Warning norse hawk failed

m said:
I am seriously not trying to start anything here but I have kitchen knives that have seen serious use for many years and still work well for their intended purposes but I would definately not consider them "tough". ANY descent tool should be able to stand up to serious use for many years. If you advertize a tool as being "tough" or "hard use" it should stand up to more than what you would expect a normal tool would, otherwise why go to the extra expence? Unless its just to massage our egos, and most here I don't think want to pay extra for that.
Click to expand...

okay, where is the norse hawk advertised as being extra tough for field use? and where am I paying a premium for it?
 
The op said his hawk bent Easily,not when using it like you would use an extra tough one. I was mainly talking about the shovel earlier which you are paying a premium for compared to other shovels but CS advertises the "worlds strongest,sharpest knives" and uses the term "high perfomance" as well as other hype to indicate it makes hard use tools. They deliver on some of their claims for some of their tools,on others they do not. My earlier statement was meant as a general one and also as I said before I am not a Cold Steel basher but neither am I any makers butt kisser(not implying that you are either).
 
m said:
We all have different ideas of what tough is,mine was easily bent,it was definately not tough.
Click to expand...

The definition for tough that I believe some of the others are referring to is regarding the steel properties.

From the Steel FAQ:

"Toughness: The ability to take an impact without damage, by which we
mean, chipping, cracking, etc."

"Generally speaking, within the hardness range that the steel performs
well at, as hardness increases, strength also increases, but toughness
decreases."

So I gather that the reason it bends and does not break is due to softer and therefore tougher steel.
 
And im not saying that the norse is a bad hawk it just has flaws. And in real woods work. The way split wood put sideway torque on it. I lay the log on its side and strike in the middle and hit it untill it splis or pry it open.
 
Well your real woods work is very different than mine. Putting side torque on a hawk or axe is a good way to damage the tool... head or handle. The Norse hawk is not designed to be a splitting axe. The swept blade improves slashing and the points are great for throwing or hooking. It is a weapon first, that can double as a tool. If you want a chopper hawk, get a rifleman's hawk.


I use my Norse hawk for everything. It gets more use than my knife... but I know its limitations and don't exceed them, intetionally.


Rick
 
Yeah. No offense, but you need to learn a different way to split wood. Twisting your tool sideways should not be part of the method.
 
m said:
I am not sure I would consider a shovel digging frozen dirt as tough.
Click to expand...

Magnussen didn't write "digging frozen dirt" he wrote "prying up frozen ground." Frozen ground is not like cement however, it's like half an inch of ice...over cement. Take a whack at it and all you see is little scufff and a dent. If Cold Steel's shovel can handle that it is one tough tool.

As for the ax, if you pull a "Noss" and apply enough pressure somethings got to give and bending seems far preferable to cracking or breaking.


benchmadebob said:
And in real woods work. The way split wood put sideway torque on it. I lay the log on its side and strike in the middle and hit it untill it splis or pry it open.
Click to expand...

Well, if you say so but I sure have been doing it all wrong then.
 
SouthernCross said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tUUctg6dfk&hl=un

Seems like Ray Mears needs some advice on how to split wood :D


Kind regards
Mick
Click to expand...

For starters, just because someone on television does something, does not mean that I follow it.

Secondly, he's not burying the axe in a piece of wood and twisting, as was described. So, you are not being nearly as clever as you'd like to think. But, do as you'd like. I, certainly, do not mind. :D ;)
 
Indeed, the technique being demonstrated in the clip is not the same practice described at the beginning of the thread. Likewise I would be hesitant to try that technique with a 'hawk since there is much less supporting material for lateral strain. It's meant primarily as a weapon, not a tool, and isn't shaped to take the force of a twist when the blade is buried deep.
 
G'day EMT_Lee

EMT_Lee said:
Secondly, he's not burying the axe in a piece of wood and twisting, as was described. So, you are not being nearly as clever as you'd like to think. But, do as you'd like. I, certainly, do not mind. :D ;)
Click to expand...
He's where I'm getting confused.

The original post talks about the effects of a test conducted to see how the tool handled torque stresses. This test involved burying the axe in a green stump.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "Yeah. No offense, but you need to learn a different way to split wood. Twisting your tool sideways should not be part of the method."; a comment on the technique BB later describes to split wood, rather than on the test?

If it is a comment on the technique for splitting wood as described by BB (and shown in Mr Mears' video), I disagree with it. That technique is effective and one I have used for nearly 40 years without ill effect to any hatchet or axe.

Hope this puts my response into context.


Kind regards
Mick
 
you can always tell when someone comes here and does not lurk a bit at absorb some of the knowledge shared here.... then they try to tell u that they are more right than others are....

the op asked a question... it was answered... if u like to split your wood different, thats cool bro... just buy a tool that will hold up to it... and no u cant borrow mine... each tool has a job and should be used as such....

you can not force your opinion on anyone, even with force... that being said this is a great little corner of the internet and there are alot of great guys here... i enjoy listening more than i speak, just a thought, but welcome and i hope u find the info u seek.....
 
To be fair, though, the Cold Steel Norse Hawk is neither an axe nor a hatchet. The face of the tool tapers near the eye, and this area is smaller / thinner than similar areas on comparable axes or hatchets. It does not look like it is set up to withstand significant torque.

csstoreonline_2059_2436818


I still think that this comes down to reasonable use, and I don't think that axes and 'hawks can be assumed to have the same performance parameters.

But, all that stuff aside, my real question to benchmadebob is - do you plan to mod your 'hawk, and if so, how? I had a blast modding my trail hawk, and there's an excellent stickied thread on mods in the axe & hawk subforum.

All the best,

- Mike
 
SouthernCross said:
G'day EMT_Lee


He's where I'm getting confused.

The original post talks about the effects of a test conducted to see how the tool handled torque stresses. This test involved burying the axe in a green stump.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "Yeah. No offense, but you need to learn a different way to split wood. Twisting your tool sideways should not be part of the method."; a comment on the technique BB later describes to split wood, rather than on the test?

If it is a comment on the technique for splitting wood as described by BB (and shown in Mr Mears' video), I disagree with it. That technique is effective and one I have used for nearly 40 years without ill effect to any hatchet or axe.

Hope this puts my response into context.


Kind regards
Mick
Click to expand...


We were not talking about spliting kindling in the OP's post. He was talking about flexing the handle in a green stump. Then he spoke of splitting wood with the same manner of prying.

"I lay the log on its side and strike in the middle and hit it untill it splis or pry it open."

Am I wrong in thinking this was refering to large wood? If he was using this technique on the appropriate sized wood this thread would not exsist. Ray was splitting wrist/arm sized wood with that levering technique..... BIG DIFFERENCE. If the Norse hawk had twisted at that, I appoligize... you have a defective tool. As far as Ray's large log spliting technique... that is torsional rotation not side levering.

I still do not know why we are discussing the inadequacies of the Norse hawk as a woodman's tool... It was clearly never intended for that kind of heavy work... though in my experience, it performs well as a camp tool.

Rick
 
Last edited:
A) Knives weren't meant to work as prybars, hawks weren't meant to be twisted.
B) When you press a hawk into work as an axe, you're using it outside it's designed use. So stuff's gonna happen (like hafts breaking or eyelets deforming when batoned). That doesn't mean it can't be used that way, just that it requires different considerations.
 
Mentor said:
To be fair, though, the Cold Steel Norse Hawk is neither an axe nor a hatchet. The face of the tool tapers near the eye, and this area is smaller / thinner than similar areas on comparable axes or hatchets. It does not look like it is set up to withstand significant torque.

csstoreonline_2059_2436818


I still think that this comes down to reasonable use, and I don't think that axes and 'hawks can be assumed to have the same performance parameters.

But, all that stuff aside, my real question to benchmadebob is - do you plan to mod your 'hawk, and if so, how? I had a blast modding my trail hawk, and there's an excellent stickied thread on mods in the axe & hawk subforum.

All the best,

- Mike
Click to expand...

I have given a cord wrap And soom im going to put on some linseed oil and strip the haed and give it a patina.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top