Big_Charlie
Bronze Member
Does anyone here have any good experiences to relate with PTO driven log splitters? Where did you find one??
PTO driven log splitter
- Thread starter Big_Charlie
- Start date
greg_g
Super Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,086
- Location
- Western Kentucky
- Tractor
- JD3720 Cab, 300X loader with 4-in-1 bucket
Yes. Tractor Supply. It's a Huskee brand, operates both horizontal and vertical, runs about $645 retail - not including hoses. Click HERE.
//greg//
//greg//
OP
Big_Charlie
Bronze Member
Looks like it runs off the hydraulics rather than running a pump off the PTO...smart.
inveresk
Platinum Member
1948berg
Gold Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2006
- Messages
- 389
- Location
- Southern Norway
- Tractor
- A Fergie-MF 35 gas- Mf 165- Mf 6161- Unimog- Fiat 880
Here are some splitters from Finland:
http://www.maaselankone.fi/tuotteet/tuotteet.php?id=klapikoneet
http://www.maaselankone.fi/tuotteet/tuotteet.php?id=klapikoneet
greg_g
Super Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,086
- Location
- Western Kentucky
- Tractor
- JD3720 Cab, 300X loader with 4-in-1 bucket
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Looks like it runs off the hydraulics rather than running a pump off the PTO )</font>
You're right, I misread the initial post; saw "PTO" but thought "TPH". Sorry
Regardless, I've always thought the PTO driven units to be redundant engineering. That is, why use an engine driven shaft to drive a detatched pump, when the engine is already driving the tractor pump by default ? Besides that - if the ground on which you're splitting is level enough, the type I'm using can standalone (in the horizontal position). If you need the tractor for something else, simply detach the two QD connectors and drive away.
//greg//
You're right, I misread the initial post; saw "PTO" but thought "TPH". Sorry
Regardless, I've always thought the PTO driven units to be redundant engineering. That is, why use an engine driven shaft to drive a detatched pump, when the engine is already driving the tractor pump by default ? Besides that - if the ground on which you're splitting is level enough, the type I'm using can standalone (in the horizontal position). If you need the tractor for something else, simply detach the two QD connectors and drive away.
//greg//
MadDog
Platinum Member
One reason is that unless your tractor hydraulic pump has pretty high output, you are going to have slow cycle times with any of the more powerful splitters. Ram power is a function of cylinder size and operating pressure.
For example, if your pump output is 7 gpm and you are using a 4" cylinder with a 2" rod, your extension time will be a bit over 11 sec. and your retraction time about 8.5 sec for a total cycle time of almost 20 seconds, which many people will find too slow for efficiency. A 4.5" or 5" cylinder would be even slower.
Thus, if you want to run a 20-30 ton splitter, unless you have a large tractor with a large capacity hydraulic pump, the only way to get reasonably fast cycle times is using a pto-driven pump.
Hope this helps.
For example, if your pump output is 7 gpm and you are using a 4" cylinder with a 2" rod, your extension time will be a bit over 11 sec. and your retraction time about 8.5 sec for a total cycle time of almost 20 seconds, which many people will find too slow for efficiency. A 4.5" or 5" cylinder would be even slower.
Thus, if you want to run a 20-30 ton splitter, unless you have a large tractor with a large capacity hydraulic pump, the only way to get reasonably fast cycle times is using a pto-driven pump.
Hope this helps.
greg_g
Super Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,086
- Location
- Western Kentucky
- Tractor
- JD3720 Cab, 300X loader with 4-in-1 bucket
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( For example, if your pump output is 7 gpm and you are using a 4" cylinder with a 2" rod, your extension time will be a bit over 11 sec. and your retraction time about 8.5 sec for a total cycle time of almost 20 seconds, which many people will find too slow for efficiency. A 4.5" or 5" cylinder would be even slower. )</font>
Think my pump is probably somewhere in the 8 gpm range, and I know I have a 4" cylinder. But from my hands-on experience, 20 seconds doesn't sound right. I actually throttle the tractor engine down to about 1100 rpm to get a comfortable working cycle speed.
//greg//
Think my pump is probably somewhere in the 8 gpm range, and I know I have a 4" cylinder. But from my hands-on experience, 20 seconds doesn't sound right. I actually throttle the tractor engine down to about 1100 rpm to get a comfortable working cycle speed.
//greg//
MadDog
Platinum Member
Greg_g: The math isn't too complicated.
A 4" cylinder has an area of about 12.57 sq.in. a 24" cylinder thus has slightly over 300 cu.in. volume.
An 8 gpm pump moves 1848 cu.in. /min or 30.8 cu.in./sec. The extension stroke would thus take about 9.7 sec.
My post had assumed 7 gpm, so your times are a bit faster than my original numbers, but not enough to make much of a difference. The point, however, remains the same, if you want the 10sec. + or - cycle times that one of the good Timberwolf splitters, for example, can produce, you are going to need to use a pump that can output about 15-16 gpm.
My B7800 (30 pto hp) only outputs about 9.5 gpm for both power steering and hydraulic system (about 7 or less for the hydraulics alone), and my memory is that you have to get up to the Kubota M Series before you get that kind of hydraulic pump output.
However, even my B7800 has plenty of pto hp to run a pump that will produce output much more than 16 gpm. On the homemade splitter that I am building, I am using a Barnes 2-stage that outputs 28 gpm at low pressures (up to about 750 psi) and about 7 gpm between that and 3000psi and only requires about 16 pto hp.
With a 5" cylinder I would only be using high pressure when dealing with a knot or twist or when using a 4-way or 6-way wedge on pretty large logs. I figure that my average cycle time (except perhaps when dealing with very large or difficult logs) will be under 10 sec.
All that said, if you are getting satisfactory cycle times using your tractor hydraulics that's fine and there is no reason to go to a pto-driven pump.
But, H**l, I always overdesign everything anyway; I built the doghouse for our newfie and black lab with 2x6 wall and ceiling framing, a partition that shelters the inner room from wind, snow and rain, and full insulation in walls, ceiling and floor slab. ...wife claims that it is better built than our house, which will be a comfort if she banishes me to it. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
A 4" cylinder has an area of about 12.57 sq.in. a 24" cylinder thus has slightly over 300 cu.in. volume.
An 8 gpm pump moves 1848 cu.in. /min or 30.8 cu.in./sec. The extension stroke would thus take about 9.7 sec.
My post had assumed 7 gpm, so your times are a bit faster than my original numbers, but not enough to make much of a difference. The point, however, remains the same, if you want the 10sec. + or - cycle times that one of the good Timberwolf splitters, for example, can produce, you are going to need to use a pump that can output about 15-16 gpm.
My B7800 (30 pto hp) only outputs about 9.5 gpm for both power steering and hydraulic system (about 7 or less for the hydraulics alone), and my memory is that you have to get up to the Kubota M Series before you get that kind of hydraulic pump output.
However, even my B7800 has plenty of pto hp to run a pump that will produce output much more than 16 gpm. On the homemade splitter that I am building, I am using a Barnes 2-stage that outputs 28 gpm at low pressures (up to about 750 psi) and about 7 gpm between that and 3000psi and only requires about 16 pto hp.
With a 5" cylinder I would only be using high pressure when dealing with a knot or twist or when using a 4-way or 6-way wedge on pretty large logs. I figure that my average cycle time (except perhaps when dealing with very large or difficult logs) will be under 10 sec.
All that said, if you are getting satisfactory cycle times using your tractor hydraulics that's fine and there is no reason to go to a pto-driven pump.
But, H**l, I always overdesign everything anyway; I built the doghouse for our newfie and black lab with 2x6 wall and ceiling framing, a partition that shelters the inner room from wind, snow and rain, and full insulation in walls, ceiling and floor slab. ...wife claims that it is better built than our house, which will be a comfort if she banishes me to it. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
btownacres
Bronze Member
Big Charlie-
I had your same dilemna several weeks ago as I was going to buy both a new tractor as well as a splitter. I decided to go with a stand alone splitter just cuz I thought it would be more convenient in that I wouldn't have to get the tractor out if I decided I wanted to cut a big pile then split it another time. I also figured I could just pull the splitter out and set up an area wherever I wanted to do the splitting without having to tie up the tractor if I felt like timbering, cutting, and splitting all at the same time. This way I don't have to worry about removing the splitter to go into the woods to haul timer out... you get the idea. I guess it's all self preference. I was told by some experienced folks to just make sure I get a 20 ton minimum capacity unit. I'll probably split about 4 cords per year. I ended up with a nice unit for about $1500 that I can pull out into the yard or woods with my quad, enabling me to get into tight spaces if I need to. When I do get the chipper, I will go with a PTO driven unit however.
Good luck with the decision!!
I had your same dilemna several weeks ago as I was going to buy both a new tractor as well as a splitter. I decided to go with a stand alone splitter just cuz I thought it would be more convenient in that I wouldn't have to get the tractor out if I decided I wanted to cut a big pile then split it another time. I also figured I could just pull the splitter out and set up an area wherever I wanted to do the splitting without having to tie up the tractor if I felt like timbering, cutting, and splitting all at the same time. This way I don't have to worry about removing the splitter to go into the woods to haul timer out... you get the idea. I guess it's all self preference. I was told by some experienced folks to just make sure I get a 20 ton minimum capacity unit. I'll probably split about 4 cords per year. I ended up with a nice unit for about $1500 that I can pull out into the yard or woods with my quad, enabling me to get into tight spaces if I need to. When I do get the chipper, I will go with a PTO driven unit however.
Good luck with the decision!!