Interesting take on the Central/South American trade axe.

300Six thanks for the explanation and lesson in American English. I too have done exactly that to the handle on a "hard hitting" axe some years ago and while it breaks with tradition, it certainly puts a different feel into the axe. I too like to think outside the box as I need an advantage in competition cos I am not built like the big guys of the sport. I must take some pics of some of my axes and post them sometime. I am really enjoying the forum as a "newbie" and seeing the passion that other members show with regard to axes and other sharp implements. It's interesting to note those that are experienced and willing to share there expertise, something I get an enormous amount of pleasure from.
 
I don't "have a dog in this fight" but I think that this discussion (banter and argumentality included) is interesting and beneficial to many of us who are here to glean knowledge. I have no access to a poll-less axe, but I'm eager to learn about them so if I ever work with one I understand it- and this discussion, with its comparisons to the axes I do understand, helps me with that. Carry on the good work, gentlemen.
 
Forgive my ignorance again but a "poll less axe" I understand is an axe with less of a poll, which here in Australia equates to what we call the back of the axe. I sometimes wonder if all the different designs, other than double butted axes, has something to do with satisfying "design patents" rather than anything to do with weight and balance as I would hardly think much R&D would have gone into a lot of the products we see on the market today.
 
ICS said:
Forgive my ignorance again but a "poll less axe" I understand is an axe with less of a poll, which here in Australia equates to what we call the back of the axe. I sometimes wonder if all the different designs, other than double butted axes, has something to do with satisfying "design patents" rather than anything to do with weight and balance as I would hardly think much R&D would have gone into a lot of the products we see on the market today.
Click to expand...

It has to do with design optimization for very specific regional uses, environments, and preferences. When you really rely on a tool on a daily basis you start thinking about how you wish it was a little more this or a little less that. That's what leads to the development of regional styles. For the occasional user it often makes little difference, but getting everything "just so" with your hand tools makes for a significant net benefit when you're doing everything (or mostly everything) by hand. Our ancestors nerded out about this stuff just as much as we do today, if not even more. There have always been gimmicks on the market, especially in the industrial era, but patterns usually exist because they were worth copying, and the reason why they were worth copying is usually because they worked. :)
 
Agree to a point but if that was the case could it not be that when original tools were developed people were just satisfied with the original design because it satisfied their need at the time, without going the further mile. I know that when I have travelled in wood chopping for instance, the basic design is the same world wide, except for idiosyncrasies associated with the hardness of the wood, whereby the weight of the head, grind and angle on the bevel are the only things that axe men look to change.
 
Axe Master '94, regardless of what axe you choose from the myriad of those available, the most important thing you can do is learn to swing an axe and learn to chop properly. Ultimately it is your technique combined with good equipment which dictates the end results.
 
Axe Master '94, let me know if you need a "poll less axe", I would be happy to do an old one up and send it to you.
 
ICS said:
Agree to a point but if that was the case could it not be that when original tools were developed people were just satisfied with the original design because it satisfied their need at the time, without going the further mile. I know that when I have travelled in wood chopping for instance, the basic design is the same world wide, except for idiosyncrasies associated with the hardness of the wood, whereby the weight of the head, grind and angle on the bevel are the only things that axe men look to change.
Click to expand...

There are far more variables than that, as well as multiple ways to achieve the same end efficiency goal. :)
 
mhutch said:
okzbk6.jpg


This is an axe at a gaucho's (cowboy's) ranch in Patagonia. From what I saw there just about all the available axes are the same or a similar pattern to this and most of them are on 30-36"ish handles. At least half of the axes I saw had handles that the owners clearly made themselves like this one. Unfortunately when I was living/working there I wasn't really into axes like I am now. A lot of Patagonia is basically like the western US about 50-75 years ago and axes are still a staple tool for a lot of people there. I kick myself now for not bringing an axe head or two home. I got a couple buddies that still work there seasonally though so I may see if one of them can bring me an axe head or two. I can't say how well-made they all are but I imagine they're pretty good since people still use them down there.
Click to expand...
Do you have a pic of the whole thing? Was that a US made head that was exported? It looks like from that pic, that the person who made that handle was exercising the concept that 42 is talking about.


FortyTwoBlades said:
...we need to look at it with the bit square, which reveals that the eye is angled so that it can bring the handle in line with the axis of rotation...
Click to expand...
I wondered if that was the case. It's pretty obvious in the first pic and kind of ties in with the pic mhutch has there. If that was like the trade pattern axe I have, the eye isn't angled, but users just bent their handles to set the heads back and achieve basically the same thing? Makes me think I should hang my trade axe differently to improve the balance, but given the size of the eye, there weren't a lot of options.
 
cityofthesouth said:
I wondered if that was the case. It's pretty obvious in the first pic and kind of ties in with the pic mhutch has there. If that was like the trade pattern axe I have, the eye isn't angled, but users just bent their handles to set the heads back and achieve basically the same thing? Makes me think I should hang my trade axe differently to improve the balance, but given the size of the eye, there weren't a lot of options.
Click to expand...

Yes--in cases where the bit is square to the eye and there's no poll for balance then an offset in the neck of the handle is necessary to bring the hand to a point where the bit will be square with the swing during a comfortable stroke. :)

This principle was used with bronze age axes as well. If you look at examples where the haft has survived the branch the head is mounted to either has an offset in the neck or a closed angle, or a lesser combination of the two. These reproductions accurately demonstrate this manner of balancing.

houten_socketed_axe_15_march_2006_1b.jpg


newtoys.jpg
 
So what you're saying is, humans have used curved handles, to alter a tool's balance, for at least 5,000 years? ;) I seem to recall from that African iron smelting video that those folks where still making an almost identical tool today. How long do you suppose the South American axes have looked more or less like that?
 
cityofthesouth said:
So what you're saying is, humans have used curved handles, to alter a tool's balance, for at least 5,000 years? ;) I seem to recall from that African iron smelting video that those folks where still making an almost identical tool today. How long do you suppose the South American axes have looked more or less like that?
Click to expand...

Yup! :D

I'm pretty sure the trade axes have looked like that just about forever...the design was expedient to produce, and therefore inexpensive (which those markets required) and initial trade, if I'm remembering correctly, came from a geographic region that favored the slip fit handle and minimal/absent poll anyhow. So once those markets became familiar with that type (and liked them) they came to prefer them and so other makers followed suit.
 
FortyTwoBlades, agree that there are far more variables however minor changes to a few of those variables has a far greater affect to overall performance say than major changes to others. Take for instance the angle of the bevel in softwood. In your opinion should it be flat or convex? As I do not have a lot of experience with your northern hemisphere woods, it would be interesting to know how you profiled the little axe in your video.
 
The edge on the axe in the video is convex, but I consider the effect of convex vs. flat less important than the angle and the overall geometry of the bit. Essentially any edge will have some degree of convexity unless it was obtained by means of a jig, though. It's just a matter of how thin vs. thick the geometry produced by the total arc is.
 
Did you mean the bevel is convex, I know that there will always be an amount of convex at the edge. It looks to me that your bevel is about 1/2 inch long with some stone work done behind, am I right in assuming that the bevel is therefore convex for the full 1/2 inch? Also, what do you mean by the angle of the bit?
 
The edge bevel is convex--the cheeks of the bit are flat, if that's what you had been asking. The edge bevel is about 2.5mm wide. By angle I was still referring to the edge.
 
Maybe I'm off base here, but this sounds like the hesitation lots of people have the first time they chop with a khukri. Everyone thinks they're going to smack the tip into whatever they're cutting, but the balance is such that you swing to connect with the sweet spot pretty instinctively.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
Maybe I'm off base here, but this sounds like the hesitation lots of people have the first time they chop with a khukri. Everyone thinks they're going to smack the tip into whatever they're cutting, but the balance is such that you swing to connect with the sweet spot pretty instinctively.
Click to expand...

Something along those lines. :)
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
A quick video chopping a downed beech. The springiness of the target absorbed some of the force of the blows but that thin bit blew right through it despite the short handle length and my relaxed "lazy" swings. As can be seen, no issues of the toe of the blade hitting first despite the closed set of the bit because that's how the tool is balanced.

[video=youtube;ruu1s2-bdsA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruu1s2-bdsA&feature=youtu.be[/video]
Click to expand...

Cool axe, looks like fun ! I'm a bit of a fur trade buff.
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
Yup! :D

I'm pretty sure the trade axes have looked like that just about forever...the design was expedient to produce, and therefore inexpensive (which those markets required) and initial trade, if I'm remembering correctly, came from a geographic region that favored the slip fit handle and minimal/absent poll anyhow. So once those markets became familiar with that type (and liked them) they came to prefer them and so other makers followed suit.
Click to expand...

Can you clarify about the design of the axe and the "slip fit" handle? Is this trade axe made so that a handle can be easily knocked out and put back on - a pick axe design? :confused::cool: It looks like there is no wedge to hold the handle on.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top