Timberwolf launches the All-New TW 230DHB

[treeman22tyger]

Thanks for your considered questions. I will try and give full and frank answers to each part without boring the pants off you!

 

Are you using a thinner steel?

No. The original design of the 150DHB is 19 years old and was designed on a 2D (flat) CAD package. This chipper has been widely recognised as the most successful sub 750kg chipper. Although the machine went through extensive revisions to 'keep it modern' it is basically constrained by the original design that carries extra weight that can't be moved/used in other parts of the machine. The 230 has enabled us to take weight out of one area and invest it in places where we can gain performance i.e. the old rotor on the 150DHB weighs 40kgs whereas the 230 weighs 66kgs!

 

lightweight bearings?

No. The bearings fitted to the 230 are larger and have a higher rating than those fitted to the Greenmech or Forst plus they are greasable.

 

I would worry that all these chippers that are sub 750kg are made down to a spec and are not going to last in the long term.

We have been making compact chippers for a long time - we have made thousands of them - the vast majority are still running. If you look on Earborist Timberwolf chippers command very good second-hand values compared with competitors with similar models, this is because no matter what the age the Timberwolf (or Entec) is made of modular construction and no matter what the condition it is possible for someone to rebuild it and get some useful life from the machine. Knowing how the TW 230 has been put together I have every confidence in saying this chipper will outlast a 150DHB - and they are still going at 19 years old so I would refute your statement.

 

Take for instance the Vermeer 625, I have one of these and the thing is 15 years old and bomb proof.

I agree, a very solid machine, but I would also hazard a guess that you are the owner operator and it is you that has helped the machine to put in such a sterling performance over all these years. It is also our experience that we have far fewer problems with owner/operators.

 

I doubt that these new chippers will still be around in 15 years time.

The 150DHB has already been around more than 15 years and with all the modern computer aided design packages available to us the 230 is a seriously tough little chipper that is fully capable of having a life greater than 15 years – more so than the 150DHB and that is still going strong!

We only react to demand, we make sub 750kg chippers because that is what a lot of people in the UK like to work with, so we try to make them the best possible chipper to that specification. We have taken our time but bi-eck we’ve produced a little cracker this time!

We do also make some very nice chippers over 750kg as well!

 

And if these chippers are so well made why didn't you make them lightweight before the new legislation?

 

I don’t quite understand the question. The 150DHB already complied with the legislation, we have been investing in our R&D department, this is the 1st model to come out of the stable that has had the benefit of all our knowledge applied through the latest design packages and we are really pleased with the results as it lifts the bar on what you can expect from a sub 750kg chipper.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard

 

I sincerely apologise, as I thought that the 150 was over 750kgs,and more like 1200kgs. Looks like i didn't do my homework first.

[Charles Hey Arborist]

How does the 230 chip compared to the 240 turntable?

[Timberwolf Sales]

I sincerely apologise, as I thought that the 150 was over 750kgs,and more like 1200kgs. Looks like i didn't do my homework first.

 

No problem sir - it gives me a chance to explain things.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard

[Timberwolf Sales]

How does the 230 chip compared to the 240 turntable?

 

Speaking honestly and frankly, the TW 230 is a better chipper than the TW 240.

Putting a turntable into the chipper and keeping it sub 750kg is a real design headache and ultimately there are more compromises in the 240 than there are in the 230. As an example, the 240 rotor weighs 53kg while the 230 doesn't have to compromise and weighs 66kg. Another example would be the engine - to the best of my knowledge Timberwolf is the only chipper manufacturer in the world who fits the V1505 35hp 4 cylinder, water cooled Kubota Diesel engine into sub 750kg chippers (TW 150 and TW 230). This is also the engine of choice for Jensen, Schliesing and Forst. But with the best will in the world we could not make it fit within the TW240. This machine is fitted with the 2nd best option the Kubota 3 cylinder turbo diesel engine producing 34hp - it is a very good engine but the torque curve is not so good as the V1505. The 3 cylinder engine is also used by Greenmech in the Quadchip and the Arborist 150.

 

If I was asked to put all these chippers in decending order of performance working on a real site in real conditions I would say this:

 

TW 230

Forst/Jensen

TW 240

TW 150

Greenmech Arborist 150

Greenmech Quadchip 160

 

This is my opinion only and I formed it after extensive testing/comparisons during the testing and comparison phase of the 230 and 240 chippers.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard

[GlobalNewark]

Only messing. I have a brochure. You seemed busy to me ! Price on that demo grinder?

 

Following an enquiry yesterday, the grinder is confirmed as sold overnight.

Sorry, these never hang around for long.

[monkeybusiness]

Speaking honestly and frankly, the TW 230 is a better chipper than the TW 240.

Putting a turntable into the chipper and keeping it sub 750kg is a real design headache and ultimately there are more compromises in the 240 than there are in the 230. As an example, the 240 rotor weighs 53kg while the 230 doesn't have to compromise and weighs 66kg. Another example would be the engine - to the best of my knowledge Timberwolf is the only chipper manufacturer in the world who fits the V1505 35hp 4 cylinder, water cooled Kubota Diesel engine into sub 750kg chippers (TW 150 and TW 230). This is also the engine of choice for Jensen, Schliesing and Forst. But with the best will in the world we could not make it fit within the TW240. This machine is fitted with the 2nd best option the Kubota 3 cylinder turbo diesel engine producing 34hp - it is a very good engine but the torque curve is not so good as the V1505. The 3 cylinder engine is also used by Greenmech in the Quadchip and the Arborist 150.

 

If I was asked to put all these chippers in decending order of performance working on a real site in real conditions I would say this:

 

TW 230

Forst/Jensen

TW 240

TW 150

Greenmech Arborist 150

Greenmech Quadchip 160

 

This is my opinion only and I formed it after extensive testing/comparisons during the testing and comparison phase of the 230 and 240 chippers.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard

 

You were doing so well with this thread but you have let yourself down now putting the tw150 above any of the modern designed machines IMO.

[Timberwolf Sales]

Good evening

 

I know I am flirting with controversy when I say this!!!

 

The TW 150 can still surprise a few people under certain conditions I.e. Chipping lush conifer where lots of air flow is required to eject the material from the chipper. This would be a test where the 150 would give a Greenmech a run for its money.

The aperture between our 150 rollers is 150x160, on the Arborist 150 the same measurement is 150x202 so the difference in aperture is not as big as advertised (they quote FEED aperture 150x230 this is a different measurement to the gap between the rollers). We have more engine torque, they have more rotor torque so it is by no means as clear cut as it looks on paper.

 

As part of our extended test program on the 230 we have been testing (and continue to do so) it against the Greenmech and Forst machines - I have been using both machines and have learnt some of their strengths and weaknesses so I do say it with some experience; I did not say it to be antagonistic but I accept it can look a bit inflammatory without some explanation and I apologise for that.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Arbtalk

[bob]

When driving around what are the most common chippers we see.

Timberwolf 150

Says a lot really

I have a 1998 Entec and it's still going though did have to spend more on it last yr than it was probably worth

But it's such a good chipper I thought it worth it

[Charles Hey Arborist]

Speaking honestly and frankly, the TW 230 is a better chipper than the TW 240.

Putting a turntable into the chipper and keeping it sub 750kg is a real design headache and ultimately there are more compromises in the 240 than there are in the 230. As an example, the 240 rotor weighs 53kg while the 230 doesn't have to compromise and weighs 66kg. Another example would be the engine - to the best of my knowledge Timberwolf is the only chipper manufacturer in the world who fits the V1505 35hp 4 cylinder, water cooled Kubota Diesel engine into sub 750kg chippers (TW 150 and TW 230). This is also the engine of choice for Jensen, Schliesing and Forst. But with the best will in the world we could not make it fit within the TW240. This machine is fitted with the 2nd best option the Kubota 3 cylinder turbo diesel engine producing 34hp - it is a very good engine but the torque curve is not so good as the V1505. The 3 cylinder engine is also used by Greenmech in the Quadchip and the Arborist 150.

 

If I was asked to put all these chippers in decending order of performance working on a real site in real conditions I would say this:

 

TW 230

Forst/Jensen

TW 240

TW 150

Greenmech Arborist 150

Greenmech Quadchip 160

 

This is my opinion only and I formed it after extensive testing/comparisons during the testing and comparison phase of the 230 and 240 chippers.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard

 

Thanks, although I'm a bit confused.

 

Your info leaflet doesn't say the 240 rotor weighs that, af it says that the infeed is larger than the 230.

 

I was told they chipped about the same, same horse power, roughly the same infeed size, but had a 240 on demo and wasn't very impressed to be honest.

[Timberwolf Sales]

Thanks, although I'm a bit confused.

 

Your info leaflet doesn't say the 240 rotor weighs that, af it says that the infeed is larger than the 230.

 

I was told they chipped about the same, same horse power, roughly the same infeed size, but had a 240 on demo and wasn't very impressed to be honest.

 

Yes - it can get very confusing, even for me! I was working from memory last night and got the figure for the aperture between the rollers wrong on the TW 150DHB. I said 150x160 when it is actually 160 wide and 170 high!

 

With regard to the TW 240 rotor weight - the leaflet says 56kg and I said 53kg. The actual weight is 54kg (see picture) this is because a different pulley has been selected from the original as we needed to make a weight saving to keep the machine genuinely below 750kg.

 

Ref. the TW 240 infeed measurement. This machine is a direct competitor to the Greenmech Quad chip. Although mechanically we have both gone about things differently the external shape is pretty similar (because we are both dealing with the same problems and parameters). Greenmech got their machine out before us and promoted the machine with an 'in-feed throat' of 160mm by 230mm. Because they quoted feed throat we did the same and quoted 241mm by 166mm so there was a direct comparison to be made when looking at brochures etc.

 

As I mentioned in my earlier post, their are always compromises going on within any design and another compromise you come across if you design vertical rollers like the Greenmech and TW 240 is that the rollers cannot open as wide as the feed aperture. The gap between the rollers for the vertical roller machines is as follows:

 

TW 240 = 204 wide by 166 high

GM Quad= 202 wide by 160 high

GM Arbor= 202 wide by 150 high

 

Before you make your final buying decision, I would recommend you have a demo of the TW 230. Happy for you to come over to the factory if you can spare the time and we can give you a better insight into what goes into chipper design.

 

Regards

 

 

Richard