Quick question. Has anyone ever seen a Maine-made axe with an inserted bit?

J

joshiecole

Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
515
So, what the title says really. It just occurred to me that I can't recall ever having seen a Maine-made axe with an inserted bit. All the ones I've seen have overcoat welded bits.

Let me know if you have seen one. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
The Dunn Edged Tool Co. used to advertise some axes that had both at once. An insert plus overcoat.
 
From Hardware Dealers' Magazine, January, 1912

books


Eaton Dollar Axe
Dunn Edge Tool C0, Oakland Me, for whom Wiehusch & Hilger Ltd 106 Lafayette street New York are sales agents, are offering the trade the Eaton Dollar Axe illustrated. It is a patent hand forged axe the distinctive feature being the combined inlaid and overcoat bit steel. Many years ago all axes were made with bit steel inserted until someone devised the method now employed almost exclusively of using overcoat bit steel This gives the axe the appearance of having double the quantity of steel on the edge but in reality the soft stock comes so much nearer to the surface that it has been urged by the few who use inlaid steel that after grinding a few times soft stock may show up at the edge. There is however a real advantage in having so much steel on the surface in that it enables the chopper to draw the axe out of the log with less effort since the hard steel does not cling to the wood like iron or soft steel. The manufacturers state that the Eaton process combines all the advantages of both inlaid and overlaid with none of the disadvantages of either. They also claim to use only the highest grade of bit steel which will admit of forging much thinner without the danger of breaking when severely tested.
 
Fascinating. Thanks to both of you. This has raised a third possibility that I hadn't considered. I'd still like to see if there were any inserted bit axes from Maine though?
 
I have four overcoat (the fourth has paint still on it so I can't tell if it'd be double or not). They all have a good 1" to 1-1/2" to the edge. I would imagine it'd take quite a while to go through that steel, and by the end you wouldn't have much of an axe left.
 
So that's still no inserted bits yet. If they all made axes in a similar fashion to those shown in the Emerson Stevens factory, then they would have been unlikely to insert the bit. Because they fold and weld the mild steel to form the eye, and an inserted bit would have a tendency to split the folded mild steel weld.

But I wondered if there were any examples using a different technique, just in the spirit of enquiry.
 
I'm not 100% sure but I think my Maine made broadaxes are inserted bit. Marsh and sons and Douglas axe co.
 
Steve Tall said:
From Hardware Dealers' Magazine, January, 1912

books


Eaton Dollar Axe
Dunn Edge Tool C0, Oakland Me, for whom Wiehusch & Hilger Ltd 106 Lafayette street New York are sales agents, are offering the trade the Eaton Dollar Axe illustrated. It is a patent hand forged axe the distinctive feature being the combined inlaid and overcoat bit steel. Many years ago all axes were made with bit steel inserted until someone devised the method now employed almost exclusively of using overcoat bit steel This gives the axe the appearance of having double the quantity of steel on the edge but in reality the soft stock comes so much nearer to the surface that it has been urged by the few who use inlaid steel that after grinding a few times soft stock may show up at the edge. There is however a real advantage in having so much steel on the surface in that it enables the chopper to draw the axe out of the log with less effort since the hard steel does not cling to the wood like iron or soft steel. The manufacturers state that the Eaton process combines all the advantages of both inlaid and overlaid with none of the disadvantages of either. They also claim to use only the highest grade of bit steel which will admit of forging much thinner without the danger of breaking when severely tested.
Click to expand...

Thank you Steve. Obviously BS advertising claims have been haunting us for a long time. 'Hard steel doesn't cling to wood like iron or soft steel' is a real stretch. The copy writer likely didn't have much experience with hand tools, or was told exactly what to write.
 
300Six said:
Thank you Steve. Obviously BS advertising claims have been haunting us for a long time. 'Hard steel doesn't cling to wood like iron or soft steel' is a real stretch. The copy writer likely didn't have much experience with hand tools, or was told exactly what to write.
Click to expand...

The bit about hard steel clinging less than mild steel does sound quite surreal, but the idea of a bit that is inserted as well as overcoated is intriguing. I imagine this means something like the quick sketch below. I may try this method later on in the week, purely out of curiosity.

IMG_20150822_232743_zps4c6de182.jpg
 
An article from 1898 says "the old process" was the inserted bit, and "better results" are now obtained by the overcoat method. Presumably this maker of Maine axes (North Wayne Tool Co.) previously used the inserted bit method (though there is some ambiguity). Interesting that this company still made its scythe blades with an inserted edge.

Lewiston Evening Journal, April 23, 1898, page 11
 
Steve as ever your google skills are far in advance of mine!

There are several interesting things that come out of that link. One is that the process is identical to that shown in the 1965 Emerson Stevens video almost 70 years later, and suggests that this process was for a time a fairly settled 'best practice'.

As for achieving better results, this may be due to increased mechanical strength of the weld. Or, as a British smith I was discussing this with a few weeks ago suggested, there may be less carbon diffusion through the weld and out of the high carbon bit with the overcoat weld.
 
Steve Tall said:
An article from 1898 says "the old process" was the inserted bit, and "better results" are now obtained by the overcoat method. Presumably this maker of Maine axes (North Wayne Tool Co.) previously used the inserted bit method (though there is some ambiguity). Interesting that this company still made its scythe blades with an inserted edge.

Lewiston Evening Journal, April 23, 1898, page 11
Click to expand...

I imagine a lot of that has to do with how the welding process was different with scythe blades. The most common method was to simply lay the bars together, grip them in some box tongs, heat them to welding temp, and then pound them together under the hammer into "scythe rod" stock. A very different procedure vs. inserting a bit.
 
joshiecole said:
Steve as ever your google skills are far in advance of mine!..
Click to expand...

As an FYI to everyone:

Since the key is picking some good search terms (along with some luck), here are the search terms I used (which gave that newspaper article on the first page of results from google):

overcoat bit maine axe

It's often a process of trial and error, trying different search terms.
 
joshiecole said:
...

IMG_20150822_232743_zps4c6de182.jpg
Click to expand...



Below is the patent, from September 13, 1904 (date listed in the advert.) Note that the central part of the unforged bit is shorter and wider than the two side flaps (in contrast to your drawing above). The patent document has a bunch of relevant details about forging an overcoat bit, such as the effects of different angles, etc. It also mentions the advantage of having much more contact surface for the weld. Interesting to see that the inventor was a resident of Collinsville, Conn.

US769858-0.png


https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US769858.pdf

https://www.google.com/patents/US769858?dq=769858&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAGoVChMIkIb1u5e-xwIVwi-ICh22Oggg
 
I don't think that is just a marketing claim as the filing itself can change how deep an axe cuts and how easily you can draw it out. The hard steel would probably work better in soft woods than a soft steel would.

Would like to see one of these Eaton axes.
 
Steve Tall said:
As an FYI to everyone:

Since the key is picking some good search terms (along with some luck), here are the search terms I used (which gave that newspaper article on the first page of results from google):

overcoat bit maine axe

It's often a process of trial and error, trying different search terms.
Click to expand...

This makes me feel even sillier. I've probably searched these terms more than 20 times and somehow never managed to spot it.
 
Steve Tall said:
Below is the patent, from September 13, 1904 (date listed in the advert.) Note that the central part of the unforged bit is shorter and wider than the two side flaps (in contrast to your drawing above). The patent document has a bunch of relevant details about forging an overcoat bit, such as the effects of different angles, etc. It also mentions the advantage of having much more contact surface for the weld. Interesting to see that the inventor was a resident of Collinsville, Conn.

US769858-0.png


https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US769858.pdf
Click to expand...

The thing that occurs on looking at this diagram, is that once you have filed down to the inserted bit, you'd be left with a very strangely balanced axe and obtuse edge. You'd be much better off getting it re-steeled. I imagine that would have been economically sensible. While it requires a little finesse to forge weld a bit, it's only really a 30 minute job for a skilled smith.
 
How long would it take to wear that much steel? I think Mors Kochanski said his main axe has worn an inch to an inch and a half. That means you can get almost a lifetime of use out of one, although not fulltime dropping lumber.

Contact surface seems the main benefit really. But I don't know how much benefit that is considering that this style wasn't adopted very readily.
 
It really depends on how you use it and how you sharpen it. If you use it close to rocks and put a lot of chips or dents in it which have to be filed out then it may wear down more quickly. And if you sharpen it with grinders then you may well take the edge back more than it needs to each time.

Geometry is important too. A very thin edge will suffer more from carbide tear out (or in the case of a lower carbon steel, from impact dents)

With proper maintenance and careful use, a quality axe really ought to last a lifetime.
 
Carbide tearout doesn't apply to axes. Only to high carbide steels sharpened with inappropriately soft stones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top