DR Rapid fire Log splitter???

[arrow]

LD1, I thought that I wasn't going to like the two handed control either, but figured I'd just modify it to one handed if it was a pain, but it isn't. In fact, it doesn't make any difference time wise and it actually forces you to stand in a safer place when splitting. What they don't show you on any of the videos is what can happen sometimes when you split knotty pieces. The majority of the time it will bust the wood like it's nothing, but there are times when it actually flips the log vertically and makes it spin right back into the cradle area. This happens faster than you can get out of the way of. With the positioning of the controls, you are out of the way and aren't getting hit with that flying piece.
As for the table, what ends up happening for me is that when I quarter the log, the bigger chunks are just in the way. The idea of sliding the piece back to you is great, but with the speed that the logs are going through, you don't want anything that is going to get in the way. When they are sitting on the table, half the time they get knocked off the end by the smaller pieces that are being split out of the quarters. Then you're picking them up off the ground at the end of the machine. Or, in our case, we have a hay elevator that the split pieces go onto and the quarters wind up on there and into the truck or on top of the pile they go. I normally have something sitting behind me and to my left that I can put the quarters on and easily bring them back to the machine when ready for them.
IslandTractor, you are right about the inertia splitter not being much of an advantage unless you are splitting commercial quantities of wood. But with the introduction of the Speeco splitter, it is the same or less money than some of the hydraulic splitters. My 35 ton Huskee splitter runs $1700 - 1800 new and can't keep up with my mecahanical one. The only advantage to it now is that it splits vertically and we can break up the big round pieces that we can't pick up to put on the inertia splitter.

You raise some interesting points about the ergonomics of differentiated splitters. Also, if a single person were splitting rounds, would the inertia splitter end up much faster as much time is taken to acquire and feed the splitter the next round. I have seen and used the Husky splitter you have at my bil's house. It is really slow. It seems to be wanting a larger pump. My 20 ton is at least a third faster and takes about 7 seconds to split a 10" round into quarters. It also takes 7 seconds for it to come back which I think is where one makes up the time with an inertia splitter. If one has to stop and get the next piece as opposed to having it handed to him, now I am not so sure of the speed advantage. At any rate, the moral of this story is there seems to be more to it than the round splitting the fastest as far as which splitter is the most beneficial for any given user or users. Thanks for your input.

 

[LD1]

You raise some interesting points about the ergonomics of differentiated splitters. Also, if a single person were splitting rounds, would the inertia splitter end up much faster as much time is taken to acquire and feed the splitter the next round. I have seen and used the Husky splitter you have at my bil's house. It is really slow. It seems to be wanting a larger pump. My 20 ton is at least a third faster and takes about 7 seconds to split a 10" round into quarters. It also takes 7 seconds for it to come back which I think is where one makes up the time with an inertia splitter. If one has to stop and get the next piece as opposed to having it handed to him, now I am not so sure of the speed advantage. At any rate, the moral of this story is there seems to be more to it than the round splitting the fastest as far as which splitter is the most beneficial for any given user or users. Thanks for your input.

I still think the inertia would be considerabally faster even if a solo affair.

I split with out 27T huskee solo quite a bit. And I find myself waiting on the actual splitting action quite a bit.

There is no doubt in my mind that it would be at least 2x's as fast as the hydraulics.

I think the biggest killer of the inertia splitters (which seems to be getting beter) is the price. It was hard to ustify $3k for a SS when a tsc huskee was only $999. I envision them becoming cheaper over the next few yesrs:thumbsup:

 

[DAY]

Agreed that price is (always) a factor. So is amount of use. A half a cord a year for romantic moments in front of the fireplace vs 10 cords to heat a home in Vermont. (Or 100's a year as a business).
I can out-split a hydraulic unit two or three to one with my "beer powered" maul- but it quickly runs out of fuel:laughing: And, I do not even bother with gnarly, knotty, or otherwise recalcitrant wood!
It looks like the inertia splitters have fewer moving parts to misbehave. There a couple of them sitting outside my local TSC that look mighty tempting. . .:licking:

 

[LD1]

I can out-split a hydraulic unit two or three to one with my "beer powered" maul- but it quickly runs out of fuel:laughing: And, I do not even bother with gnarly, knotty, or otherwise recalcitrant wood!

Maybe.....on straight grained red oak or ash.

But try that on elm. Even the smaller 10-12" straight stuff with NO knots.:laughing:

Get done splitting a few peices of that in the mid of winter, and you dont even have to burn them to stay warm:laughing:

 

[arrow]

I still think the inertia would be considerabally faster even if a solo affair.

I split with out 27T huskee solo quite a bit. And I find myself waiting on the actual splitting action quite a bit.

There is no doubt in my mind that it would be at least 2x's as fast as the hydraulics.

I think the biggest killer of the inertia splitters (which seems to be getting beter) is the price. It was hard to ustify $3k for a SS when a tsc huskee was only $999. I envision them becoming cheaper over the next few yesrs:thumbsup:

I am very rarely waiting for the ram to return as I bend down and pick up the next round. This is with a (horizontal splitter). It will take a good 10 seconds between handling the wood and splitting in quarters a round fed to an inertia splitter. The hydraulic is done in 7 seconds with a 4 way. By the time I get the next round up, the splitter has returned. I am not seeing where the great speed difference lies then again, I'm going by my splitter. My bil's Husky is so slow its maddening and if comparing an inertia splitter to that, I can more understand your point of view.
The nicest ***/vert splitter I've seen is the Splitez. Its $4000 but built like a tank. It's of heirloom quality. As in engine building, splitter speed cost money.

 

[LD1]

I am very rarely waiting for the ram to return as I bend down and pick up the next round. This is with a (horizontal splitter). It will take a good 10 seconds between handling the wood and splitting in quarters a round fed to an inertia splitter. The hydraulic is done in 7 seconds with a 4 way. By the time I get the next round up, the splitter has returned. I am not seeing where the great speed difference lies then again, I'm going by my splitter. My bil's Husky is so slow its maddening and if comparing an inertia splitter to that, I can more understand your point of view.
The nicest ***/vert splitter I've seen is the Splitez. Its $4000 but built like a tank. It's of heirloom quality. As in engine building, splitter speed cost money.

I think 10 seconds is a bit much if the pile of rounds is right behind you and all you have to do is twist at the waist. Maybe ~4 seconds tops.

And I am not arguing the retract cycle. I dont wait on that much either. What I am waiting on is standing there with my hand on the lever waiting on the wedge to bust the two peices appart. THAT part takes upwards of 10 seconds. But with an inertia, BAM and you are done.

And my saying that the inertia would be ~2x's as fast, is comparing to a single wedge. Compaired to a 4 way, I think the inertia is still faster, but not by as much of a margin. There is only a small portion of wood (at least what we cut) that could even take advantage of a 4-way. The smaller stuff that only needs busted in half, the great big stuff, crotch peices, etc all dont benefit from a 4-way.

 

[crazyal]

It looks like a nice concept but just yesterday I cut up a 30" Beech tree that Irene decided to knock down. I haven't seen a way to split it up or any of the 2' plus maples I have. I would love to hear how people with this type of splitter deals with things like that. Also I have plenty of rounds that are curved. On my hydro I just hold them in the position that allows the splitter to split them. I assume you can't hold a log as you split it with the rapid fire.


With my hydro there's not much time wasted waiting. Most of the time the ram doesn't need to go much more than 1/4 of the way through the log to split it and I rarely let it return all the way back. When it's returning I'm either repositioning the log for the second split or fetching a new round to split. But I work alone. It does look like if you have two people splitting (or even a third) it could really go right through the wood with a rapid fire type splitter. The quicker you can get the next piece on the splitter the faster.

 

[arrow]

I think 10 seconds is a bit much if the pile of rounds is right behind you and all you have to do is twist at the waist. Maybe ~4 seconds tops.

And I am not arguing the retract cycle. I dont wait on that much either. What I am waiting on is standing there with my hand on the lever waiting on the wedge to bust the two peices appart. THAT part takes upwards of 10 seconds. But with an inertia, BAM and you are done.

And my saying that the inertia would be ~2x's as fast, is comparing to a single wedge. Compaired to a 4 way, I think the inertia is still faster, but not by as much of a margin. There is only a small portion of wood (at least what we cut) that could even take advantage of a 4-way. The smaller stuff that only needs busted in half, the great big stuff, crotch peices, etc all dont benefit from a 4-way.

No I meant 10 seconds to split a round in 4 pieces on an inertia splitter. Even with a 2 second split time, you have to grab the wood to pull it back for another split, reposition it and do this 3 times adding another 4 seconds to get 4 pieces. I will concede that the size of the wood matters greatly. Seldom do I take my 4 way off with its center cross wedge high enough to split a smaller log in half. Most of my wood is 8 to 12" so I find the 4 way very advantageous. If you only need to split most of your wood in half, I can easily see the advantages of the inertia splitter.

 

[LD1]

No I meant 10 seconds to split a round in 4 pieces on an inertia splitter. Even with a 2 second split time, you have to grab the wood to pull it back for another split, reposition it and do this 3 times adding another 4 seconds to get 4 pieces. I will concede that the size of the wood matters greatly. Seldom do I take my 4 way off with its center cross wedge high enough to split a smaller log in half. Most of my wood is 8 to 12" so I find the 4 way very advantageous. If you only need to split most of your wood in half, I can easily see the advantages of the inertia splitter.

Well, in your case, a hyd w/4-way may be the better ticket.

We have a slip-on 4-way, and it IS very nice for those 8-12" peices that are nice and straight. But I would say that only accounts for 10-20% of what we split. A lot of stuff that is smaller, A lot too big for the 4-way, and then some down right uglies/crotch peices/forks, etc.

 

[peterc38]

Thanks for the feedback.

Is there any chance you can take the covers off and get a few up-close pics of the flywheels, rack and pinion, and the control???

LD1, someone posted these pictures with cover removed on AS.