Vintage vs. Council Tool

Why don't they just turn the board 90 degrees? :confused:
Steve Tall said:
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:
Click to expand...
 
There has to be a lab, company, person, etc somewhere that could take a Warren Sager Chemical, a Mann Edge Knot Klipper, a Kelly Registered, a Plumb Champion, a Collins Legitimus(pre 1940), a Council Velvicut, a GB Scandi, etc etc and run some tests on them for edge hardness/toughess, specs on whats actually in them(maybe I dunno Im not a chemist), and whatever tests we wanted. Has to be an option out there somewhere.

But then I think, what does it prove, as you are talking about different eras, companies, investments, technology, availability, and probably most importantly, men when we are trying to compare old vs new axe heads in regards to metal and performance.

Very interesting discussion, which as I stated I do find amusing, and I highly doubt there is an absolute correct answer, but makes for good discussion.

But as I stated in the beginning, I would take vintage over new anytime. Warren Sager Chemical SB - you ever seen the forge lines on those? The 40+ pugets I have of those are impressive from a toughness/wear etc piece. I would probably rank them the best metal from what I have seen(whatever exactly that means, I am not even sure really). However I am not a metal head, don't know a lot, if anything about metal, don't care to(in depth anyway).
 
Council lists their axes hardened 48-55 RC. Not sure why the wide range? Its long been a bone of contention with me. The ones I have owned are just to soft. I guess if they are on the soft side the users will not be breaking them or having them chip and possibly having an eye injury and a law suit?

GB's are on the hard side and are well known for chipping before the edge will roll. They do this on what is rumored to be 1050 steel. They take a very sharp edge and hold it pretty well. Why can Council not compare to the GB's in this regard if they are using a higher quality steel?

As far a the vintage axes there really is no comparison as far as the workmanship. I find all kinds of different hardness's in the steel though, with some brands seeming to always be good. And we do not always know what the old stuff has been subjected to. I can usually tell what I am getting into before I take a file to an old axe by just looking at the bit and seeing if the edge has rolled or chipped.

I prefer my axes more on the hard side to one that will not hold an edge.
 
jdm61 said:
Why don't they just turn the board 90 degrees? :confused:
Click to expand...

"Turn the board 90 degrees" ain't so easy when a typical blank is a 6/4 x 3 and there's supposed to be a curve in the handle. Could be that the outward appearance of wood on fancy/exotic custom axes has become very similar to the expectation by affluent folks that insist on highly figured (ie structurally weak) gunstocks. A piece of 'furniture grade' walnut ensures optimal strength against mishaps and recoil shock but yields a very pedestrian-looking gun.

I doubt very much that Neeman products ever get much of a workout and those that do will have an owner that specified what was wanted with regard to wood grain.
 
Operator1975 said:
There has to be a lab, company, person, etc somewhere that could take a Warren Sager Chemical, a Mann Edge Knot Klipper, a Kelly Registered, a Plumb Champion, a Collins Legitimus(pre 1940), a Council Velvicut, a GB Scandi, etc etc and run some tests on them for edge hardness/toughess, specs on whats actually in them(maybe I dunno Im not a chemist), and whatever tests we wanted. Has to be an option out there somewhere.

But then I think, what does it prove, as you are talking about different eras, companies, investments, technology, availability, and probably most importantly, men when we are trying to compare old vs new axe heads in regards to metal and performance.

Very interesting discussion, which as I stated I do find amusing, and I highly doubt there is an absolute correct answer, but makes for good discussion.

But as I stated in the beginning, I would take vintage over new anytime. Warren Sager Chemical SB - you ever seen the forge lines on those? The 40+ pugets I have of those are impressive from a toughness/wear etc piece. I would probably rank them the best metal from what I have seen(whatever exactly that means, I am not even sure really). However I am not a metal head, don't know a lot, if anything about metal, don't care to(in depth anyway).
Click to expand...

At one time I had access to a Rockwell hardness tester. It is problematic to run the test with out a special anvil to hold them or you would have to saw them as the test method for the FFS specs state. So I was not willing to ruin a vintage axe. Even with a way to just hold them and not saw them with the older stuff we would still need to file below the surface to get away from the work hardened surface. It is much more complicated than I really wanted to deal with.

There are labs that could tell us the make up of the steel though and that would also be very interesting. We just need an axe junkie that works in the right lab.

For my purposes it is plenty good to believe what the file tells me and the performance says. Even if it is very subjective it really tells you all you need to know.
 
The really high end gunmakers choose a blanks that has that insane "marble cake" figure on the butt, but relatively straight grain at the grip which is where the stress is. Rare stuff and that explains why it is so rare AND expensive. Post being that at their price point, folks like Neeman should be going out of their way to ensure that everything is right.
300Six said:
"Turn the board 90 degrees" ain't so easy when a typical blank is a 6/4 x 3 and there's supposed to be a curve in the handle. Could be that the outward appearance of wood on fancy/exotic custom axes has become very similar to the expectation by affluent folks that insist on highly figured (ie structurally weak) gunstocks. A piece of 'furniture grade' walnut ensures optimal strength against mishaps and recoil shock but yields a very pedestrian-looking gun.

I doubt very much that Neeman products ever get much of a workout and those that do will have an owner that specified what was wanted with regard to wood grain.
Click to expand...
 
When it comes to steel, people commonly make the assumption that more alloying equals a 'better steel' an 'upgrade' or '10xx on steroids'. The truth is that for push cutting and edge stability, lower alloy steels are king and there is plenty of metallurgical research to prove it. The Japanese understand this perfectly well. I do not consider 5160 to be an 'upgrade' on 1060 for an axe, especially when both of the axes in question are underhardened. I'm really interested to hear people's reports on the new S&N axes in 1080 steel.

Like you, I prefer my axes on the hard side, and I'm considering re-heat treating my council boy's axe as a fun experiment.
 
I'd go Council Tool.

Looking vintage axes is tough.

Especially online.

People know what there worth. It's quite the rat race
Collecting vinatge axes is a skill and hobby in itself.

If ya just need a good axe to start swinging, just grab up a council tool.
 
Square_peg said:
A council will be a good axe. It will be hung and ready to work (maybe with a little edge work). Yes, it's a good axe and a fair deal. Yes, you can get a better axe by buying vintage and putting some sweat equity into it.

I think it's one of the best values going in a new axe.
Click to expand...

I agree w/ Peg. I have three Councils and they work well for me.

The Plumb seemed to have a slight edge on the CT.

[URL=http://s810.photobucket.com/user/doubleott/media/Council%20Velvicut%20Plumb%20Cedar/KellyPerfectvsCouncilVelicut006.jpg.html][/URL]

It was a draw splitting with a Kelly Prefect and a CT.

[URL=http://s810.photobucket.com/user/doubleott/media/Kelly%20Perfect%20vs%20Council%20Velvicut/KellyPerfectvsCouncilVelicut003.jpg.html][/URL]

[URL=http://s810.photobucket.com/user/doubleott/media/Kelly%20Perfect%20vs%20Council%20Velvicut/KellyPerfectvsCouncilVelicut010.jpg.html][/URL]

I really do like vintage axes and enjoy restoring them.

Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top