After reading Will's post, and replying to it, I couldn't hold off any longer. Last night, handle, or no handle, I broke out the 20" AK and headed to the woodpile. I loaded up the tang, and about the first 3-4" of the edge (including the cho) with multiple layers of duct tape to give me a little lee-way, and donned the heavy leather gloves. Although the ergonomics of using a 3 1/2 pound knife with a stick tang aren't perfect, the splitting session was very cathartic, and reminded me just how nice an AK really is. The wood that I'm splitting is in block form, cut-offs from a local lumber mill, mostly 4x4 and 4x6 and anywhere from 6-18" in length. Red Oak and poplar are the most common hardwoods in the lot. The AK easily outperformed the 18th Century model that I have been using (I figured that it would...), and despite the fact that I had no handle to speak of, I didn't lose control or come close to it, at all. The AK performed flawlessly, usually dispersing of the wood in 1-2 chops! In response to the choice of tool for splitting (maul vs Khuk), another reason that I use the Khuk is that I do most of my secondary splitting (anything under 18" in diameter) on the front porch. Swinging an 8 or 16 pound maul in such close quarters would send wood, concrete, and God only knows what else..., flying in every direction. With the AK, I can set up a board against the house to "catch" one side of the split, and simply block the other side with my left hand to limit the travel of the piece that is split off. All in all, I don't believe that I would do it diffently. Granted with the larger stuff, the maul would be more efficient, but pieces that large are not usually in my pile. It really takes something over 12" in diameter to require that much mass to split, in most cases. Oh well, enough rambling (again), have a good day all.
Regards,
Rob
------------------
I'd rather sleep next to a Bush than be Gored!