New SpeedPro Kinetic Log Splitter from TSC...

[TFPace]

KiwiBro,

Ron didn't say when they would be back in the stores, and I failed to ask also. I'm looking forward to the improvements too.

 

[COUNTRY6543]

Hahaha... You horizontal/ vertical guys keeps saying how you would just split the big stuff vertical but if you really want to step up to the plate, jump in my skid loader and quarter it with my skid mounted splitter. Now your splitting wood. While your wresting with it on the ground I have it quartered and lifting the quarter on the speed pro for further processing. And no I didn't buy it, Once again I didn't feel they were worth the asking price and made my own out of an old backhoe cylinder and "I" beam. Anyone that hasn't used one is really missing out. Split it, Lift it, load it, no touching at all.

 

[Dozer Man]

Take one night off...

Wow, I take a night out with the wife and miss out on all the fun!!!

Thanks TFPace...Good info and good to hear. Ron was very informative when I talked to him last month. Real good guy.

Country...Hope you can get going real soon. That means we all move forward too.

Jules...My guess TSC doesn't know how close the repairs are because they haven't asked.

Philwilmt...I'd like to know what speeco has to say about stalling the ram and disengagement also.

BSD...I FEEL YOUR PAIN !!!

Wood Doc...You came into this thread VERY late. BSD posted that pic a long time ago to prove to all of us what the SpeedPro would do, not what his hoe would do. You wanted to know if it would handle big stuff...he showed you. And I also have to ask...How'd you get that big round into the back of your truck?? I still like your sideboards though!!

Vertical vs. horizontal...that is still an issue. It doesn't matter if it's kinetic or hydraulic. When I was researching splitters, I'd say it was 50/50 vertical vs. horizontal. Yes it is nice to bust big stuff vertically. But that's as far as it goes for me. I've split wood vertically for the last several years, and I can say that my back and knees suffer alot less splitting in the horizontal position. And trust me, I never thought I'd say that. Quartering rounds to a managable size is not that much of an issue.

Just my thoughts...fwiw

 

[ziggo_2]

Sounds like we need to have a splitting competition! You guys bring your splitters, ill supply the wood.....The loser stacks:hmm3grin2orange:View attachment 211748View attachment 211749

 

[nysparkie]

I'm confused...It takes you 15 seconds to clear a jam??? If the ram stalls on a piece of wood, shouldn't you just hit backwards on your engagement handle to disengage the rack???

For most simple jams yes. I am talking when a large splintered piece gets jammed up between the table and the ram head. It is stuck and takes a few whacks with another chunk of wood to free it up. Just hitting the engagement handle won't do a thing. When this happens it is OFF SWITCH and then restart.

 

[philwillmt]

Sounds like we need to have a splitting competition! You guys bring your splitters, ill supply the wood.....The loser stacks:hmm3grin2orange:View attachment 211748View attachment 211749

Looks like maybe a half day of work for a SpeedPro! :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[ziggo_2]

Looks like maybe a half day of work for a SpeedPro! :hmm3grin2orange:

:hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange:Haha you speedpro people are really out there....after its split and stacked your looking at about 15--20 cords (yes i know what a cord is) The first pile is about 12 ft wide 20 ft long and peaks at about 10ft logs are 2ft long....that one in the front corner is about 4 ft diameter and theres plenty more like it in there.

Second pile is 8 X 30,, 4 rows deep ... i know for a fact that pile comes out to over 5 cords after split and stacked.

 

[philwillmt]

:hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange:Haha you speedpro people are really out there....after its split and stacked your looking at about 15--20 cords (yes i know what a cord is) The first pile is about 12 ft wide 20 ft long and peaks at about 10ft logs are 2ft long....that one in the front corner is about 4 ft diameter and theres plenty more like it in there.

Second pile is 8 X 30,, 4 rows deep ... i know for a fact that pile comes out to over 5 cords after split and stacked.

OK, maybe I stretched it a bit...3/4 of a days work! :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[indiansprings]

I'm prolly pizzing in the wind, but I wrote the President of Speeco, offered to test any of their "new and improved" versions in any manner they wanted under daily use commercial conditions, providing HD video, pictures, wear measurements, fulfilling any engineering criteria they wanted performed at zero cost to Speeco, even said we'd return their machine to them at the end of however long they wanted it tested, providing they pay freight. They would have nothing to lose, they would gain seeing where any wear issues might lie, if it would hold up to the rigorous daily use of a commercial operation. All I would gain is the use of the splitter for an undetermined length of time. It will be interesting to see if they respond. If I were them I'd want a few tested in the field to prior to re-release.
I had sent off for the info packet on the DR, reviewed it, off course you get the follow up marketing, they are offering a deal starting today where if you buy one of the DR's and finance it thru them they are offering interest free financing for two years on their splitter, of course if you miss a payment it goes to 24.99%.
They'll prolly sell a load of them offering the 0% for 24 months and extended warranty for 3 years at no additional cost. At around 108.00 a month a person could sell enough wood to pay for one easily.

 

[Dozer Man]

:hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange::hmm3grin2orange:Haha you speedpro people are really out there....after its split and stacked your looking at about 15--20 cords (yes i know what a cord is) The first pile is about 12 ft wide 20 ft long and peaks at about 10ft logs are 2ft long....that one in the front corner is about 4 ft diameter and theres plenty more like it in there.

Second pile is 8 X 30,, 4 rows deep ... i know for a fact that pile comes out to over 5 cords after split and stacked.

Ok that's not fair. We needed a beautiful woman wearing a bikini in front of those piles for perspective!!! That would have helped alot!

 

[ziggo_2]

What?? did I scare you all away??

Did speeco fix this yet? Hope they got something more than a new rack...I think theres more going on than a faulty rack.

Whats the word on the streets?

 

[philwillmt]

RPM Range Test

I split about a cord and a half of wood today with my SpeedPro, mostly knotty, odd shaped pine. I wanted to see how slow I could run the splitter and still have enough speed for the clutch to keep the flywheels spinning. I started out at 2300 rpm, and found this speed to be too slow for knotty wood. The good thing was that the flywheels and ram would stop like they are supposed to at this speed after a hard strike, but at 2300 rpm it was happening too easy and too often. I went up to 2400 rpm, then ended up settling on 2500 rpm. At that speed, the ram seldom ever stopped, and when it did, it stopped properly. Not one time did the ram automatically and violently disengage like it has in the past at higher rpm's. This reaffirms my belief that the engagement mechanism is improperly designed, allowing the ram to auto disengage with the pinion gear during and/or after a hard strike. Also, I still believe the ratio on this machine is off...i.e. the flywheel speed above 2500 rpm's is too fast. I did have to manually retract the ram several times today, apparently due to wood and/or bark getting between the bottom of the push plate and the brass guide/wear plate. Looks like they could have made the log cradle a little higher so the log would only touch the push ram to prevent this from happening. Still waiting to hear from SpeeCo on the intended design of the ram engagement mechanism...it's been close to two weeks since I sent them my question.

 

[Dozer Man]

Good Morning All

The saga continues. All of us speedpro owners are waiting patiently for our new parts. We're hoping that Santa will be bringing them for Christmas, but I'm sure we all doubt that will happen. The sooner the better though.

Philwillmt,
I've stated my views on this thread quite often. IMHO, the problems with this machine are directly related to the engagement mechanism, and a way too fast flywheel/ram speed. If you don't get the engagement to be more reliable, imo you will keep breaking teeth on the rack, regardless of its hardness. If you don't get the flywheel and ram speed down, then you will never get a reliable engagement. To fix the engagement mechanism will take a redesign of the engagement cam. We will have to see what the engineers come up with(I have my own ideas). To slow down the flywheel and ram speed is easy...change the clutch drive pulley to a smaller diameter. (I'm figuring 1.75" to 2" outside pulley diameter will do)

In some ways, there is a part of me that is kinda glad Speeco is having the issues that they are having(its a very small part). Stop and think about this, what if speeco had made the speedpro with a gear ratio that set the flywheels to a slower speed, lets say 300rpm. First off, we all would agree to run our engines at, or close to, full throttle. But at that flywheel speed, the disengagement issues probly wouldn't have shown up...FOR A WHILE!!! So, we may not have had a rack issue...FOR A WHILE!!! All of the problems we are seeing and experiencing now might not have shown up UNTIL AFTER THE WARRANTY WAS OUT!!!

Trust me, I'm not glad that we are having issues with these splitters. I'm just pointing out that there might be some sort of a "Silver Lining" for us...hopefully that is a dependable splitter for the long run.

 

[BSD]

I did have to manually retract the ram several times today, apparently due to wood and/or bark getting between the bottom of the push plate and the brass guide/wear plate. Looks like they could have made the log cradle a little higher so the log would only touch the push ram to prevent this from happening. Still waiting to hear from SpeeCo on the intended design of the ram engagement mechanism...it's been close to two weeks since I sent them my question.

unbolt the head and check the wear plate bolts, there are 4. 3 of mine vibrated out and the fourth one sheared off. currently in my shop waiting to be drilled and tapped to go back together with some loc-tite.

 

[indiansprings]

Based on my communication with the company I believe they are committed to getting a solution to the issues resolved as soon as possible. I feel for those that are having to sit and wait, while having wood that needs split, but I'll bet they make it right will all the people who have already purchased them. Speeco has had an excellent reputation over the years on here for standing behind there product. I'm sure they are wanting to make sure what ever modifications/fixes they send out works 100% correctly before rushing them out that is half azzed. I'll bet they get it right and put a machine on the market that will save people 800-900 dollars over the competition.

 

[philwillmt]

Phone Call

Had a message from Special Products when I got home today...it was from the head of engineering. I'll try calling him back tomorrow. It will be interesting to hear what he has to say. Will keep everyone posted. Thanks BSD for the reminder about checking the mounting screws on the brass wear plate...I will do that the first chance I get. Dozer Man, I share your hopes that we will get to the bottom of these issues...the sooner the better! I don't particularly like being a guinea pig, but I'm more than happy to help SpeeCo refine their product...at least hopefully other consumers can benefit from our trials and errors! I just hope I don't break something in the mean time and get put out of commission from being able to split wood in the middle of winter, which, by the way, begins Thursday! In the mean time, I'm planning on hangin' in there like a hair in a biscuit!

 

[philwillmt]

Based on my communication with the company I believe they are committed to getting a solution to the issues resolved as soon as possible. I feel for those that are having to sit and wait, while having wood that needs split, but I'll bet they make it right will all the people who have already purchased them. Speeco has had an excellent reputation over the years on here for standing behind there product. I'm sure they are wanting to make sure what ever modifications/fixes they send out works 100% correctly before rushing them out that is half azzed. I'll bet they get it right and put a machine on the market that will save people 800-900 dollars over the competition.

Indiansprings,

I sure hope you're right...only time will tell!

 

[Dozer Man]

Can't Sleep...

I split about a cord and a half of wood today with my SpeedPro, mostly knotty, odd shaped pine. I wanted to see how slow I could run the splitter and still have enough speed for the clutch to keep the flywheels spinning. I started out at 2300 rpm, and found this speed to be too slow for knotty wood. The good thing was that the flywheels and ram would stop like they are supposed to at this speed after a hard strike, but at 2300 rpm it was happening too easy and too often. I went up to 2400 rpm, then ended up settling on 2500 rpm. At that speed, the ram seldom ever stopped, and when it did, it stopped properly. Not one time did the ram automatically and violently disengage like it has in the past at higher rpm's. This reaffirms my belief that the engagement mechanism is improperly designed, allowing the ram to auto disengage with the pinion gear during and/or after a hard strike. Also, I still believe the ratio on this machine is off...i.e. the flywheel speed above 2500 rpm's is too fast. I did have to manually retract the ram several times today, apparently due to wood and/or bark getting between the bottom of the push plate and the brass guide/wear plate. Looks like they could have made the log cradle a little higher so the log would only touch the push ram to prevent this from happening. Still waiting to hear from SpeeCo on the intended design of the ram engagement mechanism...it's been close to two weeks since I sent them my question.

Hey Phil,
Can't sleep so I was rereading your post. I put your rpm's into the pulley/rpm calculater along with my measurements. At 2300 engine rpm puts the flywheel speed at approx 415 rpm. At 2500 engine rpm, it puts flywheels at 450 rpm. Earlier BSD stated that he thought the clutch engaged at 2300 rpm. Even if someone were to spin it up faster than that and then slow to 2300rpm, it will never support any kind of load at the engagement rpm. I'm comparing that to a snowmobile, you can spin the rpm up to get it moving, and then lower it to run at the engagement rpm. It will go, but it will stop on the slightest incline unless you give it some gas. Not to mention, at 2300 rpm, the motor has limited torque and hp. Now at 2500rpm, you've eliminated any engagement/load issues, but it will still limit the hp/torque somewhat (which imho hp is not as necessary in kinetics). BUT, the bigger issue, at 2500rpm the flywheels are then spinning over 450rpm, which imho is still 100-150 rpm too fast. The DR advertises approx 400rpm, and SS says 300rpm max. I would have to guess 2500 rpm is pretty close to where I've been running mine all the time. Your findings, with your tach, have really confirmed what I've been saying all along, these things are way too fast. I still think the engagement "cam" needs reworked so there isn't any way of disengaging, except for manually or at the end of the stroke. But they need to slow the flywheels down if they want to keep them together for the long haul. If they don't slow them down, then I'll at least slow mine down.

Later Phil, let us know what you find out.

 

[philwillmt]

Hey Phil,
Can't sleep so I was rereading your post. I put your rpm's into the pulley/rpm calculater along with my measurements. At 2300 engine rpm puts the flywheel speed at approx 415 rpm. At 2500 engine rpm, it puts flywheels at 450 rpm. Earlier BSD stated that he thought the clutch engaged at 2300 rpm. Even if someone were to spin it up faster than that and then slow to 2300rpm, it will never support any kind of load at the engagement rpm. I'm comparing that to a snowmobile, you can spin the rpm up to get it moving, and then lower it to run at the engagement rpm. It will go, but it will stop on the slightest incline unless you give it some gas. Not to mention, at 2300 rpm, the motor has limited torque and hp. Now at 2500rpm, you've eliminated any engagement/load issues, but it will still limit the hp/torque somewhat (which imho hp is not as necessary in kinetics). BUT, the bigger issue, at 2500rpm the flywheels are then spinning over 450rpm, which imho is still 100-150 rpm too fast. The DR advertises approx 400rpm, and SS says 300rpm max. I would have to guess 2500 rpm is pretty close to where I've been running mine all the time. Your findings, with your tach, have really confirmed what I've been saying all along, these things are way too fast. I still think the engagement "cam" needs reworked so there isn't any way of disengaging, except for manually or at the end of the stroke. But they need to slow the flywheels down if they want to keep them together for the long haul. If they don't slow them down, then I'll at least slow mine down.

Later Phil, let us know what you find out.

Dozer Man,

I definitely believe you're thinking is on the right track! Even at 2300 rpm engine speed, the engine never bogged down. As I have said before, I think a 4, or maybe even a 3 hp engine would be sufficient...once the flywheels get up to speed, it can't take that much energy to keep them up to speed! My mind goes back to the grade school playground days...you have to work your butt off and run like a wild horse to get all of those girls spinning on the merry-go-round (especially if you're going to impress them :hmm3grin2orange, but once you get it going, you can stop running and keep it spinning with one hand! Same principal with the splitter I think. I too still believe the ram engagement mechanism is the culprit with the disengagement problem. Also, if these are cheap clutches, they could also be part of the problem if the clutch pressures are inconsistent. We'll see...

 

[sunfish]

Hey Phil,
Can't sleep so I was rereading your post. I put your rpm's into the pulley/rpm calculater along with my measurements. At 2300 engine rpm puts the flywheel speed at approx 415 rpm. At 2500 engine rpm, it puts flywheels at 450 rpm. Earlier BSD stated that he thought the clutch engaged at 2300 rpm. Even if someone were to spin it up faster than that and then slow to 2300rpm, it will never support any kind of load at the engagement rpm. I'm comparing that to a snowmobile, you can spin the rpm up to get it moving, and then lower it to run at the engagement rpm. It will go, but it will stop on the slightest incline unless you give it some gas. Not to mention, at 2300 rpm, the motor has limited torque and hp. Now at 2500rpm, you've eliminated any engagement/load issues, but it will still limit the hp/torque somewhat (which imho hp is not as necessary in kinetics). BUT, the bigger issue, at 2500rpm the flywheels are then spinning over 450rpm, which imho is still 100-150 rpm too fast. The DR advertises approx 400rpm, and SS says 300rpm max. I would have to guess 2500 rpm is pretty close to where I've been running mine all the time. Your findings, with your tach, have really confirmed what I've been saying all along, these things are way too fast. I still think the engagement "cam" needs reworked so there isn't any way of disengaging, except for manually or at the end of the stroke. But they need to slow the flywheels down if they want to keep them together for the long haul. If they don't slow them down, then I'll at least slow mine down.

Later Phil, let us know what you find out.

These small gas engines have a governor, that increases throttle when a load is applied. So that should not be a problem.

Also agree with what Phil said, a 3-4 hp gas motor is all that's needed with this type of machine. A 1 hp electric motor will run one...