quinnwaterfield
Member
I'm a blacksmith and a machinist, A machinesmith? A blackinist... wait no.
Posts: 12
|
Post by quinnwaterfield on Dec 23, 2023 2:31:24 GMT
I was doing some stump testing with my Tod Cutler Dragon Hammer and it broke where the head attaches to the shaft. I'll have to remount it a bit shorter. Try doing a laminated hickory or oak handle. if you buy two small boards you can align the wood grain in an optimal direction. laminating two different grains together drastically reduces the flex and potential for failure.
|
|
|
Post by fester on Dec 27, 2023 18:33:05 GMT
You mean EN45 steel? (couldn't find any others being used) And about the hammer, I honestly had no idea it was 800g! It looks to me like the socket has pretty sharp corners too. If it were me, I would take a file to the socket and widen it so it won't have such an abrupt corner.
Just going by his own site's description of some of the knives.
En-45, if it is that, can have wide variances making it either medium or low end high carbon steel :
I have never had an issue with any of his daggers or knives. And have owned alot over the years. There are alot of videos out there of people abusing them and they have held up well. The War hammer was being abused by the OP's own admission. And war hammers were more of a disposable item back then unlike a sword. Banging it on a stump is different than banging it on armor. I had a windlass war hammer that I used on alot metal items to test it. No issues. it held up well. But when I started using it on items that it was not intended to be used against it started to have issues. Not stumps but wooden items similiar to it that did not have much give. The hammer did not last long against it.
|
|
|
Post by elemmakil on Dec 27, 2023 22:59:12 GMT
The socket appears rather small for this kind of weapon - I wonder if the original had thinner socket walls, or a transition at end so it thins out gradually rather than make a step in haft that is an obvious weak point. As someone else pointed out, the original was actually much larger. However, one defect in Tod's version is that the "socket" portion is much shorter, proportionally, than in the original. Here is a side by side shot showing Tod's version (unmounted) and a long OOP Arms & Armor version of the same weapon:
While I like the fact that Tod made this more accurate, with the bronze body and iron hammer head and spike, I have no idea why he cheaped out on this important detail. It is in fact 1.5" shorter in the socket than the A&A version.
|
|
|
Post by izzy on Dec 27, 2023 23:57:09 GMT
Just going by his own site's description of some of the knives.
En-45, if it is that, can have wide variances making it either medium or low end high carbon steel :
I have never had an issue with any of his daggers or knives. And have owned alot over the years. There are alot of videos out there of people abusing them and they have held up well. The War hammer was being abused by the OP's own admission. And war hammers were more of a disposable item back then unlike a sword. Banging it on a stump is different than banging it on armor. I had a windlass war hammer that I used on alot metal items to test it. No issues. it held up well. But when I started using it on items that it was not intended to be used against it started to have issues. Not stumps but wooden items similiar to it that did not have much give. The hammer did not last long against it.
It's a scaled down piece, no Langets ( not sure if the original had them), as elemakil points out the socket may be shorter than needed. Yes hitting stumps repeatedly is abuse in terms of the handle. Handles break, all the time, but my impression is this item broke a bit quicker than others the OP had, happy to be corrected by the OP if that was wrong.
Tod obviously has a good HT on his "medium carbon steel" or En-45. or whatever he uses. People are standing up for his work, which I take as a good sign. Even though I am still not impressed, I realize one can take even 1050 ( not saying that is the steel OK?) an make something usable.
One thing I do doubt is that war hammers were even close to disposable back 500 years ago...not to mention the decorated ones, but any tool was too valuable in those days. I am sure they were rehafted multiple times, and used again and again.
|
|
|
Post by takitam on Dec 28, 2023 1:57:45 GMT
Every piece of armour and arms was disposable. Stop believing myths of some 'treasure like' properties of ordinary items in the old times. Weapon's function was to give bragging rights when carried and when/if actually used, to protect the owners life or to help him get more money. When you lose or break one item, you can always get another. You use a gun, it breaks, you get another. You run away and discard your body armour, you get another. Your horse gets killed in a charge but you survive, you get another. And war horses were a lot more expensive than normal swords. And wearing a 50 years old sword would probably result in you being a joke of the company, as a guy who can't afford a new fashionable weapon.
Older times, same sentiment:
One of the Saians now delights in the shield I discarded Unwillingly near a bush, for it was perfectly good, But at least I got myself safely out. Why should I care for that shield? Let it go. Some other time I'll find another no worse.
Archilochus
Times, war and people change, but certain important elements of human nature remain constant.
And vast majority of modern craftsmen creating weapon replicas know (or care) as little as customers about important details of ancient weapons, which shows in their products. They look similar to old artifacts on the surface, but usually do not weigh nor behave the same. Only a very small minority of weapon nerds wants to buy exact recreations of originals. Majority of customers do not care and you can't really blame them. These things are not used as weapons anymore after all...
|
|
seth
Member
Just Peachy
Posts: 977
|
Post by seth on Dec 28, 2023 2:38:06 GMT
It actually held up better than the Windlass English Warhammer and German Warhammer. The English WH had a huge burl in the wood though and broke right there.
|
|
|
Post by izzy on Dec 28, 2023 7:16:18 GMT
It actually held up better than the Windlass English Warhammer and German Warhammer. The English WH had a huge burl in the wood though and broke right there. That is good to read, from my keyboard and screen it's easy to be disparaging and give critique, but reading that is stood up to about actual use and abuse better than some. I still think it could be improved some, but that can be said of a lot of things.
|
|
|
Post by elemmakil on Dec 28, 2023 7:47:09 GMT
It actually held up better than the Windlass English Warhammer and German Warhammer. The English WH had a huge burl in the wood though and broke right there. That is good to read, from my keyboard and screen it's easy to be disparaging and give critique, but reading that is stood up to about actual use and abuse better than some. I still think it could be improved some, but that can be said of a lot of things. Good point - I did not mean to be overly critical, but I did consider the shortening of the socket to be an issue, not just from being a potential weak point, but also it changes the esthetic of the piece as well. Honestly didn't see the point in changing the design proportions from the original.
|
|
|
Post by izzy on Dec 28, 2023 8:11:14 GMT
Every piece of armour and arms was disposable. Stop believing myths of some 'treasure like' properties of ordinary items in the old times. Weapon's function was to give bragging rights when carried and when/if actually used, to protect the owners life or to help him get more money. When you lose or break one item, you can always get another. You use a gun, it breaks, you get another. You run away and discard your body armour, you get another. Your horse gets killed in a charge but you survive, you get another. And war horses were a lot more expensive than normal swords. And wearing a 50 years old sword would probably result in you being a joke of the company, as a guy who can't afford a new fashionable weapon. Older times, same sentiment: One of the Saians now delights in the shield I discarded Unwillingly near a bush, for it was perfectly good, But at least I got myself safely out. Why should I care for that shield? Let it go. Some other time I'll find another no worse. Archilochus Times, war and people change, but certain important elements of human nature remain constant. And vast majority of modern craftsmen creating weapon replicas know (or care) as little as customers about important details of ancient weapons, which shows in their products. They look similar to old artifacts on the surface, but usually do not weigh nor behave the same. Only a very small minority of weapon nerds wants to buy exact recreations of originals. Majority of customers do not care and you can't really blame them. These things are not used as weapons anymore after all...
A lot depends on the definition of "disposable" in terms of this conversation. No doubt, most of the time, weapons are more disposable than loyal Warriors. And some weapons cost more than others ( hammer Vs. Sword), some were valued more than others do to connections to certain qualities. ( "Certain qualities" could be either the quality of the weapon, or a connection to a historical person, or connection to the occult / religion, blessed by a certain priest, etc. etc.).
In the time period we are looking at, full armor and War hammers, that is the the European Dark Ages. Tools were more precious than today, and that is my contention, I don't see tools at that time as near disposable. You quote an Ancient Greek, but Europe was not even on the level with Ancient Greece at that time frame. These were times of War, Serfdom, Plagues, Persecution, fanatic visions.
Yes, both Ancient and Medieval times had large cottage industries making pretty similar pieces, to fix or replace whatever they were using at the time. But we can't compare Renaissance flair for fashion with the era of full plate armor when War hammers were very popular in battle.
|
|
|
Post by izzy on Dec 28, 2023 8:26:31 GMT
That is good to read, from my keyboard and screen it's easy to be disparaging and give critique, but reading that is stood up to about actual use and abuse better than some. I still think it could be improved some, but that can be said of a lot of things. Good point - I did not mean to be overly critical, but I did consider the shortening of the socket to be an issue, not just from being a potential weak point, but also it changes the esthetic of the piece as well. Honestly didn't see the point in changing the design proportions from the original. SHIELDS UP!!! The War Hammers Commeth!
IDK what was going through the designers head when he scaled it down. To me in bespeaks of the general Human physical condition, that scaling down an item would sell more of a given item. Certainly you pointed out a possible weakness of an item, I OTOH disparaged the steel he used, but people seem to be happy with that steel, and I am happy to let them be satisfied...
I think it's OK to be a little critical, without "going too far", which I may, or may not, have done.
|
|
mrstabby
Member
Posts: 1,184
Member is Online
|
Post by mrstabby on Dec 28, 2023 8:50:30 GMT
Good point - I did not mean to be overly critical, but I did consider the shortening of the socket to be an issue, not just from being a potential weak point, but also it changes the esthetic of the piece as well. Honestly didn't see the point in changing the design proportions from the original. SHIELDS UP!!! The War Hammers Commeth!
IDK what was going through the designers head when he scaled it down. To me in bespeaks of the general Human physical condition, that scaling down an item would sell more of a given item. Certainly you pointed out a possible weakness of an item, I OTOH disparaged the steel he used, but people seem to be happy with that steel, and I am happy to let them be satisfied...
I think it's OK to be a little critical, without "going too far", which I may, or may not, have done.
It doesn't look like the head size is scaled down by that much but the socket looks to have gotten a lot smaller.
The EN45 is just like Cold Steels 1055, it's not the highest quality, but it's good enough with a good heat treat (for most people). I am not a fan of 1055, it depends what you compare it with. I have a very soft 1095 and the CS 1055 beats it in all aspects hands down.
And about the wood having less give than the target the hammer is meant for: I don't think wood is less harsh on the hammer than full plate would be. I can't really grasp the dimensions, but to me the handle looks rather thin for 800g, but I can only compare it to my axes and normal hammers.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Dec 28, 2023 9:26:06 GMT
EN45 is equivalent to 9260, so 1055-1065 plus Si and a bit more Mn. Any problem with EN45 depends on the forge, which is usually Deepeeka when EN45 is stated.
|
|
|
Post by izzy on Dec 28, 2023 10:04:39 GMT
EN45 is equivalent to 9260, so 1055-1065 plus Si and a bit more Mn. Any problem with EN45 depends on the forge, which is usually Deepeeka when EN45 is stated. I fathom the U.K. gets most of it's En-45 from it's former Colony. En-45 in India has wide variance in Carbon content in India, as I posted. Heat treat is King, steel is secondary. Tod says it's medium carbon steel for some knives, I would take his word for it. ( With users vowing for his heat treat) Whether that is En-45 in every product is still a question for the maker.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Dec 28, 2023 10:55:53 GMT
Is it possible that you confused the British EN45 with the abbreviation "EN" for European Norm with different steels with different carbon content like in one of your links at Medium Carbon Steel?
|
|
mrstabby
Member
Posts: 1,184
Member is Online
|
Post by mrstabby on Dec 28, 2023 11:15:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Dec 28, 2023 11:29:21 GMT
|
|
mrstabby
Member
Posts: 1,184
Member is Online
|
Post by mrstabby on Dec 28, 2023 11:41:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Dec 28, 2023 14:05:55 GMT
On the other side for a hammerhead I'd prefer 1045 over 1055 and higher due to more toughness.
|
|
seth
Member
Just Peachy
Posts: 977
|
Post by seth on Dec 28, 2023 17:16:38 GMT
It actually held up better than the Windlass English Warhammer and German Warhammer. The English WH had a huge burl in the wood though and broke right there. That is good to read, from my keyboard and screen it's easy to be disparaging and give critique, but reading that is stood up to about actual use and abuse better than some. I still think it could be improved some, but that can be said of a lot of things. If I remember correctly, the burl was right where the langets ended on the English WH--so it didn't have the benefit of that reinforcement. I think the long and deep socket on the original Tod based his on probably functioned much like langets to distribute force down the shaft. When I rehaft this hammer, I think I will make it shorter and perhaps pin the hammer head to the shaft too.
|
|
|
Post by izzy on Dec 28, 2023 18:01:33 GMT
Is it possible that you confused the British EN45 with the abbreviation "EN" for European Norm with different steels with different carbon content like in one of your links at Medium Carbon Steel? No, that link was an accident...I'm pretty familiar with EN45, it's between 1050 and 1060 in terms of Carbon ( not 1055-1065), so it has that "fudge factor" and could be either medium, or high carbon steel ( at it's best). (9260 is a small step up in C, Si, Mn) In theory they can be used for most of the same applications, as we all know that will depend on Heat Treat. I'm not here to trash EN45, Here is a link that better fits the context of what I wrote previously: www.westyorkssteel.com/files/en45.pdfon 9260: matmake.com/materials-data/steel-9260-properties.html
|
|