Rugged made splitters

  • 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.
mstoelton

mstoelton

Feeling the Heat
Dec 16, 2013
486
SE michigan
As a stove mfg. I see tons of splitters. Check out the Dosco.com site.

Their splitters are bi directional. The split on the forward and reverse of the ram. I watched two guys run one once in Alaska and I'll bet they did the full cord in 45 minutes!
 
The rugged made seems to be a well built splitter (although I don't like tank/axle builds), but they sure are proud of them.
 
jags...

The bi directional function makes the thing very productive. But you need two people to really take advantage of thier product. Also, for my King, I use 17" logs and their splitter is better on 16" max. log length.

Chris
 
I find the bi-directional design very interesting. If I build another (and that is a big if) I think I might go with that design for speed. Couple a 4.5" cylinder with a 22gpm (or 28 if you really wanted to rock) and I think the production would go through the roof and you would have the power to bust up everything in sight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirginiaIron
I'm not considering the bi-directional because I split large rounds - up to 40 inches and the bi-directional splitters are not set-up to split vertical. That is why I was considering a log lifter.
 
There are plenty of dissenting voices out there, but I for one love my log lifter and horizontal splitter. A work table is a must for this config.
And I split large rounds too.
big1sm.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: TreePointer
The rugged made looks like it came out of the same factory as the northern tool splitters, lots of common parts. I'd question if the hydraulic tank is big enough for a 22gpm pump. They don't list the tanks capacity. Ideally it'd be close to 22 gallons... Doesn't look that big.

Hydraulic components for a log lift if done right add up quickly so the price difference doesn't seem out of line to me for the one with the lift.

Otherwise it looks tongue heavy and could use a better crank style trailer jack. In their video they conveniently skip unhooking and putting down the 'kick stand'

But overall it looks well made if you don't mind no name Chinese components.
 
Mike Fromme said:
I'd question if the hydraulic tank is big enough for a 22gpm pump. They don't list the tanks capacity. Ideally it'd be close to 22 gallons... Doesn't look that big.
Click to expand...

In an industrial application this is common "rule of thumb". For splitters it doesn't really hold true. There isn't a homeowner grade splitter on the market that I am aware of that matches the pump GPM to the tank size. Most are half or even a little less.
 
Homeowner or indsutrial doesn't matter, either way the pump is putting out 22 gallons per minute... A tank too small means the fluid is going to overheat... Rugged made must know this as they fail to list a capacity for the fluid.


Pure speculation but the components seem similar to the northstar splitters which have a tank size of 9 gallons. Which means you can fit about 7 gallons with room for expansion... There is the right way, what will kind of work for a while and just being cheap.
 
Mike Fromme said:
Homeowner or indsutrial doesn't matter, either way the pump is putting out 22 gallons per minute..
Click to expand...

Actually it does. A splitter pump being two stage kicks into the lower stage when the pressure is really on (pun intended). At the high pressure stage these pumps are running 2-4 gpm (depending on the pump). So running with the idea that there should be the same tank storage as pump capacity a 2-4 gallon tank fits the bill. Before the load kicks the pump into second gear the pressure will typically be far below 1000 psi. That ain't gonna do much to heat the oil.

A 22 gpm single stage pump is a whole nuther critter.

<edited for clarity>
 
Last edited:
mstoelton said:
Any reviews on these?
http://www.ruggedmade.com/log-splitters.html
I am particularly interested in the splitter with the lift, but it seems a little high priced for minimal additional equipment.
Click to expand...
I've owned one of these for season now and here's my take. They have plenty of power, but the metal is subpar. The first few times that I used it, the wood extractor bent and one of the cradles broke. I contacted ruggedmade and sent pictures and was told that it wasn't a manufacturing issue. I disagreed but they refused to help. So customer service also seems to fall short. I would not recommend these splitters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a Timberwolf TW2HD that picked up used a couple years back. Has a log lift, I would never go back to using a splitter without a lift mainly because I often do large rounds by myself
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirginiaIron
I'm dragging up this old thread to see if there are any more opinions.

Was hoping to find a lot more about this splitter on here. I have been going back and forth between a Timberwolf TD-2HD, TD-5, and TD-6, this Ruggedmade splitter, and a couple other splitters I have seen on e-bay and elsewhere. Also keep tossing around the thought of just building my own.

The things that bother me about this splitter have already been mentioned. A hydraulic tank that acts as an axle and a hydraulic tank that only holds 12 gallons of fluid. Granted, the MTD Yard Machine that we have been using for 20 years now has a hydraulic tank as an axle and it does not hold very much hydraulic fluid either at merely 3 gallons. However, it isn't running a 22 gpm pump. I've also towed the splitter at 55 mph on the highway and it has done alright.

If I were to get this splitter, is it possible to put a second hydraulic reservoir on it? I would essentially mount the second reservoir above the axle reservoir and then have it flow down into the axle reservoir. Is this a possibility, or a complete no-no?

Then, if the engine/pump give me any trouble, how hard would it be to swap them out for a Honda and a 28gpm Haldex?
 
fabsroman said:
I'm dragging up this old thread to see if there are any more opinions.

Was hoping to find a lot more about this splitter on here. I have been going back and forth between a Timberwolf TD-2HD, TD-5, and TD-6, this Ruggedmade splitter, and a couple other splitters I have seen on e-bay and elsewhere. Also keep tossing around the thought of just building my own.

The things that bother me about this splitter have already been mentioned. A hydraulic tank that acts as an axle and a hydraulic tank that only holds 12 gallons of fluid. Granted, the MTD Yard Machine that we have been using for 20 years now has a hydraulic tank as an axle and it does not hold very much hydraulic fluid either at merely 3 gallons. However, it isn't running a 22 gpm pump. I've also towed the splitter at 55 mph on the highway and it has done alright.

If I were to get this splitter, is it possible to put a second hydraulic reservoir on it? I would essentially mount the second reservoir above the axle reservoir and then have it flow down into the axle reservoir. Is this a possibility, or a complete no-no?

Then, if the engine/pump give me any trouble, how hard would it be to swap them out for a Honda and a 28gpm Haldex?
Click to expand...



Unless you're only splitting small stuff, I would highly recommend something other than the ruggedmade splitter.
 
Policeman510 said:
Unless you're only splitting small stuff, I would highly recommend something other than the ruggedmade splitter.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just read your posts and saw your pics on firewoodhoarders. It is just really hard to beat their price on this machine. Plus, if things really go south, I happen to be an attorney and would not hesitate to drag them down from Boston for a lawsuit. If I had to guess, it looks like some crappy bolts and crappy welds, and that you were using a Type 1 splitter and not the Type 2. It took me a little while to try and figure out how your pics applied to the Type 2. Of course, that never should have happened to that wedge, but they really should not be using bolts on that wedge either. Am I correct that this happened to the wedge on a Type 1 vertical/horizontal splitter?
 
fabsroman said:
Yeah, I just read your posts and saw your pics on firewoodhoarders. It is just really hard to beat their price on this machine. Plus, if things really go south, I happen to be an attorney and would not hesitate to drag them down from Boston for a lawsuit. If I had to guess, it looks like some crappy bolts and crappy welds, and that you were using a Type 1 splitter and not the Type 2. It took me a little while to try and figure out how your pics applied to the Type 2. Of course, that never should have happened to that wedge, but they really should not be using bolts on that wedge either. Am I correct that this happened to the wedge on a Type 1 vertical/horizontal splitter?
Click to expand...



Correct. I tried several times to get them to replace the defective pieces but they absolutely refused. They're just not built to handle big pieces of wood. I would spend a little more money next time and get something more reliable.
 
Most companies that make splitters put a max size of round in the manual- that is their out. A very large round way beyond the height of the wedge/foot plate puts an extreme amount of stress right at the top edges of both items. This is when you see either or both of these bent or twisted and worst case scenario is the beam also gets bent in the case of the vert/horz units due to all the force being transmitted into the beam. Course sometimes just a knarly crotch piece can do it also. Just what my experience and what has come through shop has shown.
 
Policeman510 said:
I've owned one of these for season now and here's my take. They have plenty of power, but the metal is subpar. The first few times that I used it, the wood extractor bent and one of the cradles broke. I contacted ruggedmade and sent pictures and was told that it wasn't a manufacturing issue. I disagreed but they refused to help. So customer service also seems to fall short. I would not recommend these splitters.
Click to expand...

We value all feedback and we are pleased to see that people are talking about our splitters. It's unfortunate that you don't agree with our decision not to cover the damage to your log knock-off under warranty. The pictures you submitted to us (attached) clearly show that a piece of wood got lodged behind the back edge of the blade, which damaged the knock-off on the return stroke. This is considered operator error, not a product defect. Log knock-offs are not designed to take the force that the cylinder is capable of exerting on it. They are designed to push off pieces of wood that are sticking to the blade. The operator should always keep an eye on the return stroke, even when using the valve's auto-return feature. If a piece of wood becomes lodged behind the blade, the operator should stop the ram and dislodge the wood.

Shannon Pippen Knock Off Damage (1).jpg Shannon Pippen Knock Off Damage (3).jpg Shannon Pippen Knock Off Damage (4).jpg

We are proud of our splitters and we stand behind them. We are also dedicated to providing good customer service. When you contacted us, we offered you a discount on a replacement log knock-off. We will still honor that offer if you decide to take advantage of it.

If anyone has any questions about our log splitters, feel free to contact us.

-The RuggedMade Team
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirginiaIron and Gboutdoors
So the design is such that you can be put in the position of having to grab a split out of the way of auto-return of the wedge? Which actually pretty much happens at 4:18 in your demo video.

Not with these hands I won't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VirginiaIron, RiverLogger and Gboutdoors
BrotherBart said:
So the design is such that you can be put in the position of having to grab a split out of the way of auto-return of the wedge? Which actually pretty much happens at 4:18 in your demo video.

Not with these hands I won't.
Click to expand...

Thanks for responding, BrotherBart. We agree - you shouldn't reach behind the blade when it is retracting under power. We simply meant that if a piece of wood happens to drop down behind the back edge of one of the horizontal blades (wings), the valve should be put in neutral. Then you can safely remove the chunk of wood before continuing. Most logs don't even stick to the blade, or are easily dislodged by the knock-off as the rod retracts.
 
Not impressed. At all.
 
Thecornguy said:
So the steel "log knockoffs" aren't strong enough to trip the auto return? Are the 322 models built with the same steel?
Click to expand...
The one video I saw (@5:??) had straight grain wood and if it wasn't straight grained the split appeared as if it could get caught- whether it's a log or a finger- one needs to be mindful and smarter than what their working on. The return seemed fast enough that one really needs to be on their game. I wonder if an additional piece of steel gusset would prevent that and cause the return to trip? (all ip rights reserved, ;))

Anyway, since my mods, my homemade unit has a similar vulnerability on return that I need to remember. If someone borrowed it, I could see it returning damaged.
But..., I really like the 37 ton RUGGEDMADE #2 full beam with log lift and push through design. I want one! I'd need to use one first before endorsing it, but I think that is the one I'd like to sell; she's hot!!.:ZZZ:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuggedMade
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Montanalocal
Manual Log Splitter
Replies
11
Views
1K
The Gear
salecker
salecker
P
Supersplit J vs. Splitfire 2265
Replies
5
Views
978
The Gear
Dmitry
Dmitry
S
New Wood Splitter, leaning toward Countryline
Replies
25
Views
2K
The Gear
cahaak
C
I
Gas Log Splitters
Replies
19
Views
2K
The Gear
cahaak
C
vbu
Adding log lift kit to splitter
Replies
40
Views
11K
The Gear
VirginiaIron
VirginiaIron
Top Bottom
Back