the absolute best splitter for the money

[plumbstraight]

Sazzami,

What you have is a great design for a wedge. I have been using that system since 1980. Being able to shove it through, tip the block up to ride the piston back for resplit is nice.

Check out my unit on youtube under plumbstriaight. Watch that spelling as I put in an extra i by mistake. Being able to take on some of the wood we have here from large maple, oak, fir, spruce and hemlock, this unit takes the backwork out of it. I have since put a larger engine on as it was first designed to run off the tractor pto.

 

[sizzami]

yeah your right because every chunk i split is twelve inches so holy cow have I wasted alot of time i wonder if I had taken a pic of a 30 inch round and your four way dropped two chunks off the top that needed to be resplit

 

[GUS FINK]

would suggest a view of this u tube makes things VERY clear as to how a tee splitter works works
dads splitter - YouTube

 

[arrow]

yeah your right because every chunk i split is twelve inches so holy cow have I wasted alot of time i wonder if I had taken a pic of a 30 inch round and your four way dropped two chunks off the top that needed to be resplit

yeah,I know what you mean as we all have a ton of 30" wood to split.

 

[Haywire]

Funny you say that. I'm the only one in my circle of acquaintances that has chainsaws with 28 and 36" bars (Husqvarna 372xp and Stihl 066). The past couple years has been cutting up stuff that the 16-20" bar owners don't want to mess with. It's fun, but those big saws will wear you out. I'd much rather be cutting 12" poles with my 346xp.

Ian

 

[sizzami]

best splitter for the money is what I said and it is what I meant I have 56 splitters in service right now I built them all from scratch attached is the most popular wedge design that I use because they all love four ways but you would pay me about three fifty for this wedge and, about fifty for T any one who uses the three way alone , thats one man splitting will have a bigger pile at the end of the day because he never chases a chunk .never you handle one piece until that piece is too small to need splitting.

 

[arrow]

I asked you honest questions and even thanked you for your contribution. You got sarcastic when I questioned you as if these questions were a threat somehow to your what? credibility? expertise?. There was no need for that as I already respected your contribution. I and others were simply interested in this concept. Being in wood production for most of my life, I equate time with money. You brought in the convenience factor which was important to you. I could understand that. Now if we can get back to the facts, I am not asking this to second guess you. I am asking because, as with any other questions purpose, I do not know. You have experience with this , so I'll ask a person with experience. I am trying to picture a typical large round of wood through the 3 way. Go back to my original size which was 15" I asked "how many times do you need to run a 15" round through" I have a table on my splitter. So I am trying to figure out if the 3 way still is faster because I do not have to bend and pick up re splits. I am looking for the fastest time to do the work I do. That is all. IF you are saying: "for the money" in terms of what a 3 way cost compared to a 4 way, I am not so much interested in that part as my 4 way cost $98. However you also brought in the the speed factor saying the 3 way will have a bigger pile. So if one is not chasing chunks from a 4 way but dragging back only, is the 3 way still faster?

 

[toxicjeeper]

would suggest a view of this u tube makes things VERY clear as to how a tee splitter works works
dads splitter - YouTube

Very nice splitter there as well!..

 

[Baby Grand]

Sazzami,

What you have is a great design for a wedge. I have been using that system since 1980. Being able to shove it through, tip the block up to ride the piston back for resplit is nice.

Check out my unit on youtube under plumbstriaight. Watch that spelling as I put in an extra i by mistake. Being able to take on some of the wood we have here from large maple, oak, fir, spruce and hemlock, this unit takes the backwork out of it. I have since put a larger engine on as it was first designed to run off the tractor pto.

Having split many cords with a maul & a big round on the ground or a stump for an anvil, the wisdom of not having to bend over & lift a big chunk to split it to a useable size (again) is clear. My ideal was always to split round and keep the pieces on end so I didn't have to bend over & reposition them for the next blow. Nearly impossible, but it's always good to have a dream.

I don't need to see a video to understand how the T-Bar eliminates this problem. The idea of letting the big chunk on top ride back with the retracting ram & drop in place for subsequent splits makes sense, also.

When calculating cycle time with the 4 way I think some consideration has to be given to how long it takes to pick the too big pieces up & reposition them in the splitter. As stroke time is reduced, the T-Bar will wind up beating the 4-way on a consistant basis. I think this lost time is at the root of sizzami's statement that, at the end of the day, his pile will be bigger.

Now I gotta find some heavy scrap for myself. Between Irene & Alfred I have so much wood on the ground I won't have to take a tree down for 3 or 4 years. The maul is no longer a viable option for me.

 

[arrow]

When calculating cycle time with the 4 way I think some consideration has to be given to how long it takes to pick the too big pieces up & reposition them in the splitter. As stroke time is reduced, the T-Bar will wind up beating the 4-way on a consistant basis. I think this lost time is at the root of sizzami's statement that, at the end of the day, his pile will be bigger.

On a large round or if that size is all one is splitting then yes. But in the whole scheme of things where the average pieces of wood are 8" to 12" it gets a little unclear because the 4 way is once and done with these pieces. I was looking at it as a whole especially if one has a log table. Still, I could be wrong because I am not operating a 3 way at all so I have nothing to compare my type of splitting with 3 way vs. 4 way. If I am splitting a 20 " round which is less than 1/20th of the amount of round sizes I am splitting given any wood season, I have two uniform 5" splits at the bottom and two giant 10"x15" split rounds at the top. The table catches these. I drag each one back and now I have 4 approximate 5x8" rounds. Which are still too big so I'll split these in half. That is a total of 7 runs through the splitter for this 20" round. Without a table, sell me one of those 3 ways today. With the 3 way, you are running that 10" to 12" round twice. The 4 way is doing this once so I'm thinking time wise, (which is my main interest) it could possibly average out. If that is the case and I am not sure it is if one has a log table, the statement "for the money" becomes the winner since the 3 way is always cheaper to buy than the 4 way.