Finnish/Earlier Scandi axes - Kirves

Those axes are super impressive Jay! I was looking at where Martii lives and works on his site - wild looking country.

The handles are almost as impressive as his metal works - I have been fumbling around trying to figure out to do with the swells on handles made from sawn boards - without much to work with side to side.


I wonder, is their is a name for that "nipple" or "pinch" there at the end? A regional style or is that just part of his signature of sorts?

300six's likening to an antler growing out after a shed is pretty close - the pedicle (I had to look that up):




There is a growing list of places I would love to visit.
 
Last edited:
I need a shovel more than an axe right now.








It ended up 24.5”. I tried to make a “mushroom” of the swell but didn’t want to just waste wood. The way it is shaped, the extra is out of the way and feels pretty solid.

I don’t really know what is considered standard length for them.

They aren’t native here but from pictures/descriptions they seem to get handled short for hatchet/building use (16-20”) and up to 28” for more general purpose. This one you can use one-handed if you grip it about a third from the swell. It feels like a boy’s axe but a couple of inches shorter.
 
Last edited:
Why,Agent_H,that's quite a respectable "mushroom".A nice handle all around,i think.
(Just for s..ts&giggles,i seem to remember this old Finnish diagram,where when holding an axe-head in your hand,the top of the head across your palm,the haft sticking straight up,then the proper-length of haft reaches up to your armpit....As in,the haft L = L of your whole arm + half a hand....something like that....).
 
I wonder, is their is a name for that "nipple" or "pinch" there at the end? A regional style or is that just part of his signature of sorts?

300six's likening to an antler growing out after a shed is pretty close - the pedicle (I had to look that up):


It's the base of the discarded antler I was talking about and not what re-grows from the ungulate critter's head starting a few months later. A foundling Caribou (sorry, Reindeer) antler might make for a dandy axe handle in a barren land or mostly stunted tree region!
 
(Just for s..ts&giggles,i seem to remember this old Finnish diagram,where when holding an axe-head in your hand,the top of the head across your palm,the haft sticking straight up,then the proper-length of haft reaches up to your armpit....As in,the haft L = L of your whole arm + half a hand....something like that....).

The Karelian way.;)
 
Why,Agent_H,that's quite a respectable "mushroom".A nice handle all around,i think.
(Just for s..ts&giggles,i seem to remember this old Finnish diagram,where when holding an axe-head in your hand,the top of the head across your palm,the haft sticking straight up,then the proper-length of haft reaches up to your armpit....As in,the haft L = L of your whole arm + half a hand....something like that....).

Thank you Jake! That is absolutely the rule I follow for the full-size axes I use – 31”-32”. For my body build that is proportionately what is described by Marcus Lepola while referencing a handle for a 12.2:
https://nordiskaknivar.wordpress.com/tag/history-of-finnish-axe/
image-9.jpg

*Picture by Marcus Lepola.


I’ve arrived at the realization that it is hard for a novice to tell a full-size 12.1 from a mid-size 12.2 when they have some considerable wear on them and no discernible markings. For a while I was certain the previous one I handled was a 12.1 but it is quite possible that is a 12.2 given its lesser overall mass (at least what is left of it) compared to another one I have. The one has less sweep to it at the top of the blade making me think that it could also have been a touch shorter in the bit to begin with. I think some of the differences in proportions with them might be shown in a slightly longer bit as well as being a little thicker leading up to and in the collar. The length of the collar is of course smaller on the 12.3 but it's hard to see a difference in length between the full and mid sizes.

I guess if I operate under the assumption that the previous one was the mid-sized version I was intuiting the rule in a sense:

The Kemi 12.1, 1.6kg (3.5lbs) – 31”
The Kemi 12.2, 1.4kg (3lbs) – 27”
The Kemi 12.3, 1.1kg (2.4lbs) – 24”
Here is kind of what I am thinking:






Looks like I had increments of about a 3+ inch drop per half pound of axe. I guess of course it depends on the user and what you plan to do with it, how you are built, and where the weight is carried in head. I will try a 31” handle for a more intact 12.1 at some point and check the difference in feel.

For some reason a 3.5lb 12.1 on a 36” seems like it might be cumbersome. Where those axes carry their weight makes them balance a little differently than an American polled axe. But I don’t know that about the 12.1 as I haven’t tried one yet…

The most interesting part of this is that I wasn’t conscious of my decisions on length difference while actually making the handles – only this morning after thinking about your comment. Do and learn. Also, there aren’t any old Finnish foresters around here to ask lol! (If there were, they would probably make fun of how long I spent goofing around with the handle before putting the head on it to use…)

That is one of the reasons I enjoy these discussions as much as I do.

It's a thing of beauty.
Thank you Square_peg! That is humbling sir.


You're very gifted, Agent!

Thank you Moonw – my mother swore the same thing whereas my father used the term, “Special” more often than not ;)
 
Last edited:
Agent_H,you're entirely correct,Sir,as far as i'm informed....The length would differ relative a number of factors....

The difference between models is best understood by exact measurements,when known,for a specific model....The important thing to keep in mind,of course,is that these were TOOLS,and like a carpenter's pencil or the like were made to wear out....And be re-ground,and reshaped,and eventually,(as we heard on that Piilu video),re-bladed....
So,the important parameters are,1.The length of the steel insert,how much is left?,and,2,the shape,and angle,of converging bevels...These two things make for the physics of the tool,and the haft controls what factors remain,adjusting the tool to the specific chore+owner as well...

But,you alrady know all that....judging by the excellent hafting job(-s)...Respect!:)
 
Gotta love that wedging technique! The fella featured in this clip for sure has made handles and conducted hangs hundreds of times before; not one wasted beat or step.
 
Found on facebook this am.

[video=youtube;TgbdWsmNu64]


Bob

That is a cool video - Thanks Bob!

Dual snakeheads - that style of wedging seems like it is intended to be a very permanent affixing of the head and handle - no digging a wedge out to rehang there.

The head he was hanging looks a bit like this:
Show

https://museot.finna.fi/Record/lusto.M011-1006

Since the bucksaw made an appearance:
 
Last edited:
. . .
Dual snakeheads. . .
Those wedges were my favorite part.

32318930872_5fa912104c.jpg


I wonder how that would work out with a hickory handle?


. . .
This is an interesting site were one of the members carves out a handle aimed at looking like a traditional Finnish handle.
http://www.trapperman.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/5380602/Making_axe_handles_and_birch_b

The wedge system was called a “snake” on a site I can’t find again right now. . .


"snake head wedge" OP on the trapperman site:
32319559222_de7daa583a_b.jpg


"feather wedge" OP later in thread:
32471109205_e9e3271cfe_z.jpg


To me the above from woodtrekker looks more like the one in the video:
32092137740_0628de4229.jpg


It does not look as if the woodtrekker was put in as deep as the one in the video:
6_thumb.jpg


. . .
Since the bucksaw made an appearance. . .
Alas, the bucksaw made its exit too soon. That video seemed to end rather abruptly. Was there originally more?


Bob
 
Last edited:
Found on facebook this am.

[video=youtube;TgbdWsmNu64]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgbdWsmNu64[/video]


Bob

Lovely video! I especially like the part on grinding as it shows excellent use of a wheel. The bevel is set accurately using the jig, and then blended in using a rocking technique.
 
. . .I especially like the part on grinding as it shows excellent use of a wheel. The bevel is set accurately using the jig, and then blended in using a rocking technique.
I thought that was pretty neat too. I've been wanting to get an old wheel. Not easy to find in my area and I suspect if I do find one it will cost an arm and a leg.

32482940215_f21e7df4bc.jpg


The edge on the above first gets jointed. I am guessing that's what the dotted line is showing. I don't think the jig would give the desired result without the correct arc on the bit edge.


32442403636_30dfe51c46_z.jpg


I didn't see this one on the jig.


Bob
 
I wonder how all those splits affect the handle over time.

From the last picture in post #134, it looks to me like the handle was fitted too loose and therefore spread (and split) in every direction with that wedge. Had it been a 'honeymoon fit' to start with the haft wood ought to have reacted same as with a modern metal conical or an old Plumb take-up wedge. Also seems to me sawing a narrow kerf (or two if cross-wedging is on the agenda) is much simpler to conduct than creating a tapered hole slightly smaller than a 'whittled spear' wedge.
 
From the last picture in post #134, it looks to me like the handle was fitted too loose and therefore spread (and split) in every direction with that wedge. Had it been a 'honeymoon fit' to start with the haft wood ought to have reacted same as with a modern metal conical or an old Plumb take-up wedge. Also seems to me sawing a narrow kerf (or two if cross-wedging is on the agenda) is much simpler to conduct than creating a tapered hole slightly smaller than a 'whittled spear' wedge.
In the first picture in post 134, the dual wedges appear to be hollow ground. Unless I am missing something?
 
In the first picture in post 134, the dual wedges appear to be hollow ground. Unless I am missing something?

Wedges and wedging in the first picture were expertly done by someone that knew what he/she was doing and obviously had done many times before.
 
Back
Top