What did you rehang today?

That's a very good splice, and somewhat like what I was talking about, but not exactly. That joint is harder to pin. Draw a half lap in elevation like your Z joint in the photo. Now, on the 2 vertical butt joints don't make them 90 degrees and plumb. Draw them at 30-45 deg. so they are captive in the undercut. Make the half lap as long as you need for structural and then pin. This is a strong and quick and easy joint to do, unlike the beveled scarf joint that Peg showed. It also is easy to do on round and odd shaped logs, unlike some of these other joints. I had a cabin roof repair in the Bob Marshall Wilderness that required replacing 36 rotten exposed round rafter tails. We used the half lap with splayed shoulder joint. We pined it with 1 1/4" white oak dowels. Because of the Wilderness requirements, we could only use hand tools. This required axes, etc. But the biggest pain was drilling 72- 1 1/4" holes through the log rafters for the dowels with a brace and 1 1/4" ship auger bit! Sorry again that I can not respond with a picture or drawing.
 
Old axeman said; "Now, on the 2 vertical butt joints don't make them 90 degrees.
Draw them at 30-45 deg. so they are captive in the undercut".
That's precisely what i mean to do next time. You explained it more succinctly than i but that's it! That and a longer half lap.
 
Hults Bruk. 31” haft. 3.5 lbs. Store bought hickory handle from Home Hardware. (See if you can spot the potential problem in the picture of the wedge!!!)
 

Attachments

  • 822D7A9D-3231-456D-B924-A3E01C6D9C8E.jpeg
    822D7A9D-3231-456D-B924-A3E01C6D9C8E.jpeg
    177.7 KB · Views: 25
  • 4D59A126-AB8A-4628-8D31-7A33D66F7C34.jpeg
    4D59A126-AB8A-4628-8D31-7A33D66F7C34.jpeg
    137.3 KB · Views: 31
  • 3DF5C519-A663-47C2-BD60-E5275834D6F2.jpeg
    3DF5C519-A663-47C2-BD60-E5275834D6F2.jpeg
    448.8 KB · Views: 23
  • D71C6D61-4D49-483F-B263-0E6CD6A36865.jpeg
    D71C6D61-4D49-483F-B263-0E6CD6A36865.jpeg
    230.9 KB · Views: 24
Curt Hal said:
Hults Bruk. 31” haft. 3.5 lbs. Store bought hickory handle from Home Hardware. (See if you can spot the potential problem in the picture of the wedge!!!)
Click to expand...
Are you weak in the knees because you're so excited?? Haha. The only thing I can see is the small crack in the right side if the eye wall? Either that or perhaps you are referring to the file work? Looks like maybe the left side is at a lower angle than the right? That could just be perspective in the photo however. The only other thing is, personally, i don't like leaving the wood proud of the eye. Other than that it's a real nice hang in my opinion! Beautiful job and nice axe!
 
Square_peg said:
While most of us prefer this for the stronger hang. But to each his own.
Click to expand...
That's why I added the "personally". That it is stronger is arguable. If it indeed were stronger than you would see them coming from the factory like that.
I would put money on it that one of my flush cut hangs would perform as well as one of yours(or anyone else's) sticking out. In the appropriate eye of course.
I leave it proud sometimes if the eye is small say in a Hudson bay for example.
For me i fail to see how you can get a stronger bond than using a flush cut with a cross wedge. But each to his own.
 
Yankee Josh said:
That's why I added the "personally". That it is stronger is arguable. If it indeed were stronger than you would see them coming from the factory like that.
I would put money on it that one of my flush cut hangs would perform as well as one of yours(or anyone else's) sticking out. In the appropriate eye of course.
I leave it proud sometimes if the eye is small say in a Hudson bay for example.
For me i fail to see how you can get a stronger bond than using a flush cut with a cross wedge. But each to his own.
Click to expand...
I think an argument could be made for wood proud of the eye being more likely to wick moisture. Which was always the biggest killer of my rigging axe handles. Factory handles came flush and I would leave the replacement handles a little proud. Can't say that one lasted any longer than the other though. None would make it long from spring into summer and many would break in the other seasons as well. I leave mine a little proud of the eye because it is easier on what ever saw I am using to trim them off, not being smart enough to remove the head from the haft and then cut it.
 
And I don't see any advantage to either the wedge sticking up say more than 1/8" or a cross wedge, if you did a good hang. The problem I have with the cross wedge is the same problem as I have always had with the metal cross wedge-why introduce a spot for a haft split to start? In addition to the fact that factories always have done flush cuts, almost all the historic axes I have owned or seen in museums or private collections have near flush cuts and no cross wedges. I offer into evidence the 1876 centennial Collins ax exhibit that we have talked about before. In 1976, when I inspected all the hung axes and hatchets at the exhibit, and in storage, at the Smithsonian-No protruding wedges, no cross wedges, no metal wedges, hafts were all vertical grain, second growth ( all white or sap wood) American hickory. But, to each his own.
 
I see where the cross wedge could cause a split to start in the haft, and I have the utmost respect for you, O Old Axeman and Yankee Josh Yankee Josh , but saying it’s better because they came that way from the factory in years past reminds me of this old tell.

One day after school a young girl noticed that her mom was cutting off the ends of a pot roast before putting it in the oven to cook for dinner. She had seen her mom do this many times before but had never asked her why. So this time she asked and her mom replied, I don't know why I cut the ends off, but it’s what my mom always did. Why don't you ask your Grandma?

So the young girl called her grandmother on the phone and said, Grandma why do you cut the ends off the pot roast before cooking it? Her grandmother replied, I don't know. That's just the way my mom always cooked it. Why don't you ask her? ). So, undeterred, the girl called her great grandmother, who was living in a nursing home and asked her the same question - why did you cut the ends off the pot roast before cooking it? Her great grand mother did not reply “I cut off the ends of the pot roast because that's what my mother did.”

She did not say because it makes the meat juicier. She said, when I was first married we had a very small oven, and the pot roast didn't fit in the oven unless I cut the ends off.

I’m not saying one way is better than the other, I personally like the look of the “proud eye”. I think structurally it mostly depends on if the head has the proper taper and it is properly hung.
 
I should have also added into evidence to my above post that when I was with the National Park Service in 1988 I toured the Mann (owner of Collins at that time) factory in Lewistown, Pa. During the tour the then owner showed us the collection of unused antique axes, none of which had protruding wedges, cross wedges, or steel wedges, and the helves matched my specs for hickory. Also in 1988 I inspected the behind the display collection of axes at Colonial Williamsburg, Va., all axes and hatchets matched my other axe investigations. In my younger years with my grandfather in his logging camps I never saw any of the axemen with protruding wedges or cross wedges. So for 250 years EVERYBODY only hung their axes the way I describe because some one else told them it was the right way? Time for someone to offer proof to the contrary. While I am on a rant- I dont see any structural problems with the protruding top. I do see that in some cases it can be in the way or get broken and cause problems; as for the cross wedge, give me a good reason to risk a split other than you like the way it looks (not that there is anything wrong with that if looking at your axe is what you do instead of working day in and day out with it) OR because you need to fix up a hang that you F----- up!
 
Old Axeman said:
And I don't see any advantage to either the wedge sticking up say more than 1/8" or a cross wedge, if you did a good hang. The problem I have with the cross wedge is the same problem as I have always had with the metal cross wedge-why introduce a spot for a haft split to start? In addition to the fact that factories always have done flush cuts, almost all the historic axes I have owned or seen in museums or private collections have near flush cuts and no cross wedges. I offer into evidence the 1876 centennial Collins ax exhibit that we have talked about before. In 1976, when I inspected all the hung axes and hatchets at the exhibit, and in storage, at the Smithsonian-No protruding wedges, no cross wedges, no metal wedges, hafts were all vertical grain, second growth ( all white or sap wood) American hickory. But, to each his own.
Click to expand...
Have you never had a wooden wedge start backing out? It's happened to me twice so i used steel wedges then. And other times because, as you mentioned, i find it aesthetically pleasing. I know some guys use glue but for some reason i can't bring myself to do it. Just doesn't feel traditional enough for me i guess. I've formed my own theories about why i feel flush is better. But sometimes i still leave it proud. But again for aesthetics not for function.
Just wanted to mention that i like tradition but i also like diversity of thought. Takes all kinds and I'm glad we've got differing opinions here. It'd be awful boring otherwise!
 
I have never had a wedge back out on a hang that I did myself. The only way a wedge can back out is if something was not right with the hang. Wedge was too narrow, too deep (bottomed out), not deep enough, haft was not properly sized to the eye, etc. I do no use, or advise, glue.
I also like diversity of thought. The problem with diverse thought on the internet is the whole world is reading and the diverse thought somehow becomes gospel. If you have noticed, I do not comment much on collecting, or manufacturers history, or steel types, or forging new axes. My interest is in facts, not speculation- concerning history, tradition, and actually working with an ax every day to make a living (I did). Diversity of ideas is one thing, but I have, and will always, throw the BS flag on speculation. So if some of you disagree with me, fine, but put up something creditable to dispute anything I have to say about axe history, axe tradition, or actually working with an axe. Give me your axe work history, a reputable reference, museum info to back up your statements. If not, how about this, just say you are speculating. The reason that I so often have referenced "Ancient Carpenters Tools" is because Henry Mercer did not speculate. 100 yrs ago he interviewed old carpenters, loggers, etc. He collected their tools and techniques. While I like Eric Sloane's books and drawings, and he got most of it right, in "Museum of Early American Tools" he illustrates a coopers curved froe being used. He speculated on this. If you work wood with a froe, or split wood by any other fashion, you would know that you can not split curved staves because you have a curved froe. Wood splits following it's own grain, end of story. This curved froe that he mentioned is rare, is rare for a reason, it did not work. So Eric, dont show a drawing and speculate.
Tell everybody here what you know because of your long time experiences or say you are speculating. I, for one, would appreciate that.
 
I think the factories cut them flush for eye appeal to present the buyer with a more finished looking product.

From personal experience I find that the protruding haft, wedged fatter than the eye, keeps the head on longer than the flush cut haft. And even better is having the haft 1/4" proud with a very tight wedge 1/8" below top of the haft. This way the haft wood swells over the top of the wedge slightly, locking it in place. If you hit the protruding haft and wedge with Swel-lock or DPG it's even better.

If the protruding haft is well oiled and not left out in the rain there shouldn't be any problem with wicking.

Lastly, sealing any tiny gaps in the eye, top or bottom, with beeswax or a beeswax/BLO/turp mix will prevent any moisture from getting into eye wood.
 
My preference for a wedge left proud is 1) purely aesthetic, I like the look of it, and 2) my observation that when the axe is inverted and the wedge is left to soak in BLO for 48 hours, the hickory swells somewhat beyond the eye, suggesting to me that the haft has taken good purchase in the head. I would always defer to Axeman’s knowledge and experience and add only that this is my personal preference. I have put steel wedges in axes, but they invariably introduce a split in the haft that looks horrible, and more importantly risks a fatal split in the handle somewhere down the road. I also feel a certain vain self satisfaction in achieving a re-haft that doesn’t need a wedge to be secure.

In my GB Forest Axe, the haft is trimmed true to the eye and a “staple” is used. I would point out, however, that their hafts are made to match specific heads and are hydraulically pressed into the head, thus ensuring a rather precise fit.

Good eye, Yankee Josh. Once the wedge was cut and sanded, I discovered that hairline crack on the right side. I hope it doesn’t become anything worse!
 
I don't think it hurts being comfortable with the wooden crosswedging of a tool. I would prefer every one of them to take one wedge solid and be secure whether for my use or for someone else.
I've salvaged great old handles after someone else's attempts were less successful using crosswedging. Many times giving the tool back to the person who did it.
My personal experience has been steel wedges often starts a crack or at least puts enough of a sore spot in tongue that it can be more trouble than it's worth in the long-run. If it doesn't go that way for others then it doesn't.
8iGDdVY.jpg

I don't like rehanging an axe/hatchet on the same handle that had steel wedges to end up with steel wedges again.

The bottom two hammers were crosswedged to compensate for the damage of steel wedges in the past. The top one was because I wanted the handle to fit it. All three are solid and get used.
VKI9moP.jpg

Crosswedging can also be handy in socketed axes such as the Billnas/Kelokoski/Kemi models in place of a snakehead wedge that pushes out in all directions instead of just laterally. I'm a bit chicken to "snakehead" something I spent the time to carve out though...

One Wedge to Rule Them All is prime but if having a sharp tool on a solidly fitted handle is the aim, I think it's appropriate.
 
Yankee Josh said:
Have you never had a wooden wedge start backing out? It's happened to me twice so i used steel wedges then. And other times because, as you mentioned, i find it aesthetically pleasing. I know some guys use glue but for some reason i can't bring myself to do it. Just doesn't feel traditional enough for me i guess. I've formed my own theories about why i feel flush is better. But sometimes i still leave it proud. But again for aesthetics not for function.
Just wanted to mention that i like tradition but i also like diversity of thought. Takes all kinds and I'm glad we've got differing opinions here. It'd be awful boring otherwise!
Click to expand...
Yesterday I knocked the stub of an original, OLD dry rotted haft out of a Fayette R. plumb au-to-graf head that had been laying around here for years. The wedge had been band sawn quickly, and I suspect purposely, leaving rough horizontal striations on each side of the wedge. The kerf also had prominent horizontal striations. No way that wedge was gonna back out.
 
I've never cross wedged an axe. I've done it on a couple hammers though. And in my opinion the only reason for using a steel wedge is to prevent the wood wedge from ever backing out. Perhaps it was a selling point but in the early 1900's there was all kinds of "patent wedges"and "take up screws" etc. They all tout that they "hold the head on more securely". I have never had one create a split and i certainly never use one to fill out the eye. That's always done with the wood wedge.
The way i see it is any outward pressure gained from driving the wooden wedge in is best utilized inside the eye. So that's where my focus is. Not removing too much material from what will be the inside of the eye after it's hung. I like to picture almost all of the eye pressing out HARD against the metal in there. While i do get the lip that gets created when leaving the eye proud does kind of hook the head on at the same time i feel that any outward pressure that isn't inside the eye is wasted. I leave it up a 1/4"or so and then after i drive the wedge in as tight as i can and then cut it off flush. And then once i put the blo to it it swells inside the eye only. Sometimes i wonder that the axes don't split apart!
This wedge discussion must have its own thread though, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top