What's a good axe?

Thanks for all the advice. I think the Iltis axes look nice. I may have to take a look at the Oxhead model. They seemed to be priced a little better than the GB axes too.
 
I have not used the double bit model, the side profile looks more like a swamper than a felling bit, but they never show the important part which is the top down profile. Actual felling double bit axes have very narrow bits, often 3-4" wide and very long, they were designed to work clearing out notches from very large trees.

-Cliff
 
Cliff Stamp said:
I have not used the double bit model, the side profile looks more like a swamper than a felling bit, but they never show the important part which is the top down profile. Actual felling double bit axes have very narrow bits, often 3-4" wide and very long, they were designed to work clearing out notches from very large trees.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

What does swamper mean?

I've been reading Cook's book and his chapter on double bit axes made them seem pretty appealing. Another thing that I noticed is that he says that the distance from the bit to the eye should be as short as possible (axis of lateral pivot iirc), without compromising having a thin blade. He says this makes it more accurate. The single bit Iltis looks like it might have a long axis of lateral pivot from the pictures, but it's hard to tell. The double bit model would eliminate this wouldn't it?

I never knew choosing an ax could be so difficult! :D
 
Cliff Stamp said:
With an axe you can fell enough wood in a few days to last through a winters burning. In general you spend more time doing the prep work than cutting the wood. It takes much more time to limb, stack and buck the wood than to just knock it down. Bucking wood with a chainsaw vs swede saw is many to one times slower though and that is where the real time is spent. You can chop down a 12" pine easily in under a minute, however it takes *way* longer to limb it, stack it, transport it to the home, buck it to length, split it if necessary, and restack it. The felling time is relatively insignificant in comparison. The chainsaw takes the axe readily on limbing though and is a huge time saver there, and similar vs a swede saw for bucking. It still isn't a massive undertaking though, about a weeks work if the wood is small to moderate in size and not dense hardwoods.

-Cliff
Click to expand...
Well you might actually be right, but there are many people around where I live who do their own wood and I've never heard of a single person doing it that way. That said wood is mostly beech and Oak (well there are actually conifer areas, but people wouldn't consider them for heating).
 
Chainsaws have replaced axes, so much so that good axes are hard to find now. However when people did use axes to cut wood, it didn't actually take that long. It was only one generation ago that they were used locally, and the individuals had full time jobs as fisherman / farmer etc. . I cut a lot of wood with an axe, maybe 5-10 cords a year, it doesn't take that long. I think back when people did it for a living, if you were good you could have cords down, limbed and stacked in a day.

-Cliff
 
When the Iltis arrives I would be interested in any details you could give on the edge profile, a tops down picture would be much appreciated.

-Cliff
 
Cliff Stamp said:
When the Iltis arrives I would be interested in any details you could give on the edge profile, a tops down picture would be much appreciated.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

No problem. I'll post a picture when it arrives.
 
I have one of Reeves' double bit hand axes with the maple handle. Scary sharp. I might get a single bit with osage orange handle from him someday.
 
HungryJack said:
... It's interesting because he says that back about 50-100 years ago there were axe stores that carried up to 300 different types of axes at a time, but nowdays it seems a lot harder to find a good axe...
Click to expand...

WHOLY CRAP!!! :eek: 300 kinds of axes? I only know of 3! Youv got Fiskars axes, Gerber Axes, and Pot Metal double-bit fantasy axes that 40 year old men with pony tails try to sell you at comic book stores. What else is there? :p
 
mr.trooper said:
WHOLY CRAP!!! :eek: 300 kinds of axes? I only know of 3! Youv got Fiskars axes, Gerber Axes, and Pot Metal double-bit fantasy axes that 40 year old men with pony tails try to sell you at comic book stores. What else is there? :p
Click to expand...

LOL, and aren't the Fiskar and Gerber axes the same thing? So that makes just two! ;)
 
Well, I got my Oxhead ax last night. I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed.

Maybe I'm just being a little picky, but there are several things that bother me about it. I'm no ax expert, but just basing my observations off of what I read in D. Cooks "The Ax Book" it has several issues that don't seem right.

1. The handle on the ax doesn't seem to be made right. According to D. Cook, when the ax is placed on the ground, perpendicular, so that the bit and the end of the handle are touching, the center of the bit should be touching the ground.

In other words, if you were to draw a tangent line from the center of the curve on the bit, it would extend until it touches the end of the handle. On the Oxhead ax it seems that the handle isn't quite curved enough, so when the end of the handle is touching the ground the lower 1/4 of the curve of the bit is what touches the ground. I hope that makes sense.

If you think about it, this is the way it should be too. If you are swining an ax, you want the bit to impact the wood at the same point that your hands are holding the handle for best accuracy. If the bit is extending out from the handle, then it impacts before your hands are reaching the tangent line of the tree trunk or piece of wood, which allows for more inaccuracy.

2. The bit was horribly dull and horribly mis-shaped. I'd assume that any ax would require some touching up, at least any high quality ax, but not anywhere near what this ax was. It looked as if they put just one side of the bit against a grinder and ground a chisel type edge onto the bit, instead of having a bevel on both sides of the bit.

Not only that, but there was a severe burr on the opposite side of the bit from where the bevel was. The bevel wasn't even uniform or sharp by any means. I doubt it could do anything but tear a piece of paper, certainly not cut it. Assuming it's high quality steel like they claim, it's going to take quite a bit of work to get it to proper shape and sharpness.

3. The ax head was mis-shaped according to how it should be in D. Cook's book. According to D. Cook, the angle formed by the ax blade should be steeper towards the bit, then shallower at the cheek and then steeper again towards the eye. It should never be completely flat, but always curving, because this helps keep the ax from getting stuck in the wood. I don't know how to describe this other than to do a picture, so here is a simple diagram:

AxCurve.jpg


Now, this is a bit exaggerated to illustrate what I am talking about, but the Oxhead is definitely not symetrical on both sides. This is hard to show in pictures because you really have to turn the blade in the light to get a feel for the contours.

I'm sure this could be corrected with some filing and/or grinding, but I really don't want to mess with that. I wouldn't mind having to sharpen the ax, but I really don't want to have to re-shape the head, so this is a significant problem for me.

4. The corners of the bit do not seem shaped right. Once again, I refer to D. Cook's book, where he says that the corners of the bit should be slightly rounded so they don't chip.

Well, I don't know if this is typical of an Oxhead ax, but the one I received had one corner that was significantly rounded, and not rounded very uniformly either. To the point I thought it was actually chipped off at first. The other corner wasn't rounded off at all. Again, this could probably be corrected with some filing and such, but I don't want to have to mess with all of that on a brand new ax. I want it made right from the get go. Also, I don't know if you can tell from the pciture below or not, but look at the way the lighting shows the contours on the ax. They certainly don't look uniform to me like the pictures on the website show.

Here is a picture, notice the difference between the top corner and the lower corner of the bit, as well as the irregular contours on the cheek of the ax:

DSCN9460.jpg


5. This is probably a minor point, but once again, according to D. Cook the bit should not have very much curve in it. If a tangent line were drawn from the center of the curve of the bit, the distance between the tangent line and the corner of the bit should be about 1/4". The Oxhead seems to have a little more curve in it, about 1/2"-3/4". However, it certainly seems to have less curve than some of the GB axes. I really wanted a double bit ax, but the GB DB ax has a LOT of curve in it according to the pictures. D. Cook says this makes an ax inefficient.

Cliff, here is a picture of the top profile of the ax, since you requested it:

DSCN9463.jpg


Sorry about the poor quality photos.

I don't know if I'm just being too harsh on this ax or not. Like I said before, I'm certianly no expert. I only have D. Cook's book to go on, and maybe I'm just reading too much into it, but it certainly seems as if this ax has some significant problems to me. At this point I'm thinking of returning it and either trying to get a custom made ax or a GB. I would hope for the price the GB would come finished enough that at least I wouldn't need to do any reshaping of the ax head. I wouldn't mind having to hone or sharpen the bit a little, but I don't want to mess with re-shaping the head right off the bat on a brand new ax.

I should probably also explain where I'm going with all of this and why I'm being so picky. The reason I want this ax is that I am planning on taking a timber framing class and then I plan on building my own home. My goal is to do it with as few power tools as possible. That being the case, I will be cutting down trees with an ax, not a chainsaw. So, I need a really good, really efficient ax if I'm going to be doing all that work by hand.
 
HungryJack said:
...when the end of the handle is touching the ground the lower 1/4 of the curve of the bit is what touches the ground.
Click to expand...

It is rare to get solid handle/head alignment on modern axes, that issue in particular can be compensated in use by adjusting where you hold the axe on the grip to put the center of the edge in line. Note how straight handles would act in this test for example. A more serious problem is the alignment of the edge with the handle, it should split the handle directly in the center if you look down the grip, the Forest and Wildlife Bruks I had were significantly skewed, the maul however is dead center.

It looked as if they put just one side of the bit against a grinder and ground a chisel type edge onto the bit, instead of having a bevel on both sides of the bit.

Not only that, but there was a severe burr on the opposite side of the bit from where the bevel was. The bevel wasn't even uniform or sharp by any means.
Click to expand...

This you can fix with 10-15 minutes with a coarse file. I know it sucks to have to do a serious amount of work on an axe before you use it but once you start using an axe no matter how careful you are glances will happen, hidden bad pin knots can ruin you day and an idiot with a spike will mess up the best axe. I always take a file and coarse/fine stone with me when I take an axe into the wood.

...the Oxhead is definitely not symetrical on both sides.
Click to expand...

This is serious, how much so depends on the nature/extent of the asymmetry. The more uneven the bit, the more the force will be on one side than the other, this will cause the blade to want to turn in the cut and prevent clean and even lines.

...the one I received had one corner that was significantly rounded, and not rounded very uniformly either.
Click to expand...

This is common due to the lack of consistency in the grinding in such axes.

...the bit should not have very much curve in it.
Click to expand...

There are many bit patterns, some are flatter. You can adjust this with sharpening by working more towards the center. This is give and take on this like all other aspects, a really highly curved bit sinks in smoother but it less effective in terms of number of hits because the cut line isn't uniform in depth. There isn't a right/wrong here, Cook is just expressing his opinion on what he feels is the best smoothness/efficient compromise.

I don't know if I'm just being too harsh on this ax or not.
Click to expand...

If you were to give the same axe to a woodsmen one generation ago he would likely just call it useless junk. Now you have to accept a lot more problems especially with head/handle alignment. However it takes a *lot* of skill with an axe to even note that these problems exist. Starting off you just have to develop the precision and power. Once you develop the ability to cut without stair casing then you will notice small changes in design.

I would suggest that you fix up the edge and use the axe, don't wait until you find the perfect axe before starting to develop your skills. In general anyway you need more than one axe. I generally take two. One I have highly optomized with a nice clean and thin bit for felling high quality wood and another that I use to clear out a knot, clip off limbs, trim off really thick bark, or work through a bad section of wood.

Thanks for the details, I am going to link that post to the review of the Iltis.

-Cliff
 
Cliff Stamp said:
It is rare to get solid handle/head alignment on modern axes, that issue in particular can be compensated in use by adjusting where you hold the axe on the grip to put the center of the edge in line. Note how straight handles would act in this test for example. A more serious problem is the alignment of the edge with the handle, it should split the handle directly in the center if you look down the grip, the Forest and Wildlife Bruks I had were significantly skewed, the maul however is dead center.



This you can fix with 10-15 minutes with a coarse file. I know it sucks to have to do a serious amount of work on an axe before you use it but once you start using an axe no matter how careful you are glances will happen, hidden bad pin knots can ruin you day and an idiot with a spike will mess up the best axe. I always take a file and coarse/fine stone with me when I take an axe into the wood.



This is serious, how much so depends on the nature/extent of the asymmetry. The more uneven the bit, the more the force will be on one side than the other, this will cause the blade to want to turn in the cut and prevent clean and even lines.



This is common due to the lack of consistency in the grinding in such axes.



There are many bit patterns, some are flatter. You can adjust this with sharpening by working more towards the center. This is give and take on this like all other aspects, a really highly curved bit sinks in smoother but it less effective in terms of number of hits because the cut line isn't uniform in depth. There isn't a right/wrong here, Cook is just expressing his opinion on what he feels is the best smoothness/efficient compromise.



If you were to give the same axe to a woodsmen one generation ago he would likely just call it useless junk. Now you have to accept a lot more problems especially with head/handle alignment. However it takes a *lot* of skill with an axe to even note that these problems exist. Starting off you just have to develop the precision and power. Once you develop the ability to cut without stair casing then you will notice small changes in design.

I would suggest that you fix up the edge and use the axe, don't wait until you find the perfect axe before starting to develop your skills. In general anyway you need more than one axe. I generally take two. One I have highly optomized with a nice clean and thin bit for felling high quality wood and another that I use to clear out a knot, clip off limbs, trim off really thick bark, or work through a bad section of wood.

Thanks for the details, I am going to link that post to the review of the Iltis.

-Cliff
Click to expand...


Thanks for the reply Cliff. I appreciate that you took my review to heart. I was a little afraid that I might offend some people with my review.

It wasn't my intent to "trash" the Oxhead axes, I was just giving my honest and humble opinion based on what I read. Of course reading and doing are two completely different things and, like you said, I need to develop skills before I will probably notice the difference.

I may just hang onto this ax and use it to develop my skills. Once I've done that I may bump up to a GB axe or a custom made one.

Looking at the GB axes, the only ax they make for felling is the DB and the American Felling Ax. The others look too small for some serious felling work. I called a dealer about the American Felling Ax and the wait is a year :eek:. What do you think about the DB for my use?
 
Wetterling makes a line which mirrors the Bruks line, same patterns, same materials, just rougher in finish. I have not handed the Bruks double bit, it isn't a felling pattern though. Double bit falling axes look like this :

http://www.vannattabros.com/adospics/axe.jpg

Note the very long bits, rather flat edges and very narrow bits. These are rare, I have been looking for one off and on for a few years on ebay. They are mainly designed for large wood, much bigger than what you would cut for log building.

You could also have a custom maker rework the bit on the axe, in half an hour with power tools they could do what would take you hours and produce from the Iltis a high quality tool.

The Bruks felling axe has way to thick a bit for local woods here, the Iltis is much more optimal. Different wood though requires differnt axes, another reason to start axe work now. You need to get familiar with your wood as much as with the axe that works it.

-Cliff
 
Cliff Stamp said:
Wetterling makes a line which mirrors the Bruks line, same patterns, same materials, just rougher in finish. I have not handed the Bruks double bit, it isn't a felling pattern though. Double bit falling axes look like this :

http://www.vannattabros.com/adospics/axe.jpg

Note the very long bits, rather flat edges and very narrow bits. These are rare, I have been looking for one off and on for a few years on ebay. They are mainly designed for large wood, much bigger than what you would cut for log building.

You could also have a custom maker rework the bit on the axe, in half an hour with power tools they could do what would take you hours and produce from the Iltis a high quality tool.

The Bruks felling axe has way to thick a bit for local woods here, the Iltis is much more optimal. Different wood though requires differnt axes, another reason to start axe work now. You need to get familiar with your wood as much as with the axe that works it.

-Cliff
Click to expand...


Thanks again for the info. I though that the GB DB didn't look right for felling. I'll have to stick with the Oxhead for now I guess.

So, what do you use for felling work?
 
I use a modified Iltis for the last few years, some grinding to clean up the shape, nothing major. Most of the wood I cut is small, 6-8", rarely is it above 12" unless it is pine because that is really light when seasoned, I carry/stack the wood myself and don't desire to move around 16" thick pieces of spruce, but those are rare anyway. All local owned ground was cut for lumber for building generations ago, so now wood cutting is on new growth.

I meant to note in the above post the extent that these influences effect performance. The Wildlife hatchet I have has a few defects, mainly the head is skewed, and the head iteself could use a light regrinding and evening. However this represents maybe a 10% performance gain. When people were logging for a living, 10% less chops meant a lot. As a causal/hobbiest user, especially when starting out, you are likely to not even notice that, and even if you did how much would you pay for it.

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