Tuesday, November 10, 2015

My DR RapidFire, 3 years later…….


I made my last payment on my log splitter just a month ago. I thought now would be a good time to write a little about my experiences with this splitter. In short, it’s regret.
I have had a lot of trouble with my splitter. The engine is great. The bolts that DR used are cheap. I’ve had the bolts used to adjust the motor snap off from normal use (tightening and loosening). They must be grade 3 by the looks of them. They should use Grade 8. The cost isn’t that great that it should even be a factor. I’ve had the bolts all replaced with Grade 8’s at my expense.

The handle mechanism has fallen apart once, needing a re-weld. Then the bushing and the rest of the engaging mechanism wore out from regular use, necessitating an upgrade from DR Power. To their credit, they sent me the upgraded material gratis, but I still had to pay a local guy here some money to do the work. Now, it’s broke down again. The handle won’t disengage if the splitter fails to make it through the wood in one pass. It’s probably the handle mechanism again, which seems to be a really weak point for this splitter.

The belts that DR use on the splitter are inferior. They should be a cogged belt for great grip around the clutch mechanism. I recommend Gates AX71 belts.

In short, this splitter is very fickle. The wood has to be just right. If it isn’t cut just right, or has a knot in a certain spot, it’s either dangerous to you the operator, or very hard on the machine. The handle mechanism just isn’t designed correctly. The Super Split guys never seem to complain about theirs, yet there’s plenty of complaints on the DR machine. I really wanted to see this machine excel over hydraulic units I have used before. While it does do well, when it’s not broken down and on straight grained, perfectly cut wood, for my usage, it’s more of a hindrance than a help. If I had it to do over today, I’d buy a good 34 Ton hydraulic splitter. Sure, it’s slower, but it would be broke down far less, negating any speed advantage the RapidFire has over it.

If you’re looking at the RapidFire and comparing it to a hydraulic, my advice to you is to go with the hydraulic unless you need to split pine, or other easy, straight grained wood. If you will be splitting elm and/or hickory, the hydraulic will be much better.

If you’re comparing it to the Super Split, I cannot help you as I’ve never used one. The Super Split is still out of my budget, and without financing, I’ll never be able to afford one.

So, three years out, I do not recommend the DR Splitter.

3 comments:

Unknown said...

Excellent job on the review.

I am not in the market for a splitter at this time but was interested in the rapidfire because of its technology. I had concerns about the belt slipping or breaking along with the teeth on the rack and pinion due to the engaging at high speeds.

I like the fact you followed up your initial review with a one and three year review. This is what we need more of as it truly shows how a product stands up over time.

I find manufacturers can use poor or lower quality in their products and a review after a few uses would not show any defaults.

I currently have a hydraulic splitter and love it. The only problem I have ever had is with the engine and it has always been minor, carb stuff you get with any engine.

After your long term (3 year) review I don’t think I will be changing soon.
The biggest advantage seems to be speed. As I don’t split for business and only split wood a few times a year the extra hour or so to do a job is no problem it’s actually relaxing and enjoyable.

Again great job on the review and thanks for the time and effort it took, it is appreciated.

Eric E. Durnan said...

You're welcome and thank you for your kind words!

Unknown said...

Great, honest review. I was thinking about switching from hydrolic to kinetic. I appreciate your follow up on the original review. Very helpful and informative. I think I'll stick with what I have. Thanks again.