Tractors and wood! Show your pics

[Piston]

Cutting on a wagon by yourself doesn't seem smarter not harder. ...

I completely agree.

Rob, I am certainly one to preach the "smarter not harder" thing, but I just don't see how grabbing a log and placing it over a wagon, getting off the tractor, climbing up on a wagon, cutting logs to size, shuffling your footing around a bunch of log rounds near the edge of a wagon that you could easily fall off of with a running chainsaw, is really the "smarter not harder" way to do things. Not to mention when working alone, now you have to get off the wagon, back on the tractor, grab another log, move the next log on the wagon, climb back on the wagon etc... It just isn't 'smarter not harder', so there is a bit of irony in that post!

To top it all off, you still have to reach/climb around the wagon to get all the rounds, let alone the fact that you need a giant wagon to cut firewood with. Why not just use your grapple to pick up a bunch of rounds from a pile? It's so simple.

That way they are right there at waist height, without the nonsense of doing the wagon dance

By the way, what do you use to move the wagon around with? It looks like you have a second tractor in one of the pics?

(I'm not saying that this system isn't good for you, I think it works wonderful for you. I just don't see it as a very viable operation for the majority of people) Lastly, I do enjoy seeing your photos.

 

[motownbrowne]

I'll chime in on this one, since SR inspired me to try his method a couple times this summer. Here actually also inspired my splitter purchase, and posted some pictures that helped me come up with the design for it. While I don't agree with SR's general my-way-is-the-BEST-way-and-your-way-BLOWS-ha-ha philosophy, he has some solid points. For one, if like he and I, you have more than one tractor, a three point splitter can be a great choice. There's still drawbacks certainly, but I love my setup, and using the tractor as the axle and power unit allowed me to be able to afford a much much nicer unit than I could have if I had bought a standalone splitter.

About cutting on a wagon, again, if you've got a wagon around, or a few hundred spare dollars (they're cheap and plentiful in my area), it can be worthwhile. I did a couple of loads on a regular hay wagon this year. Sides would have made it a little more efficient I think. I was working solo, so I would grab some logs (I was working with 10' long logs in the 4-12" range), set them up on the far side of the wagon, grab another load, and leave them elevated on the forks over the closer side. Then I'd hop up and cut/rearrange rounds for a few minutes until it was time to start over. Yes, it involved climbing around. Yes, having another guy would have been better. Also, yes, there is an inherent risk of falling off the wagon. And, since space is limited, and fitting lots of wood in the limited space is essentially the goal, your workspace isn't as safe as it could be. I found that I had to be extra careful where i placed my feet, and extra conscious of where wood was gonna drop or shift when cutting. But, after it was done, I drive the wagon right to where I wanted it, parked the splitter right beside it, and rolled the rounds right down the gentle slope to the splitter. It was very slick.

So, that has been my experience with the SR method to date. I think his PR skills could use a little polishing, but I also don't think he cares, and I certainly appreciate him taking the time to post pictures of his operation. Thanks again Sawyer Rob.

 

[Piston]

I'll chime in on this one, since SR inspired me to try his method a couple times this summer. Here actually also inspired my splitter purchase, and posted some pictures that helped me come up with the design for it. While I don't agree with SR's general my-way-is-the-BEST-way-and-your-way-BLOWS-ha-ha philosophy, he has some solid points. For one, if like he and I, you have more than one tractor, a three point splitter can be a great choice. There's still drawbacks certainly, but I love my setup, and using the tractor as the axle and power unit allowed me to be able to afford a much much nicer unit than I could have if I had bought a standalone splitter.

About cutting on a wagon, again, if you've got a wagon around, or a few hundred spare dollars (they're cheap and plentiful in my area), it can be worthwhile. I did a couple of loads on a regular hay wagon this year. Sides would have made it a little more efficient I think. I was working solo, so I would grab some logs (I was working with 10' long logs in the 4-12" range), set them up on the far side of the wagon, grab another load, and leave them elevated on the forks over the closer side. Then I'd hop up and cut/rearrange rounds for a few minutes until it was time to start over. Yes, it involved climbing around. Yes, having another guy would have been better. Also, yes, there is an inherent risk of falling off the wagon. And, since space is limited, and fitting lots of wood in the limited space is essentially the goal, your workspace isn't as safe as it could be. I found that I had to be extra careful where i placed my feet, and extra conscious of where wood was gonna drop or shift when cutting. But, after it was done, I drive the wagon right to where I wanted it, parked the splitter right beside it, and rolled the rounds right down the gentle slope to the splitter. It was very slick.

So, that has been my experience with the SR method to date. I think his PR skills could use a little polishing, but I also don't think he cares, and I certainly appreciate him taking the time to post pictures of his operation. Thanks again Sawyer Rob.

Mowtown,
Very well stated! :thumbsup: I appreciate your well written explanation and seemingly honest review/opinion.

Now that I understand a second tractor is involved, this makes a LOT more sense! I agree with your viewpoint, having the second tractor to power the splitter, enables you to afford a much nicer splitter vs. standalone. If I had a second tractor, I would have very likely purchased a 3 point model Split-Fire with a log lift.

 

[motownbrowne]

Mowtown,
Very well stated! :thumbsup: I appreciate your well written explanation and seemingly honest review/opinion.

Now that I understand a second tractor is involved, this makes a LOT more sense! I agree with your viewpoint, having the second tractor to power the splitter, enables you to afford a much nicer splitter vs. standalone. If I had a second tractor, I would have very likely purchased a 3 point model Split-Fire with a log lift.

Thanks Matt, I'm glad you enjoyed it. I know that for many guys on here, a tractor is a tool they use around the property, but generally, most guys aren't making their living with their tractors. Since i grow vegetables for a living, having more than one tractor is almost a necessity. I'm getting by pretty well with the two I have currently, but I'd love to add a couple more to the stable some
day. It's very handy being able to pull a trailer with one tractor and load it with the other. Even the time savings alone from not having to swap implements so often is huge for me. There have been days when i will literally swap implements six times or more, so any reduction in that area is a big help. So, while it's a reasonable thing for me to have more than one machine, I realize it's not the same for everyone, and I'm certainly grateful for the setup I have.

One thing that's cool about tractors too is that once you've got a sweet 4wd loader tractor, like your 4610, you can find some pretty cool older machines at very reasonable prices. That stuff isn't versatile, like Rob's Deutz for example, which is 2wd with no loader, but those machines are great for pulling wagons, running mowers, tillers, pulling a disc, what have you. Personally, I think I'd love to add something like a Deere 3020 or Ford 3000 or 4000. Something with a few features like power steering, but cheap and simple with plenty of weight and grunt to tackle bigger jobs. Dreamers can dream, right?

 

[square1]

You are all wrong
The equipment and methods employed splitting wood contribute to the goal of producing heat. The smartest, least labor intensive method attainable through equipment commonly available is not splitting wood at all. Having an outdoor burner able to accept large diameter and length rounds, a saw capable of cutting those larger rounds, and a tractor able to stack them & feed the burner. No wagons, no splitters, no tables, no lifts. Cut, stack, load, and burn baby burn.

 

[Gordon Gould]

You splitter guys provide some good food for thought but if it is all about saving work it will be hard to beat Square1's thinking !!!!!

Used my little tractor in some small wood yesterday.







gg

 

[Piston]

You are all wrong
The equipment and methods employed splitting wood contribute to the goal of producing heat. The smartest, least labor intensive method attainable through equipment commonly available is not splitting wood at all. Having an outdoor burner able to accept large diameter and length rounds, a saw capable of cutting those larger rounds, and a tractor able to stack them & feed the burner. No wagons, no splitters, no tables, no lifts. Cut, stack, load, and burn baby burn.

You sir, are a genius!

 

[aeblank]

able to accept large diameter and length rounds

Heh. Different strokes.

My boiler is a very efficient gassification unit with a 1600 gallon heat storage tank.
It doesn't want any piece of wood with a dimension (except length, of course) greater than 4" (per the manual). I certainly stretch that, depending on the wood, but still.....

Oh, and I have a used $500 30 year old northern hydraulics splitter. Does the job just fine.

 

[TomSeller]

One thing that's cool about tractors too is that once you've got a sweet 4wd loader tractor, like your 4610, you can find some pretty cool older machines at very reasonable prices. That stuff isn't versatile, like Rob's Deutz for example, which is 2wd with no loader, but those machines are great for pulling wagons, running mowers, tillers, pulling a disc, what have you.,

Exactly !

 

[arrow]

You are all wrong
The equipment and methods employed splitting wood contribute to the goal of producing heat. The smartest, least labor intensive method attainable through equipment commonly available is not splitting wood at all. Having an outdoor burner able to accept large diameter and length rounds, a saw capable of cutting those larger rounds, and a tractor able to stack them & feed the burner. No wagons, no splitters, no tables, no lifts. Cut, stack, load, and burn baby burn.

And this is exactly what has contributed to the outlawing of outdoor boilers in many communities. This concept of not spiriting wood thrown in an outdoor boiler was used as selling point years ago by these manufacturers. Just because you're not dealing with burning inside and not seeing the difference as a result, un-split wood is burning at less than half the efficiency of dried out splits. This has made a condition for many particulates to go up in smoke as the wood is burning so dirtily. You are producing steam, smoke and pollution before you are producing heat as a result and going through way more wood than needed. Now if you do not mind any of these drawbacks then fine but there are paybacks to this method as well. There is no free lunch with this task.