Questions re: hickory for handles

Ad

Joined
Mar 9, 2000
Messages
752
I guess the general consensus is that hickory is the toughest wood for handles. My questions are: Is it preferable to use heartwood or sapwood? If heartwood is the preference, which hawk makers are currently using heartwood? Where do I locate a good source for hickory? Thank you.
 
Sapwood is always the strongest/toughest wood of any tree. As for source, check with Two Hawks!
 
Heartwood and sapwood hickories have the same mechanical properties provided that they are both free from defects like small pin knots and that they have a similar number of growth rings per inch. 5 to 20 rings per inch is best. You are more likely to find this flawless wood in sapwood.

But most important is that the handle have no runout.
 
Sapwood is also where you find the most consistent directional grain, as the growth rings patterns are largest/longest.
"runout" is typically where a tension crack/split/fracture seems to originate (for fairly obvious reasons, where the runout occurs is where the grain structure is inconsistent/weak).
 
Heartwood and sapwood hickories have the same mechanical properties provided that they are both free from defects like small pin knots and that they have a similar number of growth rings per inch. 5 to 20 rings per inch is best. You are more likely to find this flawless wood in sapwood.

But most important is that the handle have no runout.
Not the same and they don't have the same properties. I know this first hand and it's why Bernie tried to write the FSS spec for sap wood handles with a consensus from knowledgeable people in the industry. That old study is either flawed or a lie, take your pick.
 
Not the same and they don't have the same properties. I know this first hand and it's why Bernie tried to write the FSS spec for sap wood handles with a consensus from knowledgeable people in the industry. That old study is either flawed or a lie, take your pick.

"In most species there is no significant difference in the strength of sapwood and heartwood. This is because the cell wall becomes fully thickened and lignified very close to the cambium, as noted earlier. While sapwood may exhibit some greater flexibility in the green condition, this will disappear on drying. It is well known, however, that brittleness is associated with older wood near the centre of the tree, and so sapwood would be less liable to brittleness than the heartwood. The outer heartwood and the sapwood are normally free from brittle heart."

"In over 500,000 tests made by the Forest Products Laboratory on woods grown in the United States, no effect upon the mechanical properties of the wood due to its change from sapwood into heartwood has been found in most species. The heartwood of oak, pine, and Douglas-fir, for example, is not intrinsically stronger than the sapwood, as has often been supposed to be the case; nor is the sapwood of hickory and ash intrinsically stronger than the heartwood, as is sometimes claimed in connection with handle stock. However, in some species in which the heartwood is high in infiltrations or "extractives," such as redwood, western red cedar, and black locust, the heartwood has been found to be considerably stronger in certain strength properties than the sapwood. In these species, however, the amount of sapwood in virgin-growth timber is relatively small. Heartwood as a rule, is more durable than sapwood in damp locations and less subject to attack by certain insects and by stain- and mold-producing fungi. It usually is colored and therefore considered more ornamental than the white sapwood, except in a few cases; in yellow pine interior finish and maple flooring, for example, the white sapwood is preferred. Heartwood is less permeable to liquid and therefore more suitable for tight cooperage, tanks, and conduits. The heartwood of some species contains more valuable extractable materials, such as tannin and dyes, than does the sapwood. Sapwood, as a rule, takes preservative treatment better than heartwood. In general, sapwood when green contains considerably more moisture than does heartwood, the difference being more pronounced in the softwoods. With few exceptions sapwood seasons faster per unit of time than does heartwood, but because of its higher percentage of moisture when green it drys in about the same time, The difference in density between heartwood and sapwood of American woods is usually not great but since sapwood contains more moisture, the green weight per cubic foot of sapwood averages higher than that of the heartwood. Because sapwood is the outer portion of the tree, it contains in large trees fewer common defects, such as knots, shakes, and pitch streaks. In resinous species the sapwood usually contains less resin than the heartwood. Sapwood is more free from odor and taste."

"In two research plots in the Saarland/Germany 30 trees ofCarya ovata K. Koch were felled and the wood strength properties were analysed. In the presented investigation bending strength and elasticity as well as density were measured on 1213 defect free specimens according to German standards. It was shown that under optimal site conditionsCarya ovata K. Koch delivers very dense wood with excellent bending properties in Germany. The intratree variation of all wood-technological parameters is quite high so that significant differences could neither be found between directions nor between heart- and sapwood. All properties of the analysed material were much higher than formerly investigated. In the case of bending strength and elasticity the wood of hickory exceeds by far that of the competingFraxinus excelsior L. andRobinia pseudoacacia L."

And so on and so forth.
 
"In most species there is no significant difference in the strength of sapwood and heartwood. This is because the cell wall becomes fully thickened and lignified very close to the cambium, as noted earlier. While sapwood may exhibit some greater flexibility in the green condition, this will disappear on drying. It is well known, however, that brittleness is associated with older wood near the centre of the tree, and so sapwood would be less liable to brittleness than the heartwood. The outer heartwood and the sapwood are normally free from brittle heart."

"In over 500,000 tests made by the Forest Products Laboratory on woods grown in the United States, no effect upon the mechanical properties of the wood due to its change from sapwood into heartwood has been found in most species. The heartwood of oak, pine, and Douglas-fir, for example, is not intrinsically stronger than the sapwood, as has often been supposed to be the case; nor is the sapwood of hickory and ash intrinsically stronger than the heartwood, as is sometimes claimed in connection with handle stock. However, in some species in which the heartwood is high in infiltrations or "extractives," such as redwood, western red cedar, and black locust, the heartwood has been found to be considerably stronger in certain strength properties than the sapwood. In these species, however, the amount of sapwood in virgin-growth timber is relatively small. Heartwood as a rule, is more durable than sapwood in damp locations and less subject to attack by certain insects and by stain- and mold-producing fungi. It usually is colored and therefore considered more ornamental than the white sapwood, except in a few cases; in yellow pine interior finish and maple flooring, for example, the white sapwood is preferred. Heartwood is less permeable to liquid and therefore more suitable for tight cooperage, tanks, and conduits. The heartwood of some species contains more valuable extractable materials, such as tannin and dyes, than does the sapwood. Sapwood, as a rule, takes preservative treatment better than heartwood. In general, sapwood when green contains considerably more moisture than does heartwood, the difference being more pronounced in the softwoods. With few exceptions sapwood seasons faster per unit of time than does heartwood, but because of its higher percentage of moisture when green it drys in about the same time, The difference in density between heartwood and sapwood of American woods is usually not great but since sapwood contains more moisture, the green weight per cubic foot of sapwood averages higher than that of the heartwood. Because sapwood is the outer portion of the tree, it contains in large trees fewer common defects, such as knots, shakes, and pitch streaks. In resinous species the sapwood usually contains less resin than the heartwood. Sapwood is more free from odor and taste."

"In two research plots in the Saarland/Germany 30 trees ofCarya ovata K. Koch were felled and the wood strength properties were analysed. In the presented investigation bending strength and elasticity as well as density were measured on 1213 defect free specimens according to German standards. It was shown that under optimal site conditionsCarya ovata K. Koch delivers very dense wood with excellent bending properties in Germany. The intratree variation of all wood-technological parameters is quite high so that significant differences could neither be found between directions nor between heart- and sapwood. All properties of the analysed material were much higher than formerly investigated. In the case of bending strength and elasticity the wood of hickory exceeds by far that of the competingFraxinus excelsior L. andRobinia pseudoacacia L."

And so on and so forth.
yada yada yada.

It's been well known for years that the sap wood is superior by those that have worked in the handle industry and also experienced users.
You can go ahead and write it off as dogma or you can grab a draw knife and some hickory staves and find out first hand like I have.

Or you can just continue to troll....
 
yada yada yada.

It's been well known for years that the sap wood is superior by those that have worked in the handle industry and also experienced users.
You can go ahead and write it off as dogma or you can grab a draw knife and some hickory staves and find out first hand like I have.

Or you can just continue to troll....

It's not trolling, broseph. It's scientific rigor applied to folklore, and the lore was demonstrably wrong or (at best) only correct within a very narrow set of parameters much more restrictive than it was commonly painted. Folklore often inspires a bad case of confirmation bias, which is a logical fallacy, and it crumbles when actually scrutinized.
 
It's not trolling, broseph. It's scientific rigor applied to folklore, and the lore was demonstrably wrong or (at best) only correct within a very narrow set of parameters much more restrictive than it was commonly painted. Folklore often inspires a bad case of confirmation bias, which is a logical fallacy, and it crumbles when actually scrutinized.
As a former government laboratory technician I know that there is bias in testing. Some that is natural and other biases that are introduced. And also tests that don't directly correlate to real world use. So excuse me if those study's don't carry as much weight with me. I would personally question everything done in a lab, but not everyone has that insight.

So you have first hand knowledge of what you are claiming? You have worked with both the sap wood and the heart wood with your own hands?
 
As a former government laboratory technician I know that there is bias in testing. Some that is natural and other biases that are introduced. And also tests that don't directly correlate to real world use. So excuse me if those study's don't carry as much weight with me. I would personally question everything done in a lab, but not everyone has that insight.

So you have first hand knowledge of what you are claiming? You have worked with both the sap wood and the heart wood with your own hands?

I know that being a lab tech doesn't mean the same thing as being an actual researcher or scientist, having been a lab tech myself in varying roles. However, the consensus seems to nigh universally indicate that there's no meaningful difference betwixt the two (for hickory, in the context of handles) save for in cases where the heartwood contains brittle innermost heart material, which only occurs as a dynamic under certain specific circumstances. And yes, I have worked hands-on with both sapwood and heartwood, both in prefabricated handles and in producing them by hand from rough-cut timber. My personal experience, anecdotal though it may be, is that if there is any measurable difference in performance between the two, it is far overshadowed by other factors to the point of being for all intents and purposes unimportant as a factor of consideration in handle choice when determining suitability for a task.
 
I know that being a lab tech doesn't mean the same thing as being an actual researcher or scientist, having been a lab tech myself in varying roles. However, the consensus seems to nigh universally indicate that there's no meaningful difference betwixt the two (for hickory, in the context of handles) save for in cases where the heartwood contains brittle innermost heart material, which only occurs as a dynamic under certain specific circumstances. And yes, I have worked hands-on with both sapwood and heartwood, both in prefabricated handles and in producing them by hand from rough-cut timber. My personal experience, anecdotal though it may be, is that if there is any measurable difference in performance between the two, it is far overshadowed by other factors to the point of being for all intents and purposes unimportant as a factor of consideration in handle choice when determining suitability for a task.

My stance is born from experience in both tool handles and bows. I know for a fact that the sap wood is superior. I'm also in some pretty good company with that stance.

I would recommend the hafts that have both the heart wood and sap wood for you. The best of both worlds....

I will continue to select clear white hickory for mine, preferably with a large late to early wood ratio. You do you.
 
The term "runout" is commonly used in woodworking to describe the orientation of grain in a piece of wood.
zzdJlVL.jpg

JS9YtPa.jpg


An axe handle is an example of a piece of wood. Going by the common definition, "runout" does not refer to an inherent defect in the wood itself, but rather it is the result of severing long fibers in making the handle.



Bob
 
yada yada yada.

It's been well known for years that the sap wood is superior by those that have worked in the handle industry and also experienced users.
You can go ahead and write it off as dogma or you can grab a draw knife and some hickory staves and find out first hand like I have.

Or you can just continue to troll....


Ben happens to live and breathe this stuff. He's not trolling. He's sharing knowledge that's really useful in terms of debunking "old wives tales." I'd also add, that he's doing it in a more scholarly, gentlemanly and much less condescending way than you are...
 
The term "runout" is commonly used in woodworking to describe the orientation of grain in a piece of wood.
zzdJlVL.jpg

JS9YtPa.jpg


An axe handle is an example of a piece of wood. Going by the common definition, "runout" does not refer to an inherent defect in the wood itself, but rather it is the result of severing long fibers in making the handle.



Bob
That is really well done Bob. I have tried to explain that in the past with out success. It can happen in another plane also with the edge grain. A rabbit hole I don't wish to go down again so have probably already said to much.
 
I will not comment from a science position, only from a user position. My work , in the private sector and both with the National Park Service and US Forest Service was in constant travel. I always made a point of inspecting the axes at every location I worked at in the USA , including Alaska and Hawaii. I did not see more broken hafts either with heartwood or sapwood. What I saw was that the majority of breaks were caused by two things- runout and the hickory hafts that had both sapwood and heartwood in the same haft. Sapwood is less brittle then heartwood, and this is good in an axe haft. For me, the bottom line for my axe hafts (hatchet and adze hafts not as strict) is: First- all sapwood, no runout; Second- all heartwood, no runout; Third- never use a haft that has runout or is mixed sapwood and heartwood.
That is what I have seen also, the heart wood is brash in comparison to the sap wood.
 
My stance is born from experience in both tool handles and bows. I know for a fact that the sap wood is superior. I'm also in some pretty good company with that stance.

Ideal or even acceptable characteristics for bow wood do not completely equal those for axe handle wood.
Bows exhibit somewhat different type of shock than axe handles.
Your "knowing for fact" means you trust your own personal experience over multiple independent studies.
Sharing your own experience is fine, and while it doesn't have to agree with the views of others, it will be more believable if you could share links to studies contradicting the ones FortyTwoBlades provided above.

Also, calling FortyTwoBlades' post trolling without providing evidence it is actually a trolling, is just a cheap ad hominem argument.

I am curious if you could provide some support to your stance beyond your own persona; experience. You might be right, but it needs to be substantiated with independent studies and no name calling.

As for the original post, in the past, when hickory was more abundant, axe handle makers likely picked species with higher average strength properties and preferred wood from second growth (younger) trees. Handle wood was likely air dried, which is less harsh than kiln drying.
Nowadays, it is more difficult to know what species are used and also handle wood is frequently kiln dried. Kiln drying might not be always optimized for all the variable (by species and age) wood dried in the kiln.
That might contribute to small splits which eventually lead to handle failure.

Old Axeman brings up an interesting issue, that of a handle consisting of both sapwood and heartwood. This is a common occurrence nowadays, and I don't know if the studies quoted above had tested mixed sap/heartwood specimens too, or only clean sapwood and clean heartwood ones.
When I look at the handles in stores, I frequently see mixed sap/heartwood, knots, checks, seemingly too dry wood, and have seen too many handles which have already split while still in the stores.
 
I always listen when Bernie (Old Axeman) shares his vast experience and knowledge, and also listen to square_peg and FortyTwoBlades when they share their own experience and knowledge too.
If we assume the clean hickory sapwood and heartwood heartwood have very similar strength properties, then how can we explain the evidently higher rate of split in mixed handles?
The quoted studies likely used wood samples of similar moisture content or at least specimens which had uniform moisture content within each sample.
Also, moisture content is known to affect strength properties.
Sapwood and heartwood can have different rates of drying and the the way the wood is dried can affect how the wood will shrink across a sample.
It also matters what is the size of the slab when the wood is dried. The larger the slab (it can be even a tree trunk), the larger the gradient of moisture and therefore the variation in shrinking will be across the specimen.
This can lead to checks and splits of variable sizes, some visible with naked eye and some microscopic.
In other words, in a mixed handle during a specific rate of not optimal drying or re-hydrating we will have a wood slab with a gradient of moisture and also a gradient of strength values. Even if the strength values of the sapwood and heartwood were the same at a specific but uniform across the slab moisture content, they are definitely not the same across a wood with a gradient of moisture content.
Also, strength properties are defined as various values of elasticity and rupture under load or shock, but they don't have to overlap completely with strength values defining resistance to split or checking due to shrinking or swelling.
Drying-induced shrinking and/or moisture-caused swelling, especially if it happens repeatedly (e.g. axe stored outdoors exposed to the elements and the wood surface is not sealed) can lead to macroscopic splits even without mechanical load, but will for sure lead to catastrophic failure from repeated shock due to use.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top