Puzzle of the day axe head ID

The little round pock mark pits left by the rust indicate that there's no wrought iron on it. Wrought iron will form a brown layer of rust almost instantly, but this oxide layer protects the metal underneath. It does not pit deeply like steel does, which is why it was used for anchors and chains on ships for so long. Granted, they may have used a high carbon steel for the bit and low carbon for the body (I can't tell from the picture- can't see any line), but I think it's a safe bet that the whole thing is some kind of steel.

Interesting that the poll/eye was not formed by the wrapping around method. It looks like two separate pieces of steel were forge welded together at the rear to form the eye. Unless it was actually wrapped around the front... ?
 
Gidday Steve Tall. Staff at the museum are entirely puzzled by this and have no records of Story axes. I will try to retype the web sources you found and pass those on to them. Failing that, if you were to send me your normal address I'd have you correspond directly with them. I'm starting to think you might be more appreciative of receiving this head than they would be. I'm at bert>>>>>>>>@gmail.com
 
Last edited:
...Staff at the museum are entirely puzzled by this and have no records of Story axes. I will try to retype the web sources you found and pass those on to them...

I compiled all the information I found, along with links, in an email that you can forward to the museum. I'm not a collector (more like an accumulator), and I think that axe should stay in Ontario where it was made, whether it's at that museum or in your care.

[You might want to delete your email address from your post before all the spam-bots find it.]
 
The little round pock mark pits left by the rust indicate that there's no wrought iron on it. Wrought iron will form a brown layer of rust almost instantly, but this oxide layer protects the metal underneath. It does not pit deeply like steel does, which is why it was used for anchors and chains on ships for so long. Granted, they may have used a high carbon steel for the bit and low carbon for the body (I can't tell from the picture- can't see any line), but I think it's a safe bet that the whole thing is some kind of steel.

Interesting that the poll/eye was not formed by the wrapping around method. It looks like two separate pieces of steel were forge welded together at the rear to form the eye. Unless it was actually wrapped around the front... ?

Thank you very much! I'm "all ears" on trying to figure this out. And this Story is definitely unique. Ordinary 'stiff' on a drop hammer or at a forge couldn't easily have shaped that head; it's too good considering all of the contours that are imparted on it. If in fact the head is all steel (not the usual wrought iron with a steel bit) that raises the bar on 'period' quality of this implement too. The eye at top and bottom has sharp inside corners which as you say look to be the result of separate pieces forge welded over a mandrel rather than the more common 'wrap' method.
Local museums around here generally have no money nor do they have much expertise on hand. They graciously accept Estate goods and are usually founded around some one or other extravagant donated collection, or a freebie heritage house and the property. They do then often get gov't grants to hire summer students to get dressed up in period costumes and pretend to be era homesteaders but that's about it.
 
Last edited:
Update. Peterborough Museum and Archives was entirely unaware of the existence of an Ashburnham (now become City of Peterborough) 1864-1871 George Story axe foundry and Steve Tall generously enlightened the curator and staff with all of the information he had uncovered. This piqued their interest and I was then asked if I would donate the axe to the museum. When I replied that if there was no monetary gain/value attributable then I might just as well clean the old girl up and take her for a spin it was then mentioned that there was the possibility of receiving a tax deductible receipt based on value. I queried them as to how they might establish "fair market value" and was told they use the services of an independent appraiser who comes by once a year. So here we sit! What has been established though is "please do not in any way alter this implement from it's current state".
 
G'day
First time user of this forum.
Not sure if I'm doing this the right way jumping in on another persons post.
Could anyone help identify the following axe!
I have a couple of them now and can't seem to find out who the maker is.
It has made in Germany stamped as well as an axeman swinging an axe circled.
Any help would be appreciated
Not sure how to post a pic sorry

Cheers
 
Howdy! Start a new thread, title it, and insert pictures via a host service such as Photobucket. The fact that your baby is stamped means that someone on here will know more about it.
 
Last edited:
Update. Peterborough Museum and Archives was entirely unaware of the existence of an Ashburnham (now become City of Peterborough) 1864-1871 George Story axe foundry and Steve Tall generously enlightened the curator and staff with all of the information he had uncovered. This piqued their interest and I was then asked if I would donate the axe to the museum. When I replied that if there was no monetary gain/value attributable then I might just as well clean the old girl up and take her for a spin it was then mentioned that there was the possibility of receiving a tax deductible receipt based on value. I queried them as to how they might establish "fair market value" and was told they use the services of an independent appraiser who comes by once a year. So here we sit! What has been established though is "please do not in any way alter this implement from it's current state".

Patience is a virtue.

:sigh:
 
Patience is a virtue.
:sigh:

On the other hand it buys time for anyone else out there, that might lust over something like this, to make some overtures. Would be tough for a museum to make a big deal out of something of which there is only one rusty old example. Were there 10-20 others out there it would be a lot more interesting plus enable some insight into evolution of shapes and sizes. That shape is most unusual for an eastern Canadian axe, and so is the weight.
 
the only hybrid I will tolerate is a Pulaski, solely because they're 'handier than a pocket in a shirt' when you don't know what you're in for, you're miles away from home, it's cold and miserable, and where the tent is pitched is uncomfortably rough.

Heh. I keep a Pulaski (one of several I own) behind the seat in the truck, along with a swede saw, choker/tow cable and some basic safety gear. EVERY damn time I've had to fight fire, home was on the other side. Tools only work when you can grab them when you need them. Pulled it out the other day and overhauled it (sharpened, check head fit, sand and re-linseed-oil the haft), because you never know when you'll need it and finding it unusable is a sinking feeling. Ask me how I know that...
 
The thick/thin paradigm is not entirely true. Although a thin head that has never been maintained/periodically thinned will perform better than a thicker head that also hasn't been maintained/kept very thin.

You've figured out that a thin axe bites deep with your experience. A thin axe also sticks-- both as a ramification of it's deep penetration, as well as fact that most very thin axes have no high centerline/point contact which allows the chopper to "wiggle" the axe out-- common in the old footage of good axemen. An axe that is "right good stuck" won't budge at all until it lets go completely, often requiring a mallet or a large branch to do so.

Your comment about the mauls is clearly hyperbole. An effective chopping axe has to balance penetration (thin) and wedge action/regulation of depth of cut (thick). A maul will not penetrate across wood grain. A very thin axe will not exert enough wedging force to be particularly useful for anything except sharpening bean poles and carving things. I own axes/mauls of both extremes.

Here's something to think about-- most all of the axes made during the era where significant amounts of wood were bucked using axes, either by homesteaders/farmers etc, or by the logging industry, were generally shaped like your example here. Almost all of the Maine made axes, supplied to the logging industry in the lumber capital of the world, were wedge patterns, 3/4 wedge patterns, Maine patterns, etc. These men were not splitting firewood with these axes, but rather notching trees, and if you go far enough back, bucking them to length (in the book "Tall Trees, Tough Men", there were accounts of operations using only axes up until 1900).

That's not to say that this axe, in it's current shape, wouldn't make a good splitter. Maine patterns, wedge patterns, etc make great splitter when they are worn out and not adequately thinned and shaped for chopping work. But that has to do more with the first inch of the edge/face than the overall geometry. If that zone behind the edge is rounded and dubbed off, you won't get much penetration, and plenty of wedging force. But if it's a "fresh one"/adequately thinned, they make excellent energy efficient cutting axes that really throw the chips.

Here's an example of a mostly untouched wedge pattern, that with a little thinning in that mentioned 1 inch back from the edge zone would make a perfectly good axe for cutting across grain.

 
G-pig; the novel critter you picture (flat cheeks with a thick taper) is not something I'm familiar with either. When does an axe become a maul? The likelihood of your baby getting horribly stuck in a piece of wood will be more so than with the variable contour setup of the Story. On the other hand 20-25 degrees overall blade angle probably never enters enough into any piece of wood to get stuck in the first place.
As a feller/chopper that head of yours would be an absolute bear to try to keep sharp and myself would have hidden it away (or relegated it to woodpile splitter status) a long time ago.
 
G-pig;As a feller/chopper that head of yours would be an absolute bear to try to keep sharp and myself would have hidden it away (or relegated it to woodpile splitter status) a long time ago.

So you are more or less admitting that you'd never have taken the time to thin one out and try using it based on your preexisting filters about which axes are for what?

Also, "sharpness" and "thinness" are very different things. This axe would stay "sharp" as well as those Swedish or German imports you used, in way of keeping a keen edge.
 
Interesting discussion! I've always hated tangling with other people's axes because preparing the blade (thinning it out) and sharpening them to my satisfaction is often a heck of a lot of work. Especially if the axe has lazily received steeper and steeper angles over the years and now has to be filed back a good inch or two. You are correct about sharpness and thinness being two different things but it's a lot easier to make and keep a thin knife blade sharp than it is a 20-25 degree taper axe blade.
 
This is a really interesting discussion. For myself, I'd be interested for it to have a dedicated thread. It'd be a shame not to carry on the debate, but it'd also be a shame to digress on what is already a fascinating historical thread.
 
Thank you and have to agree. Steep pitch sharpenings are the lazy man's 'out' and nick in the blade is often the initiator of these. To bring a thick-bladed axe back to life (properly) is one heck of a pile of work. Been there done that. Especially when using hand files. For this reason I do appreciate the flat side thin bladed European offerings; a lot less metal to remove.
 
To bring a thick-bladed axe back to life (properly) is one heck of a pile of work. Been there done that. Especially when using hand files.

It's manageable if you have the right setup. A sturdy vise with jaws at navel height, a good 10"-12" double cut or multi-cut file (coarseness - second cut) and a file card. With practice you can remove a lot of metal quickly even on a hard axe.
 
It's manageable if you have the right setup. A sturdy vise with jaws at navel height, a good 10"-12" double cut or multi-cut file (coarseness - second cut) and a file card. With practice you can remove a lot of metal quickly even on a hard axe.

I too am from the previous generation when sharpening was done by hand. Consequence I can get 10 years out of a chainsaw blade too whereas folks that take them in only get a year or two. I have an electric angle grinder and did go nuts on a spitting wedge a few years ago to try to straighten it up. That made in Mexico wedge was so badly out of shape (despite being brand new) that I must have ground off 1/2 lb of material before the darn thing would stick. Had I had to file this to make it useful it would have gone straight into a garbage can. Whenever I look at fat cheeked axes that are dull all I can think of is "lots of work". Belt sanders are probably a god-send but I have yet to make the switch. There really is something to be said about sweating bullets and inspecting your work regularly to see how little progress you've made with a file.
 
Last edited:
That made in Mexico wedge was so badly out of shape (despite being brand new) that I must have ground off 1/2 lb of material before the darn thing would stick.

The key to getting a wedge to stick is to put a very slightly hollow ground bevel on the tip with a bench grinder. Then it will stay in place very nicely.


There really is something to be said about sweating bullets and inspecting your work regularly to see how little progress you've made with a file.

There's no need to sweat and you can make fine progress with files. It's all about form.
 
Back
Top