Splitting and wood and Splitters?

[Lagrue]

I hope I am not wearing you guys out with a bunch of silly questions, but I want to make sure, before laying down the dough. That I buy the most pracitical model for my use.

First let me say that I am not a commercial wood cutter. i am cutting and splitting for my own use, trying to decide between self contained unit or tractor mounted and operated.

Do any of you take your splitters to your cutting site and split it there, or do you bring it home and split it? The self contained unit most def more applicable in that application for me as I dont have a trailer to haul my tractor.

I am going to have to buy and install a remote on my tractor. Which would serve as a benefit in other applications down the the rd. But it will run the initial cost of my tractor mounted splitter high enough to by just about any self contained unit out there including with in a couple hundred dollars of a supersplit.

 

[grandpatractor]

Alot depends on your situation. How far do you haul your wood from and how big it the chunks you are splitting.You have to decide what you can live with. If you cut big stuff and don't want to lift it into a truck, you may want to split it on site. :monkey:

 

[michael j]

I take my splitter to wherever I might be cutting and leave the mess there. My neighbor has a tractor mounted splitter, but since I got mine 5 years ago, his hasn't been hooked up. Mine's easier to handle, and he just uses mine, even in his back yard.

Mike

 

[triptester]

Self contained splitters are better if you are taking the splitter to the wood. You can bring a load home in a pickup with the splitter in tow not having to leave equipment unattended.
Keep in mind that most splitters are meant for only limited road use at low speeds. Consideration must also be given to splitters with vertical shaft engines they tend to have the pump and suction hose in a vulnerable position when towed through the woods.
I prefer splitting at the cutting site as this leaves the mess in the woods and reduces handling of the wood.

 

[timberwolf1]

Self contained splitters are better if you are taking the splitter to the wood. You can bring a load home in a pickup with the splitter in tow not having to leave equipment unattended.
Keep in mind that most splitters are meant for only limited road use at low speeds. Consideration must also be given to splitters with vertical shaft engines they tend to have the pump and suction hose in a vulnerable position when towed through the woods.
I prefer splitting at the cutting site as this leaves the mess in the woods and reduces handling of the wood.

Exactly. I always cringe a bit when I see people talking about towing a splitter over the road or through the woods. Most splitters have no suspension, with wheels mounted in the hydraulic tank area. Unless you want to eventually crack/split your hydraulic tank, or cause other damage, it should be trailered -- unless you're just moving it around the yard or something.

 

[Steve128]

Timberwolf1 / Triptester

So the wheels on most splitters are not for true travel but so that it is more mobile?

Thanks,

 

[timberwolf1]

So the wheels on most splitters are not for true travel but so that it is more mobile?

Thanks,

Correct. The manual for my splitter states not to exceed 30 mph when towing. But, even at that low speed, your splitter is getting hammered by every pothole and bump in the road without the benefit of a proper suspension.

 

[SWI Don]

My homebuilt splitter has a 2000lb axle and suspension kit on it. It rides nice going down the road with nary a rattle. Some of the high end commercial ones $$ have torsion bar suspensions. Some use a separate tank instead of the tank / axle combo that the less expensive ones use to save money.

Don

 

[highpower]

Lagrue,
Have you priced the remote for your tractor? I have a 40 horse and a 70 horse tractors. The big tractor has remotes but the small one does not. Running a splitter on a 70 horse tractor didn't seem too smart so I started pricing a remote for the smaller tractor. A kit with hoses is around $500. I had an axel and motor, made a tank and bought a pump cheaper than the remote alone would have cost.
The splitter is faster and takes a lot less fuel than a 70 horse tractor sitting there running even at an idle. Plus the wear and tear on the tractor.

 

[Foghorn]

Lagrue,

I bought the Timberwolf PTO powered log splitter and love it. Fast too - 6sec cycle time. My kubota(30hp) doesn't see many hours and so both it and I welcome the use it gets from splitting wood. The other nice thing about the Timberwolf is it has it's own pump that just slides onto the rear PTO. Don't have to worry about connecting hoses and possibly contaminating the tractors hydraulics. Since it's hooked up to the rear I can also raise and lower it to suit my back. I'm 6' so most splitters are too low to the ground for me to split for any length of time. What ever type splitter you get will have its advantages and disadvantages - this setup is the best for me...! List the pros and cons and choose what works best for you!!

Foghorn

 

[Lagrue]

Well I decided to go ahead and get the hydrolic, 3pt hitch mounted splitter. I found a hardee for 600 bucks. Adding the remote to the tractor will cost 800 bucks. I could have bought a selfcontained unit for about the same price. Adding the remote to the tractor will be a benefit in operating other impliments. I know it wont be as fast, but thats is the sacrifice I am willing to make.

It has a 4"x24" cylinder, my tractor has a 9.8 gpm to the implement flow, 14.7 total hydrolic flow. At produces 2760 psi.