Last time I split a lot of wood by hand I did it on the ground.
This time, I'm thinking of a chopping block.
Is there an ideal height?
This time, I'm thinking of a chopping block.
Is there an ideal height?
Ideal Height For Chopping Block?
- Thread starter velvetfoot
- 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
Depends on the length of wood being split and how tall you are. I like it so that I can complete a full stroke - that is to have top of the round at a height so that when the maul strikes it, the maul is roughly parallel to the ground. For me that works out to about a 16-18" high block.
Your back will thank you for using a chopping block.I'm 6'3" and use a block roughly 20" high.This works well for me and keeps my maul out of the dirt too.The only rounds I split on the ground are the ones I can't lift.
I've done it both ways, and I think it's easier to leave the chunks on the ground and split them where they are, vs. having to lift them up onto a block. Actually, the only advantage I see in a splitting block is that it keeps your maul from digging into the ground and dropping dirt all over your head and shoulders when you're making the next split.
I have never used a block, I split right on the ground. I set up a bunch of pieces, split them, and set up more. Two guys can split a lot of wood quickly if one guy sets them up and piles the split pieces while the other guy runs the maul. Using a block adds one more step to the process and slows it down.
I'm sure there's some energy absorbtion going on. On one hand you want the surface soft enough so the maul doesn't get roughed up and on the other, the softness of the ground could absorb energy. The last time, I wound up digging holes-of course that had a plus side too since then the piece wouldn't fall over.
I've also noticed that I spend more time setting up rounds to be split than I actually spend splitting. Which is worse for your back- bending over to pick up rounds and placing them on the block or splitting them on the ground?
Lately I do all my splitting in the driveway, since hauling big rounds around back is too much of a pain. So I use a block to protect the driveway. The big stuff I split on the ground, I just try not to go all the way through. What I've found is that lower is better when you need the most power, but higher is better (for the back) when you are doing easy splitting. Right now I'm working on red oak; the initial 2-3' round might take a few good whacks to section up, but splitting each section is child's play. So I do the latter on a fairly high block so I don't have to lean way down to grab the splits and toss them on the pile. Similar for the locust and pear I did earlier. For elm or red maple, I use a lower block because they require full swings.
I use about a 18" splitting block. I know lots of people here split on the ground, but I can't bring myself to do that. Splitting on the block works pretty darn good for me, so I see no reason to change. Plus, the area where I split my wood is loading with half-submerged rocks, so I think I'd be sending chards of metal all over the place if I was splitting on the ground.
Luckily, I have yet to contend with large rounds like that. The last load of tremendously large sugar maple was generously cut into pie shaped wedges that I could pick up and get on the chopping block.
The stump where the tree last stood, I cut it as close to the ground as possible after the tree is felled. I got away from blocks, much more force can be delivered after you pass waist level.
You're definitely right about that. I chopped on a 8 inch block at someone else's house and was amazed at the difference. Luckily I'm so strong it doesn't matter.
haha, yeah, right.
haha, yeah, right.
Some I split on the ground. The rest I sit on a two inch thick block of steel. It is attached to the end of the I-beam on my hydraulic splitter.
Splitting on the ground I believe, robs your swing of lot of power by not making a solid hit with maul.
If you use a block, its more moves to make the split, but the block under your round gives you a very solid hit and more bang for your buck.
Try both. What ever feels better to you, ( There is always the modern aged method of the log splitter as an option. You still have to pick up the round to load the darn thing anyway.
John
If you use a block, its more moves to make the split, but the block under your round gives you a very solid hit and more bang for your buck.
Try both. What ever feels better to you, ( There is always the modern aged method of the log splitter as an option. You still have to pick up the round to load the darn thing anyway.
John
If the ground is frozen, then maybe on the ground is ok. But our ground never freezes up so it easily takes 2-3 times the effort to split on the ground vs on a block.
I like the idea of a short block, but you'd have to be careful not to split that. 
It probably is to vary things anyway for the body's sake.
It probably is to vary things anyway for the body's sake.
When I was just out of highschool I worked on a grounds crew and one of our winter jobs was cutting up firewood for the new confrence center they had. We were cutting mostly gypsy moth killed oak. There were three black guys of varying ages who all had split wood since they were kids because thats what they had for heat and cooking. Watching them split wood was like watching Tiger Woods hit golf balls, amazing. They never used chopping blocks. And they could always hit the same place twice. I aspire to be so good one day.
I'm working on it I think. Maybe by the time I'm a little older I might be up to about 3/4 of Eric Johnson.
Being able to hit the same place more than once is the whole key. It's just a matter of practice.
My BIL once told me I should take up golf, because I guess he was impressed with my hand/eye coordination. My problem is that I tend to obsess on things I like to do. "Do you really think" I asked, "that the world needs another obsessive golfer?"
My BIL once told me I should take up golf, because I guess he was impressed with my hand/eye coordination. My problem is that I tend to obsess on things I like to do. "Do you really think" I asked, "that the world needs another obsessive golfer?"
LOL, Is there any other kind of golfer? My uncle use to use disapproving expression "doesn't amount to a cord of wood". Guess he'd approve of your choices!!Eric Johnson said:
Last time I recalled widening my eyes just as I was bringing down the maul. It seemed to make me more accurate. I have no idea why. Perhaps I too should use this technique this year in my pitiful golf outings.
I've found that a block that is about as tall as the middle of my shin is perfect for wood between 16" and 18" long. When the ground is frozen or if pieces are large diameter I don't bother with a block.
I think that when you split on the ground that you're able to swing the maul in a longer arc and thus generate more maul head speed and therefore deliver a more powerful blow to the wood....but.......then you usually hit the maul-head on the ground and have to contend with dulling the blade and/or bringing-up dirt.....so.....take your pick....
- Status
Similar threads
