DR Rapid Fire Rack & Pinion

[KiwiBro]

Let's talk differences. Some say there aren't many, but let's at least try to discuss a few of 'em.


Those guides on the table.
I gotta ask why. If a piece needs to be resplit it has to be LIFTED or ROLLED over them to re-position, rather than just slide back. The difference may not sound like much but it's generally the heavier pieces that need re-splitting so that extra fluffing around is going to add up by the end of the day/week (if commercial operators). What do DR users gain? Stopping a round from rolling off the table before it's split? How hard is it to just rest a hand on the top until the wedge bites?

the flywheels
what's the weight difference between these and SS? Are DR ones heavier (and is that at similar diameters b/c I guess it's weight at the outside diameter that counts the most), providing more momentum? If there is more momentum, does that mean the DR ram is going to take more shock loading and if so, is it able to handle that?

One SS owner in here and on youtube has added a third flywheel down low and many have said the SS is too top heavy when moving/towing. What has DR done to address that?

the rack head
the SS has two bearings each side that runs under the I (or H) beam top flange. The DR looks to have just one each side. If this is the case, why? the Same guy that did the flywheel mod to his SS also did a mod to the rack head, although i never found out why.

the hands-on right of return
In the DR vid it says 6 months hands on, but in this thread we are told 1 year. Which is it and does SS offer this?

---------------------------------------------
Also, a few guys were going nto get a SS to a get together to get some feedback on it. Would DR be willing to attend or lend out a demo model to the GTG for a side by side comparison by AS members? Yes, if that sounds like a direct challenge, you can bet your ass it is. Let's see if the slick marketing is backed up by enough faith in their machine that DR are willing to let a GTG put it through it's paces.

 

[RAMROD48]

We just got the $1200 self propelled walk behind DR trimmer and i must say that the $1200 tag was what made us resist for as long as we did...

now that we have it I must say, i know why they cast what they do...

they are heavy duty, and it has made me look at the rest of their products in a new light...

If this splitter is built to the same quality that the trimmer is, it will be a great machine!

I am in the market for an overhaul of my current splitter or to purchace new and this addition to the DR line has me looking at it a whole new light...

 

[KiwiBro]

A few more questions, if I may.

The rack engagement:

The DR method is slightly different from the SS, why? I noticed in the DR vids the operators are almost always holding onto the handle even when the rack is loaded either against the wood initially but also when the wood is loaded against the wedge also. Why? Does the rack tend to disengage unless the operator keeps some pressure on the handle? Why tie up a hand like that?

Assuming the operators are the twitchy type to want to keep a hand on the handle just in case, will the rack ever disengage by itself for any reason other than at the end of it's travel? Will it disengage when there's too much load on the rack when, for example, it hits a really serious knot and loads up too much, or is that the only reason the operators in the vids keep a hand on the handle.

Clutch:

I can't be sure b/c I am on a slow connection today and can't bring up the DR vids but I don't recall ever seeing a shot of the clutch side of the motor. Is there a clutch? Was it a deliberate act to exclude shots of that side? There were some "patent pending" aspects to the DR so maybe that area is one of them and is a key difference between the DR and SS?


Towing:

Will it be highway towable: suspension and a coupling attachment at axle/flywheel end of the splitter. There's a reasonable amount of weight quite high up so I wonder if the centre of gravity is just too high to risk saying it's towable.

 

[mooseracing]

"Highway capable" shouldn't mean 30mph,... If I'm not splitting at my house, my closest "Large scale cutting area" is about 47 miles away. I shouldn't have to (VERY) carefully load a splitter on a trailer, to transport it out there to the wood. I also don't think I should have to pay TW/Built-rite/Split-right/etc prices, just to get that convenience.

The problem is the proper highway models I have dealt with are at least twice as heavy as the common splitters sold at box stores. So you have to factor in the cost of materials.

We have an older commercial splitter that sits on 15" tires. Two people can barely roll it around, and it doesn't feel like it is going to fall apart like all the ones sold in box stores now. Mainly the H/V feel like they are twisting apart when you split hardwoods. They flex all over compared to our commercial one.

The rack engagement:

The DR method is slightly different from the SS, why? I noticed in the DR vids the operators are almost always holding onto the handle even when the rack is loaded either against the wood initially but also when the wood is loaded against the wedge also. Why? Does the rack tend to disengage unless the operator keeps some pressure on the handle? Why tie up a hand like that?

Just a theory but in this day and age I would almost bet it is to CYA type of thing. Help keep idiots from smashing their hand then suing DR ?

 

[KiwiBro]

Just a theory but in this day and age I would almost bet it is to CYA type of thing. Help keep idiots from smashing their hand then suing DR ?

Quite understandable given that the so called human 'race' is a competition between producers trying to come up with more idiot/litigiously inclined -proof designs and Mother Nature creating better and bigger idjits. If one hand has to stay on the ejector button like that, it turns me off the product straight away b/c the hands are better employed getting another round than keeping the operator at the handle. I can understand the times when one is splitting a knarly piece that may choke the splitter and the operator may have to disengage the rack to release some pressure, but other than that it's a potential waste of time, and as the guy (who must have only ever used slow hydraulic rams in the past) said in the DR video, time is money and everyone wants more of it these days.

Has anyone ever rigged then up to completely auto-cycle? and the operator only has to hit the handle to release the rack from a potentially stalling/overloaded situation? That could be a pretty cool warranty-voiding after market mod.

 

[sunfish]

Don't know about the DR, but the SS is completely auto cycle.

Unless it stalls in a bad piece, then just bump the handle down to disengage.

I haven't seen any reason yet to get the DR over the SS.

 

[KiwiBro]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. By "completely auto cycle" I mean it automatically cycles again once it has automatically retracted. A perpetual engage/disengage cycling unless the user breaks that by manually disengaging. By the time the rack has withdrawn, the user better have some wood there ready for it b/c it's gonna engage and try ramming something all by itself. This frees up both hands (and the eyes) of the user to focus on the wood and ram/rack, not the handle.

I doubt it's as dangerous as it sounds. I'd be a crash test dummy for something like that if anyone wants me to. The freight to out here could scupper that though. Be cheaper for me to get on a plane and put faces to names at a GTG.

 

[sunfish]

No, the SS has auto retract. Pull up on handle, remove hand, the ram will split the wood and retract. I would not want it to cycle again by it self, it's much too fast (2 seconds) to get anther piece in there. :msp_w00t:

 

[KiwiBro]

That's a good point. A couple of thoughts in that regard:
1. The ram travels how far? 24"? Our rounds here are generally about 10-12", so there would be quite a bit of spare room and this might create enough time (especially with both hands available) to get the wood back into position for the next auto split.
2. About getting 'the wood back into position', why is the user having to move wood back and forward like that anyway? Would it not be easier and faster for the user to have the rack vertical, so they weren't tugging wood back and forth, just turning it while the bench supports it's weight? Does it take so much more force to split on a vertical table with the wedge itself driving through the wood rather than the wood driving passed the wedge, that a flywheel splitter would keep stalling?

I'm thinking a completely auto cycling/perpetually cycling vertical rack and pinion splitter might just be the cat's meow. you could have the dis/engage mechanism as a foot or knee/hip lever.

 

[Cmccul8146]

1

completely auto cycling/perpetually cycling rack and pinion splitter .

Why would anyone want a continuous cycling flywheel splitter. I'd sure hate to see the Product Liability insurance cost per machine for something like that. One SS can keep 3 people as busy as they want to be as it is. People who have never seen one of these splitters in action , just seen the videos, have NO idea what a 2 second cycle time is. Continuous cycle & somebody is going to lose some fingers or a hand in a fast hurry.

And what's wrong with keeping a hand on the handle ,anyway. Not necessary, but it does keep THAT hand out of any danger.

 

[KiwiBro]

Why would anyone want a continuous cycling flywheel splitter.

To keep both hands working the wood, was the thought I raised that seemed to escape your attention.

I'd sure hate to see the Product Liability insurance cost per machine for something like that.

I'll take it the warranty voiding aftermarket mod musing above also escaped your attention, not to mention, by your own reasoning (which I'll address separately below) later on in your post, - if you haven't seen [sic] it then you might just have "NO idea what a [perpetual cycling option]" is let alone really be sure just how dangerous it is, as if the myriad tools and machinery used to get the wood in a state it can be split are in themselves perfectly safe in the hands of imbeciles.

One SS can keep 3 people as busy as they want to be as it is.

Unless you are saying it takes three people to make a SS or DR really hum, I don't see the point of that comment b/c unless the labour is dirt cheap or the output per labour unit is better when there are three manic workers keeping the SS or DR going, or the target market is domestic users only who either don't give a rat's about production or have many willing volunteers to help them, then throwing more people at a splitter begs the question of whether that's ultimately worth it. I thought the point of this splitter was the amount of wood one user could hum through, given the splitters claim to fame as the fastest of it's kind?

People who have never seen one of these splitters in action , just seen the videos, have NO idea what a 2 second cycle time is.

With respect, bollix. If by "never seen" you mean never been around one or worked with one, then I agree there is nothing like using a machine and getting to know how to use it well to get the most from it, but it's abject lunacy to suggest one cannot get an appreciation for the cycle times by watching the videos which are themselves real people using a real machine on real wood, after all. I know you've built one and have accumulated plenty of knowledge about them and will know far more about them than I, but to suggest not using one disqualifies others from appreciating their speed is just ridiculous, frankly.

Continuous cycle & somebody is going to lose some fingers or a hand in a fast hurry.

You know something - it just occurred to me that is probably a similar argument hydraulic splitter salespeople use to scare people off those evil, finger-eating, viciously fast 2-second rack and pinion splitters the competition sell.

And what's wrong with keeping a hand on the handle ,anyway.

Nothing, nothing at all. But I'd rather, when the wood isn't knotty, have both hands being productive, which, forgive me if I'm wrong, is the point of the auto cycle in the first place, isn't it?

As someone who has built his own, why do you think the DR has the supports and lower table and do you consider that better than the flush table with no supports?

Did you build yours to be tow-able?

 

[Cmccul8146]

Here's a video of a continuous cycling flywheel splitter.

<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2bVAAx3mMKY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Maybe I should have said rack & pinion splitter. I saw that video almost 5 years ago when I was looking for SS videos. I wouldn't put my hands anywhere near that thing. I didn't get to be 63 yrs. old ,with all my appendages by being an IDIOT. And that still isn't much faster than a rack & pinion splitter, but 100 times more dangerous. Thanks, but I'll keep & use the one I built.

 

[mooseracing]

Here's a video of a continuous cycling flywheel splitter.

I couldn't find that thread that all the videos were posted in of log splitters, but there is one that is an old square baler converted to splitter under the same principle. The ram was moving way too fast for me to have it on full auto, seems how when I set the log down it is never where I want it on the first try.

 

[DR POWER]

Innovation contest

MNGuns , I see your point and agree , it just wasn't as clear in your earlier posts (could have been just me ) .
I think you're ideas on making the machine better are spot on , may be SS or DR are paying attention because innovation is important .

Let me jump in again...We are absolutely paying attention here at DR. We have always been driven by innovation, with a passion for high-quality design. And like many of you, we have no use for ordinary products...so we're listening and willing to do what it takes to absolutely be the best.

The insight offered here by Dancan, MMGUNS, sunfish and others is greatly appreciated -- even if not entirely flattering:smile2: We've introduced a rack & pinion splitter that we're damn proud of but we won't rest there. To prove it, I want to further encourage you to give us your insight on how to make this the BEST splitter on the market. So, here's what I'm proposing:

For the next 7 days I will follow this thread and every person that suggests a sincere idea for improving our design I'll put their name into a hat and send the winner these chaps chainsaw chaps -- a $75 value!

Please send us your design ideas -- we really appreciate the passion and knowledge of splitters that can only be found is this community.

 

[DR POWER]

There have been a lot of good questions about the DR Rapid Fire. Let me answer some of them directly:

Why the log stabilizers? Two reasons: #1 it’s a voluntary industry standard that all logs must be “self stabilizing” on the splitting beam. #2 In a head-to-head comparison our testers preferred to use the machine with the stabilizing bars.

Does the DR auto-cycle? The cam assembly on the DR is spring loaded. Once your hand is removed from the lever it automatically retracts to the neutral position – about 1 second into the splitting cycle! This is also an industry standard that requires the activating lever travel in the same direction as the RAM.

Is it a 1-Year or 6-Month Hands on Trial? We’re so confident in the DR Rapid Fire that if your not 100% satisfied then we’ll take it back – no questions asked – anytime in the first full year that you own the machine (less return shipping).

Does the DR have a clutch? Yes, we use a Noram centrifugal clutch.

Why does the DR only have bearings on 1 side when the Super Split has them on both sides? The DR and Super Split have 2 bearings, 1 on each side of the beam.

More generally, I’d like to acknowledge that the Super Split is an exceptionally well-built machine and I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it to anyone. At the same time, we’re proud of the machine we’ve built here in Vermont. Enough so that we’re offering a free extended warranty – A FULL 3-YEARS – even in commercial use!

 

[Pcoz88]

It still a little pricey for shipping and the table but other then that it looks like a great machine.Got the dvd and catalog this week.

 

[KiwiBro]

Thanks for continuing to post in here, DR POWER.

These are, from what I can gather, supposed to be very fast production machines. That, as part of any system, influences other parts of the system. Given they are not hydraulic, it looks like a stand-alone conveyor would be very helpful in removing this fast production from the machine. Is there something like that in the Dr POWER line up? Alternatively, is there any belt system that could be rigged to run under the table to power a small conveyor?

Any chance of an optional extra log lift. Again, how to power it given there are no hydraulics is a ponderable.

A lower centre of gravity for better towing - how to get those flywheels down low and still efficiently engage the ram? Alternatively, could the vertical supports for the beam be extendable (using simple telescoping pipes with holes and pin) to get up to whatever height the operator needs for them, and then it can be lowered when it's going to be towed.

"In a head-to-head comparison our testers preferred to use the machine with the stabilizing bars." - did they advise why? Were the testers experienced and over what volumes were they comparing the two? There's a back and forth motion to the rounds, with the user having to pull the rounds back, the ram pushing them forward to split. Were your users having to apply any lift to the rounds (or more pull) back onto the stabilisers as they pulled them back? Do that a few hundred or more times a day and I am thinking that would add up to more user fatigue and slower production.

The flush table of the SS eliminates that. why not line the top of that table with UHMWPE or the like with very low friction coefficients but hard wearing characteristics to almost eliminate the effort of getting the wood the operator is working back into position for the next split?

A clip on or fold out extension to the splitting table so users could work big rounds easier without wood falling off the table. Or it could extend off the far end of the table and include a grated section where dross and general unwanteds could fall rather than end up onto a conveyor and into the firewood stack.


"Why does the DR only have bearings on 1 side when the Super Split has them on both sides? The DR and Super Split have 2 bearings, 1 on each side of the beam." That's not quite what I asked. Are you saying the DR has one bearing either side of the ram head running against the underside of the top beam flange? The SS has two either side, doesn't it?

 

[Circle B MN]

Let me jump in again...We are absolutely paying attention here at DR. We have always been driven by innovation, with a passion for high-quality design. And like many of you, we have no use for ordinary products...so we're listening and willing to do what it takes to absolutely be the best.

The insight offered here by Dancan, MMGUNS, sunfish and others is greatly appreciated -- even if not entirely flattering:smile2: We've introduced a rack & pinion splitter that we're damn proud of but we won't rest there. To prove it, I want to further encourage you to give us your insight on how to make this the BEST splitter on the market. So, here's what I'm proposing:

For the next 7 days I will follow this thread and every person that suggests a sincere idea for improving our design I'll put their name into a hat and send the winner these chaps chainsaw chaps -- a $75 value!

Please send us your design ideas -- we really appreciate the passion and knowledge of splitters that can only be found is this community.

Well I would have to say I am pleased to see you looking for true user input on how to make a better machine. As stated before, the biggest, and perhaps only complaint in regards to this splitter is mobility. While it make work well for Joe Home-owner to push, pull, or drag it out of the shed a couple of times of year, those that use it commercially are in need of something better. Mine gets used a few times a week minimum, and I would like nothing more than to be able to hook it to the back of the truck and tow it to the wood lot down the the road or across the state even.

 

[KiwiBro]

Take a look at people who work on production lines and you'll notice they seem to move with relative ease doing their particular operation at speeds the inexperienced might consider unsafe or unbelievable. The fact is, doing a repetitive operation builds muscle memory and eye-hand coordination to the point the operator can work safely at high speed. That's why I haven't written off the 'complete auto cycle' idea as easily as others, although I do understand it not only sounds unsafe but could expose producers to some liability issues.

Along similar but probably mechanically contrary lines, for those users splitting, say, 12" long rounds, why not eliminate the wasted travel of the ram by having those rubber (?) stops moveable to further along the beam? Or does that extra travel also act as a buffer to allow the flywheels to get back up to speed?

What about a small bolt-on honeycomb wedge for kindling? It could have flat spots around the perimeter so users couldn't try to force bigger stuff through it, but it would only need to be about, say, 3-4" diameter to get some meaningful volumes of kindling really quick without putting too much load on the wedge/rack?

 

[buildmyown]

Nice looking splitter DR if I didnt already have use of an original SS from the early 80's id have to think about this. One thing i have noticed is a lot of people dont know about this type of splitter unless they are on a site like this or have seen or used one in person. I didnt even know what they were til a few years back when I friends father pulled it out of the barn. He is the original owner that used to own 3 SS for a firewood business. The other problem is people that have never used one and only seen videos online doubt how well they work work because every video shows nice straight grain wood in the ideal size less then 20 inches in dia. Maybe you should think of making a video that shows it splitting the big and knarly type of wood even if it takes more then one hit.

Now to address a few things like the log guides I can see both sides where they would help and also become a pain. If your splitting the ideal wood for this machine then they would be fine but once you get into the big and ugly stuff I can see them getting in the way.

Over the road towing I have thought about this and a few ideas I have had are ATV/Snowmobile type tires a wider or adjustable wheel stance. This way if you want to take it in the woods you could narrow it if access is tight. For the high center of gravity again make it adjustable. The pole that supports the motor end could be a a pipe in a pipe deal pull a pin and drop the whole thing down pull the pin and raise the whole thing back up maybe have multiple holes so you can have different heights for different operators. Now for the other end that could be like a trailer jack swing it up for towing and back down and crank for splitting. Also the tow bar would have to be removable for one I can see it it being a shin and knee basher and two theft prevention.

The wedge a little taller and a little wider the wedge on the one I use I find it to short sometimes and a little wider would really help to seperate the logs. I think the wedge on mine is about 6 inches tall and 3/4 of an inch wide. Again if your splitting pretty wood its not a problem.

A log lift would be great but one of the nice things about this style splitter is it can be run from both sides without haveing to reach. I have also thought about this and the only idea I came up with would be to use a battery and an electric ram. Then you would also need sometype of charging system. The other problem I see with this would be tipping do to the high center of gravity and narrow wheel stance maybe some type of out riggers.