Wetterlings Hudson bay

Woodcraft

Woodcraft

Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
796
Working with stuff on the ground with this ax is definitely an on your knees (bushcrafty) type deal. The handle is just to short to work for any period of time standing working folded over at your feet. Not to mention the safety aspect. (I will concede that this handle seems to be a very good size for working from the knees.) This is more oak from a winter fall down. It is a point and shoot proposition. It handles well. Sliding power swings are kind of pointless when the handle is this short. It is kind of just long enough to do it, but not long enough for it to be effective in any way over keeping the hands together. The high centerline did exactly what it is supposed to, it did not stick. It blasted chips by the wayside. The bit is definitely thick, perfect for hardwood and the nonsense I put it into. I have done very little with it, for me. Limbed a bit. Split a bit, then this. It was sharp out of the box. It definitely needs to be touched up after today.
I think this head compares well with boys axes. I think it would do well on a boys ax longer handle. It is so bit heavy a longer handle may severely impact the accuracy. We shall see if I get around to re hanging it. All and all the head is impressive, I am a little cautious about edge holding ability, I will have to put some time in all at once to get a better feel.


















No chips, dings or loose head;)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that review, Woodcraft.

I thought I might add some observations and comparisons to support your thread.

I have just gotten the Wetterling Hudson Bay from Lumnia, so I wanted to give it a try. I decided to compare it to the Gransfors Bruks Small Forest Axe and the Council Pack Axe. All are about the same size, but there are big design differences between them.


First, the GB SFA is smaller, with a 19 inch handle and a thin head profile. Both the WHB and CPA have 23 inch hafts. The WHB has the thickest profile, making it better for splitting.


But I had a downed alder in the front yard, mercifully suspended at a little less then waist high, so I didn’t have to kneel in the mud.


I gave each axe a shot at cutting the alder in half, alternating axes after 10 blows, with each cutting their own Vee.


The WHB had the poorest penetrating power, which is to be expected with that head profile. The CPA was better. The GB SFA was the best for penetration.


As expected, the longer handles on the Wetterling and Council made a difference in terms of power swings. The Gransfors Bruk SFA was lighter and easier to use.


They all performed about the same. The GB SFA cut the smallest Vee. The Wetterling Hudson Bay was second. The Council Pack Axe cut the deepest Vee, but all were close.


None suffered any edge damage. Heads all remained tight.




Here are the axes: GB SFA on the left, Wetterling HB in the middle, Council pack axe on the right.
UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_2d8_zpswguqrgnq.jpg



Same order. You can see the GB has the thinest head profile, and the Wetterling has the thickest.
UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_2d9_zps040mavjt.jpg
 
Interesting comparison.
The flying cut I used was a bit small for what I was bucking........
What about sticking? What did you experience with the three? I have had nothing that didn't just "roll out" with the Wetterlings, and even that was rare.

When I compare, and quite often it is just for myself, I make my cuts the same size, sized for the log. I do not really worry about half way, I focus on the cut. And count total chops to complete the entire job.
 
I was cutting red alder, which is technically a hardwood, but very easy to chop. If any of the three would have stuck, it would have been the Gransfors Bruk Small Forest Axe. But alder chips out so well that none of the axes stuck. The GB actually sent chips flying the best, but it didn't have the head inertia of the others.
 
Thanks for the review.
Would be interested to see SFA vs tomahawk of similar weight with a proper edge on it.
The bit on the SFA looks thin and without beveled cheeks, much like a tomahawk. Which makes for a deep penetrator but comes with its own drawbacks.

I dont have one, but I cant see how the SFA can be all that its cracked up to be with a head shape like that. It may split better than a tomahawk due to the eye design but its really just a light weight axe head with a thin bit and a fancy name.
of course people will see the thin bit. Realise it penetrates deeply and forget about the other factors that make a good axe.
 
Thanks for the review.
Interesting comments by everyone. Of course everyone uses their tools under different circumstances and have different levels of experience. I use a saw for tree cutting. For me, it
is safer and expends less energy. An axe/hatchet is used for limbing & certain shelter building
tasks and for splitting firewood. (It may also be used for large knife tasks.) I backpack into remote country so have to keep weight & bulk reasonable. A 19 inch (give or take) handled axe is about the maxium I carry. In the warmer spring and summer months, I'll go with a tomahawk rather than an axe. The hawk can feed a small lightweight portable wood stove just fine for me.
 
Pointshoot777 said:
Thanks for the review.
Interesting comments by everyone. Of course everyone uses their tools under different circumstances and have different levels of experience. I use a saw for tree cutting. For me, it
is safer and expends less energy. An axe/hatchet is used for limbing & certain shelter building
tasks and for splitting firewood. (It may also be used for large knife tasks.) I backpack into remote country so have to keep weight & bulk reasonable. A 19 inch (give or take) handled axe is about the maxium I carry. In the warmer spring and summer months, I'll go with a tomahawk rather than an axe. The hawk can feed a small lightweight portable wood stove just fine for me.
Click to expand...
What stove do you use?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top