Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
This is another axe recently sharpened for a friend so I only had time to give it a brief workout, no extended edge retention testing and the volume of work was very low. A shot :
A few specifics :
-weight is 840 grams
-total length is 33 cm, balances 24 cm from end of handle
-bit is 7.3 cm wide, curvature is uneven, heel has a more obtuse curve
-the edge is 0.137" thick and 0.180" wide and there is a pronounced extra curvature at the 0.035" point which is about 27 (1) degrees.
So it is significantly heavier than the Bruks Wildlife hatchet but it is more neutral in balance with a shorter dynamic balance point and the edge is far thicker and more obtuse. It would thus be expected to be heavier in the hand in static movements with far less snap in rotation cutting with a much lower cutting ability. On to the work :
A quick check on splitting showed it to be capable of handling 2x6" pine, which isn't very demanding, but it would readily bog on felled wood unless it was very easy to split like clear pine.
The Wildlife isn't much better on thicker wood as it basically lacks the power needed for a heavy splitter but the more acute edge does allow it to sink into the wood easier which makes it more effective for finer splitting. This is also seen dramatically when making some shavings. The Bruks ones are far thinner and the Coghlan's very obtuse edge tends to fracture the wood :
A more dramatic comparison of the cutting ability is seen in actually carving some points. On the same wood for example the Bruks takes 6 slices to make a point and the Coghlan 28. Besides the edge profiles direct effect on cutting ability there are also issues of control due to the grip on the Coghlan being on a round piece of bar when gripped under the head, and of course fatigue in an issue as maximum force can't be sustained for close to 30 slices.
Both axes were also used for some limbing and a dramatic difference was also seen. The Wildlife could just sweep off the small limbs and just push cut through the very small ones which the Coghlan would just bend over. On the thicker limbs (1" at maximum) the Coghlan took 2-3 hits hits while the Bruks would clear them in 1-2.
The performance cutting thicker wood was closer as the extra weight of the Coghlan could be brought into the chop and a sample comparison (total of three cuts each) was 13 for the Bruks and 19 for the Coghlan. It was still being outperformed but the raw performance was at least not outclassed. However it also took a lot more effort as it acted more like a club than an axe due to the balance issue with all the weight in the handle.
A fire was made with both and due to the tiem of year and enviroment, neither were much use over a small pocket knife as there was lots of dry woods and scrub. The only edges cutting was to gather some grass (ripping it up drags up the snow/wet roots) and as long as the edge is sharp then the geometry doesn't matter so the only issue was the ergomics and blance of the Coghlan are still detractions. Of course the large difference in chopping ability would make the Bruks heavily favored when thicker wood had to be cut, thin splits made, etc. .
As a final comparison, both were used to drive some nails to check the performance as a hammer. On 2.5" nails through pine, there was a significant advantage to the Coghlan and the Bruks tended to glance and skew the nails. Some large spikes were used on some rounds then to push the impacts higher so more precision would be obtained in a comparison. The Coghlan finally had its revenge here and smashed the Bruks with an 18 to 34 hit run.
This was repeated a few times and the main issue was the Bruks poll is rounded in both axis so the blows tend to glance and power is lost plus the impacts were a bit less than full force due to really not wanting to smash the handle into the nail accidently or have it glance into it on a poor deflection. But in any case it was clearly evident that there was more power on a straight down hammer blow which would be expected as it is significantly heavier.
In short, with the as-delivered profile, it is significantly behind the Bruks for most wood craft, as much as many to one in certain cases. It is a typical hardware store axe, the edge is focused on extreme durability. The Coghlan is however much cheaper (<$10) than the Bruks and the edge could be regound to match the cutting performance of the Wildlife (about 15 minutes of heavy filing) though you would expect significantly lower edge retention/durability as the head is way softer.
-Cliff
A few specifics :
-weight is 840 grams
-total length is 33 cm, balances 24 cm from end of handle
-bit is 7.3 cm wide, curvature is uneven, heel has a more obtuse curve
-the edge is 0.137" thick and 0.180" wide and there is a pronounced extra curvature at the 0.035" point which is about 27 (1) degrees.
So it is significantly heavier than the Bruks Wildlife hatchet but it is more neutral in balance with a shorter dynamic balance point and the edge is far thicker and more obtuse. It would thus be expected to be heavier in the hand in static movements with far less snap in rotation cutting with a much lower cutting ability. On to the work :
A quick check on splitting showed it to be capable of handling 2x6" pine, which isn't very demanding, but it would readily bog on felled wood unless it was very easy to split like clear pine.
The Wildlife isn't much better on thicker wood as it basically lacks the power needed for a heavy splitter but the more acute edge does allow it to sink into the wood easier which makes it more effective for finer splitting. This is also seen dramatically when making some shavings. The Bruks ones are far thinner and the Coghlan's very obtuse edge tends to fracture the wood :
A more dramatic comparison of the cutting ability is seen in actually carving some points. On the same wood for example the Bruks takes 6 slices to make a point and the Coghlan 28. Besides the edge profiles direct effect on cutting ability there are also issues of control due to the grip on the Coghlan being on a round piece of bar when gripped under the head, and of course fatigue in an issue as maximum force can't be sustained for close to 30 slices.
Both axes were also used for some limbing and a dramatic difference was also seen. The Wildlife could just sweep off the small limbs and just push cut through the very small ones which the Coghlan would just bend over. On the thicker limbs (1" at maximum) the Coghlan took 2-3 hits hits while the Bruks would clear them in 1-2.
The performance cutting thicker wood was closer as the extra weight of the Coghlan could be brought into the chop and a sample comparison (total of three cuts each) was 13 for the Bruks and 19 for the Coghlan. It was still being outperformed but the raw performance was at least not outclassed. However it also took a lot more effort as it acted more like a club than an axe due to the balance issue with all the weight in the handle.
A fire was made with both and due to the tiem of year and enviroment, neither were much use over a small pocket knife as there was lots of dry woods and scrub. The only edges cutting was to gather some grass (ripping it up drags up the snow/wet roots) and as long as the edge is sharp then the geometry doesn't matter so the only issue was the ergomics and blance of the Coghlan are still detractions. Of course the large difference in chopping ability would make the Bruks heavily favored when thicker wood had to be cut, thin splits made, etc. .
As a final comparison, both were used to drive some nails to check the performance as a hammer. On 2.5" nails through pine, there was a significant advantage to the Coghlan and the Bruks tended to glance and skew the nails. Some large spikes were used on some rounds then to push the impacts higher so more precision would be obtained in a comparison. The Coghlan finally had its revenge here and smashed the Bruks with an 18 to 34 hit run.
This was repeated a few times and the main issue was the Bruks poll is rounded in both axis so the blows tend to glance and power is lost plus the impacts were a bit less than full force due to really not wanting to smash the handle into the nail accidently or have it glance into it on a poor deflection. But in any case it was clearly evident that there was more power on a straight down hammer blow which would be expected as it is significantly heavier.
In short, with the as-delivered profile, it is significantly behind the Bruks for most wood craft, as much as many to one in certain cases. It is a typical hardware store axe, the edge is focused on extreme durability. The Coghlan is however much cheaper (<$10) than the Bruks and the edge could be regound to match the cutting performance of the Wildlife (about 15 minutes of heavy filing) though you would expect significantly lower edge retention/durability as the head is way softer.
-Cliff
