Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Question/s about log processing option's


yaxleylad
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have a 13 ton pto splitter and a Eagle saw bench, we split logs into billets then cut the billets on the saw bench, the process is painfully slow!

 

Processers are good but imo only if you have straight cord wood in 5' lengths, in a nutshell firewood is very hard work for little gain....

 

 

Eds splitter is the best i've ever seen , but to much money for my liking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Log in or register to remove this advert

I use posch horizontal 30 tonne splitter from jas wilsons

It has only been stuck twice , and i put some big bits through . It will take 4 foot long and about 5foot diameter , then through an old palax processer

I would keep away from a chain processers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hire busy daddy big splitter and spend a few days splitting down big trunks in prep for my japa 700,nice simple procesor.

any small arb waste bits that hav bee cut on site and dont land themselvs too either of the big bits of kit i cut with a saw and split on a 10.5 ton thore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that is it because of having to keep changing the chains if they have a chainsaw crosscut?

 

 

I was dubious about going for a saw chain rather than a TCT blade but as long as your timber is fairly clean the saw chains aren't a bad system. Only real downside I found was that the chain on mine is lubricated from the hydraulic oil tank - expensive chain oil :scared:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that is it because of having to keep changing the chains if they have a chainsaw crosscut?

Chainsaws produce a lot more sawdust .

More sharpening.

Slower ???

Difficult on bent timber.

I run a palax , i have 2 blades , and would only expect to sharpen them twice in a good year [no nails] sharpen costs about £25 total £100

each tip costs about £1.50 expect about 10 of these

I know of 3 people woh have come back to tct blades from chainsaws

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use posch horizontal 30 tonne splitter from jas wilsons

It has only been stuck twice , and i put some big bits through . It will take 4 foot long and about 5foot diameter , then through an old palax processer

I would keep away from a chain processers

 

I completely agree. I use a hakki pilke OH60 (TCT) works fine up to 10" anything larger gets spilt into lengths on Posch vertical splitter and then through processor. Works a treat. Personally I would avoid chainsaw processors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have had my palax for about 7 years now

Besides the usual maintainance i have had new bearings in at a cost of about £30 and replacement belts.

There seems to be less maintainance on a tct blade machine , i still use the original 2 blades , there is no down time for sharpening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

Articles

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.