How important 750kg chipper

[Eddy_t]

What's the obsession with being able to move a chipper by hand? I know there are jobs where you might not be taking chip away but for the most part, the truck and chipper will be together. Can people not reverse with a chipper on?

 

 

Extremely steep drives (surely doing domestic work you've come across that?).

Working on damp fields with ruts or inclines.

Working in places where you can't feasibly drive a vehicle, you're chipping to ground and if you leave it attached to a truck, it's going to be a couple hundred meter drag?

Where the ground is soft.

 

The more modern sub-750kg chippers have plenty of power, whilst the feed rollers are getting ever wider. What are you expecting to gain from a bigger chipper? Bigger feed? If you're chipping logs too large for a <750kg, you're wasting potential firewood, and people are more than willing to take wood away for you.

Robust design? Yeah, it's made of thicker metal, but is that really going to make it that much stronger? You can save a lot of weight by trimming down machines in a way that doesn't affect the strength or rigidity, in fact, I'm sure an engineering solution could be done to the <750's that would make them even lighter and more rigid, but there is no need. The idea of 2" plate metal for a chipper body will last indefinitely longer than a couple of mm thick where the job doesn't include significant impact to distort metal.

[Dan Curtis]

 

1) Extremely steep drives (surely doing domestic work you've come across that?).

2) Working on damp fields with ruts or inclines.

3) Working in places where you can't feasibly drive a vehicle, you're chipping to ground and if you leave it attached to a truck, it's going to be a couple hundred meter drag?

4) Where the ground is soft.

 

1) Yes, but not very often as I mostly work in three of the flattest counties in England:001_smile: I drive a Land Rover, this will usually do the trick, if the Land Rover won't push it up a driveway, there's no way that I will even if it is a <750kg machine. You could always fit a front hitch to whatever you drive to keep the weight on the right axle whilst putting the chipper into place.

 

2) As above, Land Rover, or tracked chipper and Land Rover with a trailer. I've worked on ground where it's been so soft I've literally left the truck running in low range with the diff lock on whilst pushing the trailer from behind with a tracked chipper to get through. It made one hell of a mess but it was easily rectified after the ground had dried (and the snow had cleared). Even a 565kg TW125 wouldn't have been pushable there.

 

3) Land Rover/Quad or winch with a pneumatic jockey wheel on the chipper.

 

4) Land Rover again! But in all honesty, two of these are both soft ground issues, if it's really that soft then a wheelbarrow will be hard to move over the ground, let alone a chipper, whatever it's weight.

 

I wouldn't say that having a sub 750 machine will get you out of any of those circumstances, if the ground is steep, or too soft and rutted, you're not getting in without some sort of powered machine. Obviously you can't drive over people's lawns when you want the chipper across it but that's a case of the land rather than the weight of a chipper. There are ways of doing things with heavier machines that don't require pushing or slipping over and chinning a wheelarch.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Dan Curtis

[Dan Curtis]

1) Yes, but not very often as I mostly work in three of the flattest counties in England:001_smile: I drive a Land Rover, this will usually do the trick, if the Land Rover won't push it up a driveway, there's no way that I will even if it is a <750kg machine. You could always fit a front hitch to whatever you drive to keep the weight on the right axle whilst putting the chipper into place.

 

2) As above, Land Rover, or tracked chipper and Land Rover with a trailer. I've worked on ground where it's been so soft I've literally left the truck running in low range with the diff lock on whilst pushing the trailer from behind with a tracked chipper to get through. It made one hell of a mess but it was easily rectified after the ground had dried (and the snow had cleared). Even a 565kg TW125 wouldn't have been pushable there.

 

3) Land Rover/Quad or winch with a pneumatic jockey wheel on the chipper.

 

4) Land Rover again! But in all honesty, two of these are both soft ground issues, if it's really that soft then a wheelbarrow will be hard to move over the ground, let alone a chipper, whatever it's weight.

 

I wouldn't say that having a sub 750 machine will get you out of any of those circumstances, if the ground is steep, or too soft and rutted, you're not getting in without some sort of powered machine. Obviously you can't drive over people's lawns when you want the chipper across it but that's a case of the land rather than the weight of a chipper. There are ways of doing things with heavier machines that don't require pushing or slipping over and chinning a wheelarch.

 

The majority of my career has been working with chippers over 1500gs, from Greenmech 19-28, 12" Bandits, right up to 4 tonne Heizohacks, never have I had a problem with chipper placement from not being able to push one in. It is a fact that bigger chippers work faster, and require less brash prep than smaller ones, which can make all the difference on tightly priced jobs. You don't need to be chipping 12" wood but if you're not having to put brash down and cut all the unions before feeding one little bit at a time it can save a huge amount of time.

[Eddy_t]

The majority of my career has been working with chippers over 1500gs, from Greenmech 19-28, 12" Bandits, right up to 4 tonne Heizohacks, never have I had a problem with chipper placement from not being able to push one in. It is a fact that bigger chippers work faster, and require less brash prep than smaller ones, which can make all the difference on tightly priced jobs. You don't need to be chipping 12" wood but if you're not having to put brash down and cut all the unions before feeding one little bit at a time it can save a huge amount of time.

 

 

You must be doing some monster trees to warrant chippers that big, or you're really lazy when it comes to brash! Far too many people don't dress timber properly nowadays, after having had a break from tree work for nearly 3 years, I was shocked to see so many cutters leaving stubs on timber. Some of this gets firewood-ed, some milled. Yes, a wider feed aperture is easier, but if you can't spare 3 seconds to nip a branch whilst you're removing it in the first place then you need to look at your method structure.

 

Fwiw, bigger chippers don't work faster, flywheels all turn at a very steady rate, whilst big engines are sluggish. Could you imagine an 880 or 3120 belting out the 14-15k rpm of the small 40-60cc saws? In bigger engines it's all about torque and smashing through the waste, but they aren't really faster with brash

[skyhuck]

You must be doing some monster trees to warrant chippers that big, or you're really lazy when it comes to brash! Far too many people don't dress timber properly nowadays, after having had a break from tree work for nearly 3 years, I was shocked to see so many cutters leaving stubs on timber. Some of this gets firewood-ed, some milled. Yes, a wider feed aperture is easier, but if you can't spare 3 seconds to nip a branch whilst you're removing it in the first place then you need to look at your method structure.

 

Fwiw, bigger chippers don't work faster, flywheels all turn at a very steady rate, whilst big engines are sluggish. Could you imagine an 880 or 3120 belting out the 14-15k rpm of the small 40-60cc saws? In bigger engines it's all about torque and smashing through the waste, but they aren't really faster with brash

 

Thats simply nonsense, why are they fitted with "no stress" systems???? its to slow delivery, larger engines means they don't need the delivery slowed as often, which dramatically speeds up throughput.

[Steve Bullman]

Thats simply nonsense, why are they fitted with "no stress" systems???? its to slow delivery, larger engines means they don't need the delivery slowed as often, which dramatically speeds up throughput.

 

Not to mention you can put 8 branches through at a time rather than 1 or 2

[Eddy_t]

Thats simply nonsense, why are they fitted with "no stress" systems???? its to slow delivery, larger engines means they don't need the delivery slowed as often, which dramatically speeds up throughput.

 

 

I've very rarely had the no-stress system kick in whilst bunging brash through, only when I've rammed as much as possible, but more likely is to either catch the stop bar, or by sheer volume causing a blockage in front of the feed rollers.

As for the stress systems, this is to prevent the rpm dropping below idle and stalling the engine and causing a blockage. The first chipper I used was a big old 10" Jensen that had no anti-stress controls and if the rpm dropped too low it would block, then I'd be made to clear the blockage

[skyhuck]

I've very rarely had the no-stress system kick in whilst bunging brash through, only when I've rammed as much as possible, but more likely is to either catch the stop bar, or by sheer volume causing a blockage in front of the feed rollers.

As for the stress systems, this is to prevent the rpm dropping below idle and stalling the engine and causing a blockage. The first chipper I used was a big old 10" Jensen that had no anti-stress controls and if the rpm dropped too low it would block, then I'd be made to clear the blockage

 

It does not sound like you have ever used a good chipper.

[Ian C]

It does not sound like you have ever used a good chipper.

 

Sort of what I was thinking.

 

The anti stress is there to stop feed when the engine is under too much load and let it pick back up to peak power, my god if it kicks in below idle something is very wrong.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Ian C

[Dan Curtis]

You must be doing some monster trees to warrant chippers that big, or you're really lazy when it comes to brash! Far too many people don't dress timber properly nowadays, after having had a break from tree work for nearly 3 years, I was shocked to see so many cutters leaving stubs on timber. Some of this gets firewood-ed, some milled. Yes, a wider feed aperture is easier, but if you can't spare 3 seconds to nip a branch whilst you're removing it in the first place then you need to look at your method structure.

 

Fwiw, bigger chippers don't work faster, flywheels all turn at a very steady rate, whilst big engines are sluggish. Could you imagine an 880 or 3120 belting out the 14-15k rpm of the small 40-60cc saws? In bigger engines it's all about torque and smashing through the waste, but they aren't really faster with brash

 

I've done my share of bigger trees yes. I've also done a lot of clearance work, rancid lapsed hedging type material that would almost need chipping prior to attempting to get a 6" machine to pull it through.

 

I'm not lazy at all when it comes to brash, for me it's all about efficiency so most days I'll stack brash into armfuls from the tree, ready for my groundsman to pick up and put straight into the chipper, no snedding needed. With a bigger chipper I can drop one branch with a couple of forks, still an easily liftable size, and it will go through in one, meaning the guy is on his way back to the dz while the chipper does the work. With a smaller chipper I'd be making more cuts, dropping more bits and the groundsman would have to feed more bits into the rollers. Not to mention the hazards of increased cutting, and increased amounts of falling material.

 

I think you're being obtuse about flywheel speeds, what I said clearly didn't refer to rpm, but throughput capacity. There is always going to be an increase in brash throughput as the size of machine increases. You don't see biomass boys running Jo Beau's because bigger machines 'aren't really faster with brash'

 

Fwiw, I'm the most anal person I know when it comes to clean timber, as anyone I work with will tell you. I can't stand stubs, they are dangerous and make handling and stacking more difficult.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Dan Curtis