|
Post by Barnaum on Oct 10, 2019 4:07:04 GMT
I've noticed that every combat axe I've seen has a stark straight handle, while a majority of single bit work axes have some curvature in the handle and usually a bulbous end. Is this because combat axes generally have a round eye and work axes have a teardrop shaped eye or does it have something to do with the way they are used? Wouldn't a more shapely handle allow the user of a combat axe to ensure edge alignment? Or, does the shape of a combat axe's eye allow it to be lighter and and faster and so the handle is an afterthought? Or is it something else altogether?
|
|
|
Post by theophilus736 on Oct 10, 2019 4:42:09 GMT
^ Not many. Also Franciscas are often made with curved or s shaped handles, so meh. The Francisca, being thrown, would benefit from a handle that was curved, and I haven't noticed any difficulties with edge alignment using one. in fact the slight curve makes it feel even less like just a round piece of wood, and helps with edge alignment from what I can tell.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 10, 2019 7:01:57 GMT
Combat axes generally have teardrop-shaped eyes just like other axes. You don't want the blade twisting around the handle when you strike a person any more than when you strike an object, nor the handle twisting in your hand.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Oct 10, 2019 7:52:00 GMT
On axes with straight handles the axe head usually is mounted in a different way. The whole handle is slipped through the eye and stopped by the swelling end of the handle. The head can't slip over the upper end of the handle. On ergonomic shaped handles the head can only be mounted from the upper side of the handle and then must be secured. It works for working axes but perhaps the other way is better for fighting axes.
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Oct 10, 2019 10:32:51 GMT
Wood axes and fighting axes are designed differently because they are intended for two very different purposes. The head of most wood axes slips onto the top of the handle and is then secured with a wedge hammered into the top of the handle. The gentle s-curve handle is to make the axe more 'user friendly' for long periods of hard work. When using an axe that long under those conditions, the handle WILL eventually break. The design makes it easier to put on a new handle in the field and get back to work. The head of a good fighting axe is thinner and has the teardrop eye tapered larger to smaller from top to bottom to accept a straight handle that is also teardrop shaped and also tapered. The handle is dropped through the eye and is stopped by the swelling at the top. By a few taps of a hammer to the top of the handle, a very tight 'friction fit' is achieved, and swinging it only makes it tighter. The teardrop shape lets you know the edge alignment. Also, the handle is less likely to break simply because you wouldn't be repeatedly swinging it all day against a hard target the way you would with a wood axe. Even an armored man is a softer target than a tree.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 10, 2019 11:33:57 GMT
Wood axes and fighting axes are designed differently because they are intended for two very different purposes. The head of most wood axes slips onto the top of the handle and is then secured with a wedge hammered into the top of the handle. The gentle s-curve handle is to make the axe more 'user friendly' for long periods of hard work. When using an axe that long under those conditions, the handle WILL eventually break. The design makes it easier to put on a new handle in the field and get back to work. The head of a good fighting axe is thinner and has the teardrop eye tapered larger to smaller from top to bottom to accept a straight handle that is also teardrop shaped and also tapered. The handle is dropped through the eye and is stopped by the swelling at the top. By a few taps of a hammer to the top of the handle, a very tight 'friction fit' is achieved, and swinging it only makes it tighter. The teardrop shape lets you know the edge alignment. Also, the handle is less likely to break simply because you wouldn't be repeatedly swinging it all day against a hard target the way you would with a wood axe. Even an armored man is a softer target than a tree. I don't think that actually holds true in general - tomahawks, specifically, sure, but the majority of historical fighting axes I've seen with surviving wooden hafts have the haft inserted from below and secured with wedges. For example. This can be seen quite clearly even on photos where you can't see the wedged end of the haft because on many artifacts the haft actually swells slightly below the blade (to provide a solid stop against which the blade can be secured), which entirely prohibits inserting it from above. And there are plenty of tool axes hafted by simply inserting a tapered haft from above, too. I honestly don't see any clear divide in the ways fighting and working axes are hafted. Judging from period artwork and archaeological finds, it just seems that historically most axes, both weapons and tools, seem to have had straight hafts. The now standard recurved axe handle is actually a fairly modern design.
|
|
|
Post by demonskull on Oct 10, 2019 15:41:20 GMT
I think you're forgetting thrusting with an axe. Very difficult with a curved haft.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 10, 2019 16:52:46 GMT
I think you're forgetting thrusting with an axe. Very difficult with a curved haft. Depends on the curve, I would say - the right kind of shape can actually produce ergonomics analogous to the canted and/or curved grips on many thrusting swords. E.g. the iconic angled haft of 17th Century Norse axes, like these, brings the point of the blade right in line with the hand. And of course a lot of axes are just clearly designed with no regard for thrusts at all.
|
|
|
Post by theophilus736 on Oct 11, 2019 22:33:30 GMT
WOW those are ugly... but yeah even on a curved handle the blade shape makes all the difference. That's why the Francisca is so great Tomahawks are really the only ones I've seen slipped on the handle from the bottom.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 11, 2019 23:42:46 GMT
WOW those are ugly... but yeah even on a curved handle the blade shape makes all the difference. That's why the Francisca is so great Tomahawks are really the only ones I've seen slipped on the handle from the bottom. Oh, they look odd, but honestly I kinda like it. There are plenty of large battle axes with the handle attached that way, too. Here's one: Of course, unless you pin the blade or otherwise prevent it from sliding down, this method does prohibit thrusting...
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Oct 11, 2019 23:43:58 GMT
WOW those are ugly... but yeah even on a curved handle the blade shape makes all the difference. That's why the Francisca is so great Tomahawks are really the only ones I've seen slipped on the handle from the bottom. I don't think they're ugly at all. I'd love to see a replica made by a big-time maker. (Windlass, Hanwei, DSA?) They would probably be extremely hard to do, and also just as extremely expensive though....unless the handles were synthetic. (Cold Steel? Are you listening?) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDIT: If Cold Steel made a replica of that style, I'd buy a dozen.
|
|
|
Post by theophilus736 on Oct 12, 2019 0:08:14 GMT
The top doesn't have a wedge? Interesting. I wonder why its angled the way it is at the top of the handle. Seems like something that would be done after hammering in a wedge to make it look purty.
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Oct 12, 2019 0:39:43 GMT
You can't 'make' a handle like that except by using inferior woodworking tech, or growing them on trees. The grain MUST be consistent, or a failure is inevitable. The originals were certainly made using curved tree limbs with solid grain.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Oct 12, 2019 3:16:12 GMT
Judging from period artwork and archaeological finds, it just seems that historically most axes, both weapons and tools, seem to have had straight hafts. The now standard recurved axe handle is actually a fairly modern design. Yes. The modern curved axe handle became popular in the 19th century. Supposedly, the use of machinery for making musket/rifle butts is what enabled them. Sometimes, one sees axes with shaped butts to the handles, but the haft is otherwise straight: - from www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=add_ms_18850_f001rThere are some battle-axes with curved hafts, such as the classic Norwegian bent-near-the-head type: norskevaapen.no/?p=1785These will let the axe wielder give a slicing cut. We also see bent hafts in artwork:
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 12, 2019 6:39:26 GMT
The top doesn't have a wedge? Interesting. I wonder why its angled the way it is at the top of the handle. Seems like something that would be done after hammering in a wedge to make it look purty. I think it's just to make it look purty, yes (loosely following the shape of the triangular lugs around the socket that have corroded away on this one). There may well be a wedge, too, it's hard to tell in this photo, but the haft tapers towards the butt so can only have been inserted through the eye from above. You can find these broad "Dane" axes hafted with every possible method, from the tapered haft inserted from above, through one or more wooden wedges, to wedges of sheet brass around the haft, plus combinations of all the above and more.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 12, 2019 6:41:04 GMT
You can't 'make' a handle like that except by using inferior woodworking tech, or growing them on trees. The grain MUST be consistent, or a failure is inevitable. The originals were certainly made using curved tree limbs with solid grain. Yeah, when you're working with natural wood you have to follow the grain, you can't force the shape or it will fail. Finding the right piece of lumber is critical.
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Oct 12, 2019 14:15:13 GMT
You can't 'make' a handle like that except by using inferior woodworking tech, or growing them on trees. The grain MUST be consistent, or a failure is inevitable. The originals were certainly made using curved tree limbs with solid grain. Yeah, when you're working with natural wood you have to follow the grain, you can't force the shape or it will fail. Finding the right piece of lumber is critical. In my line of work I deal with mostly cedar and white pine wood, and I've seen some really WEIRD grain structure. Most of it gets scrapped, but I've tested some of it at home---and that curvy grain structure is incredibly tough---even for soft wood like pine and cedar.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 12, 2019 15:25:12 GMT
Yeah, when you're working with natural wood you have to follow the grain, you can't force the shape or it will fail. Finding the right piece of lumber is critical. In my line of work I deal with mostly cedar and white pine wood, and I've seen some really WEIRD grain structure. Most of it gets scrapped, but I've tested some of it at home---and that curvy grain structure is incredibly tough---even for soft wood like pine and cedar. Yeah, large forks and root balls and such are the densest and toughest parts of any piece of wood. You don't want one in the middle of a haft, of course, but they make for ideal naturally occurring end points.
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Oct 12, 2019 15:50:20 GMT
I currently have a large oak tree out back uprooted by a storm some time ago. The roots are exposed and should have some wonderfully weird grain structure. All kinds of possibilities there.....
|
|
|
Post by dc on Oct 12, 2019 18:15:17 GMT
I currently have a large oak tree out back uprooted by a storm some time ago. The roots are exposed and should have some wonderfully weird grain structure. All kinds of possibilities there..... Shillelaghs come to mind.
|
|