| Author |
Message |
|
J. Wilby
Location: Mississauga, Ontario Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 5
|
 Posted: Thu 08 Oct, 2009 9:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Lucas LaVoy wrote: | Hi Deshler,
I thought I'd chime in; this is turning into a fun topic. This axe may be a little on the minimalist side for what you are going for, but I've always found it fascinating.
http://www.myArmoury.com/review_aa_hungarian.html
One of the things that strikes me about the Kit Rae axes is that they all have all feature numerous points to thrust with as well as to cut; ths A&A Hungarian Axe boils it down more and only has the one point, but the concept is the same. And it certainly looks ferocious (to me at least). Anyway, the end product is certainly unique looking, as well as being a battle tested and historically accurate design. |
If I can just add one more opinion. I actually have this axe. At about 4' overall length it is light, fast, can slice (as against just hack) and has a nasty nasty point for thrusting. An axe meant for actual fighting as against being adapted from something to cut trees.... Oh - did I mention that the price is pretty reasonable? 
|
|
  |
 |
Deshler Davies
Location: Virginia Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 20
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Fri 09 Oct, 2009 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well, I've been a woodworker for forty years and I have never heard of "sagad" wood. Looking at it on the computer doesn't exactly fill me with confidence but it could be some tropical hardwood that is amazingly strong and tough that I haven't heard about. The Lutel handle looks like its oak or ash but it's stained so dark it's a tough call. If I were spending the money I'd go with the Lutel.
|
|
|
|
|
Deshler Davies
Location: Virginia Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Fri 09 Oct, 2009 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
thats one for lutel lol
it bothers me not knowing about the quality of the wood on either handle
that sagad wood is NO WHERE on the internet
i wonder if lutel is hickory
i was told hickory is the best possible wood for an axe
is this true?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Oct, 2009 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hickory seems to be traditional for tool handles (including axes) and ash seems to be the wood of choice for baseball bats. I think both are good for axe handles. If I had my druthers I'd go with ash but this is more personal idiosyncrasy than an informed opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Allen Foster
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Oct, 2009 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry to keep this thread alive, but here are some double bladed axes that I found on another forum:
 Attachment: 39.31 KB
Attachment: 50.8 KB
"Rise up, O Lord, and may thy enemies be dispersed and those who hate thee be driven from thy face."
|
|
 |
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Oct, 2009 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know why Allen is sorry to keep this thread alive, I think it's fun and interesting.
In fact, it was inspiring me to research getting a battle axe for myself to be a companion for my Knud.
I was thinking about contacting Arms and Armor about the Nordland axe and see if there was a way to make it appear less modern. It seems like an efficient weapon/tool and the price is reasonable. The problem is that it looks like a battle axe that was designed by the Bauhaus group and a lot of that is caused by the finish on the axe head. The Gransfors Bruks axe is quite a bit more money but inexpensive compared to many of the swords and other weapons discussed here and it looks like the real deal. Both of these axes are sized to allow use with one or both hands and I suppose, with practice, the axe could be used instead of a shield with devastating effect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audun Refsahl
Location: Norway Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Oct, 2009 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have tried for a while to figure out how to fight with an axe that would have a "hand and a half" size, but i seriously cant. some of those axes that was in use in norway during the 16th century are too big for 1 handed use, but still so short they will give minimal reach advantage to a sword. if anyone have a clue speak up. but for now, i'll go with a big 2 handed dane axe. I do reenactment fighting with a big dane axe, and from that I have learned that weight is a big factor. you obviously need there to be enough weight to feel a presence and follow through a cut or a stab, but for fighting speed is essential so anything that doesn't serve a purpose should be avoided. also it needs to be long enough to give you an advantage, so at least your own height.
I also do test cutting with daneaxe, and from this I have learned a lot. first of you dont need a lot of mass to out-cut any other weapon, leverage does most of the work. so the weight thing i mentioned will not be a problem, go light.
second, you want the pointy ends, they will stab or hook through a pigs skull without much effort. a bearded axe wont, but a newer model, like arms&armour danish war axe will.
then of course, there is plate armour, and you want the extra pointies.
my point is if you are looking for function or even some credibility in that area you need to go light. I have realized that there is some fantasy factor that needs to be filled, or maybe fantastic. I dont mind that, just figured i'd throw it in. I like this thread, it deserves a few more posts:)
just bacon...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Oct, 2009 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Auden,
All I can go on is my experience using tools, I haven't done any reenactment fighting.
Your comments caused me to take another look at the Nordland axe and while it's just about the same weight as the Gransfors Bruks, it's about ten inches shorter. The Swedish axe is 85 cm. which works out to about 32 inches. Both weigh somewhat more than two pounds. I think a 20" axe is too short to be effective against a 36" sword by itself although if it were used in lieu of a shield it might be good.
Just out of curiosity I retrieved a little wood cutting axe I have that's about 30" long and weighs three pounds. I wouldn't be able to use it with any kind of agility with my left hand but I'd be able to use it, for a short while, with my right. If it was a half pound or so lighter, I'd be able to use it with either hand and probably with a fair amount of agility with some practice and conditioning.
I do remember reading a comment by somebody here that the toughest opponent they ever had to face in a reenactment fight was a man with a sword and an axe rather than a sword and shield. One of the things he was able to do was hook and pull down his opponent's shield and, of course, he could fight more offensively with the sword and axe than with a sword and shield.
Test cutting with a Dane axe must be something to see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audun Refsahl
Location: Norway Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Oct, 2009 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
well, you know how good swords have a good balance? axes don't. so you have to compensate withe weight. it has to be lighter than a same length sword. my one handed blunt axe is about 6-700 grams, many are much less. it is a bit lighter than a real viking axe, but not too much. I sharpened on of those once, and tested it against the back of a pig. a kid could drive it in to the hilt, so they are very effective, you don't need a lot more. my axe is 24", so add length add weight...
as to dual wielding, its no good idea really. in reenactment style fighting often hands and arms are no target, and if you are bold enough to rush someone faster than they are comfortable with, it can work, but it isn't very realistic. you can fight equally or more offensive with a shield, especially if you can use offensive shield techniques.
I never have problems dealing with dual wielders, as long as i remember they chose to get hurt them self 
in reenactment style fighting also heads are not a target, and in this situation a 25" axe and a medium size shield will do ok against a 35" sword and equal shield, its a matter of choosing the distance to the opponent. add face the sword gets an advantage, but i don't do a lot of this wma fighting so its more difficult to comment.
thought i'd ad this, its from a bbq i hosted last summer:)
just bacon...
|
|
|
|
|
Deshler Davies
Location: Virginia Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Sun 21 Nov, 2010 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
after 2 years of research i have found there is not nearly as much information on good axes as there is swords
how ever i have on the suggestion of many users on this site browsed lutels line up and this caught my eye
http://www.lutel.eu/?p=productsMore&iProd...-axe-20012
however from the research i have done most say a good axe should weigh between 1.75 and 3.lbs
this weapon is 2.5 kg (5.5 lbs) I am 150 lbs at 6ft1. I am scared to invest in this axe because it seems out of what is supposedly acceptable for weight. My ideal axe can be used with one hand in emergency but mostly i will use it with two hands, and im not sure if im big enough to use this weapon efficiently. I could really use some guidance before i spend hundreds of dollars on something i may not enjoy.
Help?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Augusto Boer Bront
Industry Professional
Location: Cividale del Friuli (UD) Italy Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Posts: 294
|
|
|
|
|
Luka Borscak
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2010 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Both Lutel and Kovex are way too heavy. I think you would be much happier with an A&A axe, and they are not too expensive for what you get...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audun Refsahl
Location: Norway Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2010 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you want to use 2 hands you need reach, as you dont have a lot of defence. so, a 2 handed axe should be 5-7'. a 1 handed axe should be less than 2lbs. that way you can use the left hand for defence. a "hand and a half" looses both reach and defence, so you'd need a lot of armour to compensate... that lutel is a really bad idea unless you have lots of armour.
just bacon...
|
|
|
|
|
Deshler Davies
Location: Virginia Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Thu 27 Jan, 2011 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lol
i was hoping on my martial arts training :P 15 years of shorin ryu teaches you to move lol
so im going for mobility/evasion, but the ability to cause problems for even someone in armor. as we all know, swords do not pose that much of a threat to a trained knight. hence the invention of the murder stroke.
my goal is to be faster than an armored target and pose a large threat to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony Jacobs
|
| Posted: Tue 08 Feb, 2011 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The style of axe use you seem to be describing would probably fit best with the shepherds axe.
This site has quite a bit of information on them. http://www.oprishki.wordpress.com
Page3 even has some video of their use.
sorry I arrived so late to the topic. I hope this will help you.
|
|
 |
|
Simon G.
|
| Posted: Tue 08 Feb, 2011 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Deshler,
How about this one from another Czech maker, Armory Marek ? It has a nice "fantasy" look to it (I kinda like the unusual blade shape), and has a scary back spike.
(EDIT - last time I asked Armory Marek for their prices this one was 350€, it may have changed since then. Perhaps you could ask them to make you a less decorated version for less than that).
The handle is steel, though. Regarding that, I doubt steel handles are inappropriate as has been said above. There are historical examples of axes with steel handles (see for instance this one in the Albums here) and there are also many examples of maces with steel handles, so I think it's quite possible to make a resilient and adequate steel handle for such a heavy-duty weapon as an axe or mace. However, no two-handed or even hand-and-a-half handles there, a steel handle so long would probably be too unwieldy.
Hope you find your dream axe anyway !
Cheers !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin Floyd II
|
|
|
|
|
Thom R.
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Feb, 2011 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Audun Refsahl wrote: | | I have tried for a while to figure out how to fight with an axe that would have a "hand and a half" size, but i seriously cant. some of those axes that was in use in norway during the 16th century are too big for 1 handed use, but still so short they will give minimal reach advantage to a sword. if anyone have a clue speak up. |
I have done a lot of balance beam measurements on swords to delve into moment forces and moment of inertia, and how mass distribution affects handling on a sword.
there are a couple threads here at mA about mass distribution and Vincent Le Chevalier has recently published on this topic.
generally you are right - when it comes to wielding a mace, axe, or say short polearm with one hand, i have found that there is a maximum reaction force that most people are comfortable with - and that is about 4000-5000 grams of force. depends on your strength of course, especially with your wrist and forearm, but I would say that is 5000 grams force is probably an upper limit for most folks to feel comfortable wielding a weapon one handed. for a typical modern tool hammer, thats not so much of an issue as most hammers are not long tools even if the hammer head is relatively heavy. but when you start looking at the moment force for a short axe, where most of the weight is a point load on the end of the haft, there is an exponential curve of increasing moment force with distance from hand to the axe head. it is not linear. so to get a "hand and a half length" for a war axe, you have to dramatically cut back on the weight of the head to keep it manageable with one hand. or you can add weight to the handle end to move the POB on an axe, but this quickly becomes counter productive as it adds to the total weight. this is why most single hand polearm weapons are generally less than 60 cm or so in total length.
otoh, many 15th and 16th c. polearms, designed to be used with one hand or two, seemed designed to be used in a vertical falling chopping motion. they are not swords and are not necessarily designed to be maneuverable and easily recoverable from a swing. in fact they are not really designed to be swung at all because on the front line there was no room for swinging a polearm around.
|
|
|
|
|
Jack W. Englund
|
| Posted: Wed 09 Feb, 2011 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IMO, look @ these - 
 
This "style" was used from the 1300s until the 1860s + ( Naval Boarding Axes")
Yes some may "catch your eye", BUT IMO. "Fantasy axes" = Ren Faires.  If you are going to carry a "battle axe" then carry one that will "do the JOB"
BTW, I can not speak to "metallurgy", BUT the best "haft",IMHO, is Ash..
Jack
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic