# Monster Maul?



## Menchhofer (Nov 8, 2005)

Anyone here know of a distributor for the Monster Maul? One I have is about 20 years old and I would like to purchase another one.

Local TSC has a similar model but the handle is too short. Google search was not successful.


----------



## Al Smith (Nov 8, 2005)

Sotz,if that's the correct spelling,made the original"monster maul".That thing tipped the scales at 18 lbs,I believe.


----------



## davidwyby (Nov 8, 2005)

I could prolly make one....

www.splitzall.com ?

Something like this here? Name yer size/poundage.

I keep getting more ideas on this...what if I made one with a pin/bolt or something on the back so you could add or remove discs/plates or somehting for the desired weight?

I've split fresh-cut willow before that was so easy I didn't even stand it up. Just whacked it laying down like a golfer. Split a lot of wood in a short amount of time. Then you got yer old dry knotty hardwoods that laugh at you when you give 'em yer best shot....


----------



## davidwyby (Nov 8, 2005)

Thought of something else, though it probably wouldn't work for bustin' big stuff. I have a splitter that's like an axe with two levers built into it that swing out and force the halves apart as the head enters the log. Anyone ever seen one of these? Guy gave it to me, I'd never seen one before. Works ok, think it needs more weight. Pic tomorrow if anyone is interested.


----------



## rivahrat (Nov 9, 2005)

sounds cool, post a pic. also sounds like it could break easily. but ya never know.


----------



## DanManofStihl (Nov 9, 2005)

Nothern tool .com has those splitters my neighbor has one it works pretty well for some of the bigger pieces.


----------



## jokers (Nov 9, 2005)

David B said:


> Thought of something else, though it probably wouldn't work for bustin' big stuff. I have a splitter that's like an axe with two levers built into it that swing out and force the halves apart as the head enters the log. Anyone ever seen one of these? Guy gave it to me, I'd never seen one before. Works ok, think it needs more weight. Pic tomorrow if anyone is interested.



Sounds like a Chopper 1.

Russ


----------



## Gypo Logger (Nov 9, 2005)

It's just my opinion, but I think Monster Mauls and Chopper 2's are nothing more than gimmicks.
Sure they are ok for the odd clunker that is just as well sawn into pieces, but nothing beats a 6# maul with a 36" handle for all around wood splitting.
John


----------



## davidwyby (Nov 9, 2005)

jokers said:


> Sounds like a Chopper 1.
> 
> Russ



Looks like it.


----------



## Whiteindustries (Nov 9, 2005)

*I got mine at Bailey's*



David B said:


> Looks like it.



Just watch when you take you first swing,the handle is a bit shorter than a standard 6 or 8 pound Maul.
It does do a good job splitting frozen 16" oak.


----------



## trimmmed (Nov 10, 2005)

Gypo Logger said:


> It's just my opinion, but I think Monster Mauls and Chopper 2's are nothing more than gimmicks.
> Sure they are ok for the odd clunker that is just as well sawn into pieces, but nothing beats a 6# maul with a 36" handle for all around wood splitting.
> John



I can't say for the Chopper2, but the MM works. I brought home a bunch of spike-knot yellow birch that my 8lb maul did nothing to.

That said, I prefer the regular maul whenever possible. The MM takes a different swing pattern for me and never gets close to the same rhythm I get with the 8lb'er.


----------



## treeman45246 (Nov 10, 2005)

I'll go down as a fan of the MM too. Have one dad bought in the 80s that is still good as new. Bought a look alike about 10 years ago which is nowhere near as good - handle bent, etc. Anyone finds a source for the original I'm interested.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 9, 2006)

*Mauls*

Anyone know the viability of splitzall.com? How much they charge, freight, availability, etc?

Take your square of the velocity theories down to your local community college. That is true when calculating total kinetic energy. We're looking at Momentum and total Force when driving nails, splitting wood etc. So K = 0.5mv2 , M = mv, and F = M/t. At the SAME velocity (possible by me) a Monster maul has more total energy; which correlates to more splitting power than a 6# maul head mounted on a toothpick. The velocity argument is MOOT because it assumes that you can swing the smaller maul at mach speeds such that the total energy of the smaller maul is greater than the lager maul (yes, it is possible with a large variant in velocity.) Now I’ll tell you that the argument is FALSE in my case because it assumes that a “Pansy-Pete” can only lift the monster maul 12-18 inches and let it fall into the wood, but can swing the 6# maul at full bore. This is high school math, so I’ll let you plug in the numbers. I’m a chemist anyway.

Take the monster maul from behind your boots, over your head, and through wood! Bingo, same velocity, and kinetic energy is higher, momentum is higher, and total force applied to the wood is higher. Lo! One thing I forgot, the wood will actually SPLIT!!!
Same thing with that 6# maul D’oh! Bounce off! Try try again (again recall that it’s gnarly wood I’m speaking of)

Yes, monster mauls are overkill if you are splitting nine-inch clear pine, but I'm all too often working on a ribboned Black Oak stump and need more power. In fact I want a larger monster maul. A longer handle would be a great combo with about a 20# head. 

Here is what I have done: I took an old 12# maul head and put a 48” steel handle on it, filled the handle with concrete and tried it out. Well, it is awesome. The head is just a little too small, but I love the handle length. (Oh, I’m 6’ 4” and it’s a short mans world) This prototype maul probably sounds absurd to all you small short guys out there?

So, with that, where can I get an oversized splitting maul that does NOT have a wood handle, I’ve broken too may toothpicks in my life. Any help would be appreciated…. If I were made of money… and could afford to have one custom made… you can already see that’s not an option. I don’t have a welder. 

Is a splitzall my only and best choice?

Thanks,

Andrew


----------



## Kleek (Jan 10, 2006)

Gypo, I am with you on the 6# maul, only I prefer a 30"-32" handle.


----------



## BlackenedTimber (Jan 10, 2006)

8lb maul, synthetic handle. yup, i said it.

I am a BIG dude, played right tackle and all that... I can split more wood faster, gnarly or not, with the 8lb than the monster maul. I had two MMs, and bent the handle of one into a pretzle. i think the otherone evolved into a wheel chock somewhere.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 10, 2006)

*Mauls*



BlackenedTimber said:


> 8lb maul, synthetic handle. yup, i said it.
> 
> I am a BIG dude, played right tackle and all that... I can split more wood faster, gnarly or not, with the 8lb than the monster maul. I had two MMs, and bent the handle of one into a pretzle. i think the otherone evolved into a wheel chock somewhere.



Did you have a real Monster Maul from Sotz, or did you get some knock off?

Kleek: Now we know who all those chain hardware stores are catering to.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 10, 2006)

*mauls*

I forgot to mention, my definition of "gnarly" means absolutely cannot be split with 8#


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 10, 2006)

*Wait a minute*

And just when did this become a maul popularity poll?

All and all I ALSO would PREFER a simple 8# maul. But it is often futile.

This thread is about Monster Mauls and where to get 'em. There are projects that just cannot be done with a regular maul, that is the purpose of my whole argument. I don't care what you use 99% of the time. 

Back to the green...who knows details about splitzall's business? Are they available and how much $$$$ to get a maul. Does anyone know the specs? Anyone out there with the ability to think outside his comfort zone and get the job done? This is supposed to be the information super highway, not the pick the smeg out of your ears and share machine!!!


----------



## WoodTick007 (Jan 10, 2006)

*Monster Maul Maul Maul*

The problem with the MONSTER MAUL is that unless your a "BRUTE". Your using alot of good energy handling all that weight. 

I burn about 7 cords of wood during the 6 plus months I heat my house. I split all my wood with a 6lb maul with a wood handle. I also have a 6lb sledge hammer to help with the tough ones. Anything the will not split gets the 066 treatment and the curley fries help keep the mud/bullchit covered up and out the tread on my boots.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 10, 2006)

*And my favorite color is...*

blue


----------



## davidwyby (Jan 10, 2006)

Tell me what you want maybe i'll make it, just outta curiosity. I like the smaller head, longer handle idea.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 11, 2006)

*Long Maul*



David B said:


> Tell me what you want maybe i'll make it, just outta curiosity. I like the smaller head, longer handle idea.



Anyone who believes in the square of velocity theory would see that velocity could be increased with an extra long handle. In reality, momentum is increased with a higher velocity. If you don't see what I'm talking about, look at a phonograph, at the same rpm, say 45, the part of your record farthest from the center travels faster...right? Same thing with a maul head farther from the operator. Now apply physics equations, or better, just common sense without going so far as making the maul unswingable or very difficult by reverse torque.

I mentioned that I made a maul with a 48" handle. It may be a tad long, maybe about 42-44 inches would be perfect for me. I'm convinced that user height is imperative here. Try standing straight up with your shoulders square and couple your hands with your arms extended towards your feet as if holding a maul at the end of a miss swing. Now measure from the top of your highest hand to the ground, that would be ideally the overall maul length ( it's about 41.5 inches on me.) If you come up with 36" or less, congratulations! No adjustments are necessary and you don't have my problem. The reason I don't like regular 36" handles is that If the maul bounces off funny I will get hit in the shin opposed to the maul head just grounding out, as it would on a shorter individual. This makes me bend over to finish out the splitting stroke...and whenever I bend over like that repeatedly it leads to back pain...ouch!

I'd like to hear anyone's results with a longer handle, just remember that a longer handle means slight more difficulty to aim accurately. 

Who has an idea of where to get or how to make a monster maul head? That is one big chunk of steel, where would I start? I can probably find someone to do my welding.


----------



## Kleek (Jan 11, 2006)

stihl088: Me, chain stores? I've got the same maul since 1978. I have found that speed and accuracy in a swing will out-produce blindly throwing around 30 pounds of tool steel. Rest assured, a 32" handle will produce more speed than a 36 or 48"....assuming the user knows what he is doing. (ie: hitting wood instead of leg). Also take into account the ability (or lack thereof) to "read" a piece of wood. It all adds up.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 11, 2006)

*Nope*

Geek's mind is closed. Still missing the point


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jan 11, 2006)

This is what I use. It's all steel, so extending the handle would be as easy as doing a little welding.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 11, 2006)

*Now were're cookin'*



Mike Maas said:


> This is what I use. It's all steel, so extending the handle would be as easy as doing a little welding.
> 
> Thanks Mike, Now we are getting somewhere!
> 
> ...


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 11, 2006)

*Option #2*

Mike mentioned Bailey's mega maul.

I will now tell you about the other maul I have found available for purchase.

http://www.counciltool.com/product.asp?item=130ST&ID=17

Poor color choice though, that would be easy to lose in the forest.

Now... who knows about splitzalls???


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Jan 11, 2006)

Stihl088stock said:


> Do you happen to know what the stock handle length is on that puppy?


The handle is 28" long and it weighs 18#s.


----------



## jmack (Jan 11, 2006)

*monster*



Menchhofer said:


> Anyone here know of a distributor for the Monster Maul? One I have is about 20 years old and I would like to purchase another one.
> 
> Local TSC has a similar model but the handle is too short. Google search was not successful.


muench in ct still has em , 2033239712 ask for christine. monster mauls are nice for whacking green oak to lift it to the chipper or to take the first half 36-42dbh with one or two swings, line backer dude will still be swinging, the mm is heavy though and if you are splitting by hand I couldnt agree more that an 8 pounder is just right cuz you can pace.


----------



## Menchhofer (Jan 11, 2006)

All of this talk pertaining to 8 lb maul vs the monster.........I have had best experiences with the mm. I agree, with the overkill. Best to have more than not enough in most cases.

I was taught the mm (which I have not found yet) was to be swung in a tighter arch unlike the lighter ones....I usually just raise the maul not quite vertical, and swing it down onto the piece. Yes, it does eventually wear you out even using this method, but slinging it like a eight pounder would be worse.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 11, 2006)

*em?*



jmack said:


> muench in ct still has em
> 
> Could you please be a little more specific as to what they have? NOS Sotz, Splitzall, whatever Bailey's has, etc?
> 
> I'd bet shipping would cost three arms and half a leg?


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 11, 2006)

*Best deal:*

http://www.logsplitters-ironoak.com...egory&categoryid=116&parentid=109&searchtext=

Now what to use to make the handle longer?


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 15, 2006)

*Monster Mauls*

So, I guess that no one knows anything about splitzall.com/ splitzalls?

I don't think that anyone uses a splitting maul eight hours a day, rather just for personal firewood use and most everyone complains about using up too much energy and overkill. You are all a bunch of wimps! Try getting a workout without paying the gym!!!

So that means that by deduction everyone would in turn by a 6 ton gas wood splitter vs. say a 20 ton? 

I mean after all, 10+ ton is really just overkill, Right? Dummmy!

You people also imply that a person will only own ONE maul. I have two axes, two regular type mauls, and two Sotz monster mauls. Pick up the right tool for the job!!! Stop using a street sweeper to clean the kitchen counter and a tooth brush on the driveway! 

Don't get me wrong, if an eight pound maul works, don't stop using it. I AM ONLY LOOKING FOR INFORMATION ON Sotz monster mauls or their EXACT equivalent. Thank you to all who pointed out the available smaller versions, but I want a couple more of the original monster mauls for work involving my neighbors.

For all you non-innovative unhelpful people....THANKS FOR NOTHING!!!


----------



## CNYCountry (Jan 16, 2006)

trimmmed said:


> I can't say for the Chopper2, but the MM works. I brought home a bunch of spike-knot yellow birch that my 8lb maul did nothing to.
> 
> That said, I prefer the regular maul whenever possible. The MM takes a different swing pattern for me and never gets close to the same rhythm I get with the 8lb'er.



The MM is good for birch or other stringy crap that wants to stick together even though it's split. It really depends on the type of wood, the MM is better for some of it but I usually pick up the 8lb maul. One thing is for sure, using a MM in a full swing will make a man out of you...

I shouldn't say I have a MM, implying I have a Sotz, because I don't. I have the Bailey's mall. It is a lot shorter than the Sotz my father used to have. I think it would just be a matter of slipping the rubber grip off, a piece of pipe into the handle whose OD is very close to the MM handle ID, cut it to the right length, weld it, then maybe find a piece of pipe the same size as the handle and slip it over that and weld it. I am going to try this with mine when I get around to it.

If nothing else the short length screws me up when I switch between 8lb maul and MM with my aim.


----------



## woodsrider (Jan 18, 2006)

I have one of the original Monster Mauls from the 80's. I believe that Sotz went out of business long ago. I think I also got an orange metal "timberjack" type device from Sotz at the same time I ordered my MM (it's been a long time....). I got the high-zoot version of the MM with silicone shock absorbing material in the handle near the head.

The MM is definitely heavy and requires a modified stroke, but it does a great job of splitting stringy wood without getting stuck. I'd like to find its equivalent also, but I haven't found a good source. I thought I happened on a source a few months ago....I'll have to do some searching.


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 18, 2006)

*Sotz equivalent*

I think there is at least a small market for an equivalent of the Sotz monster maul. I have two, one is slightly larger, and the smaller one weighs 21# total. I keep forgetting to weigh the larger one. I also have the Sotz timber jack, although I wouldn't say it is anything special. It still has the postage tag on it from '81. Never heard of the silicone filled handle, although I don't think it is necessary or would help much.

The closest thing I can find is made by Council, total of about 16# (a 12 pound triangle head) still pretty far off from the monster.

I can see why Sotz went out of business, if you make a product that can last 25 years with only a little bend to the handle, you won't get too much repeat business, this explains why so many wood handle mauls are still in production, the faster it breaks...the sooner they can make another sale!!!


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 18, 2006)

*Another model*

http://hand-tools.gillroys.com/Hamm...s/Sledge_hammers/Woodbuster_Maul-s324787.html

I just don't understand why they don't make these 36" overall like most traditional mauls are. This one has a 30" handle, The one made by council has a 34" so it's the closest yet, and probably what I'll buy. Also the most expensive. D'oh!


----------



## Stihl088stock (Feb 18, 2006)

*To anyone who cares...*

Council's "monster maul" had a typo on their website. The item is only 30 inches overall with a 27 inch handle, not the "12# head atop a 34 inch handle" as it said before I purchased it. They have fixed it now.

Splittin' firewood sure is fun, too bad there are so many ignorant people on the subject. I wish I know more people that could help me clean up deadwood.

WOOD FIRE GOOD! GAS FIRE BAD!


----------



## thefeckerwest (Jan 22, 2012)

Have you a picture of that maul with the 48" handle? The handle seems too long. I have a 44" wooden handle on my maul which is about 7lb. in weight. It it was any longer it would be too unwieldy.

QUOTE=Stihl088stock;370836]Anyone know the viability of splitzall.com? How much they charge, freight, availability, etc?

Take your square of the velocity theories down to your local community college. That is true when calculating total kinetic energy. We're looking at Momentum and total Force when driving nails, splitting wood etc. So K = 0.5mv2 , M = mv, and F = M/t. At the SAME velocity (possible by me) a Monster maul has more total energy; which correlates to more splitting power than a 6# maul head mounted on a toothpick. The velocity argument is MOOT because it assumes that you can swing the smaller maul at mach speeds such that the total energy of the smaller maul is greater than the lager maul (yes, it is possible with a large variant in velocity.) Now I’ll tell you that the argument is FALSE in my case because it assumes that a “Pansy-Pete” can only lift the monster maul 12-18 inches and let it fall into the wood, but can swing the 6# maul at full bore. This is high school math, so I’ll let you plug in the numbers. I’m a chemist anyway.

Take the monster maul from behind your boots, over your head, and through wood! Bingo, same velocity, and kinetic energy is higher, momentum is higher, and total force applied to the wood is higher. Lo! One thing I forgot, the wood will actually SPLIT!!!
Same thing with that 6# maul D’oh! Bounce off! Try try again (again recall that it’s gnarly wood I’m speaking of)

Yes, monster mauls are overkill if you are splitting nine-inch clear pine, but I'm all too often working on a ribboned Black Oak stump and need more power. In fact I want a larger monster maul. A longer handle would be a great combo with about a 20# head. 

Here is what I have done: I took an old 12# maul head and put a 48” steel handle on it, filled the handle with concrete and tried it out. Well, it is awesome. The head is just a little too small, but I love the handle length. (Oh, I’m 6’ 4” and it’s a short mans world) This prototype maul probably sounds absurd to all you small short guys out there?

So, with that, where can I get an oversized splitting maul that does NOT have a wood handle, I’ve broken too may toothpicks in my life. Any help would be appreciated…. If I were made of money… and could afford to have one custom made… you can already see that’s not an option. I don’t have a welder. 

Is a splitzall my only and best choice?

Thanks,

Andrew[/QUOTE]


----------



## Stihl088stock (Jan 22, 2012)

Hi, no I dont have a picture of the 48" handle, the steel pipe I used ended up cracking due to the violent use it saw and since it was full of concrete I couldn't reshape it. One of my monster mauls also started cracking, (after over 20 years of use) but I had it welded.

You are right, it was too long for regular use, but it was nice for those few hard to split pieces. 

Over the years I've also concluded that the best mauls have a flat or almost flat edge. I've modified the mauls with the big round smile edge to a narrower flat edge and now they really work well.

Cheers!



thefeckerwest said:


> Have you a picture of that maul with the 48" handle? The handle seems too long. I have a 44" wooden handle on my maul which is about 7lb. in weight. It it was any longer it would be too unwieldy.


----------



## Humptulips (Jan 24, 2012)

Gypo Logger said:


> It's just my opinion, but I think Monster Mauls and Chopper 2's are nothing more than gimmicks.
> Sure they are ok for the odd clunker that is just as well sawn into pieces, but nothing beats a 6# maul with a 36" handle for all around wood splitting.
> John



:agree2:


----------



## milkie62 (Jan 24, 2012)

*Original Sotz*

I have an original Sotz MM from the 70's that my father bought.It is orange and total weight with steel handle is 25 lb's.A couple of years later they offered a smaller one that was 18 lb's total weight.There is a slight bow in the pipe since it was no where heavy enough for the momentum that could be generated.We did not have a splitter back then and I would give it my all on a knotty piece of oak.The oak would win so something else would have to give hence the slight bow in the pipe.It has been sitting in my shed for quite a few years now since I use the splitter for the tough stuff and generally all my wood.But I remember everytime swinging that MM back in the days of my youth.I am 53 now.It did give me pin-point accuracy since you did want every swing of that maul to count.My 19 year old cannot figure out how I can hit the same spot with a maul every time.


----------

