Из России с любовью - From Russia with love

S

Square_peg

Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
13,727
Today I received this excellent new old stock Russian Topor axe from Agent H and ultimately from new forum member Tras Krom. It's covered in dried grease/cosmoline. The handle is rough but well fitting. It will need some thinning and a bunch of BLO but should be a fine handle when I'm through with it.

Topor%201.jpg


From%20Russia%20with%20love.jpg


In the 2nd photo with the axe is an SKS and Makarov. Both have shown themselves to be well made instruments.
 
Square_peg said:
Today I received this excellent new old stock Russian Topor axe from Agent H and ultimately from new forum member Tras Krom. It's covered in dried grease/cosmoline. The handle is rough but well fitting. It will need some thinning and a bunch of BLO but should be a fine handle when I'm through with it.

Topor%201.jpg


From%20Russia%20with%20love.jpg


In the 2nd photo with the axe is an SKS and Makarov. Both have shown themselves to be well made instruments.
Click to expand...

I look forward to the Tonop clean up Square_peg! The Makarov and especially the SKS are nice. Sometime during the mid 80's my father and a couple of his friends purchased a box of SKS' - I believe they were mixed surplus of Norinco and another maker. It was to beat some impending restrictions on surplus weapons. 7.62x39 was like 2 cents a round. They were passed on to several family members. The last one I had around got thousands of rounds put through it until one day while target shooting my brother set it down butt first against the truck and it discharged (into the air). The bold catch had worn until it would fire if it was bumped (not bump-fired). It was a great rifle but it got traded off at some point for a demilled Bulgarian SAR-1 AK. I miss it lol. Still have a box of stripper clips around here somewhere.

Makarovs are great pistols as well. My experience is with the Bulgarian and Russian (single stack, not the commercial double stacks) are great pistols.

Anyway, do you mind if I post up some pictures of the axes and their travels in your thread? T Tras Krom deserves a shout out as well for making it happen for us :thumbsup:
 

топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr



топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


топорism by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


Tras Krom is a stand-up guy. I’m not sure what to say - he simply offered to make the axes happen.

He offered to live video while picking them out but my work schedule didn’t allow it.

All three have different marks to the heel of the center one.
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
Weird question: What is de heaviest Topor out there?
Click to expand...

I don’t know but that is a good question – my guess is that they reach at least 5+lbs?

Finnish but Billnäs made the 40/3 in 1.8kg or 3.96lbs.

35715130205_bb85b01312_k.jpg


And the 58/2 at 1.9kg or about 4.2lbs.

35715128575_9e887f9945_k.jpg



This one looks bigger than the Ziks and as big as the 25.x piilu behind it:

35584316441_e932c33907_h.jpg


I have a bunch of pictures I have collected from around the web, many from rusknife where users have scanned catalogs - wish I could remember where these photos came from but here are two different sizes together.


Axe.Topor by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


Axe.Topor2 by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr




Lieblad said:
Heaviest guy in Russia, Has to be this one.
https://www.rt.com/news/313416-flying-axe-putin-russia/
Click to expand...

Nice.
 
Cleanup pictures. I believe the coating is some sort of dried grease or cosmoline. It dissolved in paint thinner much more readily than dried paint would have.

1.jpg


The poll appears to be made of a welded insert. I'll file test this later.

2.jpg


The interior eye 'topography' (as Jake so eloquently put it) looks pretty damn good. It would make Secretary Khrushchev proud.
lol.gif
It's smooth and wider at the top in both dimensions.

3.jpg


The spur is rather crudely ground. I might clean that up a bit, heat it and bend it forward to make solid contact with the haft.

4.jpg


The bit is quite thin and relatively sharp. Some of the burr from the original grind remains. It's obviously never been used.

5.jpg


A view of the underside.

6.jpg


The stamp is clear. 1955.

7.jpg
 
Agent_H said:
I don’t know but that is a good question – my guess is that they reach at least 5+lbs?

Finnish but Billnäs made the 40/3 in 1.8kg or 3.96lbs.

35715130205_bb85b01312_k.jpg


And the 58/2 at 1.9kg or about 4.2lbs.

35715128575_9e887f9945_k.jpg



This one looks bigger than the Ziks and as big as the 25.x piilu behind it:

35584316441_e932c33907_h.jpg


I have a bunch of pictures I have collected from around the web, many from rusknife where users have scanned catalogs - wish I could remember where these photos came from but here are two different sizes together.


Axe.Topor by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr


Axe.Topor2 by Agent Hierarchy, on Flickr






Nice.
Click to expand...

Once again the limitations and deceptions of profile shots leads to false equivalency when bringing up the Billnäs for comparison since the construction of the two axes diverge radically seen from another perspective, the cheeks of the Billnäs not having the dramatic reduction in thickness of the Russian made and at the same time lacking the bulging Marty Feldman eye.
 
Last edited:
Ernest DuBois said:
Once again the limitations and deceptions of profile shots leads to false equivalency when bringing up the Billnäs for comparison since the construction of the two axes diverge radically seen from another perspective, the cheeks of the Billnäs not having the dramatic reduction in thickness of the Russian made and at the same time lacking the bulging eye.
Click to expand...

Maybe no Billnäs piilu for comparison - that picture just came to mind after looking at the weights that the Suomis listed as their Russian models in the scanned catalogs. Russian axes could have been found a bit larger than the ones we are citing from the commonly known plants? Whether that change in weight also resulted in an overall different pattern I don't know.
 
Ernest DuBois said:
the cheeks of the Billnäs not having the dramatic reduction in thickness of the Russian made and at the same time lacking the bulging Marty Feldman eye.
Click to expand...

Ernest is right of course.It can be deceptive to look to Finnish(or other N.European) manufacturers,as the production of this type of tool mutated with geography.The further East the skimpier the thickness of the blade and the bigger the eye-bulge.

But it also differed between the time periods and individual manufacturers.Some simply welded(or even riveted) a sheet-steel blade inside the likewise flat-stock poll bent about in that eye-shape.

Since this type was never really meant for Felling,the thickness of the blade could,and did,fall below that minimum necessary to act as a chip-breaker,and from there it's thickness equalled "whatevah",as the kids like to say nowadays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top