Hardcore Hatchets (made in USA)

[Square_peg]

I've read those websites and watched that video before. Jimbo and Peter both rely on Dudley Cook's book 'The Ax Book'. I'm not convinced that Dudley Cook was any expert on axe handles. He was completely clueless about grain. Have you read his book yourself? It's subtitled 'The Lore and Science of the Woodcutter'. While there is surely some science in there there's also a good bit of lore.

Cook writes about missing the wrist angle by 5° and creating a 3/4" error. But what if a skilled axe user can stay accurate to within 1° with a curved handle? Then the error is only about 1/8". And what about the advantages of curved handle. For one it makes an easier grip and produces less hand fatigue. That in itself could produce greater accuracy over a day's work. And if the curved handle allows for a slightly looser grip then it could result in more wrist snap producing more speed and power at the end of the stroke. Add a full unclipped fawn's foot (another place where I disagree with Cook) and you improve grip and reduce work again.

Peter makes a better case based on his actual hours of usage. But his work is still anecdotal. There could have been other factors at play, his different axes may have had slightly different edge bevels, higher polish or any number of other differences.

But if we want to discuss accuracy then what we really need to test is accuracy. If we put 500 lines on each of 2 sets of logs and then swung at each set of lines with either a straight or curved handle axe then we could physically measure the error in each axe. That way grind. polish, steel and lucky trees would be out of the picture.

Cook states that he doesn't know why curved handles become popular. Maybe we should answer that question before we make conclusions.

I don't know which is better. But I'm not convinced by Cook's work that straight is better.

 

[VaughnT]

I like the head shape. The octagonal hammer head doesn't bother me in the least, and if the steel and heat-treat is good, I'd be glad to buy one to supplement GB hatchet. Heck, for less than half the cost of the GB, I wouldn't be nearly as afraid to use it and get it scratched up.

Of course, everything depends on the details.

 

[DJG097]

I don't know which is better. But I'm not convinced by Cook's work that straight is better.

I think it's personal preference. For me it depends on the axe (or head) being used, I wouldn't want a straight haft on my 4lb plumb but on a boys axe or a lighter head I like a straight haft because I like the feel of it more than a curved handle.

 

[garry3]

I've read those websites and watched that video before. Jimbo and Peter both rely on Dudley Cook's book 'The Ax Book'. I'm not convinced that Dudley Cook was any expert on axe handles. He was completely clueless about grain. Have you read his book yourself? It's subtitled 'The Lore and Science of the Woodcutter'. While there is surely some science in there there's also a good bit of lore.

Cook writes about missing the wrist angle by 5° and creating a 3/4" error. But what if a skilled axe user can stay accurate to within 1° with a curved handle? Then the error is only about 1/8". And what about the advantages of curved handle. For one it makes an easier grip and produces less hand fatigue. That in itself could produce greater accuracy over a day's work. And if the curved handle allows for a slightly looser grip then it could result in more wrist snap producing more speed and power at the end of the stroke. Add a full unclipped fawn's foot (another place where I disagree with Cook) and you improve grip and reduce work again.

Peter makes a better case based on his actual hours of usage. But his work is still anecdotal. There could have been other factors at play, his different axes may have had slightly different edge bevels, higher polish or any number of other differences.

But if we want to discuss accuracy then what we really need to test is accuracy. If we put 500 lines on each of 2 sets of logs and then swung at each set of lines with either a straight or curved handle axe then we could physically measure the error in each axe. That way grind. polish, steel and lucky trees would be out of the picture.

Cook states that he doesn't know why curved handles become popular. Maybe we should answer that question before we make conclusions.

I don't know which is better. But I'm not convinced by Cook's work that straight is better.

I think you have a personal opinion that you are not sharing. And I know that you are no stranger to the use of striking tools.
All we need to do is take a look at the framing crews of the 1970's. In most tool belts you will find the rigging axe. It's 28oz, the natural balance in the head is great. It has a narrow handle that adds to the balance of the tool. Then the California style framing hammer shows up. It seems like almost over night rigging axes are rare. The California framer shortened the hammer poll but widened the face, making for better balance and a bigger sweet spot. But the main difference was the curved hatchet stye handle. A 32oz California framer is more user friendly than a 28oz riggers axe.

 

[daizee]

Is there a case to be made that a straight haft is good for striking downward, where gravity works in favor of accuracy, vs. a curved handle for chopping in other directions where the "increased turning moment" allows the user to steer against gravity with more leverage? Of course a double-bit is evenly balanced AND used both directions, so regardless of the direction of travel, a straight haft would be appropriate.

 

[garry3]

Is there a case to be made that a straight haft is good for striking downward, where gravity works in favor of accuracy, vs. a curved handle for chopping in other directions where the "increased turning moment" allows the user to steer against gravity with more leverage? Of course a double-bit is evenly balanced AND used both directions, so regardless of the direction of travel, a straight haft would be appropriate.

Not that I have ever heard. One of the most important things is the shape of the handle, oblong vs more rounded and the swell at the bottom of the grip. I have not found that a curved handle is less accurate than a straight handle. I am completely open to being wrong about that. But I have swung alot of striking tools with all kinds of handles. So much so that I have not been able to fully straighten my right arm since I turned 30 or so(a long time ago).

 

[zachtateknives]

Gorgeous handles.

 

[Square_peg]

Is there a case to be made that a straight haft is good for striking downward, where gravity works in favor of accuracy, vs. a curved handle for chopping in other directions where the "increased turning moment" allows the user to steer against gravity with more leverage?

Gravity shouldn't exert any twisting motion on a properly balanced axe. But the key words there are 'properly balanced'. An axe without a proper poll will surely be less accurate and you're right that the inaccuracy would show up more during horizontal chopping than in vertical chopping.

 

[cooperhill]

Was contacted by someone on a social media site asking about why his hatchet was coming unhung. It is a hardcore hammer hatchet. He said that this was the third one they sent him. All came unhung.

I'll stick to vintage.

 

[Double Ott]

Thanks Tom: We use 1080 Steel, and we aim for about 55RC on the bit. The polls end up about 40-45RC. This is for both the hatchet and mini hawk. Hope this helps!
best regards,
Rick

Rick Spencer, owner
Hardcore Hammers, LLC
rick@hardcorehammers.com
913.669.3330

On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Tom wrote:

You have a rather flowery description of your hatchets. How about some specs on them?
What steel is used?
What is the RC on the bits?
Are the polls hardened?

Please be specific for the hatchet and the Mini Hawk

Thank you, I’ll post your results on a popular axe forum.

Regards, Tom




--
Rick Spencer, owner
Hardcore Hammers, LLC
rick@hardcorehammers.com
913.669.3330

 

[Square_peg]

1080 steel and 55RC is respectable. Sounds like they need a little help on the hang, though.

 

[G-pig]

I've read those websites and watched that video before. Jimbo and Peter both rely on Dudley Cook's book 'The Ax Book'. I'm not convinced that Dudley Cook was any expert on axe handles. He was completely clueless about grain. Have you read his book yourself? It's subtitled 'The Lore and Science of the Woodcutter'. While there is surely some science in there there's also a good bit of lore.

Cook writes about missing the wrist angle by 5° and creating a 3/4" error. But what if a skilled axe user can stay accurate to within 1° with a curved handle? Then the error is only about 1/8". And what about the advantages of curved handle. For one it makes an easier grip and produces less hand fatigue. That in itself could produce greater accuracy over a day's work. And if the curved handle allows for a slightly looser grip then it could result in more wrist snap producing more speed and power at the end of the stroke. Add a full unclipped fawn's foot (another place where I disagree with Cook) and you improve grip and reduce work again.

Peter makes a better case based on his actual hours of usage. But his work is still anecdotal. There could have been other factors at play, his different axes may have had slightly different edge bevels, higher polish or any number of other differences.

But if we want to discuss accuracy then what we really need to test is accuracy. If we put 500 lines on each of 2 sets of logs and then swung at each set of lines with either a straight or curved handle axe then we could physically measure the error in each axe. That way grind. polish, steel and lucky trees would be out of the picture.

Cook states that he doesn't know why curved handles become popular. Maybe we should answer that question before we make conclusions.

I don't know which is better. But I'm not convinced by Cook's work that straight is better.

Peter stated he was against the curve at the *end * of the handle, that changes the line of the the grip. This is not a scientific term, at least not to me, but a way to compare one axe to another. With an offset near the throw, you can, if so desired, add a curve to the grip end without throwing that line of the grip way off behind the poll.

The second one from the left could have a slight curve on the knob end without bringing the line of grip "beyond the point of no return" so to speak. The third from left has some of the curve as well. Balancing these features can make a comfortable handle with a line of grip equivalent to a straight handle (which, for what its worth, I am not wild about necessarily).

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Midnight Mare = Nightmare Moon?

I bet it cuts muffins well.

 

[thunderstick]

A tool with a primary usage side can benefit from a curved handle. As Square_peg pointed out the grip can be slightly relaxed -- because the curvature of the handle resists the tool flying out of your hands upon impact. If you utilize a lighter grip there is less shock to the arm and less fatigue and cramping to the hand. On a straight handle like a d-b axe, I prefer a checkered grip area and a swell at the end to facilitate a looser grip. If there were any advantage to the straight handle on a s-b axe I'm sure the racing axes would all utilize them, but the overwhelming majority have a curved handle. Maybe the professional competitors don't understand the science of the axe.

 

[garry3]

A tool with a primary usage side can benefit from a curved handle. As Square_peg pointed out the grip can be slightly relaxed -- because the curvature of the handle resists the tool flying out of your hands upon impact. If you utilize a lighter grip there is less shock to the arm and less fatigue and cramping to the hand. On a straight handle like a d-b axe, I prefer a checkered grip area and a swell at the end to facilitate a looser grip. If there were any advantage to the straight handle on a s-b axe I'm sure the racing axes would all utilize them, but the overwhelming majority have a curved handle. Maybe the professional competitors don't understand the science of the axe.

That sums it up pretty good!

 

[G-pig]

A tool with a primary usage side can benefit from a curved handle. As Square_peg pointed out the grip can be slightly relaxed -- because the curvature of the handle resists the tool flying out of your hands upon impact. If you utilize a lighter grip there is less shock to the arm and less fatigue and cramping to the hand. On a straight handle like a d-b axe, I prefer a checkered grip area and a swell at the end to facilitate a looser grip. If there were any advantage to the straight handle on a s-b axe I'm sure the racing axes would all utilize them, but the overwhelming majority have a curved handle. Maybe the professional competitors don't understand the science of the axe.

If think there is some credence in what racers use, but I defenitely do not think it is the end all be all. Racing saws, for example, cut very fast. That does not mean you should file a royal chinook or some other well known crosscut to cut that aggressively to use for trail work or firewood. These people are trying to chop through a log (usually poplar or knot free pine) as fast as possible with a 6 pound+ axe, sort of a different song and dance. Personally, I give more credence to the preferences of men who sustained their life with axes over a competitor chopping a log for 1 minute and taking a break.

I am afraid I dont quite understand how a curve at the end of a handle facilitates a more relaxed grip. Or more comfortable, for that matter. I have heard people say that it positions your wrist differently, which it obviously does, but after handling numerous axes with different handles, as well as carving and using 20+ of my own, I never noticed it.

 

[Square_peg]

The second one from the left could have a slight curve on the knob end without bringing the line of grip "beyond the point of no return" so to speak.

I like that handle. I've found the balance point of most single bits to be near the front of the eye. A forward swept handle should give it better balance.

 

[thunderstick]

If think there is some credence in what racers use, but I defenitely do not think it is the end all be all. Racing saws, for example, cut very fast. That does not mean you should file a royal chinook or some other well known crosscut to cut that aggressively to use for trail work or firewood. These people are trying to chop through a log (usually poplar or knot free pine) as fast as possible with a 6 pound+ axe, sort of a different song and dance. Personally, I give more credence to the preferences of men who sustained their life with axes over a competitor chopping a log for 1 minute and taking a break.

I am afraid I dont quite understand how a curve at the end of a handle facilitates a more relaxed grip. Or more comfortable, for that matter. I have heard people say that it positions your wrist differently, which it obviously does, but after handling numerous axes with different handles, as well as carving and using 20+ of my own, I never noticed it.

I did not mean to infer that racing axe handles are the end all of the axe handle discussion, however it is clear that competitors will pick the handle with the most efficient chopping design. The lore and legend all gets tested by the time clock and only what works is what wins. The crosscut analogy does not discount my position, because there is an obvious difference in the settings of the usage between competition crosscut and work as you point out. The same analogy would also apply to the head profile of a racing softwood axe vs. a work and/or a hardwood axe. Obviously a racing profile and weight will not work most efficiently for a large majority of axe work on different types of wood or for periods of long usage. However the profile of the handle is relevant--because the same or a similarly curved profile has been shown to be used most effectively in all the different competition events, in all types of field positions. All the events essentially duplicate the most common positions from which you would employ an axe for work, so the handle geometry is relevant and is being tested for efficiency and does cross-relate to work in the field.

In the logging heyday, the professionals in the woods also often worked on piece rate and pushed themselves for their top wages, and again the curved SB and the flared end DB came to the forefront during the professional logging era. The legend and lore of the axe was adjusted by the reality of timed efficiency.

There is a reason why the curved handle came into regular usage. Its a straight-forward concept--that a straight handle with no swell or curve to anchor the hand will require a stronger grip to ensure it does not fly out of your hand on impact--especially when striking at oblique angles. There probably is some truth to the fact that a straight handle may aid better precision for the "infrequent" user, but for the professional or regular user whose precision is born of experience, the most efficient geometry will be chosen every time over what may be easier for an infrequent user to employ. Also what may work most efficiently at the beginning of a day may not be the most efficient design for all day to avert fatigue, or after fatique sets in. A competion event duplicates this fatigue in a shorter period of time and the curved handle helps to offset it with a more relaxed grip, more wrist motion, and better anchoring. It is very common in many eye-hand coordination events for the geometry of a tool to change from amateur to professional usage or from infrequent to regular usage.

I also suspect that the straight handle was more common in early America because it was far easier for the average frontiersmen to make a straight handle. However when you have a professional logging crew who will select the most efficient design from the camp carpenter, they will choose what works best, not what is easiest to make--hence the evolution of the curved handle SB axe.

Another example of this is the hawk in early America--the straight tapered handle was the most easy to make and maintain, however in time, as commercial products were more available, the Hudson Bay belt axe replaced it as a far more efficient tool--and utilized a curved handle.

 

[thunderstick]

Here are samples of curved axe handles in the early 1900s catalog of Warren Tool Company, making it clear that it is incorrect to say that curved handles only came into usage because loggers had moved on to using straight handled DB axes. The catalogue mentions that some loggers even used curved handles on their DB axes if they had a definite primary side.

http://www.roseantiquetools.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/1937warrenaxepdfopt6.54.pdf

 

[G-pig]

Here are samples of curved axe handles in the early 1900s catalog of Warren Tool Company, making it clear that it is incorrect to say that curved handles only came into usage because loggers had moved on to using straight handled DB axes. The catalogue mentions that some loggers even used curved handles on their DB axes if they had a definite primary side.

http://www.roseantiquetools.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/1937warrenaxepdfopt6.54.pdf

From the assemblies of anecdotes I have read, the crosscut came into to more widespread use right around 1900. This should correspond with the degradation of the closest thing to "perfection" axes have ever come to. In my opinion, it does.

Racers will pick the most efficient design for chopping with a rare piece of perfect softwood as fast as possible, with a long break in between work. I don't mean to chastise competitive choppers, and I think there is a lot to learn from them. That does not change the fact that competitive chopping places value in different balances of mechanical functions than normal use. Peter wrote this as response to one of my probably over zealous pries to try and get a good discussion going, speaking of Tom Clark: "Given his evident passion for the craft, and practically the whole range of wood splitting tools presumably at his disposal, why did he settle on a 4 1/4 lb. ax instead of a maul??" ....For what its worth, Tom also used a straight handle with a generous swell that still put the line of grip just forward of the eye from what I can tell.

The swell is not what Cook, Vido, myself and a plethora of old time handle carvers are saying or implying is bad. you can have a large comfortable swell without throwing the line of the grip end way off. Peter even stated while debating Ross/Woodtrekker that European axes with straight handles and no swells were inferior to what he considered the gold standard over here (paraphrasing there). A comfortable swell and grip is very important and not at all what I am steadfastly against here-- I have made straight handles with little swell and found them very unergonomic to use. I still maintain that an excessive (<--- important point) curve that throws the line of the grip (or rotational axis, a term this self described intentional ignoramus does not particularly like) off behind the poll at an angle makes an axe clumsy, less accurate, and feels like it wants to chop into the ground/my foot.

Having spent hundreds of hours carving and contemplating handles, most of which were promptly left in the corner/sawn off, I have my preferences. I encourage others to try to nurse the same positive, instead of negative, outlook on deciding preference. If you have tried a straight handle and didn't like it, try carving your own with a different swell, offset, or even knob end curve (gasp). No amount of science or physics (all of which are of the theoretical variety to me) will ever explain the how and why of what just "feels" right (convincingly, to me anyway).

Sorry if my posts come across as pointed. that wasnt the intent.