As requested... the Axe thread.

SpearHead

SpearHead

Joined
Mar 5, 2003
Messages
3,196
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the current engineering involved in knive making and depending on grind, thick knives are, pound for pound, and blade length for blade length, than axes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Would you care to show some proof of that assertion? I believe it to be absolutely false. Look at every lumber operation, where a chopping tool is used on hard woods, it is an axe. A long, thin knife (called a machete) is used to clear brush. That is where blade length is important. Even for cutting the branches off the trunk (called "limbing") an axe is used.

For chopping wood (since you specifically stated "much more efficient choppers"), the axe is much, much better suited. Espeically when you have listed the criterea of "blade length for blade length", since an axe has a blade length (called a "bit") of around 4 inches or less, whereas big knives can eaily be twice that much or more, Ten inches is not uncommon for big knives.

The blade length is actually detrimental to chopping performance, as you increase the surface area being hit by the edge, you decrease the concentration in force.

Basicly, it is silly to argue the Knife Vs. Axe debate here, it has been argued for many years, and the axe proponents always win.

Further, while there are good knives out there, there are also excellent axer makers such as Gransfors Bruk.


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, and I'll leave it at this... Jerry may be a bit better read than you might suspect.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


I don't doubt for a minute that Jerry is very well read. I don't claim to be more educated in general, or about knives than Jerry. Jerry is a college graduate (MSU IIRC), and I barely graduated high school. He is a reknowned knifemaker, and I don't doubt for a minute that he is a capanble outdoorsman in his own right.

But, I have read the classic outdoorsmen so many times, and it is an area that interests me so much, that I am sure, very sure, that I know what I am writing about here.

IN the end, the classic outdoorssmen, such as Nessmuk, would like the A.G. Russel Deerhunter as a belt knife, not the "buffallo Solider"

You don't have to like it, or agree with me, but the plain words of these outdoorsmen, as memorialized in their writings, clearly indicates a dislike of thick knives.


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, I'm guessing that Jerry was reffering to the look of the blade as "Nesmukian" or Nesmuk-esque... Not that it was truly a blade that Nesmuk would have endorsed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps. Their is simply no way that Nessmuk would have endorsed this knife.

Perhaps another label would be better suited.
Click to expand...

Mike,

I agree, BTW, that the debate over Knife vs Axe is silly. But since you brought it up, and since I'm not one avoid a good argument... I'll indulge you. And since we're discussing the "fact" that Axe-Users "win" the argument hands down... We should probably define the term "Win".

If you are defining "winning" in terms of denial of the physical realities and a complete unwillingness to admit that you are incorrect when faced with facts that contradict your opinion... then I guess "win" is the correct term.

Further, the proof I can offer is experiential and based in basic physics. It is simply this: If you apply the same force to a knife blade (regardless of edge length) and to an axe, the knife will, by virtue of geometry and other physical attributes, penetrate deeper into your test material... in this case, wood. That is not to say that you cannot chop with an axe. You most certainly can. If you apply enough force and leverage you can chop with a rock. That doesn't make it the most efficient chopping tool.

Next point: Not once did I say that you didn't understand the writings of the "classic writers". What I did say is that just because they are considered classic in some circles does not make them infallible by default. Read and believe what you like. Dislike thick knives all you like... but don't try to pass that dislike off as proof of any sort.

And lastly: Didn't I say that I believed Jerry's intent was not to present the knife as something that Nessie would have endorsed? If you restate an opinion, in the same words and same context, that is not a disagreement. That is an affirmation. Did you actually read what I wrote and you quoted before you restated it verbatim?

Yours in argumentative, logic based, Nuclear blade debate.
 
Hmmm.... that quote (and post) has been deleted along with the other posts in the thread they originated . Why ?
 
I don't know where you learned to chop but I can sink an axe head a lot deeper in a log or tree than any knife I've seen. Unless you put a knife blade on the end of an axe handle (like my ditch-bank blade) the axe will beat you every time. Now penetrating with the point might be a different matter. However, cleaning catfish with an axe is really messy. :D
 
Mike , just curious . What were you expecting with a nit-picking post like the first one you made ? A group hug .
 
Mike_Chandler's post was deleted because he is the latest incarnation of Super Troll Chad Englehardt. He has now been banned from Blade Forums under several different names, including chad234, Digger1, and Eric Draven.

And don't worry, like every other troll, he'll be back. He has nothing better to do. :rolleyes:

Jerry

Surprise, surprise, look what was just posted. :rolleyes:

Mike_Chandler
Basic Member

Registered: Sep 2002
Location:
Posts: 20

"I would like to be unbanned

HI,
I would like to be unbanned under my former user name of chad234. I have emailed you guys (Spark and Cougar) with this request.

I have no desire to debate Jerry Busse and wish him no ill. I wil not enter his forum at all.

If you do not want me posting here at all, under any user name, and also do not want me to read the posts here please let me know.

chad234"

08-26-2003 01:48 PM
 
Originally posted by mhawg
I don't know where you learned to chop but I can sink an axe head a lot deeper in a log or tree than any knife I've seen. Unless you put a knife blade on the end of an axe handle (like my ditch-bank blade) the axe will beat you every time. Now penetrating with the point might be a different matter. However, cleaning catfish with an axe is really messy. :D
Click to expand...

mhawg,

Your argument is one of leverage and force produced. And I agree with you to a point. My assertion is simply that if equal force (regardless of how you generate it) is exerted to both tools, the knife geometry is more suited to deeper penetration and material displacement.

Additionally, an axe has a design flaw in terms of strength. With an axe you have a juction of materials... the head and the handle. Where the two meet is a weak point in relation to the design of a full tang knife which is fashioned of a single piece of steel and is by definition stronger and less likely to come apart under stress... pound for pound.
 
Originally posted by Mike_Chandler
Spearhead,
Forgive me if I do not respond. It is apparent my input here is neither valued nor wanted.
Click to expand...

You're forgiven. But... WOW!!!! I don't think I've ever seen a paper tiger run as fast as you just did.:p
 
Jerry, thanks for the explanation and thanks again for the amazing face-lifts on my knives .
 
hehehehe.... good old pole arm busse's...

spearhead makes some very well stated logical remarks.

and as for design, (in my very uneducated opinion), its the handle to ax design that makes them a "more efficient" chopper. the ability of the upper body to put momentum into a heavy object thats 3 feet from the hand is much less demanding then the body trying to putting the same amount of momentum into a 14 inch item thats 14 inches from the hand.

the back muscles tend to wear out slower then the arm muscles, unless you've trained your arms to take long term anerobic excercise.

of course, a person like me wears out when useing an ax, so its more a matter of the bodies ability to put equal force on the two items, at wich point the ax is easier.

and, if you put the blade geometry of a knife onto an ax head - im not sure if the thin blade could take the lateral torqueing that can come into play when you torque wood out of the area your chopping. my question would be,

is it possible to generate the same amount of force with a knife (used as a pole arm/ax-head), as it is with an ax head wich is considerably heavier?

the second question would be, if you could do this, would the knife be able to handle the riggors of such heavy duty impacts? (and over an extended period of say, 5 years)

(i ask because i have no idea, but the sounded like good questions when i wrote them :rolleyes: :) )
 
You said, "With an axe you have a juction of materials... the head and the handle."

If you mean for me to just use the steel axe head in my hand to chop as opposed to a knife then you might have something but my axe got a big ole handle on it.
 
Spearhead:

Agreed; given equal forces applied the more acute and efficient edge grind will penetrate better.

However, as has been mentioned, how can one put as much force bend the knife as behind the axe? Polearms are usually clumsy and usually have far less durability than an axe handle (so if that is an issue for you a polearm would not work for ya).

The durability issue has been mentioned, and it is probably a valid one. Of course, with INFI and a decent grind I imagine durablity would be decent.

So, in conlusion, what we need is an axe power-level tool with knife edge geometry :D
 
i just chopped down a tree with a michalob ultra:cool:

and yes it was tougher because it was empty:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top