Dutch - Oregon Trail

I needed a visual lol - danke

Kevin Houtzager said:
You can use a grinder, but thats not neccesairy. I use one though (belt grinder). If using a file: First grind the edge in the required shape going top to bottom straight on the edge. Its blunt as a spoon by then. If the shape is good, just do it your regular way. That will probably be the quickest way.

Since I'm to lazy to upload anything:
1: 90 degrees
2: 45 degrees
3: still 45 degrees
4: 22,5 degrees

As long as you have a piece of paper with you you can always check the angle.
You can even fold the top half of nr 2 untill the middel and get 33,75 degrees (roughly a splitter)
22,5 is where most of my axes are at.
organizing%2Bwith%2Borigami%2Bbrown.jpg

22,5 degrees
Click to expand...

As far as using a file, I have one that ate at an old American broadaxe so I'll start with that. I wonder if I could just trace the blade shape of the other one I have - the welded up one.
 
This is my first time working on a big flat-bladed axe like this. I like to save stuff.

My basic/initial observations:

1. This axe is diminutive in overall build compared to the other one I have.

2. It is worn and was previously sharpened wrong/not aimed at preserving the overall shape as appears straight or arced like yours and most the nicer examples on the net.

Reasoning? Maybe it was a careless/clueless owner? – we have those everywhere and axes to prove it lol. Or maybe it was to mitigate taking more steel off it than you want, to keep it a functional user – regardless of its looks. Meaning, “Damn it (insert Dutch expletives), I chipped the heel/toe! – well, I’ll just remove that and keep at what I’m doing”.

3. Kevin, this one weighs half of what yours weighs. Obviously the blade on this one is worn down a lot but not to half its overall weight – that seems like you would want more “attachment” (larger eye and socket, thicker connection, etc) to have been the size of yours originally. That would be a big boy on a little stick. I mentioned earlier that it seemed smaller than some that I see – granted this is looking at pictures (I can take a photo to make a boy’s axe look fullsize for example). It is quite reduced in size at the eye and connection in comparison to the other that I have here. That is what I meant by it seemed like an overall smaller axe. Once again an example being how a full size axe head and a boy’s axe head look in your hands regardless of the wear on them.

4. The first file I used on it has no problem. It’s a nice old file but I’d have to grab it and look at it to see what it is. I did put a red handle on it a while ago so I knew which one it is – it will cut. Lol. It is definitely hardened steel I am working on but does not seem like trying to sharpen/profile a chip out of a Plumb half-hatchet I recently rehabbed.

5. It has a slight uniform arc running from heel to toe that reminds me of a large Cohoes New Jersery hewing axe I have here that is in pretty much original shape. A very slight gouge shape. Intentional? “Wave blade”?

I can though picture the middle bending inwards as well the ends bending out from an outward prying motion straight out with the dead center sunk or the ends being individually stressed out of position but it is looks quite uniform once I took some of the blade in. *But I’ve never used one so I can’t say yet on that. Are there variations on a theme in regards to standard shapes, sizes, and build styles across time and regions? Would these style axes have been made in different sizes in proportion to the work being done? I mean a two pound American hewing hatchet can be shaped exactly like its monstrous 10lb brother.

I like to save/salvage stuff and usually can visualize what needs to be done with a file. I just eyed it into this shape in the vise with the other one sitting next to me on the bench. I normally know when it’s "there" and any more removal is too much. There will also be shaping that occurs when I start the edge angle.

No grinder, I need junk to try that on. Obviously the front is ugly right this second just having worked from the back of it.


On the Barbecue (light background):

TheGoosewingGrind by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


Same picture flipped around for perspective (the natural light for pictures is only good in the morning and later evening):



TheGoosewingGrind by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr

TheGoosewingGrind by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


TheGoosewingGrind by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr

TheGoosewingGrind by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr

TheGoosewingGrind by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr

Looks like a different axe from the back now. :)
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
The kent was made from the 17th century onwards untill today, so thats true. But, here comes the funny part: Most axes from 1840 onwards are made of steel. Especially the English ones. That one is wrought iron with a steel insert. So I know its from 1700 - 1840.
Click to expand...

This is wrong. Wrought iron was still in common use into the late 19th century. It would have even been prevalent - the most likely material used - into or through the 1870's. Bessemer and other processes didn't instantly put wrought iron out of use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrought_iron#Decline

The Kent axe is almost surely later as that's when most of them (higher production rates) were made. To claim <1840 for no reason causes me to raise an eyebrow.
 
Also, I don't see any of the telltale laminations of wrought iron in your Kent axe. It appears to have pitted more like low carbon steel would pit. I see it has a laminated bit and poll but that is not indicative of the body material. Many many axes were made with low carbon steel bodies and high carbon steel bits and sometimes polls.
 
I don't have a lot of wrought iron on hand but these spikes from a late 19th century local saw mill are indicative. The striations in rusted wrought iron are distinctive, pretty easy to spot and lacking on your axe. Your axe shows steel pitting.

Wrought%20iron.jpg


I don't understand what you're saying about crucible steel. The bit and poll could easily be crucible steel - with a mild or low carbon steel body. Crucible steel was used in cutting tools into the early 20th century - superior steel to Bessemer or Gilchrist–Thomas process steels. But the composition of the bit and poll aren't what we're discussing.
 
That man makes things in a fiery pit that the majority of us can't even think of using.
 
I’m thinking the back of the blade will get these used on it to start:
GoosewingScours by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr
Those utility stones seemed to work well flattening the back of a large American hewing axe. So about 2" up from the edge worked flat then maybe sanding a bit higher than that?


The edge more or less in that order:
GoosewingScours by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


I actually feel fortunate to have this piece pretty much intact – gives me something to eye when that time comes:
GoosewingScours by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


GoosewingScours by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


Eye difference:

GoosewingScours by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr
 
Thanks for the tips Kevin. I've already filed the inside edges of the eye where it has been hammered on and off.

Those are "Utility files" I think they are called. I had never seen them before but OldAxeman here mentioned them. The top one is vintage and is much smoother/finer than the new one below it - they might be overkill for this project but we'll see. The only place I can find them locally is the front area in our blacksmith's shop.

Slight upsweep with hickory as material is my current plan for a handle.
 
I think those large handled stones are a good choice. I like to use them wet. They are still available new as a 'Norton Tradesmans Utility Stone' .

And you are correct to want to lap the back of that axe as the back side has the most wood contact. A little roll on the back from heel to toe can help preventing gouging in a similar manner as a curve-lipped adze. Lay a straight edge across the back from heel to toe and check for a 'high centerline'. If any exists maintain it. If either heel or toe is high you'll want to file them down. Perfectly flat is OK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top