looks good
£150
From 16/10
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906

newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.

newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 15:39:35 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.

I wouldn'y worry too much about that. It will be the full stroke time
and most logs don't need to use the full stroke, they'll split with
the wedge 2-3 inches into the log, and you can then retract the wedge.
Difficult logs may need the full stroke, but they'd be difficult and
slow with manual methods as well.

On Friday, 14 October 2016 15:57:26 UTC+1, jim wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?
--
Jim K

Way to go?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bVAAx3mMKY

On 14/10/16 15:57, jim wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?

couple of seconds for easy stuff. Maybe 30 seconds for a real knotty *******


--
€œBut what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!€�

Mary Wollstonecraft

Does anyone know the advantage of a hydraulic system compared to an
electric screw drive?

Is there some fundamental advantage of the hydraulic system? Or is it
purely a matter of designing the two alternatives and costing them out?
I suppose a long piston is a lot cheaper to machine than a long screw
thread. That sort of thing. The screw design would need a gearbox, and
that sort of cancels out the cost of the hydraulic pump.

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 14/10/16 15:57, jim wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?

couple of seconds for easy stuff. Maybe 30 seconds for a real knotty *******


Well my son has something a bit like the Lidl splitter and has got fed
up with the time it takes.

He ordered the bits for something like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZXmsj8Nlkg

and I taught myself the very basics of LibreCAD to draw up plans so that
the man who has welded up a lot of bits for the boat could assemble it.
Unfortunately, when,3 weeks ago, he rang to say it was ready up to the
stage where we could try splitting a few logs, but just needed a keyway
for the motor to be trimmed to fit, we were unable to go for a test run.
In the same call he also said he was in hospital the next day for a
major operation and would call when he got out.

It needs his heavy lifting gear to deliver it. I don't like to ring.

--
Bill

"jim" k wrote in message
...
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?

The professional ones are a hell of a faster than that and
there is no reason why a diy one couldn't do just as well.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Friday, 14 October 2016 15:57:26 UTC+1, jim wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs
with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?
--
Jim K

Way to go?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bVAAx3mMKY

Not exactly the safest thing in the world to use.

GB wrote

Does anyone know the advantage of a hydraulic system compared to an
electric screw drive?

You dont get **** in the screw drive.

Is there some fundamental advantage of the hydraulic system?

Much more reliable.

Or is it purely a matter of designing the two alternatives and costing
them out?

Nope. One obvious difference is the maintenance hassle difference.

I suppose a long piston is a lot cheaper to machine than a long screw
thread. That sort of thing. The screw design would need a gearbox, and
that sort of cancels out the cost of the hydraulic pump.

And the hydraulic system can use standard components.

In message , GB
writes
Does anyone know the advantage of a hydraulic system compared to an
electric screw drive?

Is there some fundamental advantage of the hydraulic system? Or is it
purely a matter of designing the two alternatives and costing them out?
I suppose a long piston is a lot cheaper to machine than a long screw
thread. That sort of thing. The screw design would need a gearbox, and
that sort of cancels out the cost of the hydraulic pump.

I suppose either system could require both hands on switches/levers for
safety purposes.

I assume a screw drive would need to run in reverse for the return
stroke whereas the hydraulics simply reverse the fluid flow direction.

Screw drive will incur friction losses under load.

I have said here before the Hycrack splitter I use goes on a 40HP
tractor pto so is likely to need 5-10HP for knotty stuff. The tapered
screw can rotate the log so care is needed with hand position:-)




--
Tim Lamb

harry Wrote in message:
On Friday, 14 October 2016 15:57:26 UTC+1, jim wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 10/14/2016 1:17 PM, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

Tim

Hadn't seen the figure, but that thought is one thing which is keeping
me away. OTOH it would be handy to have something to deal with logs with
large knots or junctions.


Well it says "up to 100 logs per hour". Could be a lot slower. ;-)

Tim


The figure might include loading and unloading, or multiple splits
on one log?

How quick should a diy log splitter go in your experience?
--
Jim K

Way to go?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bVAAx3mMKY


What really happened to ZZTop?

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 14/10/2016 13:17, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

I have the same model - branded differently and painted red.

The 36 secs is the time for full travel of the (quite long) bed. There
is a stop that you can engage anywhere you choose to prevent the ram
returning to the home position, so you can lock it close to the length
of log that you are splitting. Hence its only a few seconds of travel to
split the next log.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 14/10/2016 21:05, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , GB
writes
Does anyone know the advantage of a hydraulic system compared to an
electric screw drive?

Is there some fundamental advantage of the hydraulic system? Or is it
purely a matter of designing the two alternatives and costing them
out? I suppose a long piston is a lot cheaper to machine than a long
screw thread. That sort of thing. The screw design would need a
gearbox, and that sort of cancels out the cost of the hydraulic pump.

I suppose either system could require both hands on switches/levers for
safety purposes.

I assume a screw drive would need to run in reverse for the return
stroke whereas the hydraulics simply reverse the fluid flow direction.

This one has spring return - once you stop pumping the ram returns to
the home position (unless you use the lock to keep it partly extended)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm Wrote in message:
On 14/10/2016 13:17, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

I have the same model - branded differently and painted red.

The 36 secs is the time for full travel of the (quite long) bed. There
is a stop that you can engage anywhere you choose to prevent the ram
returning to the home position, so you can lock it close to the length
of log that you are splitting. Hence its only a few seconds of travel to
split the next log.



+1

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Friday, 14 October 2016 13:17:39 UTC+1, Tim+ wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 10/13/2016 10:04 PM, jim wrote:

looks good
£150
From 16/10


Oh no. I do enjoy swinging my axe, but can I resist it?

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-...etail&id=37906


I think 36 seconds a log to split them would drive you crazy with
impatience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bVAAx3mMKY
Sorted.


NT

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:16:19 +0100, GB
wrote:

Does anyone know the advantage of a hydraulic system compared to an
electric screw drive?

Is there some fundamental advantage of the hydraulic system? Or is it
purely a matter of designing the two alternatives and costing them out?
I suppose a long piston is a lot cheaper to machine than a long screw
thread. That sort of thing. The screw design would need a gearbox, and
that sort of cancels out the cost of the hydraulic pump.


There is a bit of confusion about screw drive, this video shows what I
think you mean, the splitter is at the opposite end of the tractor to
the saw and the anvil is driven by a half nut which is released after
the split, I do wonder if it would release if jammed on a knotty bit.
Return is by spring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gSGQPpQ6P4#t=83

IMO this would have the efficiency of a worm drive which I gather
varies greatly between 50 -90%. I gather hydraulic drives fall below
70%.

However hydraulic drives have better control and 6.5 tonnes of
pressure is adequate for most simple splitting. I use an axe at home
though I have both hydraulic and screw splitter. By screw splitter I
mean the type Tim refers to, mine is also on the back of a 35 hp
tractor pto.

I prefer the hydraulic one because it produces a much cleaner cut, the
screw splitter tears into the wood and often doesn't separate the two
bits because of stringy fibres. I find on some woods, holly in
particular it bores a hole and then gives up on a log which the
hydraulic splitter has no problems with. It does split particularly
knotty stuff which the hydraulic one stalls on but the log is often
too misshapen to get into the stove without further sawing.

Screw splitters are good on a small 360 digger for breaking down
oversize cordwood for the wood processor.

The screw splitter is also intent on removing fingers, finger nails,
hands and arms of the unwary, I have almost grown back a finger nail
lost when picking a split log off the screw and finding it wasn't
quite split as it snapped shut again.

AJH

In message ,
writes
On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:16:19 +0100, GB
wrote:

Does anyone know the advantage of a hydraulic system compared to an
electric screw drive?

Is there some fundamental advantage of the hydraulic system? Or is it
purely a matter of designing the two alternatives and costing them out?
I suppose a long piston is a lot cheaper to machine than a long screw
thread. That sort of thing. The screw design would need a gearbox, and
that sort of cancels out the cost of the hydraulic pump.


There is a bit of confusion about screw drive, this video shows what I
think you mean, the splitter is at the opposite end of the tractor to
the saw and the anvil is driven by a half nut which is released after
the split, I do wonder if it would release if jammed on a knotty bit.
Return is by spring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gSGQPpQ6P4#t=83

IMO this would have the efficiency of a worm drive which I gather
varies greatly between 50 -90%. I gather hydraulic drives fall below
70%.

However hydraulic drives have better control and 6.5 tonnes of
pressure is adequate for most simple splitting. I use an axe at home
though I have both hydraulic and screw splitter. By screw splitter I
mean the type Tim refers to, mine is also on the back of a 35 hp
tractor pto.

I prefer the hydraulic one because it produces a much cleaner cut, the
screw splitter tears into the wood and often doesn't separate the two
bits because of stringy fibres. I find on some woods, holly in
particular it bores a hole and then gives up on a log which the
hydraulic splitter has no problems with. It does split particularly
knotty stuff which the hydraulic one stalls on but the log is often
too misshapen to get into the stove without further sawing.

Screw splitters are good on a small 360 digger for breaking down
oversize cordwood for the wood processor.

The screw splitter is also intent on removing fingers, finger nails,
hands and arms of the unwary, I have almost grown back a finger nail
lost when picking a split log off the screw and finding it wasn't
quite split as it snapped shut again.

I wear gloves!

Would the video be an early Farmall tractor?

--
Tim Lamb

On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:55:26 +0100, Tim Lamb
wrote:

Would the video be an early Farmall tractor?

Pass. It's the same shape but the air intake is stuck on the front
nearside and I've never seen one with spade lug solid wheels, it
looks pre 39-45

AJH