fast splitter.. anyone use this type of splitter?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnqVeaKj23c&feature=related

seems to be splitting the wood up pretty quickly.

Looks impressive with whatever they are cutting. Don't think it would be very effective on nasty Pin Oak or Maple though. What do you do when the splitter can't split what it started? Looked them up and they are pricey too. 5.5 horse version is 2900, 9 hp is over 4k. What was the kid doing behind the unit in the video? Feeding the Hampsters running the engine?

I've seen them many times. They do not impress me and I do not think they are any faster. It is all in technique. I've watched others splitting wood and just have to shake my head watching all the wasted effort and motion. I simply sit and split. Easy does it, and you can get lots done in a little time.

As you can see in the video, if it can't split, you just disengage the lever and give it another shot.

They expensive because the mechanism that makes them work. The biggest advantages of the super-split style is that they require much less power (smaller engine, less fuel, easier to start etc), and they operate much faster. They automatically return once they get to the end of their stroke.

Seen them as in seen video? Have you ever used one?

Don't need to use one myself as I can tell just from watching several videos on this thing that it is not what I want and not what most folks think it is. It will do nicely for some things but not for most wood burners. Also, bear in mind that in the video he probably has someone feeding him his wood. What if he had to get his own? It won't be in the same place all the time then. What about splitting harder to split woods? What about larger logs, etc.? No, I'll stick to the hydraulics.

we have used them since 1995 still running the second model(first got ran over by a loader(volvo 90) can say this splitter is very fast and goes thru anything(we do mostly hard maple and oak) with a bit of planning you can keep this splitter in wood,but i dont know any splitter that feeds itself.we also modified the splitter knife and push plate so that we can double up on the wood,its goes thru no problem,and it can be moved easily,thrown in the back of a truck by one person.sorry,we dont sit when splitting,just our preference

I don't like the potential of my hand guiding a log against a blindly located wedge either. This video shows a guy hustling to split as much as possible. Certainly can sell a splitter that way, but can also get a heck of an injury. To each his own, I would not change my choice if I could.

So admittedly you're making a statement about it's operation based upon videos that you've watched and you feel qualified to make a statement such as this, "I do not think they are any faster"?

Now that we've established that, we'll move on to the truth.

I don't know of any hydraulic splitter out there that can split wood that fast, the matter of feeding it and keeping splits clear of the splitter are moot points because you have to do that just the same with hydraulics. The main improvement is in cycle time. When splitting with hydraulic you patiently wait for the ram to move forward and split the wood, then you wait for it to move backwards to maneuver the split in place and repeat the process. That takes a lot of time, even a fast hydraulic cycle time of 15 seconds or so is ten times slower than this is. So how can it not be any faster?

The force applied by the flywheel on this splitter is magnitudes larger than the force of any hydraulic splitter I know of. The only different between the two is that one is an impact force and the other is a continuous force. The hydraulic splitter can continue powering through nasty crotches and y's, while the super-split may take a couple whacks. But the few times you have to hit piece multiple times still doesn't make the process take more time than hydraulic splitting on a whole.

For most people hydraulics splitters work great, and for the cost they really are great, but that doesn't mean they are superior. For higher production splitting a splitter like this just can't be beat IMHO.

And that would be different with a hydraulic splitter? If you had a hydraulic splitter with a stationary wedge it wouldn't be any different than this. The only difference is this one moves much faster. If you got your hand in a hydraulic it's still going to do just as much damage, it doesn't matter how fast it is, you still can't react fast enough to stop a hydraulic splitter if your hand is in the way. I don't understand your concern.

They are splitting oak and maple in this video!

For high-volume a hydraulic splitter with a multi-way wedge is probably the fastest. One pass and you have 8 splits. Hard to beat that.

A multi-way wedge isn't an equal comparison though. We're comparing speed of comparable setups hydraulic vs. inertial rack & pinion. You add a multi-way wedge to one you have to add it to the other.

Video made my back hurt. Saw him struggling, lifting & wrestling with large rounds.
I sometimes have rounds that a 3" wide wedge don't break open on one pass, so
this type would add more work for me. If all I had was straight grained easy split wood, it would be fine,
but MN seem to throw me a tough round every now & then.
But I'm never racing when cutting wood, I set a slow steady pace. My hydraulic works fine, vert & horizontal.
Back saving vertical mode & cradle beam was the biggest reasons I went with 22 ton speeco.

Nice splitter video, could almost smell the wood being split
Very fast ram speed just lower power. Trade-offs.
How does the price compare?

I used one of those super-splitters for a summer and yes they do cycle fast. You really need 2 people. The one think I liked was the gas usage - next to nothing. That being said, I then bought a 27 ton troy bilt hydraulic splitter. The were many reasons for the hydraulic opposed to the direct drive. One, I never had a round that I couldn't go through with the hydraulic. The super-splitter required a sledge to free the round several times.

The absolute main reason for the purchase of hydraulic though was the horizontal / vertical option - period.

Lifting ALL the rounds onto the table of the super-split KILLED my back. Now I just kick the big rounds around with my foot and stand them up on the splitter plate while I sit.

CountryBoy19: "And that would be different with a hydraulic splitter? If you had a hydraulic splitter with a stationary wedge it wouldn't be any different than this. The only difference is this one moves much faster. If you got your hand in a hydraulic it's still going to do just as much damage, it doesn't matter how fast it is, you still can't react fast enough to stop a hydraulic splitter if your hand is in the way. I don't understand your concern."





The splitter I use has a stationary base, and the wedge moves with the hydrualics. This is a major difference. The wedge is visible and I dont have to guide anything with my hands. My hands rotate the lever and scratch my but all at the same time a log is being split safely away from my limbs. My concern clear now? Sounds like your the salesman for this line?

not much room for error there......

Just watched the video. I don't work that hard using a maul. :lol:

If that shaky jake splitting table is what they supply as standard equipment, I'm not impressed.

I think it has plusses and minuses. It does look faster but no verticle splitting. Most of my splitting is horizontal but I would for sure be using a verticle splitter as I get older. It does seem quite which is great! I do not like the small pad though, too small for my liking. I also think the control looks awkwardly high. Looks like your hanging in and over it more with a high control. I have a speeco 22ton splitter and will change the pumpt from 11 to 13 if it ever goes. I think the full cycle time is 14 seconds if I remember right. Thats the full stroke. I rarely go thru the full stroke so it really is not much quicker when you look at that analogy. I think the 13gpm pump will speed it up 20 percent or so just over 11 seconds. I am lucky to get a quarter of the stroke on most oak and maple. Thats something like 4-5 seconds. Not sure how much power that has as well. A smaller motor would be less powerfull is my guess. Obviously the mechanics are different so maybe not. I agree, the table looks a little chinsey. Who knows, it may be the best thing since sliced bread! :lol:

That would be a sweet set-up for two people
great if you were rolling out of a pick-up.

even sitting I have to be easy on my back
can't sit too long, either.


I'd worry about my fingers, too.
Probably just looks awful due to the camera angle.


Nice splitter.

Not at all, I'm just trying to make sure it gets a fair comparison. You can't compare apples to oranges and that is what people are trying to do.

You can't accurately compare a vertical hydraulic splitter to this.
You can't accurately compare a massive hydraulic splitter with an 8 way wedge to this.

I mean, come on, any Joe can get up an preach, "I've never seen this thing run before, but my cousin's $100,000 firewood process is faster." Well no chit it's faster... did you have to use a stop-watch to figure that out?

Make an equal, accurate comparison and then we'll talk .................................. with all the spare time left-over when we're done splitting with this one.

This has a stationary wedge, it could just as easily have a moving wedge, but it doesn't so you can't honestly say, "But this is dangerous because this." If you compared it to any other hydraulic splitter with a stationary wedge the risk would be the same. In the interest of making an accurate comparison (if a person is trying to "compare" this to any other splitters) we have to compare this to something else with a single stationary wedge. Do you see the point now?

If you like it then by all means get one. It just does not look comfortable to me for one, or as versital as the regular splitter that goes horizontal and vertical. Thats not bad, just not mainstream for a lot of people...

They are expensive because they have a near monopoly on this type of unit. Rack & pinions are not expensive compared to hyd pumps,valves, cylinders, tanks, etc etc, Randy

Ive been using a SS for 2 years now .
Ill tell you It is wayyyyyyyy faster then the hydraulic splitter .
I have a 27 ton yard machine and it is a good unit but its like watching grass grow compared to the SS .
I can throw a log on the table the size of a garbage can and it gets pushed thru in 2 seconds .
If the log gets stuck at the end of the stroke , We just run a split thru and push it out in 2 seconds .
It looks dangerous but its hard to get your hand stuck .
I keep one hand on the pull lever and the other on top of the log .
I pull the lever and lift my hand .
The SS could send a split flying if you don't hold the wood down .
We lift the logs with a skid steer with a 1/2 cord box , we 1/4 or 1/2 the rounds with the 27 ton yard machine when there cut , so the wood is small.
The wedge is sharp and cuts thru easy .
google wolf splitter , its the same as the SS smaller model . I think it runs 1400 dollars .
With my 2 sons we can cut 2 cord a hour with out pushing .
The work bench is at a perfect height and i can split for hours and not feel it .
We split about 60 cord now
If i was sitting out buy the splitter the boys would bury me in splits in a few minutes

This is how I feel about it exactly.

This is difficult to answer because it appears only one man knows the "truth!"

I'd hate to have to actually use everything first before making up my mind whether I thought it was worth the price or was any good at all. No, most of us make lots of decisions without actually using something. Hey, I even made up my mind about my wife before I married her!

On the speed issue, yes, it is different with a hydraulic splitter. Speed causes more accidents! Looking at this another way too, it appears most folks compare the cycle time. That thing is indeed fast and I doubt anyone would really say any different. However, you can not compare it to the cycle time of a hydraulic splitter. That is, not on all types of wood. For example, for the past several years and for a few more most of the wood we split here is white ash. Would I use cycle time to determine how long it takes to split the logs? Absolutely not! The reason for this is that I very rarely will use the entire cycle. I can split a lot of wood using only a few inches of travel with the ram, so it takes a very little time to split a log; that is, it will split just as fast as it shows in that video. One more thing is that we split lots of kindling with the hydraulic splitter. This means approximately 1" x 1" pieces. I would not even attempt to do it with that machine! The reason is that you have to have your hands and fingers so close to the wedge. I like my fingers and if those are lost, they do not grow back.

Having help seems to be the key here. That cycle time doesn't do much for you if someone isn't feeding you.