| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Log splitters
I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the
Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? Regards and thanks in advance Pat Macguire |
Log splitters
The message
from "Syke" contains these words: I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. -- Rusty Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk Separator in search of a sig |
Log splitters
Rusty Hinge 2 wrote: I'm looking at these at the moment, specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. I've used log splitters working on the back of tractors using the hydraulics from them -and they are crap. They take forever. It's OK on knotty sections but far quicker to just dump those and go at the straight grained stuff with an axe. |
Log splitters
"Rusty Hinge 2" wrote in message k... The message from "Syke" contains these words: I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. So do we. Mary not a felling company but idle and stingy, therefore wanting the most efficient with little cost and no storage problem :-) |
Log splitters
"Syke" wrote in message ... I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? Regards and thanks in advance Pat Macguire ~~~~~~~~~ For ordinary splitting a 'splitting axe' is very good. They are quite blunt, and teflon coated, but split with ease and never get stuck. They also have a very stout plastic shaft that cannot break. Not expensive. We use large quantities and also have a hydraulic splitter powered by an old tractor. This will split faster than two men can feed it and is not fazed by burrs or anything! Best Wishes Brian. |
Log splitters
Weatherlawyer wrote:
Rusty Hinge 2 wrote: I'm looking at these at the moment, specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. I've used log splitters working on the back of tractors using the hydraulics from them -and they are crap. They take forever. It's OK on knotty sections but far quicker to just dump those and go at the straight grained stuff with an axe. We have one of these which we work off a MF35 and it's absolutely brilliant. We have special axes and wedges etc as well but nothing is anything like as good as this thing. Don;t know about the quality or brand though, I expect it's a Makita equivalent as opposed to the Lidl version, that might well make a difference :-) -- Holly, in France Gite to let in Dordogne, now with pool. http://la-plaine.chez-alice.fr |
Log splitters
Rusty Hinge 2 wrote:
The message from "Syke" contains these words: I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. I have a few large lumps of oak lying about, about 9" x 12" x 18". Bit weathered on the outside, but hard as anything on the inside. I imagine they were part of the house before it was renovated in the 80s. They're just a bit too large to go in our woodburner and they laugh at my chainsaw. Is there any other way I might split them, or should I just find another use for them? James |
Log splitters
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 15:47:08 GMT, "Syke"
wrote: I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? Regards and thanks in advance Pat Macguire We had a look at a couple (in catalogues and magazines only - not 'real life') and found that the diameter of logs they would split wouldn't be much trouble with a splitting maul or axe. We get wood of well over a foot diameter sometimes and the best thing we found was a wood grenade from Screwfix. Looks a bit like an old spinning top and you stab the pointy end (which is very sharp) into the cut end of the log and hit it hard with a sledgehammer a couple of times and your log's split. If its a large diameter log it should only be a few inches deep, I think, or you might lose your grenade into the wood if it doesn't split. Joan in Ayrshire remove 'spam' from email to reply |
Log splitters
Rusty Hinge 2 wrote:
The message from "Syke" contains these words: I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. My neighbour in Belgium had a marvellous hydraulic log splitter (and a concession in the local forest to go with it). Cheap ones probably will not last. Ideal way for a retired pensioner to generate logs as fuel. Given the way British Gas intend to rip off consumers of gas and electricity it may become a growth industry. Regards, Martin Brown |
Log splitters
The message
from James Fidell contains these words: I have a few large lumps of oak lying about, about 9" x 12" x 18". Bit weathered on the outside, but hard as anything on the inside. I imagine they were part of the house before it was renovated in the 80s. They're just a bit too large to go in our woodburner and they laugh at my chainsaw. Is there any other way I might split them, or should I just find another use for them? You can get a panel saw-shaped 'frame' which carries a hacksaw blade. It would be slow, but you'd cut them with that. (A tungsten carbide tipped saw chain would do too, but a bit expensive for a one-off job.) -- Rusty Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk Separator in search of a sig |
Log splitters
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:04:18 +0000, James Fidell
wrote: Is there any other way I might split them, or should I just find another use for them? Steel wedges and a 4lb bronze (or lead) maul on a long shaft. (A steel lump hammer mushrooms the wedge). Three wedges is about the minimum, in case you have to work down the side of a long log. "Log burster" twisted wedges or grenades are IMHE only good for timber that's easy to split anyway. The trick with oak is that it splits cleanly and easily along the radial rays but is a pig of a job if you try and go through a ray. So start it off with the wedge placed accurately radial and then follow the split however it wants to go. Splitting oak is easy. Try elm or hornbeam if you really want to work at it! I still need to work on my oak riving technique though as I need to make usable timber by this method, not just firewood. I've never found hydraulic splitters to be worth the trouble. They need too much care with getting the logs to identical lengths, so they're less than ideal for randomly-sized clearance timber. Feeding them random lengths slows them down. They're also (if hand pumped) slower to use than a good few wedges. |
Log splitters
The message
from Andy Dingley contains these words: Steel wedges and a 4lb bronze (or lead) maul on a long shaft. (A steel lump hammer mushrooms the wedge). After a long time. Our wedges are still in use, sloshed with a sledge-hammer, and we bought them around 1965 Three wedges is about the minimum, in case you have to work down the side of a long log. "Log burster" twisted wedges or grenades are IMHE only good for timber that's easy to split anyway. The trick with oak is that it splits cleanly and easily along the radial rays but is a pig of a job if you try and go through a ray. So start it off with the wedge placed accurately radial and then follow the split however it wants to go. Splitting oak is easy. All true. Try elm or hornbeam if you really want to work at it! I still need to work on my oak riving technique though as I need to make usable timber by this method, not just firewood. Hmmm. Most of our early work was with elms, and mostly, it split more easily than oak. However, a knotty bit can be a pig. See one of our jobs at: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/elm.jpg I've never found hydraulic splitters to be worth the trouble. They need too much care with getting the logs to identical lengths, so they're less than ideal for randomly-sized clearance timber. Feeding them random lengths slows them down. They're also (if hand pumped) slower to use than a good few wedges. My experience of them is similar. -- Rusty Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk Separator in search of a sig |
Log splitters
Andy Dingley wrote:
I've never found hydraulic splitters to be worth the trouble. They need too much care with getting the logs to identical lengths, so they're less than ideal for randomly-sized clearance timber. Feeding them random lengths slows them down. They're also (if hand pumped) slower to use than a good few wedges. Ours is tractor pumped, so not quite the same. We cut 1m ish lengths where possible for tidyness of stacking and because they are the right size for our fire, and when cut in half they are the right size for the woodburner. But since we are clearing fallen trees we have loads of logs of uneven sizes. Our splitter has no problem *at all* with this. The wedge just goes down until wherever it meets the timber and then goes down right through it. Must be a different sort of animal.... -- Holly, in France Gite to let in Dordogne, now with pool. http://la-plaine.chez-alice.fr |
Log splitters
In uk.d-i-y James Fidell wrote:
Rusty Hinge 2 wrote: The message from "Syke" contains these words: I'm looking at these at the moment, not too much money, and specifically the Logmaster currently advertised in The Times at £199, and the Ferm from Screwfix at £99. anyone have any knowledge of either of these? No. We (a tree felling company) always used steel wedges and a sledge hammer. I have a few large lumps of oak lying about, about 9" x 12" x 18". Bit weathered on the outside, but hard as anything on the inside. I imagine they were part of the house before it was renovated in the 80s. They're just a bit too large to go in our woodburner and they laugh at my chainsaw. Sharpen your chain then. If you were trying to cut along the grain it might be a bit slower, cut into thin slices across the grain and then split it. Is there any other way I might split them, or should I just find another use for them? Oak isn't *particularly* good for burning so another use might be the way to go. -- Chris Green |
Log splitters
"Rusty Hinge 2" wrote in message . uk... Hmmm. Most of our early work was with elms, and mostly, it split more easily than oak. However, a knotty bit can be a pig. See one of our jobs at: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/elm.jpg You were splitting atthat height? :-) Mary |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:08 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter