What are the payment terms?

We accept LC, T/T, D/P, PayPal, and Western Union.

What is the lead time for production?

The average lead time is one month for both peak and off-season periods.

Vertical Standard Type Log Splitter High Work Efficiency

Name: Vertical Standard Type Log Splitter High Work Efficiency
Brand: Changzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd.
SKU: 2146687645

Jiangsu, ChinaChangzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd.

US$499.00-599.00

5 Pieces

Product profile

Customization

Available

Warranty

1 Year Warranty

Type

Log Splitter

Model NO.

LS/LSP22T

Power Type

Hydraulic

Layout

Vertical

Controlling Mode

Hydraulic Semi-automatic

Automatic Grade

Semiautomatic

Precision

Normal Precision

Certification

Customized

Condition

New

Color

Customized

After-sales Service

1 Year Warranty

Tractor HP

15-55HP

RAM

22tonne

Operation

Hydraulic

3-Point Linkage

Cat-1

Working Position

Vertical

Transport Package

Steel Crate

Specification

CE Standard

Trademark

Kaideli

Origin

Changzhou, China

Production Capacity

100 Sets Per Month

Key features

Vertical Hydraulic Design: Hydraulic semi-automatic operation with vertical positioning for safe and easy one-person use.

High Splitting Force: Equipped with a 22-tonne hydraulic ram for efficient wood splitting.

Customizable Options: Color and customization are available to meet specific requirements.

CE Certified Quality: Product holds CE certification ensuring safety and quality standards.

Manufacturer Direct: Sold directly by Changzhou Kaideli Machinery Co.,Ltd with OEM/ODM support.

Company profile

Changzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd.

Jiangsu, China

CertifiedBusiness Type: Manufacturer/Factory & Trading Company CertifiedR&D Capacity: ODM Service Available & OEM Service AvailableExport Year: 2011-12-01 CertifiedNearest Port: Shanghai PortAverage Response Time: ≤3.75h CertifiedTerms of Payment: LC, T/T, D/P, etc.

AI-Powered supplier vetting

SummaryChangzhou Kaideli Machinery Co., Ltd. is a China-based limited company established in 2011, with operations in Jiangsu and manufacturing facilities in Changzhou. The supplier reports agricultural machinery and component manufacturing experience, five production lines, a 6,510.57 m² manufacturing plant, 90% export sales, and exports to approximately 30 countries. It claims CE certification for most popular products and describes service responsiveness, but no supplier management-system certification is recorded. Evidence indicates established production and export capability, with four years of R&D engineer experience and 11–20 quality-control staff reported. However, the available information does not sufficiently verify financial strength, customization capability, after-sales execution, or specific customer cases.

Supplier typeThe supplier is legally identified as a limited company and commercially described as both a manufacturing/processing machinery business and a trade company. Its stated products, factory, production lines, and manufacturing history support a combined manufacturing-and-trading profile rather than a purely trading operation.

CertificationsThe supplier states that it has CE certification for most popular products, indicating product-level certification coverage. However, supplier management-system certification is explicitly listed as NIL, so the evidence supports CE certification claims but not certified management systems.

R&D capabilityThe supplier reports four years of R&D engineer experience, more than five technicians, and accumulated design and manufacturing experience in agricultural machinery and components. This supports some technical development capability, but there is no evidence of patents, new-product development records, or dedicated innovation systems.

Production capacityProduction capability is supported by five production lines, a 6,510.57 m² manufacturing plant, reported output of about 300 containers exported to 30 countries, and a one-month stated lead time in both peak and off-peak seasons. The slices also report more than 80 workers in one company description, while another record lists 58 employees; this inconsistency limits confidence in the exact workforce size but does not negate the evidence of operating production capacity.