I've been reading a lot on this site about splitters, and many seem to feel the Huskee 22 ton at TSC is a very well rounded machine capapble of handling most logs. What would make one choose a 27 ton over a 22? I'm burning most oak, maple, cherry, popular, and walnut. My pieces are no longer than 17 inches. Any input would be great.
How to choose a splitter?
- Thread starter beagler
- 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. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
fossil said:
Same exact thing happened to me...weird. Went shopping for a 22 and ended up with a 27 because it was closer and the price was nearly the same....
beagler said:
Originally I was looking at the 22-ton splitters (both Huskees and the MTD/clones) . . . but in the end I opted for the larger 27 ton as I have quite a bit of nasty, stringy elm to split and "upgrading" to a little bit larger splitter wasn't much more expensive. In truth, for most of my splitting, I am positive that the 22 ton splitter would have worked well but then again I'm a guy and most guys tend to think bigger is always better, right? More horsepower . . . more square feet . . . more cylinders . . . more tonnage.
I have a Huskee 22 and have no problems. I was splitting some 30" fresh cut red oak rounds (16-18 long) and never stopped it. The 2 stage pump works well. Sometimes a big knot would slow it down but I think that would apply to a 27 as well.
the 22 ton splitter would have worked well but then again I’m a guy and most guys tend to think bigger is always better, right? More horsepower . . . more square feet . . . more cylinders . . . more tonnage.
- - -
but less speed by the same ratio. all depends on the wood and your goals.
Personally, because of the wood I get, speed is more concern than max tons.
My share splitter is 4 inch cylinder, another I use (rarely) is 4.5 inch.
Course 20 hp, 28 gpm, and 5 inch cylinder could be the best of all worlds, but ya gotta pay the hp somewhere.
- - -
but less speed by the same ratio. all depends on the wood and your goals.
Personally, because of the wood I get, speed is more concern than max tons.
My share splitter is 4 inch cylinder, another I use (rarely) is 4.5 inch.
Course 20 hp, 28 gpm, and 5 inch cylinder could be the best of all worlds, but ya gotta pay the hp somewhere.
kevin j said:
Sometimes, depends on the pump / cylinder ratio - a 20 ton, 4" cyl w/ an 11gpm pump will have about the same cycle time as a 30 ton, 5" cylinder w/ a 16gpm pump - note that these are popular combos... The Troybuilt seems to use a 5" cyl and stick with the 11gpm pump which makes it a slower than normal machine.
Regardless of the size pump, for a two stage pump, you only need an engine of 1/2 the pump size - IOW for your proposed 28gpm pump on a 5" cylinder you only need a 14-15hp motor, the 20 would be overkill... (But then, thats the guy thing... %-P )
Gooserider
Out of the 7 or 8 cord I've split so far this year, only a handful of rounds could not be split by a small old splitter converted from 5hp gas to 2hp electric. The cylinder is 3 1/2 inch, I don't know what the pressure is. It has had no problem with the 20" diameter maple, ash and locust I ran through it this year. For anything much bigger than that, I would probably use my bigger splitter.
The little splitter is very easy to move around, store, etc. I split everything 20 feet from my wood shed attached to the garage, so it is handy to be able to pull it out, flip the switch and split when I have a couple hours.
The little splitter is very easy to move around, store, etc. I split everything 20 feet from my wood shed attached to the garage, so it is handy to be able to pull it out, flip the switch and split when I have a couple hours.
After 20 years of using my Northern Hydraulics budget splitter (all assembly required) the only thing I would want different is a larger engine and pump on the same 4" cylinder. Back then it was called a 16 ton splitter. The tonnage numbers have been exagerated for the same 4" cylinder/11 GPM pump/5HP-180cc engine combo that is called 22 ton now. The 5HP engines are now called 6HP. So it goes.
I would like a faster cycle time but the industry seems to consider consumers more vulnerable to tonnage numbers, so it isn't easy to find the faster combos. They are usually pro models and are quite expensive. The larger tonnage splitters would be useful if you did a lot of wood with a 4-way or 6-way wedge. Otherwise I thing they are just .300 Magnum deer rifles (more than necessary but just the ticket for some folks).
One could set the pressure higher on the pump, I suppose, and get a liittle more force but without getting any shorter cycle time. But then you would be working everything closer to the design limits and shortening the lifespan of things. Again, just the sort of thing some folks prefer.
I would like a faster cycle time but the industry seems to consider consumers more vulnerable to tonnage numbers, so it isn't easy to find the faster combos. They are usually pro models and are quite expensive. The larger tonnage splitters would be useful if you did a lot of wood with a 4-way or 6-way wedge. Otherwise I thing they are just .300 Magnum deer rifles (more than necessary but just the ticket for some folks).
One could set the pressure higher on the pump, I suppose, and get a liittle more force but without getting any shorter cycle time. But then you would be working everything closer to the design limits and shortening the lifespan of things. Again, just the sort of thing some folks prefer.
Gooserider said:
This is definitely the only knock I have on the Troybilt splitter. I've always worked by myself so the slow really isn't an issue, I could see it being a problem if I had a helper feeding me. If I wanted to speed it up in the future what could I do without needing a bigger engine? A smaller cylinder?(not worried about losing a few tons)
I work by myself and find that slow is a big issue. Your rounds are 3 inches shorter than mine so you would have to wait for the ram to travel that much further to contact the wood. See my thread where I short stopped my splitter to speed it up.rdust said:
rdust said:
Yup, the only ways to shorten cycle time are to either get a bigger pump (and engine to drive it) or a smaller cylinder. On the clevis end cylinder machines, it is fairly easy to do the smaller cylinder, as those can be found almost anywhere, and there are lots of options that use that configuration. You may have more of a challenge w/ the Troybilt, as I recall it uses a "trunion mount" cylinder, where the cylinder mounts on the piston end - I've heard that these cylinders are much more machine specific, so they are harder to get, more expensive, and have fewer options for size, etc... I've never looked for one though, so I don't know how true that is.
As to the marketting, you are right, it is more tonnage / size driven. Some of this is probably customers only being given that number to compare, some of it is that cycle time is a lot more of a subtle issue that is harder to describe on a hang tag or label...
Gooserider
LLigetfa said:
I set a table up right behind me and fill it with rounds or quartered splits. This saves me from bending down to pick up the next round or I can put a half round back on the table while I'm working on the first half. When I get a piece split to size I hit the auto return and toss the split/s onto the pile, when I reach back for the next piece off the table I stop the auto return early. It's far from perfect but works pretty good.
I think the extra speed would be nice when I have the ram fully extended and I have to wait for it to return.
Ja, some of the same tricks I use. I have one large round beside me as a table and I fashioned another table on the far side of the beam. I used to manually stop the auto-return too before the short stop mod.rdust said:
I do know what you mean about having to wait for the ram to return from fully extended especially when splitting stringy wood like Elm. To me speed is more important that tons if I can't afford both. Tons I only need 1% of the time while speed I need 99% of the time.
Here's a pic showing the big round as a table and the table mod on the other side.
![[Hearth.com] How to choose a splitter?](https://www.hearth.com/talk/attachments/100_0340-webp.209577/ "[Hearth.com] How to choose a splitter?")
Here is the short stop mod.
![[Hearth.com] How to choose a splitter?](https://www.hearth.com/talk/attachments/100_0346-webp.209578/ "[Hearth.com] How to choose a splitter?")
Here is the short stop mod.
The reasons the 28 ton was chosen over the 22 ton at my place was:
1. 7 hp Honda engine
2. The much wider log cradle without having to bolt on supports
3. Small increase in price over 22 ton
4. Still easily moved by hand
1. 7 hp Honda engine
2. The much wider log cradle without having to bolt on supports
3. Small increase in price over 22 ton
4. Still easily moved by hand
LLigetfa said:
LL, can you tell me about when you made that post or where to find it? I'm splitting 14" wood and try to stop the auto-return but often I'm busy pulling the previous splits apart (darn elm) so wasting that 10" of travel time is driving me crazy!
- Status
Similar threads
