PTO Driven log splitter vs. stand alone L3902HST

[John RHR]

Folks -

Welllll... Went over to Garton Tractor in Ukiah (Calif) and did a "preflight" on the L3902HST that is being delivered on Tuesday. Very much looking forward to it! Our L245DT has served admirably, if intermittently, due to the foibles of PO abuse and general age - Had her out yesterday moving some brush as a last hurrah.

Okay, my question. My FIL has a 3pt Hyd Log Splitter, but it is meant to hook into the tractor's hydraulics. The tractor my FIL got it for, a Massey Ferguson TO35 doesn't HAVE hydraulics. We've used the splitter powered by a shop built hydraulic pump that is SLOW and of limited portability. He's happy with that, even though we could have purchased a full on splitter with an engine and all for another $200. Dunno... I didn't have a vote on this, so.

So, my question is - I was told that hooking the 3pt splitter to the L3902's FEL hydraulics wasn't feasible - the capacity of the system and need of additional valving were problematic. Okay, fine.

Do I try to fab up a PTO driven hydraulic pump and reservoir to attach to the 3pt with the log splitter, or do I say to hell with it, and simply buy a stand alone unit? I could probably do the PTO hydraulic set up for less $, but it would be yet another fab job and "thing to do" on my already-full punch list. I have 20 acres of walnut to split and that's more important that building a log splitter.

Is there a hack or some method that the 3pt splitter can be hooked into the FEL control valve body or ???

The argument for the PTO setup is that it's cheaper; against, is that it's more monkeying around and may not be the best use of putting hours on the tractor. The argument for a stand alone splitter is that I put gas in it, check the oil and go on my way. I can get it into places that I might not get easily with the tractor, and it can be easily towed to another location if needed. The argument against is that I'd be spending more $$ for a stand alone, and then I have somewhat of a white elephant with a 3pt splitter that I am not going to use with the tractor.

Those are the horns of a dilemma upon which I sit. I am very much interested in your input, observations and feedback.


Selah,

John Moorhead
L3902HST (as of Tuesday!!)
L245DT (until Tuesday!)
Massey Furguson TO35
Ford 9N
BMW 2002tii

 

[tinkerwitheverything]

Well I used to run my home built splitter off my tractors hyd system. MF 175 . It worked okay but every time I wanted to run the splitter ,well I had to get the tractor out hook everything up etc: I had access to a older 410 MF combine that I was able to remove the hyd oil tank and hyd pump. So with a little fabricating I got it done. Now with using the 410s pump it has two power outlets . One for the main hydralics and the other for the power steering . So I was able to divert one back to the tank. Now after using it like this for a couple years I wanted a hyd lift table to lift up heavy wood. So I removed the steering cylinder from the combine which has a built in control and was able to utilize this cylinder with a bit of fabrication to use it as a lift arm . So all I had to do was hook the other port from the pump to the cylinder and the cylinder return back to the tank. Love how I have the freedom of just using the splitter by itself.Off course I did have to install a gas engine to power the pump. I hated having to get the tractor out of the shed where it's always kept and now its way easier just to get the splitter out and put gas in and its ready to use. BTW after use I always drain all gas out of tank plus the carb .

 

[Flintknapper]

Stand alone splitter hands down.

 

[animals45]

WHy not convert the PTO splitter to a stand alone one ? A motor , pump , hoses & fee tor wheels ? If the splitter is in good shape thats the road i'd be headin down .
ymmv
animals45

 

[TheOldHokie]

Folks -

Welllll... Went over to Garton Tractor in Ukiah (Calif) and did a "preflight" on the L3902HST that is being delivered on Tuesday. Very much looking forward to it! Our L245DT has served admirably, if intermittently, due to the foibles of PO abuse and general age - Had her out yesterday moving some brush as a last hurrah.

Okay, my question. My FIL has a 3pt Hyd Log Splitter, but it is meant to hook into the tractor's hydraulics. The tractor my FIL got it for, a Massey Ferguson TO35 doesn't HAVE hydraulics. We've used the splitter powered by a shop built hydraulic pump that is SLOW and of limited portability. He's happy with that, even though we could have purchased a full on splitter with an engine and all for another $200. Dunno... I didn't have a vote on this, so.

So, my question is - I was told that hooking the 3pt splitter to the L3902's FEL hydraulics wasn't feasible - the capacity of the system and need of additional valving were problematic. Okay, fine.

Do I try to fab up a PTO driven hydraulic pump and reservoir to attach to the 3pt with the log splitter, or do I say to hell with it, and simply buy a stand alone unit? I could probably do the PTO hydraulic set up for less $, but it would be yet another fab job and "thing to do" on my already-full punch list. I have 20 acres of walnut to split and that's more important that building a log splitter.

Is there a hack or some method that the 3pt splitter can be hooked into the FEL control valve body or ???

The argument for the PTO setup is that it's cheaper; against, is that it's more monkeying around and may not be the best use of putting hours on the tractor. The argument for a stand alone splitter is that I put gas in it, check the oil and go on my way. I can get it into places that I might not get easily with the tractor, and it can be easily towed to another location if needed. The argument against is that I'd be spending more $$ for a stand alone, and then I have somewhat of a white elephant with a 3pt splitter that I am not going to use with the tractor.

Those are the horns of a dilemma upon which I sit. I am very much interested in your input, observations and feedback.


Selah,

John Moorhead
L3902HST (as of Tuesday!!)
L245DT (until Tuesday!)
Massey Furguson TO35
Ford 9N
BMW 2002tii

Dont believe everything you are told. Your 3pt splitter will work and its dirt cheap to hook up. Here is my 3pt log splitter on a L3901. It has been upgraded with a regenerative splitter valve and cycle time is 15 seconds with extend speed almost twice retract. That will keep one man busy.

Dan

 

[fried1765]

Stand alone splitter hands down.

I have never had either, but my vote is for stand alone.
Similar issue to PTO powered generators.....NO!

 

[MapleLeafFarmer]

IMHO it is feasible and not that difficult and not that expensive. However I think the key question should be is it a good idea / will it work sufficiently.

BUT that being said I do not see anything about the flow rate of your splitter?

My smallest log splitter has a flow rate of just less than 3gpm and my biggest one is 32 but this runs the splitting ram plus the log feed as well. So not enough flow from the tractor for the big one and overkill for the small one.

I hated my tractor mounted splitter as the tractor was then tied up. if I had a helper then they couldn't move split wood with the bucket out of my way, or bring me more rounds close in to split if my supply running short, couln't grapple full lengths into position, etc... Not to mention running 40hp diesel engine when 10hp would have been enough, etc..... But opinions like arse-h@ts: we all have them.

 

[Grindstone]

I prefer a stand alone log splitter. Like you said then my tractor is not tied up and is available to move wood either to the splitter or away as is needed.

 

[drumminj]

^^^ Agree with above. i bought a stand-alone splitter that I can tow out with my Mule...and use the tractor elsewhere or keep it in the shop. No regrets at all.

 

[N3BP]

Been in your shoes about a dozen years ago. Ultimately I went with a 27 Ton Troy Bilt tow behind unit and still feel it was the right choice. Wood splitting is a slow process, so if you have a lot to do, you will rake up the hours on your machine.
Just tow it to the pile, fill it up with gas, and have at it. I usually split until the tank runs empty, about an hour and a half, then I bag it.

 

[mcmxi]

I could probably do the PTO hydraulic set up for less $, but it would be yet another fab job and "thing to do" on my already-full punch list. I have 20 acres of walnut to split and that's more important that building a log splitter.

I think you answered the question for yourself. Look for a used log splitter perhaps and use it while you get the pto model figured out, then sell one of them. I bought a nice and very lightly used Oregon 22 ton splitter with a Honda engine for $1,200 about a year ago. One of those new Chinese made models from a box store will cost more than that ... Black Diamond for example.

 

[TheOldHokie]

I think you answered the question for yourself. Look for a used log splitter perhaps and use it while you get the pto model figured out, then sell one of them. I bought a nice and very lightly used Oregon 22 ton splitter with a Honda engine for $1,200 about a year ago. One of those new Chinese made models from a box store will cost more than that ... Black Diamond for example.

He can run the 3pt splitter he already has directly off the L3902 hydraulics - all he needs is a 24" hydraulic hose and a $25 quick coupler. Takes less than 30 minutes to install. Why spend $500+ and days fabricating a PTO pump and reservoir?

Dan

 

[Tropical Jack]

He can run the 3pt splitter he already has directly off the L3902 hydraulics - all he needs is a 24" hydraulic hose and a $25 quick coupler. Takes less than 30 minutes to install. Why spend $500+ and days fabricating a PTO pump and reservoir?

Dan

I completely agree with Dan on this. I have a “Split Fire“ 3 point splitter with log lifter. It runs very well from the hydraulics of my L3301. If you already have access to the 3 point log splitter, I would think that you would spend the minimal time and expense to utilize the hydraulics of your new L3902.

Jack

 

[mcmxi]

He can run the 3pt splitter he already has directly off the L3902 hydraulics - all he needs is a 24" hydraulic hose and a $25 quick coupler. Takes less than 30 minutes to install. Why spend $500+ and days fabricating a PTO pump and reservoir?

Dan

Absolutely, and you made that point earlier. But the OP states ...

" The argument for the PTO setup is that it's cheaper; against, is that it's more monkeying around and may not be the best use of putting hours on the tractor."

.... so he's not entirely convinced that he wants to go down this path. Personally, I don't want to put hours on a tractor unless it's moving. The Oregon 22 ton splitter I bought has a 190cc Honda engine putting out maybe 5hp and it splits knotted, twisted maple with relative ease. Does it make sense to use a near 40hp engine to power an implement such as a wood splitter? I find it hard to believe that it's fuel efficient over a gas powered splitter, particularly with DPF models such as the L3902 where you can't or shouldn't run them at low rpm. Then you have the depreciation as the tractor accrues hours which may or may not be important to some.

I also realize that my bias may not be founded in data and certainly not in personal experience (with a 3-point splitter) but I'm always open to learning or changing my mind. I have to admit though, I only want to use tractors for tasks that are hard if not impossible to do with something else, or would require a much more expensive piece of equipment to accomplish. Given how "cheap" gas powered wood splitters are, how cheap they are to run, the fact that they don't tie up the back end of a tractor giving room for something else such as a trailer, and probably some other benefits, I don't think that a 3-point wood splitter has ever been on my wish list. I'll save the PTO for snow blowers, rotary cutters, flail mowers, sprayers, tillers, seeders/sanders and anything else that requires rotation and translation. But that's just my opinion.

 

[TheOldHokie]

Absolutely, and you made that point earlier. But the OP states ...

" The argument for the PTO setup is that it's cheaper; against, is that it's more monkeying around and may not be the best use of putting hours on the tractor."

.... so he's not entirely convinced that he wants to go down this path. Personally, I don't want to put hours on a tractor unless it's moving. The Oregon 22 ton splitter I bought has a 190cc Honda engine putting out maybe 5hp and it splits knotted, twisted maple with relative ease. Does it make sense to use a near 40hp engine to power an implement such as a wood splitter? I find it hard to believe that it's fuel efficient over a gas powered splitter, particularly with DPF models such as the L3902 where you can't or shouldn't run them at low rpm. Then you have the depreciation as the tractor accrues hours.

Then why did you suggest he pursue a PTO option for his 3pt log splitter? That was my one and only point.

We can argue all day about your or my prefetences but I am not interested.

The simple fact is his current PTO log splitter is FREE, will split as well as a typical box store small engine machine using just the tractor hydraulics, and can be in use the day he takes delivery of the tractor.

Dan

 

[Matt Ellerbee]

Stand alone for sure.

 

[mcmxi]

Then why did you suggest he pursue a PTO option for his 3pt log splitter? That was my one and only point.

We can argue all day about your or my prefetences but I am not interested.

The simple fact is his current PTO log splitter is FREE, will split as well as a typical box store small engine machine using just the tractor hydraulics, and can be in use the day he takes delivery of the tractor.

Dan

Jeez, who's arguing? I don't know how attached he is to the PTO splitter and maybe he'll like it and want to keep it. If he's able to compare the two he'll have more data to work with. That's why I suggested a parallel path approach.

 

[rc51stierhoff]

Jeez, who's arguing? I don't know how attached he is to the PTO splitter and maybe he'll like it and want to keep it. If he's able to compare the two he'll have more data to work with. That's why I suggested a parallel path approach.

I’ll say this…if he is not attached to the PTO splitter it’s not going to work . Yeah yeah bad joke, I know.

I think a lot sort is of depends on each individual individuals process and priorities…personally, I think for tasks that the front loader is an extra arm, stand alone imolements are nice to have use of the tractor (extra arm). But I also value not having another engine to maintain. And then I also think how often am I going to use it…do I want to it attached or not?. I have both implements that attach like a chipper and separate from machine as a stand alone splitter…I use the splitter much more than the chipper and I think it is better as a stand alone. Chipper would be handy as a stand alone as well. If you have some knarley elm or whatever, any splitter is better than no splitter. Clearly the solution is having more than one tractor. ( I know I’d like to have a third machine )

 

[Vince1230]

I use a stand alone someone built. It is an i beam with tank motor and wheel. I like in can tow around and us tractor to move and pick up wood. Usually keep chipper on vack to clean up as i go.

 

[GreensvilleJay]

my 'vote' is for stand alone, either a complete machine or bodge the FIL's unit.
Tying up the tractor for 'just above idle' to split wood is expensive per hour especially when the DPF say's 'time up'. There's also the problem of NOT being able to use the tractor for 'tractor type stuff'. It'll happen...get splitting and someone needs you and your tractor......Murphy says so .
What isn't known are the spec for the FIL's splitter...PSI and GPM. Unless the tractor has MORE GPM and enough PSI, splitter won't work well. Provided you run a gas engine dry when done, they are reliable, not a huge problem. Stand alone also allows someone else to split while you're stacking or sitting having a brown pop....