On an Ariens 22T with the Subaru. Pretty impressed. Thanks everyone for their input.
Pulled the trigger
- Thread starter Kool_hand_Looke
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
TreePointer
Minister of Fire
Way better than the Huskee. Balanced very well. I like that it's not I beam construction. That little Subaru purrs right along too. Split some pretty big oak rounds. I'm very impressed.
I've been an iron worker for 5 years. A structural welder, and a structural fitter. The I beam design is complete overkill and a LOT of added weight that isn't needed. I've got a pretty good grasp on whether I beam design is over kill or not. And I'm telling you, it is.
ironworker
Burning Hunk
Hogwildz
Minister of Fire
I prefer the overkill. May be overkill for most splitting, but when you get a twisted, tight gnarly pc on there, the "I" beam is welcome here.
Ive had so much torque on mine, that the vertical support leg bent. Which is much easier to replace in time than the main structure.
I've welded enough stadiums together with D1.1 and D1.5 certificates with almost every process and fit up enough skid beams, columns, box girders, bridges, flood gates, etc. to have a pretty good idea of what's useful and what's overkill.Wow, 5 years! Maybe the logsplitter industry will hire you as a consultant
Not to mention I'd bet my life that those beams that are being used, are from China or Korea. There's a reason bridges and stadiums aren't built with Chinese and Korean beams.
Hogwildz
Minister of Fire
Bet more of those bridge beams are made from foreign materials than you think.
Steel mills in this country are far few than there used to be.
How many parts on that Ariens do you think are made in the USA Vs. China & Mexico?
Not saying its right, just the way it is.
I'll stick with my beam thanks. Old enough, may even still be US made. And I prefer the old style of the wedge on the end. Just my preference.
Been splitting wood with several different types of equipment since the early 80's. SO I guess I have a pretty good idea of whats works also.
Steel mills in this country are far few than there used to be.
How many parts on that Ariens do you think are made in the USA Vs. China & Mexico?
Not saying its right, just the way it is.
I'll stick with my beam thanks. Old enough, may even still be US made. And I prefer the old style of the wedge on the end. Just my preference.
Been splitting wood with several different types of equipment since the early 80's. SO I guess I have a pretty good idea of whats works also.
I DO really like the angled bevel wedge on the Ariens.
Just for the record, when a bridge is built or stadium, whatever...there are hold points in the building process. They're built within AWS procedures. They're the golden standard. Across the globe. AWS has base material requirements. Not only that, you're not building anything statically or axially loaded in the US without an AISC certificate. Which requires heat codes on every part, every piece, and material data on each bolt, beam, part, etc. All of that is in in the traceability. Lawsuits because of a failed design or faulty material because a company wanted to hide and save pennies on the dollar isn't common place.
Just for the record, when a bridge is built or stadium, whatever...there are hold points in the building process. They're built within AWS procedures. They're the golden standard. Across the globe. AWS has base material requirements. Not only that, you're not building anything statically or axially loaded in the US without an AISC certificate. Which requires heat codes on every part, every piece, and material data on each bolt, beam, part, etc. All of that is in in the traceability. Lawsuits because of a failed design or faulty material because a company wanted to hide and save pennies on the dollar isn't common place.
When I split wood with a bridge I will worry about that.
TreePointer
Minister of Fire
I no iron worker, but is it possible that the structural I-beams on bridges and buildings typically have greater thickness and stronger properties than the fairly small I-beams I've seen on splitters? I know the exposed I beam in my basement is a lot taller and thicker than my Huskee splitter's beam.
Another thought is that SpeeCo, Troy-Bilt, and others who manufacture to hit big box store price points aren't going to put extra steel (cost) into a beam (or any other splitter component for that matter) unless they must. Some of the greatest engineering in the world is done to make a fully functional product hit a low price point.
Another thought is that SpeeCo, Troy-Bilt, and others who manufacture to hit big box store price points aren't going to put extra steel (cost) into a beam (or any other splitter component for that matter) unless they must. Some of the greatest engineering in the world is done to make a fully functional product hit a low price point.
TreePointer,
An I-beam's strength is determined by the height and weight (in general). Another words a W8x18 is a beam that is 8 inches tall and weighs 18 lbs. per foot. Given that, an I-beam that weighs more per foot with the same height is stronger. A W8x24 beam would be stronger and thicker. Same height of 8 inches tall but thicker web etc; It weighs 6 more pounds per foot than the W8x18. Thicker, stronger, and heavier but still only 8" tall. Or the taller and heavier I-beams are the stronger generally speaking.
An I-beam's strength is determined by the height and weight (in general). Another words a W8x18 is a beam that is 8 inches tall and weighs 18 lbs. per foot. Given that, an I-beam that weighs more per foot with the same height is stronger. A W8x24 beam would be stronger and thicker. Same height of 8 inches tall but thicker web etc; It weighs 6 more pounds per foot than the W8x18. Thicker, stronger, and heavier but still only 8" tall. Or the taller and heavier I-beams are the stronger generally speaking.
Danno77
Minister of Fire
Soooooo, anyway. I'm jealous. I haven't picked mine up yet. Glad to hear you like it after using it a little.
Did I hear "overkill"?
Now THAT I beam is overkill. (I stole it from a bridge).
Now THAT I beam is overkill. (I stole it from a bridge).
OhioBurner©
Minister of Fire
Wish I had some pics of the splitter dad and his friends built and shared when I was growing up. Massive. They salvaged all sorts of parts, I think the axles was off a hay wagon or similar, with the corresponding wheels. Had an old wisconsin spin start engine out of some piece of farm equipment (a bailer maybe?) a ram off some big old loader for the town (one of the guys worked for the town). The I beam may have come from a bridge for all I know. They made big plates that slid into a channel on each side of the ram, I remember I couldn't even lift em. Made a nice working area the size of a card table to split on. You couldn't move this one around by hand (compact truck was a little sketchy too lol). Would split about anything but of course no vertical splitting capability. So you were limited by what could be lifted onto the splitter. I recall a few big rounds we had from the town when they widened the road a dropped all the logs in our yard... there was one when I was in 7th grade that dad couldn't even get on there and we both tried to lift it together. Maybe about 4 foot across? Of course the first time I tried I wasn't prepared and after we got it about a foot high I dropped it. Took off half the skin on my forearms. Went to school for a week or so with purple, black& blue forearms. The second attempt we got it on the splitter. Personally I'll take overbuilt any day. In case I happen to back into it with the tractor or by barn falls in. Splitter will still be good! But I'd devise a better way to get the big rounds on deck 
But these new little splitters are pretty convenient and still split pretty much anything. I'm still shocked when I walk by them how tiny they are all, but hey, they work great! Good luck with your new splitter sorry for my tangent back on memory lane. I got to go out and use the axe now... 
But I'd devise a better way to get the big rounds on deck But these new little splitters are pretty convenient and still split pretty much anything. I'm still shocked when I walk by them how tiny they are all, but hey, they work great! Good luck with your new splitter sorry for my tangent back on memory lane. I got to go out and use the axe now...
TreePointer
Minister of Fire
Ah, so you're saying that not all I-beams are alike, and using one on a log splitter may not be overkill. I wanted to see If I could get an iron worker to conclude that.
Ah, so you're saying that not all I-beams are alike, and using one on a log splitter may not be overkill. I wanted to see If I could get an iron worker to conclude that.
Exactly!
mstoelton
Feeling the Heat
Looks like it is "just right" to me!
I have had my 25 ton Huskee lock-up on some really twisty red oak. It's I-beam may be overkill, but my definition of overkill means it is something I never have to worry about breaking.
There are H-beams as well.
I sacrifice a few house of repair...for a few hundred pounds less. Easy to maneuver by hand. All for IN CASE I MIGHT have one piece I shouldn't push though.
I sacrifice a few house of repair...for a few hundred pounds less. Easy to maneuver by hand. All for IN CASE I MIGHT have one piece I shouldn't push though.
Hogwildz
Minister of Fire
Just be careful with the Ariens and others with the same set up. I saw on here and other sites that the issue with those, are when splits are stuck on the wedge, and the wedge is brought back in attempt to get the split to release, the pin holes on the back of the wedge tear open &/or the pin bends. They are set up great for pushing, but not so great for pulling back.
A beam on a splitter hardly weighs a "few hundred pounds".
There may be a slight bit of embellishment there.
And we all tend to try to put pcs through, that maybe should not be sent through.
That makes it fun.
Its all good. Enjoy the new toy.
A beam on a splitter hardly weighs a "few hundred pounds".
There may be a slight bit of embellishment there.
And we all tend to try to put pcs through, that maybe should not be sent through.
That makes it fun.
Its all good. Enjoy the new toy.
- Status
Similar threads
