Let's get a brief comparison over the Council Tool Woodcraft And the Granfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe.
Alot of us are very curious about how they compare.
Especially since they are both vying for the top spot as a the best Bushcrafting, wilderness camping tool.
Why this size of axe?
Out of all the axes I own, these are the best sizes for the long hike into the wilderness.
Not as tiring to carry as a 36" 4lbs felling axe, but also more wieldy and less clusmy for wilderness camp chores
Don't get me wrong, If I had forestry type work to do I would want the bigger tool. But otherwise I can swing faster and more times and also use it for my detailed work.
Also I'm not dropping giant trees in the field. Mostly standing dead no bigger then my thigh.
Both the GB and the CT have great balance, supreme throw. And have a great multi role capability over a longer, bigger axe or a shorter hatchet or small forest axe.
The 24-25 inch haft with the 1.9-2 lbs head on the SFA and WC is the sweet spot for this type of axe.
They Swing faster with more repeated blows then a traditional boys axe at 2.25lbs and the 28" handle, But also has more capablitiy over a small axe with a 1.5 to 2 lbs head on a 19" haft.
IMHO it's the goldly locks zone for an all purpose ,long distance,wilderness axe.
The key is in the swing, the handle is the perfect length for a non sliding technique combined with the light head weight and it's perfect for rapid fire blows on wood.
A boy's axe is just too big for this type of swinging. Its not impossible, but it's not as efficient. A sliding technique feels more natural at 24-25" length.
Let's check out the GB SFA and the CT WC
(The Hudson bay is just for reference. It's on a 19" haft so it's not a direct comparison.)
The GB is thinner
That translates to two things, better penetration in wood and Better for fine detail work but at a cost to splitting and knocking out chips during chopping, also the bit has serious sticking issues with hard swings.
I get a great notch started with the GB but it lacks the "oopf" to pop wood chips, it just bites and starts sticking once the initial notch is cut.
The CT Wins in the geometry department, the phantoms work great, and really help bust out chips with the slightly thicker geometry. It's less work and it's faster
Speed is important for my taste when wilderness camping since I like to set up camp before night fall. After dark, it becomes dangerous to swing an axe. So you only have so much time to use the most effective field tool. Making speed one important factor to many for this type of niche tool.
From thickest to thinest
The HB is much thicker and can do some serious work but suffers at finer tasks because of the thicker geometry. Lacks the bite at this thickness.
I feel the HB is better suited on a 24" haft versus the 19" in picture.
The SFA is a bigger axe the the WC in size but they are realitive in weight since the GB is so thin.
The poll is HT on the WC for striking but will still mushroom on steel wedges. The SFA does not have a flat poll and is not HT for striking metal.
The WC has a tighter hang. The SFA is hung nicely but it is not hydraulically seated on the handle which means it's more susceptible to improper hanging from the factory However the SFA is positioned better on the handle down on the shoulder.
(The gap on the SFA is not an issue)
The handle is better all around on the SFA. It looks nicer, feels nicer in hand and swings and throws great. The only complaint is that they left sides too thick and didn't taper it on the sides at the swell which causes the pinky to ride up on the hook at the bottom of the handle causing discomfort with heavy use and hard swings.
The woodcraft handle is not as attractive and doesnt have the great curve of the SFA. It had a more production feel but it gets the job done and counters the issues with the SFA with slimmer sides better taper into the swell transition and a more comfortable swell when swinging on impact
but it's simply not as nice as the SFA in looks and fondling but seems more comfortable in use once the bit strikes wood.
The Grain orientation is not great on the WC but can vary with any axe and company. I have really punished the woodcraft and have had no cracks on the handle from the hard swings
In the end, the woodcraft has a better geometry, it's more versatile and can do more jobs as far as splitting and bucking then the SFA yet still compete with the SFA in finer tasks but the SFA will be slightly better for detail work.
The SFA has better steel, the metallurgy held up better in use and was still shaving sharp. The WC holds a decent edge but lost its shaving sharp edge at the end of the day. The SFA comes with a paper cutting, hair shaving edge out of box the WC is not as sharp from the factory but is more responsive to sharpening then the SFA since the steel is softer and grinds better.
The sheath is a better design on the SFA and fits better, The WC mask has Better leather and finish but it is loose and need modification for a tighter fit.
I'd argue that the SFA is a nicer product but that the WC holds its own when put to swinging and the has more user features like the 90° spine, hardened square pole, the phantoms and the tighter hang with circle cross wedge.
Depending on the task the Woodcraft will out perform the SFA and vice Versa.
So its preference but also availablity.
If your really into axes, bushcrafting, and wilderness camping then Just get both
However,
The GB SFA is hard to come but and there is horrible price gouging out there. They retail for $150 and are great at that price. But I would not spend $200.
The WC is widely available and is retail at $135.
I really want to cover the Woodcraft in some more detail in my next post. Especially the 5160 steel.
Thanks guys
Shawn.
Got a sheath for the Velvicut too.
