Kentucky Axe Pattern

They're all just axes but regional differences initiated by dedicated local makers of the time distinguished one geographical area from another. Folks in Kentucky may have chopped through a lot more Oak than they did Pine too like they did out west. And I guess multiple generations of nearby users got used to them and swore they were better than ones brought in from the outside.
Once globalization started to take hold the simplified versions that still proved useful, and were easier to make (ie affordable), slowly took over.
Notice how quality axe heads of old had a labour-intensive blade insert of high strength steel whereas the fashionable custom stuff of today (G-B, just to name one) uses only one type of steel for the whole kit and kaboodle. Someone has to remind me where progress, and quality, plays out in all this.
 
Cajun Kamikaze said:
Makes sense.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, but I'm glad you think so. Tradesman individuality/experience and skill likely had quite an influence on the surrounding population, once upon a time. I like to think different designs are 'eternal signatures' of dedicated craftsmen that knew exactly what was needed and tailored their work accordingly. Today these mostly-lost skills are relegated to custom and fantasy stuff whereby a wishful buyer dictates the design and the money-hungry maker merely complies.
 
300Six said:
Not necessarily, but I'm glad you think so. Tradesman individuality/experience and skill likely had quite an influence on the surrounding population, once upon a time. I like to think different designs are 'eternal signatures' of dedicated craftsmen that knew exactly what was needed and tailored their work accordingly. Today these mostly-lost skills are relegated to custom and fantasy stuff whereby a wishful buyer dictates the design and the money-hungry maker merely complies.
Click to expand...

"They're all just axes but regional differences initiated by dedicated local makers of the time distinguished one geographical area from another. Folks in Kentucky may have chopped through a lot more Oak than they did Pine too like they did out west. And I guess multiple generations of nearby users got used to them and swore they were better than ones brought in from the outside.
Once globalization started to take hold the simplified versions that still proved useful, and were easier to make (ie affordable), slowly took over"

Makes perfect sense...

This
"Someone has to remind me where progress, and quality, plays out in all this."

is a different story
 
Kentucky pattern is supposed to be close to jersey pattern, although it is hard to separate late marketing nomenclature from reality, and variations were likely common. Having nothing better to go on, however, I have experimented with a straight handled #3.5 jersey and found it excellent all around with splitting probably one area it would be most weak in, if I had to guess. That would be a reasonable tradeoff, as splitting trunks for firewood seems to be a recent and somewhat wasteful development, when the branches of many trees provides ample fuel easily chopped with an axe after using the logs for construction. I understand why loggers take only the log,but I see a lot of "woodburners" waste much of the tree and only take wood that needs splitting.

PS, the steel insert was cost issue originally as steel was made in less quantity than wrought iron. Combining the two gave a hard edge and a tough head, just like differential hardening/tempering does with an all steel head with the now cheaper steel. There are lots of losses to mourn, but I don't think that is a huge one, but that is just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
BG_Farmer said:
PS, the steel insert was cost issue originally as steel was made in less quantity than wrought iron. Combining the two gave a hard edge and a tough head, just like differential hardening/tempering does with an all steel head with the now cheaper steel. There are lots of losses to mourn, but I don't think that is a huge one, but that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...
I am not a metallurgist but this explanation sounds reasonable to me. Good steel was expensive to come by and very difficult to make until the Bessemer process came about in the 1800s. In theory then a modern axe head made entirely of steel ought to be superior to one made of wrought iron with a steel insert, providing the differential tempering process is properly done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top