Best splitting maul

[cheeves]

Got any picherz?

You won't believe it Zog but that 7# Stanley and my 8# Snow&Neally were stolen out of the back of my truck last Feb during the week long power outage we had. A company called Pike that was up here from NC helping to restore power stole them. Even Verizon when they were here had a memo warning their employees about Pike stealing stuff! They cleared out of town before the cops nailed them!
My wife went on Ebay and found me four old mauls from Oregon. Two were very similar to my 7# Stanley and I have them on handles and have used them this Spring. Work very well. Don't know the name!
The secret with Mauls is to get a sharp point, not blunt, that widens. Maul needs to penetrate the round and spread the wood.
What was that fabulous guy on You Tube? Was it Charlie Moore or something like that. Blacksmith that made his own mauls and beat those two guys on a hydraulic splitter! He's got the design!! He died I think, but his wife was selling some of his mauls! Love to have one. Wider than an axe with a weight welded to the back. Just as sharp though.

 

[zogger]

You won't believe it Zog but that 7# Stanley and my 8# Snow&Neally were stolen out of the back of my truck last Feb during the week long power outage we had. A company called Pike that was up here from NC helping to restore power stole them. Even Verizon when they were here had a memo warning their employees about Pike stealing stuff! They cleared out of town before the cops nailed them!
My wife went on Ebay and found me four old mauls from Oregon. Two were very similar to my 7# Stanley and I have them on handles and have used them this Spring. Work very well. Don't know the name!
The secret with Mauls is to get a sharp point, not blunt, that widens. Maul needs to penetrate the round and spread the wood.
What was that fabulous guy on You Tube? Was it Charlie Moore or something like that. Blacksmith that made his own mauls and beat those two guys on a hydraulic splitter! He's got the design!! He died I think, but his wife was selling some of his mauls! Love to have one. Wider than an axe with a weight welded to the back. Just as sharp though.

Yep, he's the guy (Tom Clark) that did the match trick in the video that I tried and did on the 6th swing. He did it with that custom splitting axe he built, I did it with the fiskars.

Long time ago I think it was stlooiefirewood said he might have had a lead on one of his axes, but nothing came of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95Z2UXEFUIw

 

[ReggieT]

Yep, he's the guy (Tom Clark) that did the match trick in the video that I tried and did on the 6th swing. He did it with that custom splitting axe he built, I did it with the fiskars.

Long time ago I think it was stlooiefirewood said he might have had a lead on one of his axes, but nothing came of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95Z2UXEFUIw

Watched the video, quite impressive...is Tom still alive & kicking?

 

[zogger]

Watched the video, quite impressive...is Tom still alive & kicking?

Nope.

 

[zogger]

Watched the video, quite impressive...is Tom still alive & kicking?

My trophy...

 

[AKKAMAAN]

one crack..I would get out my hydraulic splitter and go down the middle. I don't have a problem using the maul. the leading edge is not tapered enough and it sticks a lot more than my other mauls. and for the one shot method..If I would only hit a piece of wood one time it would be too big for my stove. Furthermore it is a loaded question. what kind of wood? how green is it? straight grained? oak pine ash or maple I would hit "F" . kinda like asking how big the next fish will be that I catch. every round is different. cracks, grain, knots, where someone drove a spike into it to hang a birdhouse. too many variables for a one hit wonder. I would hit three across the middle. far. close. middle and usually have 2 halves..then work that. not saying my style is like anyone elses and I like to be unique. sometimes I might slab the outside.

[video=youtube;c_U07ijVOsY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_U07ijVOsY[/video]

 

[thefeckerwest]

Hi KodiakKen! I am interested in the problem you have with using that maul. Hope you do not mind if I ask you a question.

Where is your favorite "sweet spot" to crack open a 20" log with a maul? Lets say you are only given one shot at it!
I made it simple, just answer A,B,C,D,E,F,G or H. You can motivate your answer if you want.
I do not mind if others reply ply too, but then I might should have set up a poll in another thread.

View attachment 301316

I hit it at 'D' assuming that it is the side nearest to me. That is the best chance of opening up the round.

 

[RAW]

People are individuals, and what works for one may or may not work for the other. I have read this entire thread 3 times. Since my main heat source is wood and I burn 3-4 cords a season ( now that I bought a more efficient wood stove.) , and I split 90% of my wood with an 8 lb. maul. The idea of a splitting as fast, if not faster with less weight got my attention. The rave about the Fiskars x27 had me fired up. So yesterday Tuesday, August 20, 2013 I went out and purchased one. This morning couldn't come fast enough. Just as the sun was up, I grabbed my new Fiskars and the dog and headed out to where I had downed a couple of swamp maples I had cut into 16" lengths in late spring. These pieces were aprox. 27" in diameter all straight grain with no knots.some thing that with work my 8 lb. maul will do. So I took a shoulder wide stance, focused my eye 4'' in from the outside edge, bent my knees and raised the Fiskars as it reached head height I slid my right hand down to meet my left hand, straightened my knees and powered the X27 down into the wood. Well she made a little crease so I swung again another little crease. Repeatedly I tried again and again changing my stance and swing to no avail. So I figured I would head to the west a little and try it out on some red oak. After a few swings I was splitting the red oak. How ever not as easy as my 8 lb. maul. So this afternoon I returned the maul and said I was disappointed in it's performance.

If you don't have or use a hydraulic splitter here are the rules to cutting and burning wood I live by:

1. Buy the most efficient wood burner you can. Means you have to cut less wood.
2. Use a 3/8" or .404 chain and keep it sharp.
3. Split when you fell the tree right then and there
4. Make sure you split it the way it grows
5. Smaller pieces make hotter fires. 90% of my wood is an average of 4". And it dries faster.
6. Keep the stuff off the ground. As you split it, throw it on pallets.

The above keeps wood splitting more efficient. The idea is to work smarter, not harder.

 

[zogger]

People are individuals, and what works for one may or may not work for the other. I have read this entire thread 3 times. Since my main heat source is wood and I burn 3-4 cords a season ( now that I bought a more efficient wood stove.) , and I split 90% of my wood with an 8 lb. maul. The idea of a splitting as fast, if not faster with less weight got my attention. The rave about the Fiskars x27 had me fired up. So yesterday Tuesday, August 20, 2013 I went out and purchased one. This morning couldn't come fast enough. Just as the sun was up, I grabbed my new Fiskars and the dog and headed out to where I had downed a couple of swamp maples I had cut into 16" lengths in late spring. These pieces were aprox. 27" in diameter all straight grain with no knots.some thing that with work my 8 lb. maul will do. So I took a shoulder wide stance, focused my eye 4'' in from the outside edge, bent my knees and raised the Fiskars as it reached head height I slid my right hand down to meet my left hand, straightened my knees and powered the X27 down into the wood. Well she made a little crease so I swung again another little crease. Repeatedly I tried again and again changing my stance and swing to no avail. So I figured I would head to the west a little and try it out on some red oak. After a few swings I was splitting the red oak. How ever not as easy as my 8 lb. maul. So this afternoon I returned the maul and said I was disappointed in it's performance.

If you don't have or use a hydraulic splitter here are the rules to cutting and burning wood I live by:

1. Buy the most efficient wood burner you can. Means you have to cut less wood.
2. Use a 3/8" or .404 chain and keep it sharp.
3. Split when you fell the tree right then and there
4. Make sure you split it the way it grows
5. Smaller pieces make hotter fires. 90% of my wood is an average of 4". And it dries faster.
6. Keep the stuff off the ground. As you split it, throw it on pallets.

The above keeps wood splitting more efficient. The idea is to work smarter, not harder.

My swing is different than that. My knees are bent and I am dropping my body at moment of impact.

I honestly don't think one small session, with years and years of muscle memory with an 8lb maul can be overcome that easy.

I think..perhaps..all my earliest splitting was done with a generic limbing /chopping axe, not a maul. I only got into mauls much later. Years later...many many cords later. As such, I developed speed and focus with a very lightweight axe, which was easy to relearn with my original 28inch supersplitter. I have yet to try an x27 model, but will say, after hefting one, (first time today in fact as coincidences go), I don't like the axe shaped head and would prefer their original wedge shaped head. IF I was to purchase an x27 I would grind the top and bottom straight so it looked like a wedge. I like the longer handle, but not the head shape, and also noticed the factory edge was barely half as sharp as the factory edge came on the SS, and the teflon coating did not feel as slippery.

Besides that, I have to withold judgement, never put one to wood yet, but bet I could make it work, even leaving it stock.

Anyway, doesn't matter, your other stuff is right on and I agree with it.

Why the heck Fiskars won't at least *try* to sell the x39 in the USA is beyond me. That is the model I am way more interested in as an addition to the wood splitting fleet here.

Sorry it didn't work out for you, but, sounds like you get your wood busted, that's all that counts!

 

[Brushwacker]

My swing is different than that. My knees are bent and I am dropping my body at moment of impact.

I honestly don't think one small session, with years and years of muscle memory with an 8lb maul can be overcome that easy.

I think..perhaps..all my earliest splitting was done with a generic limbing /chopping axe, not a maul. I only got into mauls much later. Years later...many many cords later. As such, I developed speed and focus with a very lightweight axe, which was easy to relearn with my original 28inch supersplitter. I have yet to try an x27 model, but will say, after hefting one, (first time today in fact as coincidences go), I don't like the axe shaped head and would prefer their original wedge shaped head. IF I was to purchase an x27 I would grind the top and bottom straight so it looked like a wedge. I like the longer handle, but not the head shape, and also noticed the factory edge was barely half as sharp as the factory edge came on the SS, and the teflon coating did not feel as slippery.

Besides that, I have to withold judgement, never put one to wood yet, but bet I could make it work, even leaving it stock.

Anyway, doesn't matter, your other stuff is right on and I agree with it.

Why the heck Fiskars won't at least *try* to sell the x39 in the USA is beyond me. That is the model I am way more interested in as an addition to the wood splitting fleet here.

Sorry it didn't work out for you, but, sounds like you get your wood busted, that's all that counts!

The original shaped head works way better for me. I tried the new 1 with the long handle and was disappointed. It just doesn't split as good. I wish they would put a long handle on the original splitting ax and i believe it would of improved it.
To me the Fiskars isn't powerful as most heavy mauls but the original has a great power to weight ratio and the shock to the body transfer through the handle is very little compared to what I was use to. Average straight grained wood here is where it shines and it will get through a modest knot fairly well but tougher splitting wood I prefer switching to an adequate tool to get the task done without over stressing myself. It would need to be dirt cheap before I' d buy the later design Fiskars because I doubt I'd use it much. The original, I wish I had another.

 

[CR888]

Hi KodiakKen! I am interested in the problem you have with using that maul. Hope you do not mind if I ask you a question.

Where is your favorite "sweet spot" to crack open a 20" log with a maul? Lets say you are only given one shot at it!
I made it simple, just answer A,B,C,D,E,F,G or H. You can motivate your answer if you want.
I do not mind if others reply ply too, but then I might should have set up a poll in another thread.

View attachment 301316

I would hit H

 

[BillNole]

The original shaped head works way better for me. I tried the new 1 with the long handle and was disappointed. It just doesn't split as good. I wish they would put a long handle on the original splitting ax and i believe it would of improved it.
To me the Fiskars isn't powerful as most heavy mauls but the original has a great power to weight ratio and the shock to the body transfer through the handle is very little compared to what I was use to. Average straight grained wood here is where it shines and it will get through a modest knot fairly well but tougher splitting wood I prefer switching to an adequate tool to get the task done without over stressing myself. It would need to be dirt cheap before I' d buy the later design Fiskars because I doubt I'd use it much. The original, I wish I had another.

This is pretty much my take as well. I still use my older mauls depending on the wood, but I really do like the X27 when the wood accepts it. I'd use the X27 for everything if it would work, but it won't. My order of preference is X27, mauls, then hydraulic.

I've never seen or used the older Fiskars you guys mention. Makes me wish I could come across one, at least to try...

It's all good!

 

[zogger]

This is pretty much my take as well. I still use my older mauls depending on the wood, but I really do like the X27 when the wood accepts it. I'd use the X27 for everything if it would work, but it won't. My order of preference is X27, mauls, then hydraulic.

I've never seen or used the older Fiskars you guys mention. Makes me wish I could come across one, at least to try...

It's all good!

Yep, all fiskars needed to do was make the darn handle longer, but noooo, they had to dork around with the shape to make it look like an axe when it is a splitter! I bet a weeks pay that was a marketing decision and not an engineering decision...the original shape was a wedge on a handle, which works quite well. The next closest for anything you can buy brand new looks to me in the pictures to be the wetterlings splitter at around 200 bucks. For that much money I would take the x27 fiskars and grind off the top and bottom, make it straight wedge shaped again. The spreader wing angle still looks the same to me, it is fine. Really not that much metal to remove to make it straight. Maybe a machine shop with a good metal cutter, a powered hacksaw (do not know a name for this...) could do it cheap, don't know. Or just use a grinder and take your time to not overheat it up while doing it.

 

[CTYank]

One problem with evaluating splitting tools such as mauls & axes, is assuming such a tool is one or the other. Box "A" or Box "B". Minimal difference.

Fact is there are many variations on "maul", like of material, weight, shape, edge and handle for starters. These characteristics all vary enormously, as does the efficiency of the maul in splitting wood. No surprise.

People make all sorts of comparisons involving mauls, focusing totally on weight, often based on hearsay or hazy memory. Ignoring other factors. Seems to me you need to try them side by side, for a while, unbiased.

I did that with some, and reshaped some "Bradlees special" 6-pounders and an 8-pounder to mimic an Austrian maul. They went from instruments of torture to efficient wood-splitting tools. The changes were: flat cheeks with minimal "chubbiness" and sharp edges that are essentially at the same angle as the cheeks. Like a real axe. I couldn't do anything with the metallurgy.

The 8-pounder is still noticeably less effective, for me, than the 6-pounders, but useful for driving wedges into part-noodled forks & knots. Comparing them side by side with fiskars, I really didn't see what the hype was all about.

For a really good maul at a good price, try the Ochsenkopf that Stihl dealers sell with their label for ~$80. Then you can split rounds right down the middle instead of daisying (taking chips off the outside) them. Or try Gransfors Bruks, or Wetterlings, or Mueller or others.

Bottom line- if you're going to compare mauls with X-whatever, try a good maul, not a cheapie POS.

 

[RAW]

Well my 8 lb. el cheapo maul was re ground to mimic the Austrian made Mueller which is 6.6 lbs. To some extent weight doesn't play as big a factor as the shape of the head itself. The Mueller face is shaped from the splitting edge STRAIGHT up to the widest point at the center of the eye. No flares or raised ribs. Using an 8 lb. maul for a day is kind of relaxing when you grind them this way.

 

[cnice_37]

1. Buy the most efficient wood burner you can. Means you have to cut less wood.
2. Use a 3/8" or .404 chain and keep it sharp.
3. Split when you fell the tree right then and there
4. Make sure you split it the way it grows
5. Smaller pieces make hotter fires. 90% of my wood is an average of 4". And it dries faster.
6. Keep the stuff off the ground. As you split it, throw it on pallets.

The above keeps wood splitting more efficient. The idea is to work smarter, not harder.

2. Why? 346xp with .325" cuts pretty good, so why change it over when the current setup works and your setup would cost me more $? Maybe when the time comes and the sprocket is done, but until then...
3. This isn't true for all wood. Split red oak in the cold, let pine dry, etc.
4. What does that mean? Stump faces down? What about knots and Y's? I just read the wood.
5. Sure do, but when you want to go to bed bigger chunks certainly have their place. All sizes that fit in the stove have their use.

As to your take on the Fiskars, it is a tool that has its niche (straight grained stuff), and puts my cheap maul to shame in a lot of the wood I split. It isn't very good for knotty stuff. I have found that if its a tougher species, or nasty piece, just throw it to the side for the hydraulics. The Fiskars is more enjoyable for me, I can swing it for an hour and feel great with plenty of work to show for it. And at the price point, it's my $40 life long gym membership.

I'd sure like to see the grinds on the heads of the cheap mauls, I want to give it a try but really have no idea what my end shape is.

 

[RAW]

2. Why? 346xp with .325" cuts pretty good, so why change it over when the current setup works and your setup would cost me more $? Maybe when the time comes and the sprocket is done, but until then...
3. This isn't true for all wood. Split red oak in the cold, let pine dry, etc.
4. What does that mean? Stump faces down? What about knots and Y's? I just read the wood.
5. Sure do, but when you want to go to bed bigger chunks certainly have their place. All sizes that fit in the stove have their use.

As to your take on the Fiskars, it is a tool that has its niche (straight grained stuff), and puts my cheap maul to shame in a lot of the wood I split. It isn't very good for knotty stuff. I have found that if its a tougher species, or nasty piece, just throw it to the side for the hydraulics. The Fiskars is more enjoyable for me, I can swing it for an hour and feel great with plenty of work to show for it. And at the price point, it's my $40 life long gym membership.

I'd sure like to see the grinds on the heads of the cheap mauls, I want to give it a try but really have no idea what my end shape is.

# 2.Yes the 346 XP does cut well with the .325. However the 346 is a still only a 50 cc saw, and if I remember correctly a little low on torque. The point being for efficiency of cutting a 3/8' standard pitch chain should be used on a saw above 55 cc. And yes you will find lots of forums where people use a .50 sprocket with a 3/8' standard pitch and claim they cut better on the 346 XP. I should have made that a point in my original post. Personally my saws are all old and 60 cc and over. Dolmar Sachs 166 and a model 7700 Green Machine at just under 62 cc's. I have tried the .325 in both saws and they do not cut as well

# 3. I will very much disagree with the fact that red oak splits better when frozen. I cut and split most of my wood in the spring. The hardwoods I have are maple, red oak, black cherry. On another lot I cut a lot of shag bark hickory, beech and an occasional elm. And yes I have split many of y pieces..... with my 8 lb. mauls. I also cut dead and diseased apple trees from a large orchard. Out of all of those species I would much rather split red oak when it's fresh green.... splits like seasoned fir. Apple is never straight and full of knots, it's my least favorite to split. Pine I cannot remark on because I do not burn it simply because where I live it's double the work to get the same heat as I would from a cord of hardwood. Once I quarter my pieces I switch over to a hand forged axe circa 1920's to split pieces to the 4" size.

#4. As I mentioned above I split it the way it grows straight up. That means I split from the bottom up. Y's I stand straight up with the smallest branch stump facing away from me. Big knots I turn parallel to my view.

# 5. Physics plays a part here. Larger wood burns slower. The lower the temperature wood is burned at the more smoke and creosote you produce. For years I would burn 8" rounds at night in my Warner. The amount of creosote build up was so much that in the spring my stove pipe would have a 1/2" lining in it. Last fall I purchased a Pacific Energy Fusion. The fire box was only 1.5 cubic ft. I had to re cut the wood I had cut for the Warner which averaged about 20". The surprise was with smaller wood in both length and diameter I burnt a 1/3 LESS wood. If you go to A non-commercial service in support of responsible home heating with wood - woodheat.org home you will find that they recommend splitting wood from 3-6"

The Fiskars I'm sure does have a niche for some as far as the cheap end of things, but my one day use offered me none. If you look down in the head of your maul you want to see a straight line from the contact edge straight back to the widest point of the mall at the eye. Grind the sides until you can't see light with a straight edge laying across the 2 points. I never ever have or will sharpen the striking edge.

 

[CTYank]

2. Why? 346xp with .325" cuts pretty good, so why change it over when the current setup works and your setup would cost me more $? Maybe when the time comes and the sprocket is done, but until then...
3. This isn't true for all wood. Split red oak in the cold, let pine dry, etc.
4. What does that mean? Stump faces down? What about knots and Y's? I just read the wood.
5. Sure do, but when you want to go to bed bigger chunks certainly have their place. All sizes that fit in the stove have their use.

As to your take on the Fiskars, it is a tool that has its niche (straight grained stuff), and puts my cheap maul to shame in a lot of the wood I split. It isn't very good for knotty stuff. I have found that if its a tougher species, or nasty piece, just throw it to the side for the hydraulics. The Fiskars is more enjoyable for me, I can swing it for an hour and feel great with plenty of work to show for it. And at the price point, it's my $40 life long gym membership.

I'd sure like to see the grinds on the heads of the cheap mauls, I want to give it a try but really have no idea what my end shape is.

I can tell you what worked for me, to rework a couple "Bradlees special" mauls.

Starting with 7" rigid carborundum disc in a right-angle grinder. Holding the maul by the head in a little "workmate" I ground it slowly across each face, from the widest point to the edge, with the disc making contact along the head. (Lengthwise scratches.) Slowly grind off most all protrusions of the face above the plane from the widest point, to the edge. Then follow up with couple of grades of flexible disc, ending up with sharpening the edge.

(Mueller maul has the widest point of its head along the centerline of the handle. The cheapies don't, and there's nothing I could do about that. That head shape, keeping the splits from getting jammed into the handle, sure seems to have helped keep the handle like-new after splitting more than 10 cords.)

Bottom line: a sharp edge, and a head taper that's quite a bit more blunt than an axe- about .380-.440" thick at about 3/4" back from the edge, works great. For reference, my Snow & Neally axe is about .245" thick in that area. I just take off the "bumps" on the faces that the grinder finds for me. Nice and easy, keep it cool.

I see no down-side to a sharp edge, and I've found evidence that it gets it split more efficiently. With pre-mod mauls, often at the split face I'd find a good stripe, maybe 1/2" wide of crushed & torn fiber at the start of the split faces. They were being tortured rather than cleaved. With sharp edges, that's history.

 

[ENYT]

CTYank can you post a picture of the mauls you have worked on.I am trying to do the same thing with an old 6lb maul that I had laying around.

 

[CTYank]

CTYank can you post a picture of the mauls you have worked on.I am trying to do the same thing with an old 6lb maul that I had laying around.

Likely wouldn't help much, since I don't have any before/during pix. Desired head shape: looking from above, picture a very skinny piece of pie at the business end of the head, without obtuse angle or convexity near the edge.

As mentioned, I used a 7" rt-angle grinder, first w/rigid carborundum discs, then flexible discs, outdoors.

Very simple in concept (just takes time):
1. Clamp maul laying on its side, so a face of the head is accessible. Notice where the bulges on the face are; we want to reduce them as possible. A 6" straight-edge might help some folks.
2. With rigid disc, moving back and forth parallel the handle, with the disc making contact along the face, slowly grind into the high spots and explore for others. The idea is to make the face as flat as (reasonably) possible, from the edge to the widest point. Just get close to the edge here. Be careful to keep it cool- water helps.
Check your work with a straight-edge if it helps.
3. After grinding the other face, polish them some, fixtured the same way, with med. and fine flexible discs, and just touch the edge here. Again keep it cool.

IIRC, it took about 45 min. to rework each of 3 mauls, taking care to not overheat their mystery-metal. I just wanted to see how important the head-shape was, and if that would help them to work as effectively as the Mueller. Now I use the Mueller for the big stuff/first splits, and the no-nameo-s for the smaller stuff. The 8-lb one was merely a pointy sledge before; now it can split wood.

Enjoy the experiment; I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.