up with" it or achieving it's maximum output, you are correct.  For those who own a splitter, keeping up with it to get the most out of the splitter is less critical.  However, even a one-man operation will always benefit from a faster splitter, and not repeatedly waiting 12 seconds (times a few thousand cycles per day) for a slow hydraulic splitter to cycle thru a single split.


I own the predator,  and was a student working off some of my tuition with the SS.
The predator has no return stroke, it is ready to go as soon as soon as I am done repositioning the round.
This makes it so I almost never am waiting for a ram to meet the wood. The trick is to not run full strokes,  once the wood cracks apart, run the wedge until the aft edge is two inches into the wood, grab the splits and yank. Toss the split(s), reload or reposition the round to the other side of the ram and reverse the ram.
If your round length is consistent,  you can drop your new round between the opposite foot and the wedge, with an inch or so to spare.
Cycle time is nil
the SS has an advantage in straight grained wood, but I think the predator is the best for any wood, unless you are in the firewood business,  a SS is overkill, (and I really tried to justify one)


----------



## saewoody (Apr 2, 2017)

Ashful said:


> If you were renting the splitter, and therefore had some vested interest in "keeping up with" it or achieving it's maximum output, you are correct.  For those who own a splitter, keeping up with it to get the most out of the splitter is less critical.  However, even a one-man operation will always benefit from a faster splitter, and not repeatedly waiting 12 seconds (times a few thousand cycles per day) for a slow hydraulic splitter to cycle thru a single split.



This is exactly what I have been thinking when people say you can't keep up with it. Whether or not I can go as fast as the splitter is irrelevant. Once I put the round on the splitter 12 seconds vs 3 seconds is a lifetime. It could quite literally mean I can split the same amount of wood in one quarter the time; or four times the wood in the same amount of time. I'm sure it won't be quite that advantageous, but even if I went twice as fast it would be worth it to me. I enjoy running the splitter, but I also enjoy getting to the other things in my life that need to get done. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## saewoody (Apr 2, 2017)

rowerwet said:


> I own the predator,  and was a student working off some of my tuition with the SS.
> The predator has no return stroke, it is ready to go as soon as soon as I am done repositioning the round.
> This makes it so I almost never am waiting for a ram to meet the wood. The trick is to not run full strokes,  once the wood cracks apart, run the wedge until the aft edge is two inches into the wood, grab the splits and yank. Toss the split(s), reload or reposition the round to the other side of the ram and reverse the ram.
> If your round length is consistent,  you can drop your new round between the opposite foot and the wedge, with an inch or so to spare.
> ...



Good points. I have also considered HF Predator splitter because of the the bi-directional splitter. I know it probably wouldn't be as fast as a SS, but the price is right and it would still be faster than a traditional hydraulic. I had the opportunity to try a SS this morning (thanks Mike! By the way, I ended up filling up my trailer near the Simsbury/Bloomfield line). It was pretty impressive. This one happened to be electric; I liked the low noise level.  It was much more peaceful than a ~200cc engine humming away right next to you (even wearing earplugs).  I came home and split for several hours with the hydraulic and I don't think it compares in any way with the efficiency of the SS. 

Of course, if anyone in the CT area has a HF Predator splitter they are willing to let me try, I would be willing to check it out![emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## thinkxingu (Apr 2, 2017)

saewoody said:


> This is exactly what I have been thinking when people say you can't keep up with it. Whether or not I can go as fast as the splitter is irrelevant. Once I put the round on the splitter 12 seconds vs 3 seconds is a lifetime. It could quite literally mean I can split the same amount of wood in one quarter the time; or four times the wood in the same amount of time. I'm sure it won't be quite that advantageous, but even if I went twice as fast it would be worth it to me. I enjoy running the splitter, but I also enjoy getting to the other things in my life that need to get done.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The math doesn't work because you'd only save that time for the actual split--all the before and after time would remain the same. I'd even hazard a guess that you'd lose some of that time savings with the kinetic because you'd want to be more precise with placement before starting the split whereas with the hydraulic I start it moving as I'm finalizing placement of the round. Finally, the 12 seconds is the absolute slowest vs. 3 being absolute fastest.

Losing overall power/ability while decreasing safety for a minimal time savings (especially with <5 cords) seems like a bad choice.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk


----------



## saewoody (Apr 2, 2017)

Valid points.  I know it's not perfect math. You are right, it is just split time I was figuring.  I was not accounting for placement and all that.  Also, don't forget the reason you can adjust your piece while starting movement of the ram is because by nature the ram moves slowly. Thanks for your input. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ashful (Apr 4, 2017)

thinkxingu said:


> The math doesn't work because you'd only save that time for the actual split--all the before and after time would remain the same. I'd even hazard a guess that you'd lose some of that time savings with the kinetic because you'd want to be more precise with placement before starting the split whereas with the hydraulic I start it moving as I'm finalizing placement of the round. Finally, the 12 seconds is the absolute slowest vs. 3 being absolute fastest.
> 
> Losing overall power/ability while decreasing safety for a minimal time savings (especially with <5 cords) seems like a bad choice.
> 
> Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk


Keep in mind, you're commenting on saewoody's comments toward my comments... and I was on a tangent to this thread discussing a fast hydraulic splitter, not the OP's kinetic splitter.  The trouble with doing any math of this sort is that you're taking operations which are measured in seconds, and attempting to extrapolate that to hours of work, when the operation is repeated a few thousand times.  The only guarantee in this is that your error of measurement is multiplied by those thousands of operations.

It's better to take real-world examples.  I have spent many, many days splitting with my 12-second splitter, and also several days with a 6-second splitter I used to rent one or two weekends each year.  I can say for a fact that I got a lot more wood split with the faster splitter, even when all other differences in circumstance were negated.

For me, there's another factor, though.  I find waiting on a splitter with a 12 second cycle time very frustrating.  I am burning wood because I enjoy it, and that darn slow splitter is taking away from my enjoyment of this pursuit.


----------



## jetsam (Apr 4, 2017)

Ashful said:


> For me, there's another factor, though.  I find waiting on a splitter with a 12 second cycle time very frustrating.  I am burning wood because I enjoy it, and that darn slow splitter is taking away from my enjoyment of this pursuit.



Maybe you should consider a kinetic splitter, or a maul.


----------



## Ashful (Apr 4, 2017)

jetsam said:


> Maybe you should consider a kinetic splitter, or a maul.


I did the majority of my splitting with a maul for most of my life.  But it really started messing up my shoulders, when I installed two stoves in this house, and started trying to do it on my current scale.  I'm just using too much wood per year to be splitting with a maul, as a middle-aged desk jockey.


----------



## Jags (Apr 4, 2017)

Durn kids - man up, I say.  Pay no attention, just putting salve on the joints.....


----------



## Jazzberry (Apr 5, 2017)

_


Jags said:



			Durn kids - man up, I say.  Pay no attention, just putting salve on the joints.....



Click to expand...

_

My grandpa used to say tape a aspirin to it and quit bitchin lol


----------



## Ashful (Apr 5, 2017)

I don't mind pain, I just want it to come from something I enjoy more than swinging a maul.  Just sayin'.


----------



## jetsam (Apr 5, 2017)

Every time I hurt myself to the point that I have to take a break from wood processing, it's from shifting huge rounds.

What I need is a modernized powder wedge with a 500 round clip!


----------



## Starstuff (Apr 9, 2017)

I just got an electric Super Split. I have a lot of toys, but this is already my favorite, and I don't regret the high price tag. In the long run, it will probably be the cheapest option considering there is very little that requires maintenance (beyond some routine greasing) and can wear out over time. Also, it's really not that much cheaper than a larger (33ton+) hydraulic. The SS doesn't blink. Speedwise, I don't consider it overkill at all for my needs. I burn 3-5 cords a year, but I get the wood at various times. With this, I can be done splitting a scrounge hall in 30 minutes, or I can split an entire winter's worth of wood in an afternoon and get on with my life. 

I'd been looking at the HF dual action splitter as well. But even though it has a *mostly* good reviews, if you read closely, they're mostly from fresh purchases. The first purchases of that machine are coming up on 2-3 years. I bet we're going to start seeing a lot of "piece of junk" stories. Also, I split some BIG rounds. I'm not sure if the HF can handle them. 

Other big thing that I like about the SS is the ability to have it run on electric and still handle the big, gnarly rounds. Now I can have a conversation with my splitting partner(s) and not bother my neighbors.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Apr 10, 2017)

Starstuff said:


> I just got an electric Super Split. I have a lot of toys, but this is already my favorite, and I don't regret the high price tag. In the long run, it will probably be the cheapest option considering there is very little that requires maintenance (beyond some routine greasing) and can wear out over time. Also, it's really not that much cheaper than a larger (33ton+) hydraulic. The SS doesn't blink. Speedwise, I don't consider it overkill at all for my needs. I burn 3-5 cords a year, but I get the wood at various times. With this, I can be done splitting a scrounge hall in 30 minutes, or I can split an entire winter's worth of wood in an afternoon and get on with my life.
> 
> I'd been looking at the HF dual action splitter as well. But even though it has a *mostly* good reviews, if you read closely, they're mostly from fresh purchases. The first purchases of that machine are coming up on 2-3 years. I bet we're going to start seeing a lot of "piece of junk" stories. Also, I split some BIG rounds. I'm not sure if the HF can handle them.
> 
> Other big thing that I like about the SS is the ability to have it run on electric and still handle the big, gnarly rounds. Now I can have a conversation with my splitting partner(s) and not bother my neighbors.


Sounds great I'm excited for you. Can you post a video of it splitting the larger rounds?


----------



## rowerwet (Apr 10, 2017)

I'll let you know how the HF splitter does on year three, I bought the three year warranty just because it is harbor freight. 
Though I am becoming more impressed with the quality of what they sell over the past few years. 
I'm on a mechanics forum and they have multiple threads about what is good and trash at HF. They actually seem to be listening and demanding better quality from their suppliers.


----------



## rowerwet (Apr 10, 2017)

The predator engine is a Honda clone,  many people have just gone to Honda dealers for replacement parts, and had a perfect fit. 
The motors are also fairly inexpensive right from the store. 
The rest of the splitter is off the shelf parts, or something a welding shop could repair. 
For the price I got new,  I couldn't touch a used hydraulic splitter


----------



## saewoody (Apr 10, 2017)

rowerwet said:


> The predator engine is a Honda clone,  many people have just gone to Honda dealers for replacement parts, and had a perfect fit.
> The motors are also fairly inexpensive right from the store.
> The rest of the splitter is off the shelf parts, or something a welding shop could repair.
> For the price I got new,  I couldn't touch a used hydraulic splitter



I've been reading some of the reviews recently and most are from people just starting to use them (same with most of the YouTube videos). So it is hard to get an accurate gauge on how they are holding up. Also, if you read the lower star reviews, there are several mentions of lack of easy replacement parts and some of the connections not being standard sizes. That is a bit concerning.  I know I am capable of fixing a machine, but not if I can't get the right parts. Getting the three year warranty was a very good idea. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rowerwet (Apr 12, 2017)

saewoody said:


> I've been reading some of the reviews recently and most are from people just starting to use them (same with most of the YouTube videos). So it is hard to get an accurate gauge on how they are holding up. Also, of you read the lower star reviews, there are several mentions of lack of easy replacement part and some of the connections not being standard sizes. That is a bit concerning.  I know I am capable of fixing a machine, but not if I can't get the right parts. Getting the three year warranty was a very good idea.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This is my third season using it,  I just fired it up for the first time this year and split a big pile of wood. And this was after I left it outside all winter.
I do have a cover over the motor,  as I have had the on off switch ground out when wet. Otherwise it is going strong,  splitting some of the toughest maple I've ever seen.
I may have made one of those videos,  I need to make an updated one, but all my wood is monster rounds that any splitter would be slow with. If I had a pike of 8 to ten inch rounds , I could show the speed.  Instead I have rounds that are so heavy I have to use a ramp.


----------



## Starstuff (Apr 16, 2017)

I was planning to do a video for you this weekend, but ended up pulling a muscle in my lower back as I was, ironically, loading up a round. But just to describe it to you, the SS has no problem pushing the bigger rounds. It's the little wedge that is an issue, so I usually have to flip the round a couple times to completely break it apart. I've seen people who have modded their SSs to add a larger cutting wedge. I will probably end up doing that. Not sure why the SS guys have such a dinky little wedge on their otherwise beast of a machine...



VirginiaIron said:


> Sounds great I'm excited for you. Can you post a video of it splitting the larger rounds?


----------



## VirginiaIron (Apr 17, 2017)

I'm sorry to hear that you pulled your muscle in your back. That's one reason why I'm building a lift on my splitter. On YouTube, there was a video of the kinetic splitter versus the harbor freight 20 ton. The kinetics unit has a much higher and more comfortable work surface and has a lift attached to the splitter but I think it's a manual unit.

Edit: I found the video by doing a search on the harbor freight 20 ton unit.


----------



## saewoody (Apr 19, 2017)

VirginiaIron said:


> I'm sorry to hear that you pulled your muscle in your back. That's one reason why I'm building a lift on my splitter. On YouTube, there was a video of the kinetic splitter versus the harbor freight 20 ton. The kinetics unit has a much higher and more comfortable work surface and has a lift attached to the splitter but I think it's a manual unit.
> 
> Edit: I found the video by doing a search on the harbor freight 20 ton unit.



I've been trying really hard to find a video like that.  Just picked up a used SpeedPro. I will update when I have more time. Edit:  just realized I have seen that video. What I would love to see is the Harbor Freight splitter vs a 22 Ton Huskee, or something similar. That is a comparison I can't seem to find anywhere. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## saewoody (Apr 19, 2017)

As the OP, I thought I would give an update for those who may be following the thread and/or contributed. I stumbled across one of the Speeco SpeedPro kinetic splitters on Craigslist the other day, so I bought it. I know they had their problems (this one does have the recall replacement parts), but I figure if nothing else it allows me to become familiar with how well a kinetic will work for me. And as long as it doesn't implode one me, I can probably sell it for what I paid for it. I am sort of looking at is as a long term rental, so I can hopefully save up for a higher quality kinetic. I've been using a 22 ton Huskee for the past few years, and in terms of speed/efficiency there is no comparison. The SpeedPro is much faster and goes through my elm way faster and way cleaner than the hydraulic ever did. Some of the larger elm took two hits, but even that is still significantly faster than the hydraulic. 
Here is a pic. I didn't time it, but this took about 25-30 minutes.  







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tar12 (May 1, 2017)

Is this the one that requires 2 hands to operate the ram? Looks like it did a good job on that small stuff! What kind of elm did you split?


----------



## saewoody (May 2, 2017)

Tar12 said:


> Is this the one that requires 2 hands to operate the ram? Looks like it did a good job on that small stuff! What kind of elm did you split?



I'm not sure what type of elm it was, but I know the hydraulic splitter wasn't a fan of it. I have another post somewhere that contains pics of the same type of elm. Here's the link.

https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/elm.161560/ 

At this point I have run some bigger stuff through it, like 16-18" diameter oak, maple, and some twisted black birch. No issues, all at half throttle.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## macattack_ga (Jun 7, 2017)

I have the DR and it has worked well. If I can get it on the table it will usually split it.


----------



## Jazzberry (Jun 7, 2017)

I like your system but its still much easier with a vertical splitter when the rounds never leave the ground. For a non tilting splitter you do have a cool system figured out. The little splitter does look a little mismatched with that big round though. Reminds me of seeing a little Toyota pickup pulling a camp trailer.


----------



## VirginiaIron (Jun 7, 2017)

macattack_ga said:


> I have the DR and it has worked well. If I can get it on the table it will usually split it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That is a nice setup. How do you balance those rounds on your table? I would like t see that in moving pichers, please.

EDIT: Time for me to sell mine and get the DR.


----------



## macattack_ga (Jun 7, 2017)

VirginiaIron said:


> That is a nice setup. How do you balance those rounds on your table? I would like t see that in moving pichers, please.
> 
> EDIT: Time for me to sell mine and get the DR.



I got a deal in the DR (used via CL). I think I'd get the super split if I was buying new.

How do I balance those rounds? 
With all my might, steel toed boots and significant caution.
Those rounds in the pic are atypical. White Oak and heavy, but split nicely.

I've built a wooden work table (out of 2x4s) at the same level as the splitter's table to catch the far side half of the round after splitting it. 
Works well for staging reasonable sized rounds too.

I've got a 4-ton+ of ash/oak to split... maybe I'll do a video.


----------



## MrWhoopee (Jun 7, 2017)

Jazzberry said:


> I like your system but its still much easier with a vertical splitter when the rounds never leave the ground.



That is true for those who cut and split on site. For those of us who must bring the wood home, putting the rounds on the ground makes no sense. Once mine have been loaded into the truck, they never touch the ground again. Truck to splitter to wheel-barrow to stack.


----------



## Jazzberry (Jun 8, 2017)

Looks like a tricycle pulling a camp trailer this time lol


----------



## jotul8e2 (Jun 8, 2017)

Jazzberry said:


> I like your system but its still much easier with a vertical splitter when the rounds never leave the ground.



I cannot lift pieces like that anymore.  Probably never should have.  On the other hand, I do not like to take the time to shift the splitter vertical.  It is low tech, I know, but for those really big rounds I find it faster and easier to use the maul to break them up into quarters.

Of course, I do not have elm to deal with....


----------



## macattack_ga (Jun 8, 2017)

jotul8e2 said:


> I cannot lift pieces like that anymore.  Probably never should have.  On the other hand, I do not like to take the time to shift the splitter vertical.  It is low tech, I know, but for those really big rounds I find it faster and easier to use the maul to break them up into quarters.
> 
> Of course, I do not have elm to deal with....



I also prefer quartering the really big stuff by hand.


----------



## Jazzberry (Jun 8, 2017)

Takes maybe 10 seconds to tilt a splitter.


----------



## saewoody (Jun 8, 2017)

macattack_ga said:


> I also prefer quartering the really big stuff by hand.



As the OP, I find it interesting you guys point this out because I prefer to do the same thing.  I started this thread trying to sort out the pros and cons to each sort of splitter and ultimately I chose the kinetic and bought an original used Speeco SpeedPro.  So far, so good. I've probably split about 2 cords by now. 

I split at least 1/2 a cord of fresh oak about two weeks ago and the trunk rounds were in the 2' diameter range. I found it much easier to break them up with the Fiskars and run the pieces through the splitter.  I have always preferred splitting horizontally because it is more comfortable. Also, when splitting vertically you need to continuously move the round to split it, which to me seems to be a lot of work. Plus getting the round to sit nicely on the little "foot" on the ground can be a real pain too. 

And even though I was able to get those rounds up, it wasn't worth it because it would be too easy to give myself another hernia or tweak my back; and also at that diameter the split didn't carry all the way through the round so I would have to flip, or at least rotate, the round. And then once you split it all the way through half falls to the ground unless you've got a good sturdy table set up to catch it.  Then you are picking up the half.  I found it much more efficient to bust it up on the ground and then send it to the splitter. I would do (and have done) the same if I was using a hydraulic splitter.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NP ALASKA (Jul 16, 2017)

Love this unit but had to sell it and order a new Super Split HD

Both have there place in my opinion

If I was messing with 2-3' rounds regularly the vertical hydro may have stayed in my shed- i dont so the SS HD was a great option anx cycle
Time is amazing from what I have seen

SS ships to me next week- cant wait


----------



## Bad LP (Jul 16, 2017)

NP ALASKA said:


> View attachment 198596
> View attachment 198597
> 
> Love this unit but had to sell it and order a new Super Split HD
> ...


You are going to love it.


----------



## NP ALASKA (Jul 16, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> You are going to love it.


Hope so
Kinda of a gamble since I haven't touched one before
Videos sold it for me
Electric version so i can work in the shop all winter- 30-40 below wont matter anymore


----------



## Bad LP (Jul 17, 2017)

NP ALASKA said:


> Hope so
> Kinda of a gamble since I haven't touched one before
> Videos sold it for me
> Electric version so i can work in the shop all winter- 30-40 below wont matter anymore




I started with the Honda powered option at first and swapped it over to 240. Honda motor sitting on the shop floor that has just a few hours on it.

I have no regrets on the electric version. Dedicated 240 20 amp circuit with 2 locations to plug twist locks in. Run the most heavy cord you can afford. I'm #10 from the panel to the 2 locations in EMT, then drop down to #12. Cord set on the splitter is 20 feet. Then I have a 80 foot extension for the wood splitting area. I used SO 12-3 that I found on the internet, maybe fleabay but I don't recall. It was the end of a roll and pretty cheap and brand new. The Hubbell cord caps cost more than the cable.

It's doubtful I'll ever split further than that away from the house but in 20 mins I can do the swap if I need to.


----------



## saewoody (Jul 17, 2017)

Good luck with it. Still loving mine.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lakeside (Jul 18, 2017)

A little off topic but there is a used SuperSplitter for sale  at

A & J Tree Services LLC
1722 New Britain Ave  Connecticut
(860) 677-4904

I drove by it today and was not able to see how much there asking .   Just thought this maybe of use to someone . No I am not affiliated with them.


----------



## NP ALASKA (Jul 18, 2017)

Ive been planning the eletrical stuff for months
I aready have 220 in shop - easy connection there

Gonna run #10 circuit out the wood dedicated 20amp

Already have a 50' #10 cord from another project

Should be pretty good from what I see


----------



## NP ALASKA (Jul 19, 2017)

Well I am stoked!! 

Got the email from Connor yesterday; unit shipped 3 days sooner than they said it would.

On the way and I am looking forward to it.


----------



## NP ALASKA (Aug 1, 2017)

Started uncrating tonight after
Working on wiring for new septic. 
Too many projects
Ill finish putting it together tomorrow


----------



## Bad LP (Aug 1, 2017)

Did you get the table with it?


----------



## dznam (Aug 1, 2017)

That'd be the table flanking the beam, two halves. Can't imagine using one without the table - love my HD, total overkill!


----------



## Bad LP (Aug 1, 2017)

dznam said:


> That'd be the table flanking the beam, two halves. Can't imagine using one without the table - love my HD, total overkill!



Mine was delivered fully assembled for no extra money. The dealer poured the oil in the motor and added gas. 

Sorry for the stupidity on my part.


----------



## NP ALASKA (Aug 2, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> Did you get the table with it?


Table is on the sides as mentioned, it has th two sides and a center piece the width of the Ibeam


----------



## NP ALASKA (Aug 3, 2017)

Well- finally finished putting things together 
Its the HD model but doesnt say it anywhere, not sure why

Gonna split a couple cord
Tomorrow

Yeah


----------



## Bad LP (Aug 3, 2017)

I see they added two more legs on each side of the table. Wonder why?

With my single leg I let the wood pile up to the point that the splits push the SS along the ground leaving a windrow of split logs behind. One of these days I'll build a slip on shoe with an angle on the front like a ski.


----------



## NP ALASKA (Aug 3, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> I see they added two more legs on each side of the table. Wonder why?
> 
> With my single leg I let the wood pile up to the point that the splits push the SS along the ground leaving a windrow of split logs behind. One of these days I'll build a slip on shoe with an angle on the front like a ski.



I beleive it is partially for table support and also an attempt to keep up with the pack. Split wecond splitter has outriggers like this. The nice thing is you can mount them further back toward the motor if you wish or even across the front.

I agree on the front part- im gonna add a wheel that can lock. Easy to move splitter by hand and also the ability to stabilzed it in uneven ground.

Regards


----------



## dznam (Aug 8, 2017)

NP ALASKA said:


> Well- finally finished putting things together
> Its the HD model but doesnt say it anywhere, not sure why
> 
> Gonna split a couple cord
> ...




I'm guessing you'll have a big grin on your face after going through those cords - hope you have a helper - these things can keep 6 hands busy!  
Look forward to hearing your thoughts...


----------



## NP ALASKA (Aug 20, 2017)

dznam said:


> I'm guessing you'll have a big grin on your face after going through those cords - hope you have a helper - these things can keep 6 hands busy!
> Look forward to hearing your thoughts...



Okay
Very pleased with this thing
Quiet and fast
Lovn it

Finished welding the removablf tow hitch today; works great


----------



## Lakeside (Aug 20, 2017)

NP ALASKA said:


> Quiet and fast



I have an electric J model , Quite, Fast and *Clean.  *No smoke, or oil & gas to deal with is *Great !

It's even made ( mostly ) in the USA. * I understand the fly wheels may come from Canada.*

All the Best with your New splitter.*


----------



## Bad LP (Aug 20, 2017)

Lakeside said:


> I have an electric J model , Quite, Fast and *Clean.  *No smoke, or oil & gas to deal with is *Great !
> 
> It's even made ( mostly ) in the USA. * I understand the fly wheels may come from Canada.
> *
> All the Best with your New splitter.*


My understanding is that the flywheels are made in Nashua New Hampshire


----------



## Lakeside (Aug 20, 2017)

Bad LP said:


> My understanding is that the flywheels are made in Nashua New Hampshire


That's good to hear, my statement was from apx 5 years ago.  Maybe Paul for Supersplitter can clarify what percentage of his machine is made in good old USA ?


----------



## Bad LP (Aug 20, 2017)

Lakeside said:


> That's good to hear, my statement was from apx 5 years ago.  Maybe Paul for Supersplitter can clarify what percentage of his machine is made in good old USA ?



I believe all of it.


----------



## NP ALASKA (Sep 1, 2017)

Great experience so far
Very pleased with My decision

I have a friend that can find negative in just about anything- non the less he was impressed with this unit and how fast it is


----------

