The ash I get is darn near as stringy as the elm, but a bit easier to bust... gotta' be due to local conditions I figure.
*
*
Kind of interesting how a maul that weighs 2 more pounds or so could be much more effective vs the Fiskars. I would think you could make that difference up with strike speed. Perhaps I should have paid attention to your physics argumentI've found the Fiskars won't split (with one whack) most of what I cut. Seriously, it won't split anything a single bit ax won't, although it does it with a bit more authority. I had high expectations also; reading what the "fans" post you get the idea it the next best thing to a Star Wars Light Saber. But the "reality" is, like any other tool, it has its purpose and use... no more than that. I actually believe it would be a better tool with a good hickory handle on it; but then they couldn't use the "lifetime" sales gimmick... and, of course, the head would need redesign. The cost of the thing (not that it's that much) must be mostly the handle anyway, 'cause the steel ain't all that great... too hard/brittle for a striking/cutting tool.
I use the "one-whack" theory when splittin' wood with ax or maul... if one won't do the job, I'm using the wrong tool (an occasional two whacks if the second is just to break the last few fibers or strings). The Fiskars is not effective on Burr Oak, Ash, Black Cheery, Hackberry, Hard Maple, and (straight) Red Elm... but the maul is. The Fiskars is effective on Silver Maple, White Cedar, Black Walnut (most of it), and standing-dead Pine... it does OK on a few of the others I mentioned after they've been halved or quartered by the maul.
Nothing but hydraulics is effective on American Elm... or, at least, I ain't found anything else. Heck, wedge 'n' sledge ain't even effective.
Some stuff just ain't worth tryin' to split with shoulder power.
*
Kind of interesting how a maul that weighs 2 more pounds or so could be much more effective vs the Fiskars. I would think you could make that difference up with strike speed. Perhaps I should have paid attention to your physics argument
Maybe my problem is I can't make up the difference in speed with the fiskars to make it more effective?Yes it can be made up with more speed.
Kind of interesting how a maul that weighs 2 more pounds or so could be much more effective vs the Fiskars. I would think you could make that difference up with strike speed.
But... you guys are assuming the lighter ax is being swung faster (or striking at a faster speed), which may, or may not, be true depending on the user.Yes it can be made up with more speed.
Maybe the heavier tool doesn't slow your swing (or striking speed)... which would nullify any "speed" advantage the lighter tool might gain.Maybe my problem is I can't make up the difference in speed with the fiskars to make it more effective?
We need Myth Busters to settle this. It's opposite for me. I feel like I can swing that Fiskars faster than a wood handled maul. I also swing the maul a bit different. I think I keep the Fiskars more verticalBut... you guys are assuming the lighter ax is being swung faster (or striking at a faster speed), which may, or may not, be true depending on the user.
There's a speed limit for the human entity... some guys may be faster than others, but it ain't infinite for anyone.
Of course I've never measured it... but, going on feel, I'm seriously doubting there's any difference in striking speed when I swing a 4# ax or 6# maul... and maybe a miniscule difference with an 8# maul. It may be further into the swing (longer time) before I reach maximum speed, but that doesn't change the striking speed.
Maybe the heavier tool doesn't slow your swing (or striking speed)... which would nullify any "speed" advantage the lighter tool might gain.
*
Maybe my problem is I can't make up the difference in speed with the fiskars to make it more effective?
There's a speed limit for the human entity.
I think not... it's already been settled several times.We need Myth Busters to settle this.
You mean... we agree??Yes, there is a limit to how fast you can swing even with no weight.
I was just thinking there's so many variables involved. Weight of the blade, weight of handle, balance, profile of head, swing characteristics, speed, etc. It would be interesting to see a scientific experiment to test the variables. Hope that makes sense, finance major hereI think not... it's already been settled several times.
Google the speed of a baseball bat, golf club, or whatever... there's a point where decreasing weight of the object being swung, or building more muscle on the person doing the swinging, no longer increases the speed of the swing (it can even slow it some).
*
Kind of interesting how a maul that weighs 2 more pounds or so could be much more effective vs the Fiskars. I would think you could make that difference up with strike speed. Perhaps I should have paid attention to your physics argument
I was just thinking there's so many variables involved. Weight of the blade, weight of handle, balance, profile of head, swing characteristics, speed, etc. It would be interesting to see a scientific experiment to test the variables. Hope that makes sense, finance major here
Axe comparison plus good way to use the fiskars
Axe comparison plus good way to use the fiskars
Axe comparison plus good way to use the fiskars
The Fiskars people made the video - they are going to show their product in the best light. You could argue about a few things in it..Is it just me or do they use more boards stacked up with the competition's models vs the fiskars? Wouldn't using less boards give the axe more time to speed up?
Yeah... I noticed that also.Is it just me or do they use more boards stacked up with the competition's models vs the fiskars? Wouldn't using less boards give the axe more time to speed up?
Yeah... I noticed that also.
Ten blocks for competitors #1 and #2, what appears to be eight for #3, and seven for the Fiskars. More stacked blocks also makes for more "give", or absorption of the blow. But it's a sales video (shrug)... it-is-what-it-is. If it didn't show the product it's advertizing as a better mouse trap... it would be a lousy sales video. I believe they call it marketing. Ya' know?? Selling the magic.
I always laughed at the one where the Chevy and Ford were hooked together in a tug-o-war (don't remember now who's advertizement that was).
*
I notice that too. The green ash around me (just north of you) is nearly as bad as elm when green.The ash I get is darn near as stringy as the elm, but a bit easier to bust... gotta' be due to local conditions I figure.
*