The SP machine has had so many failures and the rapid fire machine from DR so few, it's misguided to lump them both together. But doing so does highlight how good DR have been about looking after their customers and that alone is a great differentiation from SP.
I do feel comparisons between different splitting concepts should be encouraged though. Production rates and overall costs and ease of ownership, in different types of wood are still worthwhile matters to compare when buying a splitter. Too hard comparing the mechanics and construction of each in isolation though. It's what they can produce and how much effort and extra gear is needed to produce, how long they may last, etc that's going to hit any of us in the wallet at the end of the day.
Much of these types of guestimate comparisons and assumptions, especially whether or not the Aussie Dr rep got it wrong when advising the machine won't handle down-under wood (if that is indeed what they advised), could be eliminated/settled if DR would just flow me a machine to test out. (it was worth another try anyway).