Has anyone ever used something like this or can recommend similar?

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Su...tter-LJ10M/206425365

Thanks!

JB

Gimmick. Hydraulic power rules when splitting logs. If you cannot acquire a hydraulic splitter, the maul+wedges+sledge is the way to go. Watch out for those elm logs, they will kick your ass (and your hydro splitter's too)!

As Artie alludes to below, being young is, perhaps, your biggest asset when splitting wood.

I have heard that they work pretty well, but are very slow. Getting through gnarly stuff that you wouldn't want to split by hand is fine, but you won't process much wood with it. Even the gas powered hydraulic versions are painfully slow.

We heated with wood when I was younger, and we used a 15 lb. Monster Maul. Steel head, steel handle, would go through pretty much any piece of oak or swamp maple you could find, usually with one stroke per split. It's really not much work, the weight of the maul does all the work, you are just lifting and aiming. Anything truly nasty got a starter cut from the chainsaw, then finished with the maul.

Here's a modern example at 12 pounds from Ace Hardware. Collins Maul

quote:

Originally posted by architect:

Gimmick. Hydraulic power rules when splitting logs.

Per the description (see the link in the OP) this is hydraulic.

The hydraulic pressure is generated by hand pump.

I have no experience with this type log splitter, but the hand-pump method of generating hydraulic pressure worked just fine in the Aero Commander 520 that I used to fly, where we needed to build up hydraulic pressure for the brakes prior to engine start.

I had one and used for twenty or so years.
I used at the deer camp ,mine took up to 18 inch logs and split very well ,mostly red and white oak for camp heater.
They used to be $79.00 and lots of places sold them years back
Has two handles,one moves fast and the other for stubborn logs.ten ton was my one.

Might want to look at something like this but maybe a little bigger and hooked to a larger motor?


https://www.youtube.com/embed/N1FYqrCVZ9Y


Fab Rats version:



https://www.youtube.com/embed/Vj8A6gUN-iw

quote:

Originally posted by architect:
Watch out for those elm logs, they will kick your ass (and your hydro splitter's too)!

Please elaborate. I've got a stack of elm from a tree that came down a few weeks back, cut not split. Trying to find someone who wants it as is but maybe there's more they should know?

My opinion is that if that's all you've got, it'd probably work fairly well...albeit SLOW. Looks like all that is is a floor jack. Consider how long it takes you to jack up a vehicle with one of those things. Then consider doing it 3-4 times with each chunk of wood. Yeah, it'd take forever to do any appreciable amount of wood.

If you're just needing it for the occasional backyard campfire, I'd consider it. Otherwise a maul, wedge-sledge, or powered splitter is the way to go.

For decades I used the original Monster Maul from the 70s Earth First catalog on similar chunks, although we don't see much elm fire wood around here.

There's a special technique described above, a lot like 'ballistic power steering' for wood maul. All you gotta do is get it over your head then begin it's guided descent from the ionosphere and most stuff splits in one whack.

3 or 4 seasons back I finally converted to an electric inertial splitter as designed by DR equipment. Magnificent, efficient, practical.

A maul is the answer and good exercise too. You just need a little practice to learn how to split it with the grain and stay away from large knots.
You'll find a length that works well too.

quote:

Originally posted by Ripley:

quote:

Originally posted by architect:
Watch out for those elm logs, they will kick your ass (and your hydro splitter's too)!

Please elaborate.

Elm is notoriously resistant to splitting. It tends to grab wedges and hold them tight, I have seen many wedges abandoned in an elm log in utter frustration. Don't even think about using an axe. Locust is another wood that will do this, especially if it is green (elm doesn't care how dry it is).

How much wood will you be splitting, and how old are you? For moderate quantities such as camp fires and an occasional fire inside I would employ a maul, the ax side to use on smaller and straight grain, and the hammer side with a wedge for the larger or more stubborn pieces. When I was younger I would split enough this way to also feed an insert which burned when it was in the 20's or below. Now that I primarily heat with wood, and I'm in my '60's, I utilize a gas powered, hydraulic splitter. It's easier and WAY faster than splitting by hand, I only wish mine cycled a little faster.
I can't imagine how slow it'd be to hand pump a piston to split wood? Maybe if your wood supply is limited and you want to split even the really gnarly stuff it could be used on those.

After years of splitting by hand with with all manner of implements, I discovered the Fiskars splitting axe. It is hands down the greatest splitter I’ve ever owned. It works amazingly as well as big, heavy splitters.

https://www.amazon.com/Fiskars...1-1002/dp/B004M3BAQE

Thanks all

Just the occasional fire. I do pretty well with a maul and a wedge on things that are not super resistant to splitting.

Just need a bit of help in my advancing age and dont have the consistent need for a gas-powered splitter.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by architect:

Gimmick. Hydraulic power rules when splitting logs.

Per the description (see the link in the OP) this is hydraulic.

The hydraulic pressure is generated by hand pump.

I have no experience with this type log splitter, but the hand-pump method of generating hydraulic pressure worked just fine in the Aero Commander 520 that I used to fly, where we needed to build up hydraulic pressure for the brakes prior to engine start.

Well, sure, but doing it with a hand hydraulic pump will be REALLY slow.

Operating brakes is one thing - the pads move a small distance until they touch the braking surface, then they don't move any more. You can build up a ton of pressure (and braking force) because you don't have to keep moving the pads.

Work (in the physics sense of the energy expended to do something) is force times distance. In an ideal system, applying the brakes would require no work (energy expenditure) at all. In the real world, of course, stuff flexes and compresses and the hydraulic system expands and so there is a bit of "distance" in the work sense, but it is minimal.

When splitting logs, you have to push the wedge through the log. It takes a lot of force to push the wedge in, and you have to push it inches before the log splits. That's a lot of work (energy expenditure).

Looked at another way, you pressurize the system with the hand pump, and the wedge moves 1/8" into the log, and the hydraulic volume expansion from the piston expanding drops the pressure to almost nothing and you have to start all over - and do it again, and again, and again, just for one log.

The hydraulic log splitters people who split a lot of wood use either run on a hydraulic pump powered by a dedicated gas motor, or on a hydraulic motor connected to the PTO of a tractor, or sometimes directly off the hydraulic system of a tractor (if it is a big enough tractor to have hydraulics for a front loader or towed equipment or whatever) or backhoe or similar piece of equipment.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
After years of splitting by hand with with all manner of implements, I discovered the Fiskars splitting axe. It is hands down the greatest splitter I’ve ever owned. It works amazingly as well as big, heavy splitters.

https://www.amazon.com/Fiskars...1-1002/dp/B004M3BAQE

+1 on the Fiskars....I'm 73 now and still use it for up to 12" logs.

Those things are PURE. GARBAGE. Just buy a hydraulic splitter.

My favoroie activity is watching my neighbor use a maul to split wood and an electric leaf blower whilst I have finished my work and am drinkn beer.

I have an MTD 22 ton splitter that I got off craigslist 10 years ago. I have yet to meet a log it can't split.