Stewing on speeding up box store splitter

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

CNYCountry

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
251
Reaction score
49
Location
Remsen, NY
So I've had a Troy-Bilt/MTD 27 ton splitter (https://www.troybilt.com/en_US/prio...g-splitter-model-24bf572b711/24BF572B711.html) for about 13 years and while it beats hand splitting I wish it was faster. Full cycle time 19 sec, 27" stroke, 4.5" bore, 11gpm driven by a vertical shaft Honda GCV 160. The hydraulic tank is the axle portion of the splitter and is only about 3 gallons. Total system capacity is about 5 gallons. Relevant to my question, because of the vertical shaft motor setup, the pump is mounted low under the motor, well under the level of oil in the tank.

I've been happy with it but have always been nervous about the half beam design - I remember seeing that some people had had problems with the side of the cylinder cracking at the trunnion where all the load is concentrated. I've never had a problem - I sharpened the wedge and it generally cuts through knots without the sending the pressure sky high but I've always been nervous about taking a high pressure jet of hydro to the face or something. Point is, I only want to go so crazy upgrading - it has what I think is a serious flaw that's not possible to fix without basically replacing the whole splitter. I could see myself replacing it with something better built someday but even with elm I've never found something it wouldn't handle, so the tonnage meets my needs, just not the speed.

While I haven't actually measured the fitting and hose sizes I'm thinking I could get away with bumping it up to 16gpm driven by one of those Harbor Fright 301cc 8hp horizontal shaft motors. Any more would really be pushing it unless I replaced all plumbing, valve, fit bigger ports to the cylinder etc. There were other versions of this splitter with horizontal shaft engines from the factory (e.g. https://www.troybilt.com/en_US/prior-year-models/tb-27-ls-troy-bilt-log-splitter/24BG57M1766.html) and it looks like while the motor and pump are mounted lower, the pump is right about at the level of the top of the fluid in the tank. Obviously capacity and cooling would also be a concern with a larger pump also, especially since I'd probably be pushing flow rates high through small hoses, fittings and valve.

I have the tools and fab skills to mount the motor and pump lower. The pump mounts and couplers also seem easy to find. My only concern is fluid capacity, cooling and height in relation to the pump.

Here are my questions - can someone tell me if they think this is a completely stupid idea - what if I mounted a second tank above the level of the first one, moved the return hose and filter to the upper tank inlet, and then ran a hose from the upper tank to the lower one at the original return inlet? I'd block off the fill on the lower one. Besides the obvious problems with a mess it would cause with servicing some parts, can anyone see any problems with the idea? Also, am I really pushing it with a 16gpm pump? This machine doesn't get run for more than a couple hours at a time.
 
I run a 16gpm pump on my splitter, 9hp Subaru Robin engine. 5gal tank, system capacity is about 7 ish gallons. No real over heating issues even in sumer heat. It's on the slow side of things too, but fast enough it's hard to keep up with with one person. Different design then what you have. Relief is set @2800 psi. Can give the I beam quite the workout sometimes. But my cylinder isn't trunion mounted either.
 
As long as you seal the bottom tank you will be fine. I would make sure the hose connecting them is equal to the suction hose diameter you use And I would think about putting a threadolet on the top of the lower tank to manage air accumulation and allow it to migrate to the top tank.
 
I had to go look up threadolet... There are three holes in the original tank from the factory, NPT inlet for filtered return on top, NPT fitting for vented dipstick on top, and barb outlet on bottom to pump suction. Wonder if I could just use the fill/dipstick hole for a vent hose to the top tank then, I had thought about just blocking it with a NPT plug but hadn't thought about venting air still coming out of the fluid...
 
If you are splitting 16" or 18" rounds then letting it travel the full 27" will waste a significant amount of time. If you're not already manually short cycling it (not letting the wedge return fully), you could do that. Adding travel limiters could automate it.

I think a 4.5" cylinder needs more like 16 gpm to have a reasonable cycle time. My Oregon "28 ton" splitter with 4.5" cylinder has a Kohler CH395 (270cc) and 16 gpm. It's cycle time is about 11 seconds. It's still a little slow for me much of the time so I manually short cycle it.

But if you want other features like say a log lift or a push through design with the wedge on the beam, you may be better off buying a new splitter and selling the old one.
 
I had to go look up threadolet... There are three holes in the original tank from the factory, NPT inlet for filtered return on top, NPT fitting for vented dipstick on top, and barb outlet on bottom to pump suction. Wonder if I could just use the fill/dipstick hole for a vent hose to the top tank then, I had thought about just blocking it with a NPT plug but hadn't thought about venting air still coming out of the fluid...
Sorry, im a mechanical engineer and your post put me in engineer mode..lol

you sure can use the fill bung, just dope the heck out of it since all connections will be under pressure from the top tank and subject to leaking. If you get really board, you could add a sight glass to the tube to see the level.

You could also use the bung for connection to the upper tank by fabbing the fittings you need and block the old return. As long as the top of the bottom tank is connected to the top tank, air will follow that path when it’s not running. I wouldn’t anticipate running air to be an issue, just accumulation over time.
 
If you are splitting 16" or 18" rounds then letting it travel the full 27" will waste a significant amount of time. If you're not already manually short cycling it (not letting the wedge return fully), you could do that. Adding travel limiters could automate it.

I do stop it from fully retracting but it's an extra thing to pay attention to... I did try putting a piece of steel in to stop it retracting all the way at one point but it only took about 1/2 hour until it broke the bolt pinning the wedge to the cylinder rod. The rod on this one is shaped so that there's no way to put a limiter on without putting the shear load on that bolt....

I think a 4.5" cylinder needs more like 16 gpm to have a reasonable cycle time. My Oregon "28 ton" splitter with 4.5" cylinder has a Kohler CH395 (270cc) and 16 gpm. It's cycle time is about 11 seconds. It's still a little slow for me much of the time so I manually short cycle it.

I was thinking the 16gpm would help a lot with the 22 not really worth the other upgrades that it would make necessary - kind of a "diminishing returns" thing.. I feel like if I could get 11 seconds instead of 19 that would be worth it based on some scrounged or cheap parts..

But if you want other features like say a log lift or a push through design with the wedge on the beam, you may be better off buying a new splitter and selling the old one.

Agreed - this is just me stewing on what limited things would help this machine without going crazy - without spending more than it's worth...
 
You could also use the bung for connection to the upper tank by fabbing the fittings you need and block the old return. As long as the top of the bottom tank is connected to the top tank, air will follow that path when it’s not running. I wouldn’t anticipate running air to be an issue, just accumulation over time.
Yeah I had not thought about air accumulating and getting trapped in the lower (existing) tank - this is exactly the reason I posted seeking the community's thoughts on what to be aware of...
 
Do some cutting, grinding and welding and stack two at a time. This is my big splitter with stacks on it. The bottom round is 12" diameter.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_00000186.jpg
    IMG_00000186.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 5
  • IMG-20130904-00501.jpg
    IMG-20130904-00501.jpg
    145.8 KB · Views: 5
  • 20210611_155656.jpg
    20210611_155656.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 5
  • 401759-9aa301ac085dfda814abba75ae103367.jpg
    401759-9aa301ac085dfda814abba75ae103367.jpg
    2.3 MB · Views: 5
19 seconds that’s gotta be painful! I agree shorten the stroke first off. Top of my head I think the gc 160 is 5hp?i think that’s what came on my ramsplitter when I bought it probly almost 20 years ago. I took that off and put a harbor freight 6.5 ho and it walked all over that low grade Honda motor. Last year I put a bigger pump on and it helped a good amount. I just bought a Wolfe ridge last fall and haven’t used the other splitter since. My old splitter is a faster cycle time but no log lift no 4 or 6 way adjustable wedge. I haven’t reduced the stroke on the new one it’s much longer than my Frankenstein splitters stroke.

I’ve never used a super split and if I didn’t want that log lift so bad I probly woulda went that route myself.
 
Over the years I have upgraded a number of the splitters that had the 11GPM two stage pumps to the 16 GPM two stage pump with a larger motor. They all worked great and did cut the cycle time. Most of those kind of splitters don't warrant up grading to a 22 or 28 GPM set up, cost gets too high. I just did a old Speeco for a guy a while back that wanted electric start. I put the HF 13 HP engine with electric start and a 16 GPM two stage pump on it. He loves the set up.
 
IMG_0506.jpgIMG_1557.jpg
A faster splitter isn't the only factor.
As posted before, I sold a TW-6 and kept the SuperSplit.
It depends on your type of wood supply and how you move the wood to and from the splitter.
-A bench of some kind will greatly improve the work flow and reduce the effort. In this case it extends well beyond the wedge to catch the splits for re splitting. It is also wide enough to work a large round with it's pieces and parts, to re split at arms reach.
-There are stroke reducing collars on this one. Not all splitters can tolerate them depending on if the wedge is pinned to the cylinder or threaded onto the cylinder. Threads will fail, as will a connecting bolt. However the bolt can be replaced. I used low grade bolts, softer bolts, and replaced them a couple times a year.
-The wedge design. I rarely used full stroke in splitting most Oaks. The splitter wedge design is a huge factor, along with wood type. The wedge on this splitter is long and narrow, with considerable flair that spreads the wood, and can easily reduce the stroke length in half, or less.
-Working height. Most new splitters have addressed this. This old SpeeCo has a tube axle and Volkswagon hubs/wheels adapted.
The modifications to this splitter cost very, very little, with huge results.
Your design is quite different, but an independent table and possibly stroke reducing collars (depending) could reduce your effort.
-I would also consider trying a different wedge design. I've never used that style of splitter so just guessing.
I strongly recommend ordering a SuperSplit if that fits your wood supply. You would have a machine that is a joy to use, and has resale value if your situation changes. Any money spent on your current machine may not be effective and most likely never recouped.
Many like the challenge of improving something. That's me to a point, but I don't understand hydraulics enough to know what effects what, and what is cost effective as well.
 
Like Rancher2 says, just put a bigger engine and pump on it and call it done. 14/16GPM with 5Gals fluid is pushing it a bit, but there are lots of box store splitters sold with 14GPM pumps and 4-5gal tanks. If you are only running a couple of hours, should be okay. If the fluid gets hot, then take a break or throttle down to 75%.
 
Speed is related to how fast you can fill and empty the 2 sides of the ram. Heat build up is related to friction of oil in system. Bigger pump more flow but at a cost of higher friction. Almost all of the commercial units have 1/2" ports the kicker is most also have a hard line ( pipe 1/2" od - maybe 3/8" or bit more Id) that bugger slows things down, valves are oem 1/2" ports , replacement 3/4" are available. a lot of the connections are made with standard fittings - there are high flow fittings available. That leaves the cylinder ports at 1/2" - bit pricey to replace with a cylinder that has 3/4" ports- future purchase if cylinder goes bad. Most shops will not mess with rebuilding oem cylinders.
I rebuilt my HF 30ton a number of years ago- issue were bad oem welds the afore mentioned plumbing and the the unit would get so hot that if you touched the cylinder you would get burned. It would boil the oil out after about and hour of run time. That was caused by the return oil being introduced back into the supply tank at or very near the max oil level in the tank causing air to be mixed into oil_ that creates a lot friction and severely degraded things. I also managed to bend the beam a bit.
Made new beam, made aux tank mounted above oem tank which now stays completely full_ no air mix. re-plumbed unit with 3/4" lines, valve ports are also 3/4" and hi flow fittings. Still have 1/2" ports on cylinder which is OEM, motor OEM, and pump 11gpm OEM Love joy coupler also still OEM. The idea being that if/when the pump or cylinder go south they will be up graded. The actions taken at rebuild reduced temp rise over 50%+ made full use of the 30 tons and did decrease cycle time a bit. My unit has a 8hp motor so a 13 gpm pump will work without motor up grade, further reducing cycle time- 16gpm on up would require more hp. I am on my 3rd valve ( keep wearing them out ) unit is now some 20+ years old doing upwards of 15+ cord a year. I haven't had any thing go south( except valve) since rebuild some 12 years ago( shucks- if it ain't broke why fix it). Going with 3/4" ports on clylinder would have more effect than larger pump.
 
19 seconds that’s gotta be painful! I agree shorten the stroke first off.

I already whack the valve out of return when it gets to the right spot, yeah it's a huge time saver. But it's a hassle and looking to improve beyond that.

Top of my head I think the gc 160 is 5hp?

4.4 - 5 depending on what you look at. Seems well paired to the 11gpm but the combo is slow AF

i think that’s what came on my ramsplitter when I bought it probly almost 20 years ago. I took that off and put a harbor freight 6.5 ho and it walked all over that low grade Honda motor. Last year I put a bigger pump on and it helped a good amount.

I had thought about trying the HF 212 - I replaced a Tecumseh 8hp (HM80) with a 212 on a family member's snowblower with good results, it's an impressive little motor, I've heard they're underrated. But nervous if it really has quite enough jam to drive a 16gpm pump. And the price to try would be the pump mount and lovejoy half that wouldn't work on an 8hp or bigger motor. If the 212 would do it, it sure would be cheap!

I'd considered the Predator 301 or 420 or maybe a used GX270, GX340 or GX390. By the way there's a coupon for the 301 until the end of July https://go.harborfreight.com/coupons/2022/07/180177-62554/

I just bought a Wolfe ridge last fall and haven’t used the other splitter since. My old splitter is a faster cycle time but no log lift no 4 or 6 way adjustable wedge. I haven’t reduced the stroke on the new one it’s much longer than my Frankenstein splitters stroke.

I'd definitely like something nicer but lots to spend money on right now besides that. Was thinking I could scrounge or put some cheap stuff on to just bump this up a little for the next couple years..

I’ve never used a super split and if I didn’t want that log lift so bad I probly woulda went that route myself.

While the inertia splitters look cool, I'm not sure they fit my use case. Easy wood I can split with a go-devil faster than the splitter. The splitter's really for the crotchy twisted knotty northeastern hardwood here. Which it seems like every other round is...
 
It depends on your type of wood supply and how you move the wood to and from the splitter.

Nasty, crotchy, knotty sugar maple, elm, cherry, northeast hardwoods. Some of it would go fast by hand but there's a reason I have a hydro splitter. I stack rounds on the tractor loader and put it right at arm height to my side as I stand at the splitter. Splits are thrown directly into the woodshed where the kids are tasked with piling it.

-A bench of some kind will greatly improve the work flow and reduce the effort. In this case it extends well beyond the wedge to catch the splits for re splitting. It is also wide enough to work a large round with it's pieces and parts, to re split at arms reach.

I welded a decent size table on the far side of the beam, I can lift up to about 30" rounds off the tractor loader onto the beam, whack them in half and push the one half off onto the table while I work on the other. You're right, it made a huge difference.

-There are stroke reducing collars on this one. Not all splitters can tolerate them depending on if the wedge is pinned to the cylinder or threaded onto the cylinder. Threads will fail, as will a connecting bolt. However the bolt can be replaced. I used low grade bolts, softer bolts, and replaced them a couple times a year.

I tried a temporary version of this right away when I got the splitter years ago. The bolt attaching the splitting wedge to the cylinder rod broke within 1/2 hour from the shear stress. I can assure you it was grade 8 and at least a 1/2" bolt. Not sure if my valve detent is too tight or what but there's really no option to limit return since the rod only has the bolt to pull the wedge back. I do as part of my workflow keep an eye on the retraction and can usually slap the valve into neutral when it's retracted enough, as I'm reaching for the next piece.

-The wedge design. I rarely used full stroke in splitting most Oaks. The splitter wedge design is a huge factor, along with wood type. The wedge on this splitter is long and narrow, with considerable flair that spreads the wood, and can easily reduce the stroke length in half, or less.

Wedge is sharpened, and while I can pop many rounds without going full stroke, a lot of what I have is so stringy and knotty that I really need to go full stroke to cut through that stuff. We're talking in and out of second stage of the pump as it goes full stroke on some of it.

-Working height. Most new splitters have addressed this. This old SpeeCo has a tube axle and Volkswagon hubs/wheels adapted.

I was going to try to fit bigger wheels/tires but realized the end of the beam wouldn't be at the ground when flipped vertical. While I rarely use this, when I need it, it's really nice. 40+" rounds are pretty brutal to pick up. I have the splitter up on some old steel truck rims so I don't bend down. Another place where I'll agree - working height is really important.

The modifications to this splitter cost very, very little, with huge results.

Agreed, however I'm doing many of these things already to some extent. There are still times where I feel like I'm waiting for the ram. Sometimes *because* other parts of the handling and process are efficient.

-I would also consider trying a different wedge design. I've never used that style of splitter so just guessing.

Certainly something to try.

I strongly recommend ordering a SuperSplit if that fits your wood supply. You would have a machine that is a joy to use, and has resale value if your situation changes.

They look cool. Just not sure if it would work for me in the tough stuff.

Any money spent on your current machine may not be effective and most likely never recouped.

And fair - I'm not looking to spend more than $500, if I can find used stuff and/or fab some of it probably a lot less.

Many like the challenge of improving something. That's me to a point, but I don't understand hydraulics enough to know what effects what, and what is cost effective as well.

Which is my reason for coming here to ask... Thanks for the input and advice.
 
Made new beam, made aux tank mounted above oem tank which now stays completely full_ no air mix. re-plumbed unit with 3/4" lines, valve ports are also 3/4" and hi flow fittings.

See this is what I want to hear about. Anything special about adding a higher aux tank? Is it just plumbed with regular hoses, etc? I was thinking of using a 5 gal air tank and welding fittings...

My unit has a 8hp motor so a 13 gpm pump will work without motor up grade, further reducing cycle time- 16gpm on up would require more hp.

Really? Everything I've found on here seems to indicate that 8hp would be OK for 16gpm dual stage? Would I really need more?

I am on my 3rd valve ( keep wearing them out ) unit is now some 20+ years old doing upwards of 15+ cord a year. I haven't had any thing go south( except valve) since rebuild some 12 years ago( shucks- if it ain't broke why fix it).

Wow, quite a story - I thought this MTD was built cheap but have never had issues with hot fluid or bent beam as it is out of the box...
 
Like Rancher2 says, just put a bigger engine and pump on it and call it done. 14/16GPM with 5Gals fluid is pushing it a bit, but there are lots of box store splitters sold with 14GPM pumps and 4-5gal tanks. If you are only running a couple of hours, should be okay. If the fluid gets hot, then take a break or throttle down to 75%.
I might try it, if heat is a problem I could always add an aux tank.
 
Back
Top