Timberwolf Verses Super Split process time

[2FatGuys]

Is this on planet Noproblemos?

You know... Rope... you never fail to amuse me!

 

[angelo c]

My dad can beat your dad up !!!!:greenchainsaw:

 

[Curlycherry1]

I don't care where you live... a cord is a cord.

Calling a "face cord" a cord is like calling a yugo a 1-ton pickup truck. It isn't, and never will be. If you want to brag about production rates, at least use proper measuarable terms!

And your basis for competition is flawed. Allowing "any reasonable length (14-20")" isn't a fair competition. the range between 14" and 20" means that some people will be cycling their splitters 6" in and 6" back more on each stroke than others. Set a length... say 16" (since 3 rows 4'high x 8' long would equal a CORD)... and stick to it... anything under 16" is disqualified... anything over is a waste of splitter time. Let's face it, the 4x200m relay uses FOUR people.. not 3-5 people....

Hey, I don't dictate what people call and ask for. Move to CNY and set up shop selling firewood for full cords and see how far you get. Haven't you heard "the customer is always right, even when they are dead wrong?" Anyone in business knows that to be 100% true.

I know calling a measure of wood by anything other than a full cord is BS, but I am not going to keep going on that. End of discussion. Anyone with a brain can do the conversion of a FC of wood into full cords for comparison purposes as long as they know the lengths of the pieces.

Second I was not bragging. The family I was talking about was not my family. They are the Smiths out of Canastota NY. They are sort of known in the area from being featured in a newpaper article about their business they kept going after the dad died in a logging accident many years ago. Our family operation run by my brother is based on a Timberwolf HD processor. I have posted the full story of that here on AS and is easy to find. (Firewood, go big or go home)


Ok, so I'll agree that 14"-20" is not fair for the splitter smack down. For sure 20" wood will have a different time to split than 14". Fair enough. My pile right now is 16-18" wood so that is what I have to work with this very moment. It is also what I burn and from being in the business for 30+ years I would say it is a reasonable length that keeps most people happy. I cite that my brother sells in excess of 2000+ face cords (sorry for FC but it is what he sells) of 16" wood so that is my data point. Also, I don't want to go to the woods and fetch anything longer or shorter for the smack down because I would not be able to burn it.

Modifed challenge: Time to fill a 4' square rack with 16-18" splits of firewood, with each piece being split reasonably sized so that an average person can pick it up in one hand. Which to me means oak or similar density wood split smaller than 16 square inches when viewed on the end. Ie the wood should not be bigger on an end than 16" square inches, or at least not be 1.5-3X that size.

I am open to other suggested modifications to the smack down. Time to settle which splitter is the fastest, or at the bare minimum tack on some numbers to various splitters. I can see if my brother is willing to fill a rack off his processor. That might not be a fair comparison because log diameters makes a HUGE difference in processing time. 20" logs have a different processing time than 6-8" logs do. Night and day difference.

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

Nice video, fast splitting, but I personally don't want to run a splitter that has an automatic forward lever, I like my hands and fingers too much!!!

Yeah, check this video. Right at the 20 second mark, he almost loses a finger, and doesn't even seem to know it! :jawdrop:



<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wMHcR6VEcg0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wMHcR6VEcg0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

That might not be a fair comparison because log diameters makes a HUGE difference in processing time. 20" logs have a different processing time than 6-8" logs do. Night and day difference.

:agree2:

Didn't somebody say something about matching the tool to the wood? So, maybe, there's no such thing as THE best splitter? And maybe not even, THE Fastest Splitter?


Maybe, just maybe, it depends on what you're splitting. Methinks the SS wouldn't do so well with 36" oak crotches, but might just smoke a TW-6 with 10 straight pine.

Maybe?

 

[Curlycherry1]

Yeah, check this video. Right at the 20 second mark, he almost loses a finger, and doesn't even seem to know it! :jawdrop:
>

Agree! How cow if that guy keeps splitting like that he WILL lose a finger eventually. No doubt about it.

The dangerous thing I have found about the SS is that when it hits a root stump flair piece or some other piece that causes it to ride up on the wedge it does so lightning fast. I have almost kissed an aweful lot of pieces.

 

[Curlycherry1]

:agree2:
Maybe, just maybe, it depends on what you're splitting. Methinks the SS wouldn't do so well with 36" oak crotches, but might just smoke a TW-6 with 10 straight pine.

Maybe?

That would have to be part of the smackdown qualifications. What counts as "average" firewood. I would be that 90% of the wood burned for firewood is in the tree size range of 8-20". The big stuff is more rare to most folks me thinks. I could be wrong. There eventually will be that one time.

 

[super3]

:agree2:

Didn't somebody say something about matching the tool to the wood? So, maybe, there's no such thing as THE best splitter? And maybe not even, THE Fastest Splitter?


Maybe, just maybe, it depends on what you're splitting. Methinks the SS wouldn't do so well with 36" oak crotches, but might just smoke a TW-6 with 10 straight pine.

Maybe?

There ya go.

 

[angelo c]

Yeah, check this video. Right at the 20 second mark, he almost loses a finger, and doesn't even seem to know it! :jawdrop:



<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wMHcR6VEcg0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wMHcR6VEcg0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Mark,
I can't tell you anything about that video except I can say that either the engine is at idle or the video is slowed way down. Mine won't run that slow through the cuts. Also my wedge is much shorter and I would have to literally try to put my hand "under" the wood to put it in a dangerous position. I also think that he( video operator ) needs to think about a (production)table. You can't use a SS efficiently (or safely) w/o one.
Something don't smell right with that video.

 

[Curlycherry1]

There ya go.

Hmmm I have been thinking some more (yeah, I know, look out!). Having spent a lot of time munching up really big old hard maple trees that were over 3' in diameter, I gotta say that big wood is probably slower just due to the time required to manipulate the big logs into position. I could whack those things up quick with my 4-way, but overall they took more time to fill the truck back when I was doing it. That was 30+ years ago that I was doing wood that big, so memories might have faded.

I guess the smackdown should come down to fastest AS member splitting wood, and the splitter chosen and size of wood chosen is up to the competitor.

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

Most of mine is big stuff, because it's free. If I were buying logs, I'd sure rather they were in the 8-12" range. Just a lot easier to handle.

 

[Curlycherry1]

Just in case anyone has not seen this before. It makes "big wood" a moot point.

http://www.timberwolfcorp.com/log_splitters/video.asp?id=15

 

[ropensaddle]

Just in case anyone has not seen this before. It makes "big wood" a moot point.

http://www.timberwolfcorp.com/log_splitters/video.asp?id=15

Don't get many calls for ten foot wood

 

[angelo c]

Just in case anyone has not seen this before. It makes "big wood" a moot point.

http://www.timberwolfcorp.com/log_splitters/video.asp?id=15

we have seen the steriod era in baseball...now I have witnessed the steriod era in woodsplitting....Lou Ferrigno meets Timberwolf.

Boy and for all this time we were just noodling then splitting, who knew we could buy a 30k machine and just split. I guess TW doesn't believe in Tub grinders... or chainsaws for that matter.

 

[CUCV]

A few years back I got the opportunity to run a huge splitter, it was mounted up on a tractor trailer and makes the TW-10 look like a TW-1 in comparison. I got to run a few truckloads of wood thru it as the owner ran the split wood through a firewood processor. It helped made waste wood into a valuable product.

 

[Manatarms]

I'm a little late to the party, but I agree with Curly....the only way to settle this crap is with a splitter challenge! I vote we assemble a large collection of woodsplitters in my yard and have the "split-off". I'll supply the wood. I've got plenty of sticks to split up of various species and size. We could start with stuff under 16 inches...and move our way up to the nasty yard trees.

Angelo can bring the SS, someone else the TW-5/6 and we can run them against my Built-Rite 24 and any other machine that comes along.

-Mark

I'd like to see "The Great Woodsplitter Challenge." People could enter with any machine they wanted. The rules would be simple. Start with any pile of rounds they wanted, big, small, random, whatever. Next to the splitter would be a rack, 4' across the bottom, 4' high sides and a top so as to settle the overfill issue. This would be made out of 2x4s or some other materials, but would hold a set amount of wood that any contestent could build. Lengths should be reasonable ranging from 14" up to 20" depending on the contestent's choice.

Then the games would begin. The contestent would have a witness or more preferably a video camera trained on the rack and the splitter and the time needed to fill the rack would be recorded. Videos would be preferred, but I could also go with a clock attached to the rack and a start and end picture recorded showing the clock times. Time stamps on the photos would also verify the time needed to fill the rack.

Just like the "rounds vs splits, which takes up more room" debate, I am willing to do my part to put this darn issue to rest once and fer all.

The dude or dudette that can verifiably fill their rack the fastest gets to claim "Fastest Woodsplitter on AS." We could even have two categories, machine and hand split.

Anyone game? I got Davec's SS and a nice random pile of wood for the SS data point. I got video and still cameras to so as to keep my side honest.

 

[Manatarms]

BTW, I could care less which machine wins...I'll host this event for the purely selfish motive of having my wood split

 

[ropensaddle]

I'm a little late to the party, but I agree with Curly....the only way to settle this crap is with a splitter challenge! I vote we assemble a large collection of woodsplitters in my yard and have the "split-off". I'll supply the wood. I've got plenty of sticks to split up of various species and size. We could start with stuff under 16 inches...and move our way up to the nasty yard trees.

Angelo can bring the SS, someone else the TW-5/6 and we can run them against my Built-Rite 24 and any other machine that comes along.

-Mark

Who would want to go to NJ it was the most unfriendly state I ever been in. I do see some examples of good folks on here from there but I really did not like your state. PS: no offense meant to you btw.

 

[Manatarms]

Who would want to go to NJ it was the most unfriendly state I ever been in. I do see some examples of good folks on here from there but I really did not like your state. PS: no offense meant to you btw.

Rope, no offense taken....however, I live in the nice part of Jersey...the part with trees!

 

[ropensaddle]

Rope, no offense taken....however, I live in the nice part of Jersey...the part with trees!

Lol the trees were friendly it was the gas station attendant the wife held me back on then the cars honking at me and some sob flipping me the bird and me trying to chase after him with a 53 foot trailer in tow that I did not like lol