Splitter... Moving wedge vs Fixed

[Mcbride]

I have used both and prefer the horizontal splitters myself.
My pet peeve is the slow ram speeds on all splitters I have tried.
I wish it was more common to have splitters with ram speeds 5 times as fast as they currently are.

 

[bogydave]

I bought a combo : Vert/ Horiz & have found I use both positions.
Versatility is nice.
Speeco 22T was available here. $ was right. Liked the cradle beam so the round centers itself & ram mounted on the end.

 

[firefighterjake]

FFJake's post reminds me of a guy standing in front of a lion's den holding a steak saying here kitty kitty. So glad you guys are patient going over a topic that has clearly been passionately debated many times. BW... I'm so glad you didn't disappoint FFJake and you replied to give your opinion. The picture with the mountain of wood says it all, you've been there done that.

Dennis, I'm having a difficult time imagining how you can stay seated for very long before you need to get up and manueuver logs within arm's reach to keep feeding the beast. Clearly you have a system.

With my neighbor's horizontal I quickly learned to use another log to push thru a stuck log. Jlove's comment implies that the moving ram jams less. Tough to imagine why..... The Horizontal guys imply that the fixed wedge is a tougher design. I really like the idea of moving wood from the trailer right onto the splitter. Great idea.

Easy to see why this topic generates so much passion. Thanks all for your insights. I've learned a lot. Gonna go look at some splitters.

It may not seem it, but I have a lot of respect for Dennis and really hope to meet him in person one day . . . then I can harass him in person about splitting wood vertically.

But I don't drink beer . . . I do however like a good hard cider once in a blue moon.


Tennman, it is actually quite easy as I stack the wood during the winter and do all the splitting in the spring. That means that I can just place the splitter beside the stack and can split lots of logs before having to move. When I have to move, I simply move the splitter ahead, sit back down and go to work. It actually works out well too because as you can see I sit low. So stretching the legs while moving the splitter feels good. If you look at the pictures below you will see that I place the splitter very close to the stack and just move along with it. This also has the added benefit of not having to throw the split wood all in one spot. When I am done splitting there is usually quite a large pile but it is a long enough pile that it is just right for the length that I want the stacks to be. One compliments the other.

As for Jake, he and I will be meeting some day. Maybe over a beer we can hash this out on the proper way to split wood. ;-)

 

[firefighterjake]

I have used both and prefer the horizontal splitters myself.
My pet peeve is the slow ram speeds on all splitters I have tried.
I wish it was more common to have splitters with ram speeds 5 times as fast as they currently are.

I sometimes wonder if the speed is deliberately kept slow to avoid folks from mashing their fingers . . . or if it's simply the result of the design, cost and limitations of hydraulic splitters.

 

[Jags]

I sometimes wonder if the speed is deliberately kept slow to avoid folks from mashing their fingers . . . or if it's simply the result of the design, cost and limitations of hydraulic splitters.

Gas over hydraulics is actually an energy sucker. Not real efficient. To increase the speeds at the typical splitter pressure, it requires volume. Increasing volume requires more HP and thats the straw. Not many people want to be running a 20HP log splitter, unless they make money with it.

 

[firefighterjake]

I sometimes wonder if the speed is deliberately kept slow to avoid folks from mashing their fingers . . . or if it's simply the result of the design, cost and limitations of hydraulic splitters.

Gas over hydraulics is actually an energy sucker. Not real efficient. To increase the speeds at the typical splitter pressure, it requires volume. Increasing volume requires more HP and thats the straw. Not many people want to be running a 20HP log splitter, unless they make money with it.

I knew someone smarter than me would show up with the real answer . . . just never figured it would be you Jags. And yes, I am kidding . . . as always I respect your opinion and knowledge.

 

[Jags]

I sometimes wonder if the speed is deliberately kept slow to avoid folks from mashing their fingers . . . or if it's simply the result of the design, cost and limitations of hydraulic splitters.

Gas over hydraulics is actually an energy sucker. Not real efficient. To increase the speeds at the typical splitter pressure, it requires volume. Increasing volume requires more HP and thats the straw. Not many people want to be running a 20HP log splitter, unless they make money with it.

I knew someone smarter than me would show up with the real answer . . . just never figured it would be you Jags. And yes, I am kidding . . . as always I respect your opinion and knowledge.

What can I say - I am a horizontal splitter guy. :cheese:

 

[Manatarms]

I sometimes wonder if the speed is deliberately kept slow to avoid folks from mashing their fingers . . . or if it's simply the result of the design, cost and limitations of hydraulic splitters.

Gas over hydraulics is actually an energy sucker. Not real efficient. To increase the speeds at the typical splitter pressure, it requires volume. Increasing volume requires more HP and thats the straw. Not many people want to be running a 20HP log splitter, unless they make money with it.

Or we can all just buy SuperSplits and call it a day!

 

[cmnash]

Try to buy one with a good commercial rated engine. Don't get caught up with tonnage. I went for a new Timberwolf with a Honda GX engine. A pricey thing but it is sure to outlast me.

 

[SolarAndWood]

but it is sure to outlast me.

so is that sweet looking Case

 

[Jags]

Try to buy one with a good commercial rated engine. Don't get caught up with tonnage. I went for a new Timberwolf with a Honda GX engine. A pricey thing but it is sure to outlast me.

A Case VAC - I got one of them (its a wide front, also.)

 

[jlove1974]

Try to buy one with a good commercial rated engine. Don't get caught up with tonnage. I went for a new Timberwolf with a Honda GX engine. A pricey thing but it is sure to outlast me.

How much did that T-wolf run you and which tonnage is it? I'd love to compare one to an Iron and Oak of the same rating...

FWIW those Honda GX engines have been recalled in the last two years. Also, their low oil cutoff switch is crap....But OTOH go cart racers have been buying the Harbor Freight 'greyhound' Honda clones and racing them well past their governed RPM. So the design must be solid overall. Glad I got one for $79 new in
the box. I'll repower a used splitter when/if it fails, and I got the 2 yr replacement warranty - no questions asked.

I'm just saying. The horizontal-shaft engines are all pretty good choices. The Briggs vanguards are just as reliable as anything else out there and more affordable. I'd rather concentrate on the hyraulics since that is what most people have trouble with first (unless they run it totally out of motor oil).
THe hydraulics on a splitter are the most important thing. I would say the way the wedge is built is the second-most.

I looked at the way the Huskee 22-ton wedge rides in the log channel and I'll pass. That's just asking for debris/rust/wear esp in the horizontal mode.
I also question not limiting the side to side travel of the cylinder. It also slops around more than any other splitter design I have seen.
Maybe that is a 'design feature' eh?

 

[Mcbride]

I myself would pay double the price for a splitter with high ram speed.
Still the same amount of steel and labour need to produce it, except a small amount more maybe.
Just need a bigger motor, slightly larger hoses, valves, and its quicker.
Fuel burn is not going to be much more, as the running time is less, and the under load time when they really suck back the fuel is way less.
My new street bike has about twice the power of my od bike, and my fuel mileage dropped maybe 2 or 3% is all.
This one just works less hard.

 

[Manatarms]

the Huskeee doesn't jam up bad..although it does look like it. Mine gets some hard pack debris down at the bottom of the channel, but I clear it out once in awhile.

Try to buy one with a good commercial rated engine. Don't get caught up with tonnage. I went for a new Timberwolf with a Honda GX engine. A pricey thing but it is sure to outlast me.

How much did that T-wolf run you and which tonnage is it? I'd love to compare one to an Iron and Oak of the same rating...

FWIW those Honda GX engines have been recalled in the last two years. Also, their low oil cutoff switch is crap....But OTOH go cart racers have been buying the Harbor Freight 'greyhound' Honda clones and racing them well past their governed RPM. So the design must be solid overall. Glad I got one for $79 new in
the box. I'll repower a used splitter when/if it fails, and I got the 2 yr replacement warranty - no questions asked.

I'm just saying. The horizontal-shaft engines are all pretty good choices. The Briggs vanguards are just as reliable as anything else out there and more affordable. I'd rather concentrate on the hyraulics since that is what most people have trouble with first (unless they run it totally out of motor oil).
THe hydraulics on a splitter are the most important thing. I would say the way the wedge is built is the second-most.

I looked at the way the Huskee 22-ton wedge rides in the log channel and I'll pass. That's just asking for debris/rust/wear esp in the horizontal mode.
I also question not limiting the side to side travel of the cylinder. It also slops around more than any other splitter design I have seen.
Maybe that is a 'design feature' eh?

 

[Jags]

I myself would pay double the price for a splitter with high ram speed.
Still the same amount of steel and labour need to produce it, except a small amount more maybe.
Just need a bigger motor, slightly larger hoses, valves, and its quicker.
Fuel burn is not going to be much more, as the running time is less, and the under load time when they really suck back the fuel is way less.
My new street bike has about twice the power of my od bike, and my fuel mileage dropped maybe 2 or 3% is all.
This one just works less hard.

You would probably need to pay double. Stepping up in hose size can get pricey, bigger engine and pump and a larger volume valve starts to add up pretty quick for the average homeowner user.

 

[SolarAndWood]

I myself would pay double the price for a splitter with high ram speed.
Still the same amount of steel and labour need to produce it, except a small amount more maybe.
Just need a bigger motor, slightly larger hoses, valves, and its quicker.
Fuel burn is not going to be much more, as the running time is less, and the under load time when they really suck back the fuel is way less.
My new street bike has about twice the power of my od bike, and my fuel mileage dropped maybe 2 or 3% is all.
This one just works less hard.

You would probably need to pay double. Stepping up in hose size can get pricey, bigger engine and pump and a larger volume valve starts to add up pretty quick for the average homeowner user.

I wonder how long the frame/fittings/etc on a $1000 20 ton splitter would last if you put a 22 gpm pump and appropriate motor to drive it on it. Same force in half the time will require more steel unless the guys making $1000 20 ton splitters are being very generous.

 

[SolarAndWood]

I sometimes wonder if the speed is deliberately kept slow to avoid folks from mashing their fingers . . . or if it's simply the result of the design, cost and limitations of hydraulic splitters.

Gas over hydraulics is actually an energy sucker. Not real efficient. To increase the speeds at the typical splitter pressure, it requires volume. Increasing volume requires more HP and thats the straw. Not many people want to be running a 20HP log splitter, unless they make money with it.

Is the curve linear? 5hp drives 11 gpm so 20 drives 44? What is the not efficient part for gas over hydraulic? Same true for electric?

 

[Jags]

I wonder how long the frame/fittings/etc on a $1000 20 ton splitter would last if you put a 22 gpm pump and appropriate motor to drive it on it. Same force in half the time will require more steel unless the guys making $1000 20 ton splitters are being very generous.

Solar - I think you would do quite well with it. Here is why:
First - you are not increasing force, your increasing speed, so the same structural design should suffice.
Second, most components that are designed for splitters will handle a 22 gpm pump pretty easy. It is when you jump to 28 or more that you really have to start with the bigger hoses. Most splitter valves will handle the 22 just fine.

Edit: 1 hp (gas) will pull ~2 gpm (two stage) pump
5.5hp = 11gpm
8hp = 16 gpm
11 hp = 22 gpm
14hp = 28 gpm

Oh - and I am unaware of any 2 stage pumps larger than 28 gpm. Then ya start getting into a whole 'nuther world.

 

[Jags]

What is the not efficient part for gas over hydraulic?

Any time that you convert energy from one form to another there is a loss. It can be from heat, noise, light, etc. First step is you are using an internal combustion engine at 15-20% efficient (of converting gas to rotational energy). Then you are converting rotational energy into pressure (the pump) that is about 80% efficient on the energy conversion.

Since electric has a higher efficiency conversion than Internal combustion engines - in the true form you would be more efficient, but you will still only get about an 80% conversion from the pump.

 

[SolarAndWood]

I must be hard on equipment or maybe its what I am splitting. My splitter is built on an 8" beam with 1/2" flanges and I still see flex in it.

 

[lowroadacres]

Since no one has chimed in with it I am a huge fan of the split fire splitters.

I especially like the rental one which costs me 75 dollars for a weekend. The four way wedge splitting in both directions can move a pile of wood through when we have 2 or more people on it. At one point this fall we had 4 people working around it. It took a few minutes to get a routine going but once we did it was pretty amazing.

 

[mywaynow]

I am very happy with the 28 Ton Husky. It has a Honda motor, which I feel is a major selling feature over the Briggs engines. It cuts vertical and horizontal. I use the vertical only when the logs are huge. My greatest accomplishment to the splitting process was to refine the method of tree to pile procedure. For months I piled unsplit logs where my stacks are. I would then attack the pile with a wheel barrow to receive the splits, and take them to the pile. It worked, and to my defense, I did not own a splitter when the piles were really accumulating. Now I have learned the value of limited contact with the wood. I bring the trailer load of logs to the stack site where the splitter is set up. The log goes from the trailer bed to the splitter deck to the pile at the stack. I move the splitter up and down the stack site to spread the pile along the 30 ft length of the stack. Because the trailer is about 30 inches off the ground, the action of moving the log onto the splitter requires little to no back bending, and the log does not hit the ground until it is split. Makes a big difference over the course of a day.

 

[jlove1974]

I am very happy with the 28 Ton Husky. It has a Honda motor, which I feel is a major selling feature over the Briggs engines.....

it's not a major advantage vs the premium you pay. It's marketing from about 10 years ago. Honda builds nice cars no doubt.

I have a honda powered pressure washer that is a total POS because of the pump design. In fact, I thought about taking the engine
off and selling it for more money than the PW is worth lol. Same with a splitter. If the 'draulics are crap, ain't no engine design gonna save it.

 

[bigburner]

owned one splitter - homemade -single stage pump - twin Wisconsin - 12 inch beam - 30 x5 cylinder w/12inch singe wedge - Hor or Ver -- a little slow, but would push a log threw sideways. I liked the vertical back then- if building today hor with a lift would be my choice. back is pretty much shot. I have a boiler that can take a 30 round and I load it with a two wheel cart. I wouldn't mind having my home made splitter back [ver mode] just for the very big stuff that I now have to quarter saw. My routine is cut in woods - load with skidder into dump truck - pile away from boiler shed - once a week skidsteer enough wood to the front pad of the boiler shed for a week. Not much splitting here.

 

[jlove1974]

thats funny you mention log sideways. I just watched some timberwolf propaganda videos where they put a dry maple log sideways and then bust it thru the wedge on a horizontal only model.

Yawn.

Consider the thing costs $2000 and doesn't do vertical or come with a 4-way standard, it had better do that.