Low GPM 3pt log splitter

[Cliff_Johns]

I asked a local log splitter manufacturer about using a 3" cylinder instead of a 4" one so I could get a bit better turnaround time. He said he has done this before. By switching to a 3" cylinder and making the total split length 20" he said it would be acceptable although not fast on my 4110 (5.5 GPM implement flow).

I don't do things in a hurry and to be honest I think I might be happy with the 4". Cycle times are slow, but who cycles the head all the way through the log most of the time anyway.

So I was wondering what the TBN wisdom on this would be. It would reduce the force to 12Tons, but again, I don't see that I need 20 tons. In the thread about electric log splitters people seem happy with 7 tons or even 4.5.

I don't heat with wood and only split maybe a cord a year, but rental around here is $65 for 4 hours and that includes time to get it and return it and I'm tired of that. I want to split when I want to split. This splitter would be $500 if I go pick it up. It's their 20Ton model, just with a smaller diameter cylinder.

Thoughts on this strategy?

Cliff

 

[MadDog]

Cliff:

If you'll be happy with it, that's what counts. If you are going to be running it by yourself, you don't need the fastest cycle time anyway. I'm just an impatient old SOB. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

From point of view of performance, If you are going to be splitting mostly smaller rounds (6-12") it should be fine. But were it me, I think I'd stick with the 4" cylinder and accept a slower cycle time. Presumably, you're going to be doing this on weekends, when it's nice to be outside and you're in no particular rush anyway.

I think that it is larger rounds, or splitting with a 4-way or 6-way wedge that is apt to require more power. Timberwolf makes a quality splitter with a 4" cylinder.

 

[Cliff_Johns]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( . . . I think I'd stick with the 4" cylinder and accept a slower cycle time. Presumably, you're going to be doing this on weekends, when it's nice to be outside and you're in no particular rush anyway. )</font>

Well, exactly. On the other hand, I don't want to get bored waiting either.

Cliff

 

[rambler]

If that works for you, fine. Usually a 20 ton splitter is woefully inadiquite in the Minnesota hardwoods I deal with, so I'd rather have a slower 4" or 5" cylinder.

--->Paul

 

[turnkey4099]

For the amount you are splitting, the slow cycle time shouldn't be a problem.

Unless there is some physical reason, I can't see shelling out big bucks for a splitter. That amount can be done by hand easily.

Of course thee is always the "toy" factor of which I have way too many sitting around.

Harry K

 

[Soundguy]

If you do get impatient with the 4" cyl.. you can always rig up a pto pump, an extra spool set, and resv' and then split wood blindingly fast..

For what it's worth.. I run a fel on a tractor that has a 4gpm pump.. works good enough for me. I know people running loaders on tractors with 2.9gpm pumps, as well as splitters on those same tractors... Just however long you want to wait is the issue.

Soundguy

 

[2Reds]

I run a 3pt splitter on my old IH 300U. It is not fast but as others have noted when working by yourself you can't go all that fast anyway. Mostly I am splitting old locust and am able to crack them pretty well (sometimes the stump end of the tree is tough). I would say if you are splitting for yourself and working alone it will be fast enough to suit you.