Vintage vs. Council Tool

[jdm61]

But my understanding is that each "model" of race axe is different depending on what it is designed to chop to the point that the people that make them recommend you buy a "practice" ax if you actually want to use it for regular wood chopping as you can really screw up a race ax if you use it on something other than what it was specifically designed for. The advantage of 4140 for axes or tactical tomahawks is that not only is it "good enough" but also it is extremely cheap compared to something like L6. The raw steel needed to make a single axe head from L6 will cost you a lot more. Take the extra raw material cost difference and multiply it by 2.5 and you have the price difference for the axe assuming that most cutting tools typically end up selling for about 80% of stated MSRP in today's e-commerce driven world. $20 in cost becomes $50 at the store. Of course, that is before you factor in any extra labor or different equipment needed to make an axe from those higher grade steels. What I have read says that CT used 1060 for their regular line, not 4140.

Council Tool FSS axes have the 4140 steel at 55HRC, I have used it and it works very well.
About racing axes, they are produced for any type of wood, wet or dry, beech or pine in Basque case, the wood could vary a lot. They are produced for even harder woods in Australia and NZ. They are the same as racing vehicles, you can have a F1 car for a circuit or a truck for the Dakar.

 

[BG_Farmer]

This will sound awful, but the worship of vintage steel and axe designs can get a little silly. In the good old days, steel compositions were carefully guarded secrets and metallurgy was only slightly more advanced than voodoo. We don't know what percentage of crucial other components were used, especially manganese. We do know that a good number of axes were brittle and chipped or cracked, as several premium makers advertised either optimum hardness or proper heat treatment.

The standardization of 10xx steels changes a lot of that and if you add in alloys, nothing is the same. 5160 is beyond anything the FSS spec writer could have received by his recipe requirements. 4140 seemed to pass the test, which is rather stringent, or it would have been rejected outright for its composition. Even 1045/c45 as used in many axes is consistently serviceable, and the 1050/c50 steel used in Swedish boutique axes has embarrassingly hyperbolic superpowers ascibed to it.

The FSS spec writer was either doing his best to make a steel recipe or more likely was trying to include as many variants as possible. He seems like a diligent guy, as the hardness testing procedure is beyond thorough!

 

[Square_peg]

I think some of us may be underestimating the sophistication of axe makers in the first half of the 20th century. Those guys did their R&D. They weren't randomly choosing steels and applying haphazard heat treatments. Both saw and axe production were taken to sciences.

Material costs are by far the lesser cost of manufacturing. Labor is always the greater cost. There's no doubt that certain steel types caused a marked increase in labor costs, surpassing the material costs. This is a reason for choosing a lesser steel - it reduces labor costs.

 

[Steve Tall]

...There's no doubt that certain steel types caused a marked increase in labor costs, surpassing the material costs. This is a reason for choosing a lesser steel - it reduces labor costs.

Reminds me of what Council Tool wrote about their Velvicut line:

Many of our products are drop forgings, including Velvicut® axes. The drop hammer is a massive piece of equipment where a large steel mass (known as the ram) is dropped repeatedly, under control, on a hot piece of steel until the steel fills out the desired shape. The advantage of a forging is that the steel’s grain is refined and aligned with the shape of the product, providing superior strength. The drop hammer used to forge many of our axes has a ram with a falling weight of around 3,500 pounds. Operating a drop hammer takes a combination of physical strength, hand/eye coordination, concentration and experience. It’s both skill and art. The forger holds a hot piece of steel using tongs and moves the material about the die, making rapid decisions based on experienced judgment. We are fortunate to have a number of qualified forgers whose experience averages 26 years. When using high carbon steel, it takes 6 to 8 ram blows to produce an axe head. We use 5160 grade alloy to make a Velvicut® axe head, and this material takes nearly twice as many blows to form a similar head – a testament to its toughness. The end result of the alloy material in these axe heads is an outstanding product --strong and tough with superior edge-holding properties.

 

[bbforstr]

Council axes are nice. I wouldn't trade any of my vintage TT Kelly Works axes for one though.

 

[jdm61]

Interesting. having worked with a bit, i never really found 5160 to be hard to move under the hammer but then again, I have never used any plane carbon steel with carbon content lower than 1075. Now big round bars of O-1 or CruForge V are another matter.

Reminds me of what Council Tool wrote about their Velvicut line:

Many of our products are drop forgings, including Velvicut® axes. The drop hammer is a massive piece of equipment where a large steel mass (known as the ram) is dropped repeatedly, under control, on a hot piece of steel until the steel fills out the desired shape. The advantage of a forging is that the steel’s grain is refined and aligned with the shape of the product, providing superior strength. The drop hammer used to forge many of our axes has a ram with a falling weight of around 3,500 pounds. Operating a drop hammer takes a combination of physical strength, hand/eye coordination, concentration and experience. It’s both skill and art. The forger holds a hot piece of steel using tongs and moves the material about the die, making rapid decisions based on experienced judgment. We are fortunate to have a number of qualified forgers whose experience averages 26 years. When using high carbon steel, it takes 6 to 8 ram blows to produce an axe head. We use 5160 grade alloy to make a Velvicut® axe head, and this material takes nearly twice as many blows to form a similar head – a testament to its toughness. The end result of the alloy material in these axe heads is an outstanding product --strong and tough with superior edge-holding properties.

 

[jdm61]

the general consensus is that steel cost is a very small part of the cost of making a high quality cutting tool.......until such time as you start using really expensive steel. For example, the cost of the steel for a CT 2 pound hatchet would maybe $18 retail if you used L6. The regular production 1060 hatchet lists for $42. That is a BIG difference. even an axe sized piece of "cheaper" higher quality tough steel like 80CrV2 would run you around $9-10

I think some of us may be underestimating the sophistication of axe makers in the first half of the 20th century. Those guys did their R&D. They weren't randomly choosing steels and applying haphazard heat treatments. Both saw and axe production were taken to sciences.

Material costs are by far the lesser cost of manufacturing. Labor is always the greater cost. There's no doubt that certain steel types caused a marked increase in labor costs, surpassing the material costs. This is a reason for choosing a lesser steel - it reduces labor costs.

 

[Steve Tall]

I think that manufacturers in general tend to scrimp and cut corners where they can get away with it. If big-volume producers can save $1 in steel cost per axe, they'll do it in a heartbeat because it translates to pure profit, as long as the customer doesn't notice the difference to the extent that it hurts sales significantly.

Because of this, I think that vintage axes (from the earlier half of the 1900s) were made to higher standards, since there was a big market with a lot of competition, the axes played a bigger role in money-making activities, and the customers would tend to notice the effects of cheapening of the product and could easily buy better axes from another company.

 

[Square_peg]

When thousands of men were using axes 8 or more hours/day it quickly became evident who had the best axe. And lumber bosses paid attention. Profit margins were sometimes very slim. Any boost in production was needed. During the bust years of the Panic of 1893 and the Great Depression many logging companies went broke. A tiny edge could mean survival.

 

[jdm61]

From what I read, the Kelly company was a pioneer in steel MAKING to the extent that they kind of figured out on their now what Bessemer figured out. Of course, Bessemer got the credit because he went BIG and was in the UK, the largest industrial economy in the world by a large margin at the time. With that said, it took a while to get took steel like we get today. Alfred Krupp almost immediately adopted the Bessmer process to making steel cannons, but a lot of other folks lagged behind, All we have to dos look at the heat problems of the mild steel plate and wrought iron rivets used in the Titanic's hull to see that it was still a "work in progress" even that late in the game. Many common steels like W2, 01, 4140, 1018, 52100 and AEB-L have been around a long time, but most popped up in the 20th century.

 

[nickzdon]

Best Made dictates their product specifications but the actual manufacturing and assembly is done by (except maybe the decorative coats of paint) by Council Tools. There is nothing new about this sort of arrangement and if I understand correctly all Norlund products were also consequence of being 'farmed out'.

Steve, you mentioned that a Best Made is a rebranded velvicut. I read another article that indicated the owner of Best Made set out to directly compete with velvicut. I think "rebranded" implies that CT makes the heads for BM, which wouldn't necessarily make sense. Did you mean that CT makes them for BM, or just that they are twins except finish?

Best Made developed their Felling Axe/Velvicut with Council. They were both released around the same time. It's always been a partnership. I believe the specs should be identical, as both are made by Council. Although Best Made does sand their handles down so they're a bit smoother. And all Best Made axes go through a secondary inspection when they arrive at their warehouse.

 

[mc556]

I love vintage made axes but the Council Tools ones are extremely well made.
With vintage ones getting hard to find for some of us $50 is a good deal for the CT

 

[BG_Farmer]

From what I read, the Kelly company was a pioneer in steel MAKING to the extent that they kind of figured out on their now what Bessemer figured out. Of course, Bessemer got the credit because he went BIG and was in the UK, the largest industrial economy in the world by a large margin at the time. With that said, it took a while to get took steel like we get today. Alfred Krupp almost immediately adopted the Bessmer process to making steel cannons, but a lot of other folks lagged behind, All we have to dos look at the heat problems of the mild steel plate and wrought iron rivets used in the Titanic's hull to see that it was still a "work in progress" even that late in the game. Many common steels like W2, 01, 4140, 1018, 52100 and AEB-L have been around a long time, but most popped up in the 20th century.

And steel was still often imported from England and Germany for some applications or levels of quality for a long time (1930s?).

Kelly was one of the companies that "made" it in terms of usually good steel and treatments. I still doubt the metallurgy is superior to what can be done today. Just like Roman concrete was used by the mountain load and has endured well but the recipe is not used for specifications these days!

Also, not all vintage axes were tried by fire in the logging industry. The home market for axes was huge, as large numbers of households heated and cooked with wood even in cities. Quite a few brands hung on serving the price sensitive or indifferent markets, I'd guess.

 

[vcbvcbvcb]

I need to boil this down to the nuts and bolts. Is the steel used in the Velvicut line/Best Made axes, better than the steel in the standard CT line? Next, is the steel used in the vintage CT forestry service axes better than either one of those?

 

[Hacked]

Velvicut will have better steel and heat treatment / tempering as well as fit and finish.

The FSS axes will have a better heat treat / tempering.

The standard line should be fine for the average user who simply wants a good working axe.

 

[jdm61]

The 5160 is going to be tougher at a similar level of hardness.What that means in the real world is that they can leave the bit a little harder so it will be able to take and hold a more stable edge.

I need to boil this down to the nuts and bolts. Is the steel used in the Velvicut line/Best Made axes, better than the steel in the standard CT line? Next, is the steel used in the vintage CT forestry service axes better than either one of those?

 

[vcbvcbvcb]

Thanks

 

[Operator1975]

This thread is amusing.

 

[Square_peg]

I still doubt the metallurgy is superior to what can be done today.

Did someone suggest that is was better than what can be done today? I only suggested that it is better than what is done today.

 

[Steve Tall]

...Also, not all vintage axes were tried by fire in the logging industry. The home market for axes was huge, as large numbers of households heated and cooked with wood even in cities. Quite a few brands hung on serving the price sensitive or indifferent markets, I'd guess.

Yes, and manufacturers had "second quality" lines that served those markets, instead of lowering the bar for their standard brands. Perhaps the Warren Axe & Tool Company is an exception, because they claimed to "cater only to the trade demanding highest quality", according to their 1937 catalog. Even then, their Sager line of axes got special treatment (according to the catalog), listed as:

- finest quality of axe bit steel
- hand forged with several hundred blows under the hammer
- tempering process requiring double the time of the ordinary run of product
- rigid inspection including several heavy hammer blows
- nothing covered up by paint
- priced "a little higher" than the "inferior" competition

My take is that the axe manufacturers of today could take full advantage of the better steels available today, and have higher standards for quality assurance (which takes more time and results in more rejects), but it seems that they generally don't. Even some duds from Gransfors and Wetterlings show up on this forum, axes which should never have made it out the factory door. Even axes from John Neeman, some of the most expensive axes available today, can come with handles having significant runout. When asked about handle runout by somebody at this forum, the guy from John Neeman said that the axe was not made for hard work, but was a collectible.

I guess I better back that up with proof:

Hey, if you're John Neeman or a distributor.
That axe handle clearly has a problem with handle grain orientation.
As is it is plain wrong and should be perpendicular to that.
I noticed this on your previous axes, but it is much more a problem on this design as I can easily see the handle break.View attachment 256824

That seems really out of place.

Yes. I agree with that, but the particular one was not made for hard working, but as a collectable.