"No unnecessary weight in the poll."

[Square_peg]

Benjamin, the flaw in your reasoning is that these poll-less axes have an axis of rotation that is not aligned to the axis of control - as already I explained in your earlier promotional thread. This is why the poll axe is easier to use in the long run - takes less effort, allows you to perform more work in a day.

Many but not all of this style axe is also encumbered by the slip-fit eye which precludes having an adequate swell at the end of the haft. This also increases the amount of energy consumed simply to control the axe - not to do any work. It makes them less efficient. This is why experienced users who have used axes for many hours per day choose a polled axe with large abrupt swell.

 

[Square_peg]

Tuatahi axes have a similarly small poll, but notice the trajectory of the main length of the handle--it points right towards the center of gravity. The neck is offset to allow for this.

This is a great design for an axe used in 60 second spurts of effort. But the lack of balance will make it a less efficient axe for use over an extended period of time. It's well designed for its specific use.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Benjamin, the flaw in your reasoning is that these poll-less axes have an axis of rotation that is not aligned to the axis of control - as already I explained in your earlier promotional thread. This is why the poll axe is easier to use in the long run - takes less effort, allows you to perform more work in a day.

Many but not all of this style axe is also encumbered by the slip-fit eye which precludes having an adequate swell at the end of the haft. This also increases the amount of energy consumed simply to control the axe - not to do any work. It makes them less efficient. This is why experienced users who have used axes for many hours per day choose a polled axe with large abrupt swell.

There's a few problems with what you're saying, though, which I've already explained to you at length. The "axis of control" you're referring to only applies when both hands are applying force to the handle and only introduces wobble if the handle is out of alignment with the axle because one point of contact is acting as a lever on the axle of the dominant grip point, and then only if that hand is deviating from alignment with the trajectory of the tool. As previously noted, most polled axes also do not have the handle running true to the axle--they're just a lot closer than on deep-bitted poll-less axes with straight handles. Ideally, such axes would have an offset neck like found on the adze I posted earlier. I can even take a demonstration video with my adze that has such a handle to demonstrate the balance on it. The head doesn't balance at the eye, but the tool balances along the handle because it is aligned along a single axle. My personal experience with slip fit handles (which really is unrelated to what's being discussed here) is that I don't have to hold any harder than I would be otherwise and a tapered wooden cross-pin can provide a stop for the hand without interfering with the ability to rapidly disassemble the tool. There are plenty of very experienced fellows out there who use axes for many hours a day who use axes with slip fit handles. It's true that a large knob to the handle is a great feature to have and that most slip-fit handles preclude it, but it adds certain other features to the tool that may outweigh the negatives for that user''s functional contexts.

This is a great design for an axe used in 60 second spurts of effort. But the lack of balance will make it a less efficient axe for use over an extended period of time. It's well designed for its specific use.

It's just one of many examples that I've already posted that demonstrate a correctly aligned handle that balances the tool. The reason why it's a great design for racing but not extended use has to do with characteristics other than the balance. It's a balanced tool.

 

[Square_peg]

It's just one of many examples that I've already posted that demonstrate a correctly aligned handle that balances the tool. The reason why it's a great design for racing but not extended use has to do with characteristics other than the balance. It's a balanced tool.

It is absolutely not balanced.

I understand that you have a financial interest in maintaining that these poll-less axes are just as good as an American poll axe. I don't expect to ever deter you from that effort. I'll be content to make sure the whole picture is presented in this thread for posterity.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

It is absolutely not balanced.

I understand that you have a financial interest in maintaining that these poll-less axes are just as good as an American poll axe. I don't expect to ever deter you from that effort. I'll be content to make sure the whole picture is presented in this thread for posterity.

As already noted, contending that my defense for poll-less axes is financially motivated is preposterous. I sell them because I like them, not the other way 'round. I actually had my first experience with the Italian axes over a year before I was able to start purchasing them for sale, thanks to Steve Tall being kind enough to supply me with a 700g old-production Falci Calabria pattern through a contact who was making a group purchase. It quickly impressed me, and I wrote as much about it at the time despite not having any reasonable way at that point to obtain them for resale.

And yes, it's balanced. The main length of the handle is aligned with the center of gravity. Test some of your own axes using the methods I've described and you may find the results interesting. Most American axes actually have the center of gravity aligned with the front edge of the handle rather than its centerline.

 

[Old Axeman]

Benjamin, what you have written that is incorrect is "false precepts and myths that have been handed down as part of the lore of the American axe. the primary advantages of a poll are very basic: to simplify the form of an handle and to add pounding ability"
DEAD WRONG!
First off, you are saying that the advantages of the American poll axe are a myth. In North American our forefathers found the most formidable forest they had ever seen. The American poll axe developed because it was a more efficient chopper, no other reason. Your brash statement, besides being incorrect is insulting.The poll did not show up to simplify the form of a handle and to add pounding ability. American axe makers were the greatest the world will ever see. Are you saying that American makers and users did not know an efficient chopper? Again, DEAD WRONG and also insulting. Are you saying that my great grandfather and grandfather, who both were the "Bull Of The Woods" on some of the biggest logging shows in both Montana and northern Wisconsin did not know what the were doing when they taught me about axes more than 70 years ago? Are you discounting my years of working with a axe every day to make a living?
Upstarts like you really give this old axeman a pain in the okole!

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

[video=youtube;Tc6yNPz7MBY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc6yNPz7MBY&feature=youtu.be[/video]

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Benjamin, what you have written that is incorrect is "false precepts and myths that have been handed down as part of the lore of the American axe. the primary advantages of a poll are very basic: to simplify the form of an handle and to add pounding ability"
DEAD WRONG!
First off, you are saying that the advantages of the American poll axe are a myth. In North American our forefathers found the most formidable forest they had ever seen. The American poll axe developed because it was a more efficient chopper, no other reason. Your brash statement, besides being incorrect is insulting.The poll did not show up to simplify the form of a handle and to add pounding ability. American axe makers were the greatest the world will ever see. Are you saying that American makers and users did not know an efficient chopper? Again, DEAD WRONG and also insulting. Are you saying that my great grandfather and grandfather, who both were the "Bull Of The Woods" on some of the biggest logging shows in both Montana and northern Wisconsin did not know what the were doing when they taught me about axes more than 70 years ago? Are you discounting my years of working with a axe every day to make a living?
Upstarts like you really give this old axeman a pain in the okole!

You literally have me laughing here--I'm rather taken aback! If it was to make it a more efficient chopper, pray tell how did it make it more efficient? By what means? What mechanism was at work? I emphatically never stated nor even suggested that American makers were in any way not knowledgeable or sub-par. Rather, I actually very much agree with you that they were the finest the world had ever seen and likely ever will! They simply placed a functional emphasis on certain performance factors that were different from those preferred or emphasized in other parts of the globe. I in no way discount your experience using an axe, but if you cannot demonstrate my statements as being false it doesn't matter how much experience you have using the tool. Watch the above video and you can see how the "unbalanced" (American) adze head is miraculously brought into perfect single-axis balance by the offset neck of the handle. However, a handle with such a neck requires a larger blank than one without so great of an offset would require, and straight handles are found on many poll-less axes around the world mostly because they are faster and easier to fashion. They would perform best if they had such an offset.

 

[rjdankert]

. . . I don't know if you ever surfed this forum before your join date. . .

. . .I most certainly have. My join date is Mar 2011 and yours is shown as Mar 2016. What's your point?. . .

. . .In regards to the questions you posed, the reason for asking your join date was made clear, was it not?. . .

No, it was not. Could you please restate it?. . .

Im not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse. It was in reference to the existence of threads pre dating your joining the forum. . .

Anyone able to describe anything "obtuse" in the remarks above? It would be of great comfort to Mr. Swan if you do (only from my qoutes of course).

The rest of this post - take it anyway you like.

If you want to draw up some diagrams with equations (have fun), feel free to post them here. . .

OK, if you promise not to go obtuse on me.

. . . I will remain content with basic knowledge of physics, logic, and experience. . .

. . . I don't carry the burden of proof, it rests on the people who see the unpolled axe and automatically say that it is inherently unbalanced.

I have so far not made any statements regarding poll or no poll on axes in this thread or in any others prior to your join date (surf to your hearts content).

It seems that since you mentioned "unbalanced" regarding axes, you have the burden of defining what that means. Could you please, using the "basic knowledge of physics, logic" that you claim, describe this property. If you want to draw up some diagrams with equations (have fun), feel free to post them here. That is unless you want to cop out and leave it to FourtyTwoBlades or go fill orders.

Bob

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

FourtyTwoBlades

Fixed it for ya'.

Almost done with that writeup by the way. Just need to do one or two more quick diagrams and write a concluding paragraph and it'll be ready for posting. I imagine I'll manage to squeeze in the time to get that done within the next few days.

 

[Square_peg]

[video=youtube;Tc6yNPz7MBY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc6yNPz7MBY&feature=youtu.be[/video]

Thank you for so clearly demonstrating my point. The adze handle makes the axis of rotation coincidental to the axis of control. Completely opposite of the unbalanced axe you posted earlier.

A different axe, but here's an example of the axis of rotational balance on a "Calabria" axe.

Now you know what an axe handle would have to look like to make your unbalanced axe work properly.

 

[Lieblad]

Fixed it for ya'.

Thats the best part of the four pages of this blathering crap topic I read.
( could been spent better reading something else, But whatever...)

Seriously I never noticed his proper spelling "Fortytwo". I am a dumbass sharp tool using foreigner afterall.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

That axe is in balance, but does not have the handle laying along a single axis. Any change in the grip point results in a new axle, which also alters the presentation of the bit in use. Once two grip points are active you then have triangulation, which is what requires the greater mindfulness in use because of how the two axles act as levers upon one another.

I think perhaps I'm talking past you a bit, and when I'm done with my little article on the subject you'll understand what I mean. You clearly are getting the core of the concept, but just either missing a few small aspects of it or possibly even just confusing a few terms. And yes, I actually have diagrams done up already showing optimized single-axis handles. Here are ones for the Calabria shown above and a Council Velvicut.

 

[Steve Tall]

...the unbalanced axe you posted earlier...

That axe is in balance..

Those are two opposing claims about the same axe. Are the arguments based on different meanings of "balanced", when it comes to an axe?

Here's an Australian view of what a balanced axe is, from a 1905 article published by the Department of Agriculture in NSW, Australia:

"Why should the weight of the poll matter? Because if the poll is lighter than the blade the axe will not balance evenly in the user's hand but will swing downwards making the cut slant downwards as the result... If the poll is heavier than the blade it will keep the edge turned up hill and spoil the cut again. To judge a new axe's balance grasp it and stand as if about to swing. Now open the hands flat, Fig 27, and let the axe lie loosely on them. If blade and poll are properly balanced the axe will lie perfectly fiat. If either has the advantage it will dip that way."

from Agricultural Gazette of N.S.W., 3 Jan 1905, page 51

 

[rjdankert]

. . .I never noticed his proper spelling "Fortytwo". . .

I have no excuses, but I think "forty-two" is the correct spelling of the number "42".

Bob

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Those are two opposing claims about the same axe. Are the arguments based on different meanings of "balanced", when it comes to an axe?

Here's an Australian view of what a balanced axe is, from a 1905 article published by the Department of Agriculture in NSW, Australia:

"Why should the weight of the poll matter? Because if the poll is lighter than the blade the axe will not balance evenly in the user's hand but will swing downwards making the cut slant downwards as the result... If the poll is heavier than the blade it will keep the edge turned up hill and spoil the cut again. To judge a new axe's balance grasp it and stand as if about to swing. Now open the hands flat, Fig 27, and let the axe lie loosely on them. If blade and poll are properly balanced the axe will lie perfectly fiat. If either has the advantage it will dip that way."

from Agricultural Gazette of N.S.W., 3 Jan 1905, page 51

That view of it is a common but incomplete one. If held and wielded in such a manner that only one grip point is active, an off-axis handle will behave like one with a unified axis. As such, when holding an off-axis handled axe below the head, it is important during the swing to not drive so hard from that hand as one would with an axe with a unified axis. That hand's job is for lifting the axe, not for delivering the force. Force can be applied from that hand by an adept user, but extra care must be taken to keep the stroke true, as both hands must be moving along the same plane or else wobble will be introduced. A unified-axis handle enables the off hand to be more engaged in the swing, which is what makes it ideal compared to an off-axis one. My illustration of this is one of the last ones I have to do before I'm ready to post up my full take on the matter. The greater the angular divergence between axles, the greater the propensity for wobble.

In many ways it's comparable to scythes with single-gripped vs. double-gripped snaths. Single gripped snaths are easier to make and easier to fit to multiple users, but are decidedly more one-sided in terms of muscle engagement, while snaths that bring the left hand lower are able to derive power from that side of the body in the stroke much more readily--but so, too, is their manufacture or fabrication made more complex.

 

[Park Swan]

​

Anyone able to describe anything "obtuse" in the remarks above? It would be of great comfort to Mr. Swan if you do (only from my qoutes of course).

The rest of this post - take it anyway you like.




OK, if you promise not to go obtuse on me.

I have so far not made any statements regarding poll or no poll on axes in this thread or in any others prior to your join date (surf to your hearts content).

It seems that since you mentioned "unbalanced" regarding axes, you have the burden of defining what that means. Could you please, using the "basic knowledge of physics, logic" that you claim, describe this property. If you want to draw up some diagrams with equations (have fun), feel free to post them here. That is unless you want to cop out and leave it to FourtyTwoBlades or go fill orders.

Bob

Dude, really, I'm sorry if I came across as a raging asshole, but I don't know what your beef is. Your tone has seemed condescending to me from your first post, but I could be reading it totally wrong.
Yeah, it seems intentionally obtuse to split a sentence in half, and ask "why?" regarding the first half of the sentence... I'm not trying to be insulting, but what's the point of picking apart the posts?
I'm more than willing to have friendly discussion. I'm even willing to admit when I'm wrong. Not having the time to write a dissertation on axe balance doesn't equate to copping out

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

This is a great design for an axe used in 60 second spurts of effort. But the lack of balance will make it a less efficient axe for use over an extended period of time. It's well designed for its specific use.

This axe has an offset neck. It's obviously more subtle than the one on the adze you conceded as being in balance, but it's there and doing its job. Because the head is not so long end to end as the adze or some of the other axes mentioned (such as the Calabria) the amount of offset required is not as great.

 

[Steve Tall]

... If held and wielded in such a manner that only one grip point is active, an off-axis handle will behave like one with a unified axis...

No offense, but this doesn't sound right. If correct, this would mean that a one-handed carving axe, with the grip portion of a curved handle being aligned with the cutting edge, would behave the same as if the axe had a straight handle where the grip is aligned with the eye (when a substantial poll results in the center of gravity being in the eye). This is just one of the counter-examples that come to mind.

 

[Old Axeman]

The adze balance demonstration is a bad example. Although balance plays a role, the most important consideration is the angle of presentation of the bit to the stick of wood. That is why the curve is in the haft, it is not curved for a balance point. Haven't you wondered why the haft shape is different for a carpenters adze and a shipwrights adze, while using the same weight and balance head? To an extent, this is also true for axes. That is why, depending on who is chopping and what the intended use is, sometimes you need a straight haft and sometimes you need a curved haft on the same head. This balance thing is not the end all to this discussion as some here would have you believe. There are a lot of variables that are being left out of the discussion.