rtrsam
ArboristSite Operative
On the first three pages here there are over 20 threads about different types of splitters, mauls and hydraulic. But no-one talks about how to split wood.
All this discussion about the virtues of different types of splitting mauls, brands, cast vs forged heads, head sizes, got me thinking about a few things. Then there’s the numerous threads dedicated to log splitters, hydraulics discussions, engine sizes, split tables, vertical vs horizontal, you get the picture and know what I’m talking about if you’ve been reading here more than ten minutes. I thought I’d weigh in with my own experiences and observations. It’s New Year’s Day, I’m off work, the wife is still asleep and I’m killing time until we start taking down Christmas decorations.
Now, everyone’s got different circumstances, some people are wanting big chunks of wood for an OWB, some people want small stove bolts for a small wood stove. Some people have a backyard woodlot and equipment (tractors) for moving and hauling wood, some people (like me) have to travel anywhere from 15 to 60 minutes each way to get to where they cut wood. The only equipment I’ve got is a saw (Husky 262 XP, Stihl 044, Stihl MS 460, Stihl 066) a maul and a peavey. Then there’s the whole dissertation of the different splitting properties of various wood species. So my discussion is by no means applicable to everybody. But I think it applies to more people than not.
For firewood, I split a little redwood, some fir, but mostly tanoak and madrone (California north coast). Sizes range from 48 inch on down. I’m not a snob, I’ll work up butts and crotches (that sounds sort of vulgar but it’s not intended to be and you know what I’m talking about) and sometimes end up with some odd shaped pieces in my stack, but it all burns. I’ve also split many cords of Western red cedar, red alder, big leaf maple, cottonwood, you get the picture.
I prefer a smallish maul. For years I used a six pound maul, now I use an eight pound maul. More important than weight is head shape. I prefer a sort of convex edge. The narrow, concave edge allows the maul easy entry into the wood, but if it does not pop first try, it’s harder to get the maul un-stuck.
I hate plastic, fiberglass or composite handles on mauls. I prefer the feel of a wood handle in my hands, and if you get the plastic handle tool stuck, the handle bends and flexes a lot more than a wood handle while trying to get it out of the wood. I refer to them as “rubber handled” mauls and avoid them. I have used two mauls for ninety percent of my splitting, and need to replace a handle maybe once every five years or so, usually due to rot from being left out in the wet or the handle loosens up from so many years of shrink-swell.
Now the important part, far more important than what type of maul you use is how you swing it and where you hit the wood.
There’s the swing. I use a short, over hand chop if I think the wood will pop easily. This is my usual technique on straight grained wood, or when knocking big half sections or quarter sections into smaller pieces. If cracking open a bigger round, I use a roundhouse swing. I start with the maul sitting on the piece of wood, about where I want it to hit, then bring it down low, behind my back, up over my head and down with a mighty slam into the wood. Perfect this technique and you can go to the county fair where they have the “ring the bell” game and win your sweetie a big teddy bear. You can also break open some really big chunks of wood this way, usually with one or two swings. I’m pretty accurate, probably half the time hitting exactly where I planned, the rest of the time being within an inch or less of where I aimed, on these roundhouse swings.
Try to swing so the edge of the maul contacts the wood more or less flatly (maul handle ends up close to parallel to the cut face you’re swinging into). This is where a chopping block to stand your logs on might be helpful; it gets your log higher so your maul edge hits it more parallel to the cut end. I used to use one, now I usually don’t; I find the split efficiency is probably offset by the extra effort of lifting each chunk onto the chopping block.
Ends of the log should be cut flat and more or less square. You want the shock of the maul to be transferred cleanly to the fibers of the log. If swinging into a crooked cut, the shock is transferred more to bending the fibers on the short side of the cut. Same if you’re swinging the maul into a ragged broken end (like the hingewood portion from a felled tree; cut this off so you’ve got a clean surface to strike). Make sure the log is not sitting on a “shock absorber” of duff, sawdust, bark or mud, again you want the shock of the maul strike to be transferred to the fibers of the log. Firm dirt is fine, wet muddy lawn not so good. Concrete or pavement is okay, but be prepared to mess up your maul edge when you accidentally overpower a swing (and chips of concrete come flying up in your face).
Finally, and most important, is look at the piece of wood you’re splitting. Make the right decision as to where you want to hit it. Swinging a good tool accurately is pointless if you don’t hit the wood in the right place to make it split.
First of all, identify the center of the log, the center of the growth rings. In the rare perfect round, this is the center of the log, but usually it’s offset a little. All split efforts should radiate out from this point like spokes on a wheel (radial). All knots and growth deformities will radiate out from this point, this way you’re not trying to bust across them.
See if there is a “wind-check” in your log. Anything bigger than 12” diameter probably has one. This is a crack that radiates out from the center of the growth rings toward the edge. This is where the tree has been swaying back and forth in the wind. There may be several windchecks, try to split inline with the biggest one first. Don’t swing for the center of the log; if you hit the wind check you’re not really transferring your shock as cleanly to the fibers. Hit inline with the wind check maybe halfway to the edge of the log.
If denied, keep swinging, but try to aim your strikes further out to the edge with each swing. So you end up with a line of strike marks inline with the windcheck. If denied after three or four swings, transfer to striking the other side of the windcheck. This is known as checkering a line, and is a key element to splitting big logs accurately (not that it matters for firewood, but each strike gets the wood to split a little and as long as you keep your strikes inline with previous strike, you’re getting some benefit from them). It is the rare piece of wood that can stand up to this sort of evaluation coupled with an onslaught of roundhouse swings from an eight pound maul.
When I encounter such a piece of wood I know it because it ‘rejects” my maul. Spits it right back out at me. If my maul sinks in enough to get stuck, I know I’ll own it. If I bounce off a few times, I just snort and kick it over sideways and take a chainsaw to it, and rip it in half (cut with the grain, not end grain, you get these groovy long, curly shavings). Log is not feeling quite so tough now. Cut maybe three quarters of the way through, then stand it back up and swing inline with your cut and grin as you show that log whose ol’ boar et the cabbage. If you think you can split the remaining halves, just have at it, otherwise tip them over and repeat the chainsaw thing.
I’ve got a short bed ¾ ton 4x4 to fill with wood. A nice truck but not a timber moving beast. I go out, cut my rounds, then split them and stack them in my truck. Keep the mess and debris of splitting in the woods. Stack on maybe ¾ of a cord, not going crazy but getting a good charge on her (stake sides to permit stacking to top of cab height). Drive home, and unload the truck by stacking the wood where it will remain (covered in plastic in the winter) until I go to bring it in to burn. I find this more efficient than bringing home rounds to split in the backyard and have to re-stack.
Log Splitters.
I’ve used log splitters a few times. If you are dealing with stringy wood, wood that does not split until you physically chase the split from one end to the other and separate the two pieces, a log splitter is the way to go. From reading here, I understand there are some eastern species that are like this. In California, I haven’t yet encountered them except for a few stubborn butt cuts on Douglas fir. If you’ve got consistent sized logs, 12-18’ diameter, and a four or six way wedge, so you only have to cycle the splitter once and you’ve got firewood, you’re pretty efficient. Otherwise, I can guarantee that with my eight pound maul I can outsplit two guys running a log splitter. And you can, too, if you know how to split wood. The maul requires less moving the wood; you can pretty much split the round wherever it lays instead of having to wrestle the round to the splitter. And even if it takes a few roundhouse swings to get that first split, after that I can chunk the log into quarters, eights, whatever, in less time than it’ll take to cycle the splitter enough times to accomplish the same thing.
But I still want one. It’s like I told my wife when I bought a leaf blower to clean the gutters on the house (a key fire protection measure); I am a male and anytime I can apply power tools to a task instead of hand work, I approach it much more cheerfully. So maybe my log splitter opinion is all sour grapes, but I can still outrun it for splitting firewood.
All this discussion about the virtues of different types of splitting mauls, brands, cast vs forged heads, head sizes, got me thinking about a few things. Then there’s the numerous threads dedicated to log splitters, hydraulics discussions, engine sizes, split tables, vertical vs horizontal, you get the picture and know what I’m talking about if you’ve been reading here more than ten minutes. I thought I’d weigh in with my own experiences and observations. It’s New Year’s Day, I’m off work, the wife is still asleep and I’m killing time until we start taking down Christmas decorations.
Now, everyone’s got different circumstances, some people are wanting big chunks of wood for an OWB, some people want small stove bolts for a small wood stove. Some people have a backyard woodlot and equipment (tractors) for moving and hauling wood, some people (like me) have to travel anywhere from 15 to 60 minutes each way to get to where they cut wood. The only equipment I’ve got is a saw (Husky 262 XP, Stihl 044, Stihl MS 460, Stihl 066) a maul and a peavey. Then there’s the whole dissertation of the different splitting properties of various wood species. So my discussion is by no means applicable to everybody. But I think it applies to more people than not.
For firewood, I split a little redwood, some fir, but mostly tanoak and madrone (California north coast). Sizes range from 48 inch on down. I’m not a snob, I’ll work up butts and crotches (that sounds sort of vulgar but it’s not intended to be and you know what I’m talking about) and sometimes end up with some odd shaped pieces in my stack, but it all burns. I’ve also split many cords of Western red cedar, red alder, big leaf maple, cottonwood, you get the picture.
I prefer a smallish maul. For years I used a six pound maul, now I use an eight pound maul. More important than weight is head shape. I prefer a sort of convex edge. The narrow, concave edge allows the maul easy entry into the wood, but if it does not pop first try, it’s harder to get the maul un-stuck.
I hate plastic, fiberglass or composite handles on mauls. I prefer the feel of a wood handle in my hands, and if you get the plastic handle tool stuck, the handle bends and flexes a lot more than a wood handle while trying to get it out of the wood. I refer to them as “rubber handled” mauls and avoid them. I have used two mauls for ninety percent of my splitting, and need to replace a handle maybe once every five years or so, usually due to rot from being left out in the wet or the handle loosens up from so many years of shrink-swell.
Now the important part, far more important than what type of maul you use is how you swing it and where you hit the wood.
There’s the swing. I use a short, over hand chop if I think the wood will pop easily. This is my usual technique on straight grained wood, or when knocking big half sections or quarter sections into smaller pieces. If cracking open a bigger round, I use a roundhouse swing. I start with the maul sitting on the piece of wood, about where I want it to hit, then bring it down low, behind my back, up over my head and down with a mighty slam into the wood. Perfect this technique and you can go to the county fair where they have the “ring the bell” game and win your sweetie a big teddy bear. You can also break open some really big chunks of wood this way, usually with one or two swings. I’m pretty accurate, probably half the time hitting exactly where I planned, the rest of the time being within an inch or less of where I aimed, on these roundhouse swings.
Try to swing so the edge of the maul contacts the wood more or less flatly (maul handle ends up close to parallel to the cut face you’re swinging into). This is where a chopping block to stand your logs on might be helpful; it gets your log higher so your maul edge hits it more parallel to the cut end. I used to use one, now I usually don’t; I find the split efficiency is probably offset by the extra effort of lifting each chunk onto the chopping block.
Ends of the log should be cut flat and more or less square. You want the shock of the maul to be transferred cleanly to the fibers of the log. If swinging into a crooked cut, the shock is transferred more to bending the fibers on the short side of the cut. Same if you’re swinging the maul into a ragged broken end (like the hingewood portion from a felled tree; cut this off so you’ve got a clean surface to strike). Make sure the log is not sitting on a “shock absorber” of duff, sawdust, bark or mud, again you want the shock of the maul strike to be transferred to the fibers of the log. Firm dirt is fine, wet muddy lawn not so good. Concrete or pavement is okay, but be prepared to mess up your maul edge when you accidentally overpower a swing (and chips of concrete come flying up in your face).
Finally, and most important, is look at the piece of wood you’re splitting. Make the right decision as to where you want to hit it. Swinging a good tool accurately is pointless if you don’t hit the wood in the right place to make it split.
First of all, identify the center of the log, the center of the growth rings. In the rare perfect round, this is the center of the log, but usually it’s offset a little. All split efforts should radiate out from this point like spokes on a wheel (radial). All knots and growth deformities will radiate out from this point, this way you’re not trying to bust across them.
See if there is a “wind-check” in your log. Anything bigger than 12” diameter probably has one. This is a crack that radiates out from the center of the growth rings toward the edge. This is where the tree has been swaying back and forth in the wind. There may be several windchecks, try to split inline with the biggest one first. Don’t swing for the center of the log; if you hit the wind check you’re not really transferring your shock as cleanly to the fibers. Hit inline with the wind check maybe halfway to the edge of the log.
If denied, keep swinging, but try to aim your strikes further out to the edge with each swing. So you end up with a line of strike marks inline with the windcheck. If denied after three or four swings, transfer to striking the other side of the windcheck. This is known as checkering a line, and is a key element to splitting big logs accurately (not that it matters for firewood, but each strike gets the wood to split a little and as long as you keep your strikes inline with previous strike, you’re getting some benefit from them). It is the rare piece of wood that can stand up to this sort of evaluation coupled with an onslaught of roundhouse swings from an eight pound maul.
When I encounter such a piece of wood I know it because it ‘rejects” my maul. Spits it right back out at me. If my maul sinks in enough to get stuck, I know I’ll own it. If I bounce off a few times, I just snort and kick it over sideways and take a chainsaw to it, and rip it in half (cut with the grain, not end grain, you get these groovy long, curly shavings). Log is not feeling quite so tough now. Cut maybe three quarters of the way through, then stand it back up and swing inline with your cut and grin as you show that log whose ol’ boar et the cabbage. If you think you can split the remaining halves, just have at it, otherwise tip them over and repeat the chainsaw thing.
I’ve got a short bed ¾ ton 4x4 to fill with wood. A nice truck but not a timber moving beast. I go out, cut my rounds, then split them and stack them in my truck. Keep the mess and debris of splitting in the woods. Stack on maybe ¾ of a cord, not going crazy but getting a good charge on her (stake sides to permit stacking to top of cab height). Drive home, and unload the truck by stacking the wood where it will remain (covered in plastic in the winter) until I go to bring it in to burn. I find this more efficient than bringing home rounds to split in the backyard and have to re-stack.
Log Splitters.
I’ve used log splitters a few times. If you are dealing with stringy wood, wood that does not split until you physically chase the split from one end to the other and separate the two pieces, a log splitter is the way to go. From reading here, I understand there are some eastern species that are like this. In California, I haven’t yet encountered them except for a few stubborn butt cuts on Douglas fir. If you’ve got consistent sized logs, 12-18’ diameter, and a four or six way wedge, so you only have to cycle the splitter once and you’ve got firewood, you’re pretty efficient. Otherwise, I can guarantee that with my eight pound maul I can outsplit two guys running a log splitter. And you can, too, if you know how to split wood. The maul requires less moving the wood; you can pretty much split the round wherever it lays instead of having to wrestle the round to the splitter. And even if it takes a few roundhouse swings to get that first split, after that I can chunk the log into quarters, eights, whatever, in less time than it’ll take to cycle the splitter enough times to accomplish the same thing.
But I still want one. It’s like I told my wife when I bought a leaf blower to clean the gutters on the house (a key fire protection measure); I am a male and anytime I can apply power tools to a task instead of hand work, I approach it much more cheerfully. So maybe my log splitter opinion is all sour grapes, but I can still outrun it for splitting firewood.
OR buy a splitter and you do it
