In recent years more and more people have taken up the challenge of restoring and repairing vintage axes. An essential part of most repairs is the replacement of the axe handle. I know that I personally have had a hard time finding quality handles, especially when phrasing them online. For that reason I decided to put together a short list of websites where you can buy some hard to find handles.
Gransfors Bruks Replacement Handles
Omaha Knife-This site just started carrying the axes. Specifically, they have the full line of Gransfors Bruks axes and replacement handles. They are your best bet for getting a Gransfors Bruks replacement handle for a reasonable price in the US. They are a small store, so you will have to email them with your order. I have found them to be very responsive.
Country Knives-This is the only other source of Gransfors Bruks replacement handles that I have been able to find in the US. Their prices are quite high.
Dieter Schmid-Fine Tools-This is a European distributor.
Pro Adventure-Europe
Sports Link Up-Europe
Wetterlings Replacement Handles
Garrett Wade-This is the only source that I have been able to find that sells Wetterlings replacement handles. You can probably contact some other sellers and they might be able to get you some handles, but this is the only place that sells them for few of the models.
Husqvarna Replacement Handles
Bailey’s-They sell replacement handles for the Husqvarna Traditional (Multi-Purpose) Axe.
Snow & Nealley Replacement Handles
CSP Outdoors-This site has very good prices on all Snow & Nealley axes and replacement handles for each model. There are other locations where you can find the handles, but this is my favorite.
Other Replacement Handles
House Handle Company-This company sells a good line of replacement handles at low prices, and their quality is fair.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Hultafors/Hults Bruk Agdor Axe HY 10-0,9 SV Review
In this review I will take a look at an axe that is not available in the US, but many of you have probably heard about. I thought people might be interested to see how it compares to some better known models. Of course this model is widely available in Europe, so this review might have more practical value to European readers. I hope you enjoy it. It certainly took me forever to try to get one of these axes shipped to the US.
Specifications:
Manufacturer: Hultafors/Hults Bruk
Axe Head Weight: 2 lb (900g)
Axe Length: 26 inches (650mm)
Axe Head Material: Unknown carbon steel
Handle Material: Hickory
Cost: $52.00
First, a bit of background. This axe is actually made by Hults Bruk, a well known manufacturer of axes, with a history spanning back for centuries. Relatively recently Hults Bruk was purchased by Hultafors, a manufacturer of striking tools. Even though now technically part of Hultafors, Hults Bruk still controls the production of the axes. That is why you will see both the Hults Bruk and Hultafors stamps on each axe head. Hultafors now produces two lines of axes. One of them is the Agdor line, of which this axe is representative. They also have a newer line, which they call their “classic” line. The classic line closely resembles the Gransfors Bruks axes to which we have become accustomed.
The axe is moderately priced. Unfortunately, the shipping to the US can get very expensive. On top of that, I was able to find only one store in Germany that was willing to ship this particular model to the US. It took many months and prolific use of Google Translate.
In this review I will compare the Hultafors/Hults Bruk Agdor axe to the Gransfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe. Here you can see the two axes next to each other.
The handle of the Hultafors Agdor axe is just a little bit longer than that of the Scandinavian Forest Axe. In all other respects they are virtually identical. The grain orientation is very good. The Hultafors handle is not as well finished as that on the Gransfors Bruks, but the differences are minor. For example, the area around the lanyard hole is not as well sanded as it is on the Gransfors Bruks.
The head of the Hultafors Agdor axe is specified as being the same weight as that of the Gransfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe head, but it seems to be a bit heavier. The whole axe measured at 2lb 12oz, while the Scandinavian Forest Axe measured at 2lb 8oz. That is because the Scandinavian Forest Axe actually has a head that weighs closer to 1.75 lb rather than the advertised 2 lb. The head is attached to the handle using a wooden wedge and a round metal pin. The attachment is very good; although the part of the handle protruding from the top has not been well finished. That is why it looks uneven in the picture.
The grind of the Hultafors Agdor head is as close to perfect as I have seen on an axe. The bit is nice and thin, although it is just marginally thicker than that of the Gransfors Bruks. The cheeks are smooth and continuous, and unlike on the Gransfors Bruks, there is no abrupt transition when they near the eye. I have seen pictures of some other Hultafors Agdor axes, which had cheeks that were not as smooth, so some examples might need some sanding. The metal appears to be very hard judging by how hard it was to file. The hardness seems to be similar to the Gransfors Bruks axe. I prefer axes that are a bit softer, but the edge did not get damaged during use.
So, is this the perfect axe head? Well, it’s close, but not exactly. The only problem I was able to find was that the balance is not perfect. The poll is a bit too light. As you can see from the picture, the bit hangs a little low when the axe is balanced. The average user will not be able to tell a difference during use, but ideally the poll should be a little heavier.
In terms of performance, I was not able to detect any difference between the Hultafors/Hults Bruk Agdor axe and the Gransfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe. I think the slightly thicker bit balanced out the slightly higher weight of the Hultafors axe. Theoretically, the Hultafors axe should have an advantage when it comes to splitting because of the head geometry, but with axes this size, it is hard to detect that difference unless you are splitting wood that is larger than anything you are likely to use in the woods.
The axe does not have a sheath of any sort.
Overall, this axe is a bargain. It is a shame that they are not sold in the US. At less than half the price of a comparable Granfors Bruks axe, it gives great value for the money. Some minor sanding and a touching up of the edge with a sharpening stone gives you an amazingly well performing tool. During testing, it did not lag behind the Grasfors Bruks axe in any way. I personally think that the head of the Hultafors Agdor axe has much better proportions than that of the Gransfros Bruks one. Had the balance been a little bit better, this would have been as close to my ideal axe as I have been able to find so far.
Specifications:
Manufacturer: Hultafors/Hults Bruk
Axe Head Weight: 2 lb (900g)
Axe Length: 26 inches (650mm)
Axe Head Material: Unknown carbon steel
Handle Material: Hickory
Cost: $52.00
First, a bit of background. This axe is actually made by Hults Bruk, a well known manufacturer of axes, with a history spanning back for centuries. Relatively recently Hults Bruk was purchased by Hultafors, a manufacturer of striking tools. Even though now technically part of Hultafors, Hults Bruk still controls the production of the axes. That is why you will see both the Hults Bruk and Hultafors stamps on each axe head. Hultafors now produces two lines of axes. One of them is the Agdor line, of which this axe is representative. They also have a newer line, which they call their “classic” line. The classic line closely resembles the Gransfors Bruks axes to which we have become accustomed.
The axe is moderately priced. Unfortunately, the shipping to the US can get very expensive. On top of that, I was able to find only one store in Germany that was willing to ship this particular model to the US. It took many months and prolific use of Google Translate.
In this review I will compare the Hultafors/Hults Bruk Agdor axe to the Gransfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe. Here you can see the two axes next to each other.
The handle of the Hultafors Agdor axe is just a little bit longer than that of the Scandinavian Forest Axe. In all other respects they are virtually identical. The grain orientation is very good. The Hultafors handle is not as well finished as that on the Gransfors Bruks, but the differences are minor. For example, the area around the lanyard hole is not as well sanded as it is on the Gransfors Bruks.
The head of the Hultafors Agdor axe is specified as being the same weight as that of the Gransfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe head, but it seems to be a bit heavier. The whole axe measured at 2lb 12oz, while the Scandinavian Forest Axe measured at 2lb 8oz. That is because the Scandinavian Forest Axe actually has a head that weighs closer to 1.75 lb rather than the advertised 2 lb. The head is attached to the handle using a wooden wedge and a round metal pin. The attachment is very good; although the part of the handle protruding from the top has not been well finished. That is why it looks uneven in the picture.
The grind of the Hultafors Agdor head is as close to perfect as I have seen on an axe. The bit is nice and thin, although it is just marginally thicker than that of the Gransfors Bruks. The cheeks are smooth and continuous, and unlike on the Gransfors Bruks, there is no abrupt transition when they near the eye. I have seen pictures of some other Hultafors Agdor axes, which had cheeks that were not as smooth, so some examples might need some sanding. The metal appears to be very hard judging by how hard it was to file. The hardness seems to be similar to the Gransfors Bruks axe. I prefer axes that are a bit softer, but the edge did not get damaged during use.
So, is this the perfect axe head? Well, it’s close, but not exactly. The only problem I was able to find was that the balance is not perfect. The poll is a bit too light. As you can see from the picture, the bit hangs a little low when the axe is balanced. The average user will not be able to tell a difference during use, but ideally the poll should be a little heavier.
In terms of performance, I was not able to detect any difference between the Hultafors/Hults Bruk Agdor axe and the Gransfors Bruks Scandinavian Forest Axe. I think the slightly thicker bit balanced out the slightly higher weight of the Hultafors axe. Theoretically, the Hultafors axe should have an advantage when it comes to splitting because of the head geometry, but with axes this size, it is hard to detect that difference unless you are splitting wood that is larger than anything you are likely to use in the woods.
The axe does not have a sheath of any sort.
Overall, this axe is a bargain. It is a shame that they are not sold in the US. At less than half the price of a comparable Granfors Bruks axe, it gives great value for the money. Some minor sanding and a touching up of the edge with a sharpening stone gives you an amazingly well performing tool. During testing, it did not lag behind the Grasfors Bruks axe in any way. I personally think that the head of the Hultafors Agdor axe has much better proportions than that of the Gransfros Bruks one. Had the balance been a little bit better, this would have been as close to my ideal axe as I have been able to find so far.
This manufacturer makes a number of other axes appropriate for bushcraft from both the Agdor and Classic lines.
Friday, March 4, 2011
Aurora Fire Starter 2SA Review
Recently I’ve started looking at some alternative fire striker designs. The first one that came to mind was the Aurora fire starter by Solo Scientific, which I had seen reviewed a long time ago.
Specifications:
Length: 3.6 inches
Diameter: 0.625 inches (the whole tube)
Material: Aluminum shell with a magnesium and ferrocerium alloy rod.
Cost: $25.00
The Aurora fire starter is a very interesting design. The unit is contained in a small aluminum cylinder. When you unscrew it, you can pull out the actual spark producing rod. The striker is contained on the other part of the cylinder. There are two models available. The original model is the 440C one. It is named that because the striker is made of 440C steel. The newer model, and the one I tested here is the 2SA model has a cobalt striker. The change was made because people found the 440C striker to get dull too quickly. Here you can see the Aurora fire starter next to a Light my Fire firesteel, scout model.
The actual rod element is a ferrocerium rod, which contains magnesium. As a result, the sparks that are produced, last considerably longer than those produced by a regular ferrocerium rod. The downside however is that the added magnesium makes the rod very hard, and difficult to strike. If you use the back of your knife, there is a chance that the spine will be damaged. That is why it comes with the built in striker.
I had high hopes for this unit, but was unable to get it to work properly. I just found it too hard to make good sparks. To actually produce sparks, I had to apply a large amount of force and use a quick, flicking motion of the wrist. The process was much harder than with a standard ferrocerium rod. I found it nearly impossible to make sparks in a controlled manner, which would not disturb the tinder. The other issue I had with the design of the fire starter was that the functional element is much smaller than the unit as a whole. The overall size is about that of an army model Light my Fire firesteel, but the actual rod is a similar size to the smaller scout model that you see above. It is a beautiful design, and great in theory, but I just couldn’t get it to work well. Maybe the inability to use it was simply my failure, and I have seen other people get good results, but I’ve never had a problem using a regular ferrocerium rod.
Specifications:
Length: 3.6 inches
Diameter: 0.625 inches (the whole tube)
Material: Aluminum shell with a magnesium and ferrocerium alloy rod.
Cost: $25.00
The Aurora fire starter is a very interesting design. The unit is contained in a small aluminum cylinder. When you unscrew it, you can pull out the actual spark producing rod. The striker is contained on the other part of the cylinder. There are two models available. The original model is the 440C one. It is named that because the striker is made of 440C steel. The newer model, and the one I tested here is the 2SA model has a cobalt striker. The change was made because people found the 440C striker to get dull too quickly. Here you can see the Aurora fire starter next to a Light my Fire firesteel, scout model.
The actual rod element is a ferrocerium rod, which contains magnesium. As a result, the sparks that are produced, last considerably longer than those produced by a regular ferrocerium rod. The downside however is that the added magnesium makes the rod very hard, and difficult to strike. If you use the back of your knife, there is a chance that the spine will be damaged. That is why it comes with the built in striker.
I had high hopes for this unit, but was unable to get it to work properly. I just found it too hard to make good sparks. To actually produce sparks, I had to apply a large amount of force and use a quick, flicking motion of the wrist. The process was much harder than with a standard ferrocerium rod. I found it nearly impossible to make sparks in a controlled manner, which would not disturb the tinder. The other issue I had with the design of the fire starter was that the functional element is much smaller than the unit as a whole. The overall size is about that of an army model Light my Fire firesteel, but the actual rod is a similar size to the smaller scout model that you see above. It is a beautiful design, and great in theory, but I just couldn’t get it to work well. Maybe the inability to use it was simply my failure, and I have seen other people get good results, but I’ve never had a problem using a regular ferrocerium rod.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Council Tool to Release a New Line of Axes Under the Name Velvicut
There has been some information floating around for some time now that Council Tool will be releasing a premium line of axes and there have been rumors that it will be targeted towards the bushcraft community. The new line of axes will be called Velvicut. Recently Council Tool released the below picture of a 4lb Dayton pattern axe, which will be the first to be released in the line.
I am told that this particular axe is not aimed at the bushcraft community, and is instead going to be used to commemorate the 125th anniversary of the company. Retail price is expected to be around $170.
They are working on an axe specifically targeted at the bushcraft community, which will in effect be a redesigned Hudson Bay axe. It will be made of the higher grade 5160 steel which is featured in the 4lb Dayton axe, and will come with a hickory handle and a leather sheath. I am told that they will also eventually release a hatchet, a broad axe, and possibly a double bit cruiser axe within the Velvicut line. The release dates will depend on how significantly they are redesigned from existing models.
In the interest of disclosure, I’ve had the opportunity to test one of the 4lb Dayton pattern prototypes and to give my feedback to Council Tool. Since it is an unfinished product, I have promised not to release any specifics about it. All I’ll say is that I am very excited about the new lone of axes.
I am told that this particular axe is not aimed at the bushcraft community, and is instead going to be used to commemorate the 125th anniversary of the company. Retail price is expected to be around $170.
They are working on an axe specifically targeted at the bushcraft community, which will in effect be a redesigned Hudson Bay axe. It will be made of the higher grade 5160 steel which is featured in the 4lb Dayton axe, and will come with a hickory handle and a leather sheath. I am told that they will also eventually release a hatchet, a broad axe, and possibly a double bit cruiser axe within the Velvicut line. The release dates will depend on how significantly they are redesigned from existing models.
In the interest of disclosure, I’ve had the opportunity to test one of the 4lb Dayton pattern prototypes and to give my feedback to Council Tool. Since it is an unfinished product, I have promised not to release any specifics about it. All I’ll say is that I am very excited about the new lone of axes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)