The Great Heartwood/Sapwood Controversy

Are we over concerned with heart wood and sap wood in handles? Ya probably. But the fact still remains that there is a difference in the sap wood and heart wood of hickory. Do you think we just used the hickory sap wood handles for a couple hundred years because of a myth?

I like it. It certainly is different (sap wood vs. heart wood). Let's not forget the major sponsor responsible for 99% of the arguments made that heartwood is equivalent to sapwood is none other than the US federal government. I can't imagine that such an entity would have ulterior motives (sarcasm alert). That being alleged, when it comes to axes - sapwood is more resilient. Will you have a problem with a heartwood handle? Probably not short of operator error, as Operator stated. Is a handle with both heartwood and sapwood more likely to fail than an all sapwood handle or all heartwood handle? Who gives a shit because we all known that grain runout and grain density are more important anyway.

If you want a text book handle, then search for one that is 100% sapwood, no grain runount, grain orientation perfectly aligned, grain density of no more than 20 rings per inch, and obviously staight, etc. And then, I hope you break it and realize that the operator is ultimately the keystone.
 
Is a handle with both heartwood and sapwood more likely to fail than an all sapwood handle or all heartwood handle? Who gives a shit because we all known that grain runout and grain density are more important anyway...............................................And then, I hope you break it and realize that the operator is ultimately the keystone.

Right on. :thumbup:
 
Very smug, the both of you, but there comes a point when the technique is more or less under the belt and one can move on to other concerns.

E.DB.
 
Yew is a whole different thing. I think that the sap wood contributes nothing to the strength of the bow at all. To me it feels almost like rubber. Great in tension? Oh ya! If you notice the prehistoric yew bows the sap wood is removed.

While I'm fairly certain you disagee with me, I still can't work out if you disagree with what I said.
I think that Hickory sap wood was traditionally used for handles because of its greater flexibility/tensile strength.
 
While I'm fairly certain you disagee with me, I still can't work out if you disagree with what I said.
I think that Hickory sap wood was traditionally used for handles because of its greater flexibility/tensile strength.

I think that it may have been perceived as being stronger, but it likely came down more to the greater likelihood of heartwood to contain hidden flaws? There's actually a drumstick company that uses heartwood for their most premium line because their testing showed its durability to be superior. But if there are flaws in the wood, all bets are off, eh?
 
While I appreciate what the practical guys are saying, "just use it - who cares", this thread was started to discuss a concept.

Purely the use of "mixed wood" in impact tool handles, and is it a disqualifier. This is after all, a discussion forum.

I've broken wood handled tools from use, and I know about user error. Everyone would agree on runout as a problem.

Looks to me like the Forest Service paper was good research, coupled with data from a LOT of axes. They don't have a problem with grain orientation either.

We have some interesting technical info on wood, and some theories about what is stronger, but noone has posted about

handles failing due to mixed grain. I just wanted to see if there was any evidence behind the rule.
 
While I'm fairly certain you disagee with me, I still can't work out if you disagree with what I said.
I think that Hickory sap wood was traditionally used for handles because of its greater flexibility/tensile strength.

Just this part do I disagree with you on.
" One of the reasons Yew was chosen for bows was the difference in characteristics between heartwood and sapwood, with heartwood being better able to resist compression and sapwood, tension".
It is not true as I stated. It was used for a long time with the sap wood removed. Keeping the sap wood on was a rather recent thing. And I don't know if the native Americans ever kept the sap wood on. Maybe, but I have not seen it.
The part about tension compression, I agree with you.
I am OK with a difference of opinion, hope you are also.
Just don't want to come across wrong and offend you.:thumbup:
 
Very smug, the both of you, but there comes a point when the technique is more or less under the belt and one can move on to other concerns.

E.DB.

You are certainly right, however the majority of people will never reach that point because of very little time swinging. My method of picking out handles is to get the best one I can find without obsessing over it. Works well enough for me. I've only broken one handle that I wouldn't consider outright user error, and it was a very nice all sapwood handle. I did add to the discussion with my opinion then added the off cuff remark. There was a time on this forum where you didn't have to "tiptoe through the tulips."

While I appreciate what the practical guys are saying, "just use it - who cares", this thread was started to discuss a concept.

Purely the use of "mixed wood" in impact tool handles, and is it a disqualifier. This is after all, a discussion forum.

I've broken wood handled tools from use, and I know about user error. Everyone would agree on runout as a problem.

Looks to me like the Forest Service paper was good research, coupled with data from a LOT of axes. They don't have a problem with grain orientation either.

We have some interesting technical info on wood, and some theories about what is stronger, but noone has posted about

handles failing due to mixed grain. I just wanted to see if there was any evidence behind the rule.

I think your thread idea is fine. My expressed opinions were intended to add to the discussion not discount it. Now, when you say "They don't have a problem with grain orientation either," what are you referring to?
 
Very smug, the both of you, but there comes a point when the technique is more or less under the belt and one can move on to other concerns.

E.DB.

Come on Ernest, That's what you got to contribute? Don't have hickory handles in Netherlands?
 
You are certainly right, however the majority of people will never reach that point because of very little time swinging.


My first thought when I read this was that you were underestimating people. But then I thought of the axe, hatchet and hammer reviews I have seen on the net and well, its just odd watching a review with some guy that swings like a sissy or uses two hands to swing a hatchet with a 18" handle.
So yep, your right.
 
I read that research from the Forest Service and believe it. I've purchased all heartwood hickory handles because I like the color. I think the origin of the thought that sapwood is superior is that in some species of wood, sapwood does have superior strength. Apparently not true in hickory.
 
I think we are forgetting that the sapwood-heartwood differences are not only varying from species to species but also with the age of the tree. The formation of the heartwood is not an instantaneous process but a gradual one. In short lived trees the changes might occur more quickly, but hickory is not a very short lived tree.
The heartwood, the older part of the tree of an old growth hickory was formed more than 100 (if not 200) years before the sapwood portion, so the mechanical differences are likely to be greater than in a younger tree, where the age difference is several decades at most, and the differences between the sapwood and heartwood are not so pronounced yet.
For the last century, tool handles were most likely made of young growth hickories, simply because the old growth trees were cut down by that time.
The Forest Service document cited above is likely referring to young growth hickory.
 
I think we are forgetting that the sapwood-heartwood differences are not only varying from species to species but also with the age of the tree. The formation of the heartwood is not an instantaneous process but a gradual one. In short lived trees the changes might occur more quickly, but hickory is not a very short lived tree.
The heartwood, the older part of the tree of an old growth hickory was formed more than 100 (if not 200) years before the sapwood portion, so the mechanical differences are likely to be greater than in a younger tree, where the age difference is several decades at most, and the differences between the sapwood and heartwood are not so pronounced yet.
For the last century, tool handles were most likely made of young growth hickories, simply because the old growth trees were cut down by that time.
The Forest Service document cited above is likely referring to young growth hickory.

Very good point!
 
At Best Made, we sell axes with handles of mixed wood, as well as pure heartwood, and pure sapwood. After literally thousands of axes sold I can say that I've never seen a failure that could be contributed to the sapwood/heartwood argument. I see just about every axe that comes back for return, as well as the ones we pick out for QC. The vast majority of handle failures are due to operator error (overstrike is a bitch). After that, grain run out and just plain defective wood are the second most common causes of failure.

The reason we sell handles with mixed wood is that to obtain the quantity of handles we need with superior grain we have to accept them. It's the trade off we have to make. It just means we have to explain that fact every once in awhile. And it's easier to tell the heartwood/sapwood story than it is to explain why a handle has crappy grain :)
 
The only wood handled hammer failure I can recall: a carpenter dropped a new hammer a couple stories onto concrete. Whole handle. Whole head. Sundered by concrete and gravity.

I never took a close look at the break. But I’m pretty sure that heartwood-sapwood was not the issue.
 
The reason we sell handles with mixed wood is that to obtain the quantity of handles we need with superior grain we have to accept them. It's the trade off we have to make. It just means we have to explain that fact every once in awhile. And it's easier to tell the heartwood/sapwood story than it is to explain why a handle has crappy grain :)

I guess its the way things are now. The quality of wood has really went down hill. I remember when track homes had hard wood floors because they were cheap.
I am still going to select my handles with no heart wood and as little run out as I can. If I have a choice.
 
I guess its the way things are now. The quality of wood has really went down hill. I remember when track homes had hard wood floors because they were cheap.
I am still going to select my handles with no heart wood and as little run out as I can. If I have a choice.

The quality has gone down hill because almost all the old growth stuff that could make truly flawless and perfect handles has been cut down. We as a community now have a choice--absolutely insist on cosmetic perfection (universal absence of heartwood) and continue to contribute towards the pickiness that's partially responsible for creating the scarcity in the first place, or we can not sweat the small stuff and realize it'll work just fine and dandy as long as there isn't any runout.

Just my own philosophy regarding the situation, though, and I fully respect your (and others') preferences. Like you said, a lot of times it comes down to whether you have a choice or not, and if I'm at a brick and mortar store and see a flawless creamy-white handle with perfect grain alignment/no runout that's what I'll grab, but as long as there's no runout I'll be happy. I could care less about heartwood, and grain alignment isn't a killer for me.

That being said, I'll "Grade B" stuff that I carry in the shop if the grain alignment is off even though I'd use it myself. :p
 
The quality has gone down hill because almost all the old growth stuff that could make truly flawless and perfect handles has been cut down. We as a community now have a choice--absolutely insist on cosmetic perfection (universal absence of heartwood) and continue to contribute towards the pickiness that's partially responsible for creating the scarcity in the first place, or we can not sweat the small stuff and realize it'll work just fine and dandy as long as there isn't any runout.

Just my own philosophy regarding the situation, though, and I fully respect your (and others') preferences. Like you said, a lot of times it comes down to whether you have a choice or not, and if I'm at a brick and mortar store and see a flawless creamy-white handle with perfect grain alignment/no runout that's what I'll grab, but as long as there's no runout I'll be happy. I could care less about heartwood, and grain alignment isn't a killer for me.

That being said, I'll "Grade B" stuff that I carry in the shop if the grain alignment is off even though I'd use it myself. :p

As far as I know the old growth has never selected for handles. The second growth has always been the premium handle material. Its more of just a dollars and cents thing. And pride in workmanship is a thing that this country needs badly. It is a very rare thing these days, if you find it buy it. How much harder can it be to align the grain correctly? Might take a few seconds huh? Might as well do it right or it not worth doing.
 
A lot of it comes down to a cost/benefit thing. How much extra would it cost to do the additional work, and how valued would that work be to their average consumer. If it would raise the cost more than the extra work is perceived as being worth to the consumer it doesn't make economic sense to do it since you'd actually run a strong risk of losing business. Hence why it makes sense for a company like GB to lavish attention on their axes (because they're pursuing the high-end market) but for Truper not to because they're chasing the low end. A lot of it is competition for market share, brand positioning, production efficiency, etc. etc. and it can get fairly complex why a company may choose to do what it's doing. The overwhelming majority of the market doesn't really know or care (or care to know!) so the larger makers typically don't bother with such details and sourcing materials in that quality range can be difficult for a smaller shop like Best Made because of supply chain relations and economies of scale.
 
Back
Top