New kind of Splitter... Good or Bad?

  • 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
Not open for further replies.
I saw it in person last week at TSC but didn't see it in action. It's the new SpeeCo version of the Super Split, WoodWolf, DR RapidFire, et al.
 
Looks kinda small to "me." Sure you don't wanna consider a 5-ton or more? What's the cost? (not shown?)


-Soupy1957
 
soupy1957 said:
Looks kinda small to "me." Sure you don't wanna consider a 5-ton or more? What's the cost? (not shown?)


-Soupy1957

Huh?? Its rated 28 ton. Cost is $1699.
 
Seen one at tsc yesterday but not in action. Looked built Kind of wimpy to me.
 
Looks like a giant tape measure. Cycle time is great, be sure to keep your hands away from the thing when its in action.
 
As said above, it is a knock off of the super splitter. Those that own super splitters usually back the machine with words like: awesome, great, fast, efficient, etc.

They are not for me because of the wood I am usually playing with, but for someone that deals with medium to smaller stuff as their mainstay...well this "design" is pretty cool. I have not seen the actual build of this machine, so I will not comment on that.
 
Only Super Splitter I know of is the $40 Fiskars variety.

This looks nothing like that.
 
mayhem said:
Only Super Splitter I know of is the $40 Fiskars variety.

This looks nothing like that.

Thank God!
 
how long have they been making rack and pinion type log splitters? I would think way before hydraulics.
Tons of older saw mills used this same type system.

It should work great and be very simple to work on. "Should be"
 
Actually, I kinda like the rhythm of a hydraulic and the sound a log makes as it's split with the ram.
 
I am interested in this splitter, but too new to the market for me. I will be watching for reviews from people who have seen this in action, or have used this themselves. If anyone uses this splitter, please let us know how you like.

Steve
 
I used a Super Split very much when I worked as a landscaper in the 80's. It is fast, will split just about anything a hydraulic splitter will. By it's nature and design it is much faster than a hydraulic, and I never lost any fingers.
As with any splitter though, if you are working with another person operating the engage handle, caution must be heeded as to make sure each are aware of the others pace and actions. My boss was a dealer, and rented out the one we had. I loved it, and got used to the pace in no time. The original Super Split was too expensive for me to justify one though.
My neighbor has a hydraulic I have used a few times, and will be buying off him for $400.00. It is only horizontal, but I really like that it has the wedge on the end and not on the ram.
He paid $1,600.00 for it new, and I am getting a hell of a deal. Been sing a 4ton Ryobi, and have to say, it is a tough lil SOB. I put alot of huge stuff through it. The electric limits it though, as I want to do my splitting out near the barn these days, no electric out there.
 
I had checked out some reviews on Arborsite and some scoop I got is that this thing is big, 600 lbs, it will split vertical, it has a safety feature that requires two hands, a button and a handle. Some people in the wood processing business said they figured out you can make it one handed easy by using a tie on the button to keep it depressed. One guy said he did a whole dump truck in a couple of hours. I don't need it that fast but for the money it seems good. There is some vibration because of the two 70 lb flywheels, probably less in dirt. It is, however, made in Chine.

I was going to get the 22 ton MTD on sale, but I may wait now and read more reviews as they come out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.