Allagash cruiser, anyone use/have one?

garry3 said:
And calling it "Alagash Cruiser" further muddies the water. I thought I would see a DBL bit when I clicked the link. Not a fan of their naming but from a marketing stand point it will probably be a success. ;)
Click to expand...
Internet has tendency to streamline definitions and loose some info in the process. Things get interesting when you talk to somebody who has pre-internet knowledge of axes. I have run into a guy (he was sourcing his axes from Adirondack region) who was calling all boy's size axes (regular and Hudson Bay) cruisers. It might be regional but we have to have in our minds the definition of Timber Cruiser job.
Incidentally, he had beat up 2.5 lbs Sager Cruiser with 26 inch Adirondack haft (up to this point this is only Cruiser I managed to buy)
I have just found old thread about that subject https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/cruiser-axe-your-definition.929948/
 
Last edited:
crbnSteeladdict said:
Internet has tendency to streamline definitions and loose some info in the process. Things get interesting when you talk to somebody who has pre-internet knowledge of axes. I have run into a guy (he was sourcing his axes from Adirondack region) who was calling all boy's size axes (regular and Hudson Bay) cruisers. It might be regional but we have to have in our minds the definition of Timber Cruiser job. Incidentally, he had beat up 2.5 lbs Sager Cruiser with 26 inch Adirondack haft (up to this point this is only Cruiser I managed to buy)
I have just found old thread about that subject https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/cruiser-axe-your-definition.929948/
Click to expand...
Good point. While it may not be technically correct from the names listed in the old catalogs there is for sure regional nomenclature. When an old timer around here mentions a falling axe I know he is talking about a Puget Sound or a bow tie is descriptive enough.
 
Many pattern names are mostly useful for distinguishing between models within a manufacturer, and even then, often only with a new axe. Sometimes the only difference between two patterns in a company's repertoire is pointed vs. rounded heel and toe or curved vs. flat poll. There are some certain generalities that can be made about a pattern based on what is essentially consensus between manufacturers on particular features of a certain named pattern, but there are lots of patterns that were once given their own name that would be impossible to identify today because the degree to which they deviate from other named patterns is so slight. Especially in cases where you're dealing with a bit with a more or less curved edge--once it's been sharpened back a bunch, possibly unevenly, that difference is no longer meaningful. It's really just shorthand for describing the features, but even then you often find yourself in a situation where you're still having to explain the specifics. :p
 
I wish that manufacturers had bothered to issue their patterns as at least a 3-view format, with profile, top view, and cross section taken running in a straight line between the heel and toe. Even better would be if the defining characteristics were actually described in good detail. But to the best of my knowledge, no one was that thorough, and a lot of patterns were pretty loose in conforming to any given standard between makers.
 
The pattern debate is somewhat confusing. All the things 42 mentioned plus they change some with different weights. A boy's axe is often slightly different than a full size I've noticed. It's kind of approximation guesstimation. I've been focusing on the Maine pattern, wedge patterns, yankee(my username was after this pattern) and new England patterns. Because I'm from Maine i had a particular interest in getting these ones right and its been bugging me for over a year now. So we're all in agreement then, Maine wedge is not a pattern?
I'm out now but i have a real nice Maine pattern S&N on the original haft. It was the second one i got once i started collecting. I'll post a pic later here later of that and a wedge i have side by side.
 
I've actually been on the search for a Maine pattern in nice shape for years now. I come across beat-up ones with relative frequency, but in Maine tradition, the things got used and used hard. It's actually pretty uncommon to find them in decent shape.

And yes, I'd say "Maine Wedge" is not a pattern. "Wedge" with Maine as a descriptive prefix, yes, but not "Maine Wedge". Just like my Maine-made Jersey is not a "Maine Jersey" pattern, but is a Maine "Jersey". :p :p :p
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
I've actually been on the search for a Maine pattern in nice shape for years now. I come across beat-up ones with relative frequency, but in Maine tradition, the things got used and used hard. It's actually pretty uncommon to find them in decent shape.

And yes, I'd say "Maine Wedge" is not a pattern. "Wedge" with Maine as a descriptive prefix, yes, but not "Maine Wedge". Just like my Maine-made Jersey is not a "Maine Jersey" pattern, but is a Maine "Jersey". :p :p :p
Click to expand...
Perfect! Thank you! This was my suspicion all along but as i said i was leery of broaching the subject.
I think a whole thread should be dedicated to patterns. We could post a photo and then we could all vote on the pattern and this way develope a consensus.
It's all relative anyway and as you mentioned once sharpened a few times often the original pattern is lost. Anyway great discussion! Thanks to all who pitched in!
 
I don't think consensus among individuals is the way to determine a pattern! It's more consensus among manufacturers that determines it. The pattern is basically whatever they decide to call it. And when another company comes out with the same pattern it's the intersection of the things that stay essentially the same between manufacturers using the same pattern name that determines it.

As previously noted, that makes ID'ing a lot of used axes fairly difficult unless they have pretty obvious identifying characteristics, which is why most discussion revolves around a handful of pretty distinct styles rather than very specific ones that were basically a variation on a theme. I think most folks would have a hard time, for instance, telling a Southern Kentucky from a standard Kentucky from a Georgia pattern if there was even a little bit of wear on them and we didn't have manufacturer-specific diagrams of the three. The lines are pretty fuzzy, yet the original manufacturers had a clear idea of the differences when making them. It's just different manufacturers had their own interpretations of those patterns. A good example of this is how the Plumb Rockaway is distinct from Rockaway patterns from other makers, but is still readily identifiable for what it is. It's more off-model than most cross-manufacturer intersections, and so stands out a bit when comparing them, but most common patterns had a lesser version of this going on.
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
I don't think consensus among individuals is the way to determine a pattern! It's more consensus among manufacturers that determines it. The pattern is basically whatever they decide to call it. And when another company comes out with the same pattern it's the intersection of the things that stay essentially the same between manufacturers using the same pattern name that determines it.

As previously noted, that makes ID'ing a lot of used axes fairly difficult unless they have pretty obvious identifying characteristics, which is why most discussion revolves around a handful of pretty distinct styles rather than very specific ones that were basically a variation on a theme. I think most folks would have a hard time, for instance, telling a Southern Kentucky from a standard Kentucky from a Georgia pattern if there was even a little bit of wear on them and we didn't have manufacturer-specific diagrams of the three. The lines are pretty fuzzy, yet the original manufacturers had a clear idea of the differences when making them. It's just different manufacturers had their own interpretations of those patterns. A good example of this is how the Plumb Rockaway is distinct from Rockaway patterns from other makers, but is still readily identifiable for what it is. It's more off-model than most cross-manufacturer intersections, and so stands out a bit when comparing them, but most common patterns had a lesser version of this going on.
Click to expand...
I can appreciate, and agree with, your point of view that manufacturers should be the ones to determine which is which. I've just always hoped for a way to keep those old, slightly distinctive patterns alive. Like the difference between the New England, long island and yankee patterns for instance.
I feel that Brant & Cochran are doing a disservice by erroneously naming their axe. I mean it's theirs to name but i feel they are starting a misnamed product line. And trying to be all historical about. Kinda funny in a way.
 
I mean, it's not really too different from manufacturers of old slapping the name they felt like on a pattern. They're not super far off and even though they supposedly are trying to essentially clone an existing head, I'd hazard a guess that there's probably some minor stylistic differences. So while it does irk me a little that they call it a Maine wedge...it's very possible to simply consider it a manufacturer pattern name for a model that falls within the "Maine" family of axes, which I'd say includes the "Maine", "Wedge", "Half Wedge" and their variants. The Rixford catalog I linked to earlier calls theirs a "Maine Special", for instance. I think it'd be possible to essentially consider each manufacturer's own production of a given model to be like a unique species that's closely related to other manufacturer's axes of the same pattern name. I think it'd be possible to place all of those under certain over-arching families of design elements. So something of a typology system applied to axe manufacturers and their patterns would be doable.
 
junkenstien said:
Are the old Maine axes butter soft?The ones I see for sale are beat all to hell as well.
Click to expand...

No, not butter-soft whatsoever, just used up. Mainers are a thrifty bunch. You can bet that most of them belonged to fellows with only the one axe and a lot of jobs to do. Maine-made axes have long been celebrated for their quality. It's just that the locals didn't exactly go easy on their tools and didn't discard them when they were heavily worn--they just kept on squeezing every penny of use they could out of them. :p
 
Last edited:
junkenstien said:
Are the old Maine axes butter soft?The ones I see for sale are beat all to hell as well.
Click to expand...
In my experience, the old Maine axe heads typically had thinner softer eyes than what was typical. That doesn't make them inferior in use and the bits are as hard as you could want, but it does make them less tolerant of abuse. By far the most common failure when they are abused is eye deformation. But I have seen mashed up eyes and chipped bits on the same head.
 
The axe looks very nice, and I am sure that it is well made. However, while many fine axes have something like 1050 steel and ash handles, those are not premium materials. I fully support ash as a perfectly fine handle material, but at $250 I would expect straight grained hickory and a better steel choice. If someone needed to buy a new boy's axe to use, they could get the functional equivalent in a Council product for $40. I understand that these are low volume and hand made; they have to charge more to make the operation viable. But from the buyer's perspective it is a hard sell. I would bet that most of these will be purchased by people that put them to very little use.
 
jblyttle said:
The axe looks very nice, and I am sure that it is well made. However, while many fine axes have something like 1050 steel and ash handles, those are not premium materials. I fully support ash as a perfectly fine handle material, but at $250 I would expect straight grained hickory and a better steel choice. If someone needed to buy a new boy's axe to use, they could get the functional equivalent in a Council product for $40. I understand that these are low volume and hand made; they have to charge more to make the operation viable. But from the buyer's perspective it is a hard sell. I would bet that most of these will be purchased by people that put them to very little use.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, while it's technically proprietary, Gransfors' steel is basically 1055 that barely doesn't conform to standard spec. Also B&C is running their axes harder than Council. We don't have much in the way of hickory in Maine, so I reckon they probably wanted to keep it as Maine-made as possible, and I bet they're having handles made by Peavey. The way I see it the steel is just fine if the heat treatment is well done and the handle material choice is just fine if they're grading the stuff appropriately. At least they're not charging all that money for a paint job. ;)
 
Council uses 1060 (or 5160 for their Velvicut line), as you know. They're not my favorite, as I've been stung twice with their heat treat. But I have to say, I'd probably try them again before paying that B&C money. 1050 is pretty... bare minimum. I don't know.

It also looks like Council has been investing quite a bit, and switching up some steel to 1080 and fresh designs.

I'd really need to see how hard they are running their 1050 and wait to hear about consistency. Even at max working harness 1050 is not going to blow 1060 out of the water, and certainly not 1080 or 5160. They'll have to get it to 58 (1050 max) consistently, and it'll still have really low wear resistance.
 
Last edited:
FortyTwoBlades said:
From what I understand, while it's technically proprietary, Gransfors' steel is basically 1055 that barely doesn't conform to standard spec. Also B&C is running their axes harder than Council. We don't have much in the way of hickory in Maine, so I reckon they probably wanted to keep it as Maine-made as possible, and I bet they're having handles made by Peavey. The way I see it the steel is just fine if the heat treatment is well done and the handle material choice is just fine if they're grading the stuff appropriately. At least they're not charging all that money for a paint job. ;)
Click to expand...
I came across an email that was posted on the web from Council tool that claimed there Swedish competitors were using boron steel I think it was. Can't remember were I came across that so take it for what you will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top