i know from working with hammers everyday at work and trying everything possible keep the from breaking that the less you allow the wood to flex the more likely it is to break, if your head allows for for no movement what so ever then all that force will be transferred to the handle causing it to break sooner
i agree, for the most part. fiber-alignement allows you toi get around that, but you lose shock-absorption benefits with a straight-fiber-grained wood handle sometimes.
because of cash-flow, i have to wait to get some composites that will allow me to make odd-shaped handles that are as strong as the
Mk Vs. - meanwhile, the
Mk V handles are designed on top of the
Gen 1 Mk 4 handles, which were more whippy. i like them both, i might have to keep making the
Mk 4, but the
Mk V i think i s going ot be my staff handle, for sure.
they both flex about the same range, it's just harder to flex the
Mk V - so far, with the tremendous forces that go into the handle on huge impacts/chops, they still absorb the shock that the
Mk 4's were known for, so one doesn't get the hand shock.
with wood on the other hand, you get a lot more neck stresses than with an endo-/exo-skeletal handle such as ours, where there are two large purpose-built cavities in the handle. - all the finerglass handles out there
(that i have seen) are a joke in my opinion, because they just repeat the limitations of wood,
without wood's natural fiber alignment, by making the necks solid without a gradual step-down in structure
(if the handles are hollow at all).
you get a big stress riser in the junture area of the head/neck when you make a compoiste handle that way. add a bad overstrike or two and you are done.
by taking the foam out of our original handle design, we actually made the same handle stronger, because we removed the fulcrum that breaks the handles' backs.
less really is more.
vec