Heads up! Maine Pattern Axe... Making The High Carbon Overcoat Bit

  • Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.

joshiecole

Member
Apr 30, 2012
28
0
london
Hey chaps,

Just thought one or two of you might be interested to see a quick snap of the first phase of my Maine pattern axe production. (similar to the vintage Maine axe I posted about the other month) I'm making wedge pattern axes with high carbon 80CRV2 steel bits overcoated on. This picture shows the bit before it gets split. I didn't take the picture myself (obviously!) so sorry it's not more exciting.

wpid-img_20150805_153257_zps1ermwpat.jpg


Anyway, I'm using exactly the same process as in the Emerson Stevens factory. If you want to keep up to date on what I'm up to you can do it here or here.
 
I'm really interested in what you learn from this project. The ES factory video was a real find because I would never have believed that axes were being produced that way to the mid 20th century to be price competitive with axes produced by die forging on an industrial scale.
 

joshiecole

Member
Apr 30, 2012
28
0
london
Thanks Jimbo,

Yes, that video is an absolute God-send. Other than that video there is very little specific information about how to make axes in this fashion available, There are lots videos and posts about how to wrap and weld with an inserted bit, but there is very little information about how to do the 'overcoat' bit favoured by my favourite Oakland Maine companies.

I've got a couple more pics here. I'm doing a few different things at the moment, but I'll hopefully have a finished product within a few days. Meanwhile, here are a few pics of the overcoat taking shape.

20150805_173955_zpsadc7481f.jpg


20150805_175330_zpsb883fdad.jpg


20150805_175504_zpsdb2e92e5.jpg


20150805_175554_zps6d481ac1.jpg


20150805_175559_zps47e9894d.jpg


IMG_20150805_181008_zps27b4a7d3.jpg
 
One thing is for sure - you'll have the first axe head made by that method in a long time!

There are still people like Lee Reeves - oops I guess he's retired - making iron axe heads with inserted steel bits so that they are authentic replicas of early axes made when steel was expensive. I certainly haven't heard of anyone else making a head by the wrap method, though!

Despite a lot of study of axes, I'm still wondering why the ES factory continued with the method so late, and what the advantages of the method are, given that it's extremely skilled labour intensive. For sure die forging requires large equipment and expensive dies - and even then they wouldn't have been able to compete with the huge factories which had an advantage of scale, with identical products. That's the problem with axes - everything about them and their history is confusing. Some manufacturers were still stamping their axes with "Cast Steel" meaning that they were forged from steel ingots made by the consistent Bessemer process, long into the 20th century, decades after advanced steel making became the norm. Axes were expensive compared to wages, though, and I can see how people would want to be reassured that their new axe was as good as their grandpa's.
 

Dave Budd

Gold Trader
Staff member
Jan 8, 2006
2,895
321
44
Dartmoor (Devon)
www.davebudd.com
There are a few of us out there that have used this technique having seen that video in other places ;) I first tried it as a way of saving an axe that had become too short in the blade to be useful (the original core split in the heat treat and I didn't want to waste the work that had already gone into it)

Not as easy to do as the more usual splitting of the body, but does offer certain advantages to the finished head. The main advantages of this method are that you can use the same base axe as a double bevel or side axe without having to relocate the steel edge (a side axe would need the steel welded to one side, so conversion form one to the other would result in soft edges). A weld flaw would leave a snag pointing towards the back of the axe not towards the edge in this case, so if it were to open in use then the wood won't drag or open it further. It will give more useable steel on the axe before it gets worn through, without possible loss of carbon at that point during the forging (a core will leave carbon into the body, so the longer you take over making it, then the less C you have at the edge). There is another reason that came to mind, but it is early and I've forgotten it for the moment!

I've seen this method used on knives/swords more commonly than axes archaeologically. For axes it is much more difficult to make the connection nice (dress the welds in), especially if the body is significantly softer that the edge at heat. It is also a more difficult weld to do. Preparing the U-shaped bit is a bonus to the weld and the mass allotted for the body, but is more difficult to make than the V-shaped coat in the last picture (which can result in a thin and weakened head if too narrow, as well as cold shuts)

Looking forward to seeing it done :)
 

richardhomer

Settler
Aug 23, 2012
775
7
STOURBRIDGE
I will look forward to the seeing the updates on your project. Thanks for sharing the link to the video. I have never seen that before and I enjoyed watching it
 

joshiecole

Member
Apr 30, 2012
28
0
london
Thanks for the advice Dave, I've been an admirer of your work for some time.

On this issue of the V versus U shaped overcoat, I would have thought it would be ok. It's 12.5mm thick so each side is around a quarter of an inch, and because I've used a slightly larger quantity of HC steel than in the video the wings of the overcoat should extend further back towards the poll to give a more secure weld. Anyway, I'll report back on how it goes.
 

Dave Budd

Gold Trader
Staff member
Jan 8, 2006
2,895
321
44
Dartmoor (Devon)
www.davebudd.com
cheers :)

The problem with the V sn't so much with the steel on the outside, more with the soft body. It gets squished quite a lot during the welding and forging down and it has a tendency to form a wafer thin body. Then near the edges of the weld (where you will spend most time dressing it in), if it isn't thick enough to support the steel then the coat can just shear through the body instead of blending in. At least that was my experience. There might be more chance of that happening with you choice of edge steel too on account of it's extra stiffness at temperature compared to the mild. Worth a go though!
 

Dave Budd

Gold Trader
Staff member
Jan 8, 2006
2,895
321
44
Dartmoor (Devon)
www.davebudd.com
most likely by that time it was just habit.

Pre-20th century it was still cheaper to laminate tools and weld edges in than to buy the whole amount of steel. Also, depending on how you are set up machine wise, the mild steel/wrought iron is easier to work with due to being softer and more forgiving of working temperatures.

The whole construction method that they use is well suited to the tooling that they have, or vice versa. Punching an eye through a solid block requires heavy stock to be handled (both in terms of the 4m length at the start and the 3kg lump at the forge) and a punch must be driven through before drifting; this can be quick but if you cock it up then it is not easily corrected, so doing this into expensive and hard tool steel would be risky. So a power hammer that comes down verticaly (like the one on the poll not the trip hammer) but with a heavy blow (unlike the poll hammer) o a hydraulic press would be needed in a production set up.

The method that they use for making the body allows them to buy in one size of soft iron and forge it to the correct dimensions for a range of axe designs without much wasted time compared to the same with a hard steel billet, the same is true for their choice of edge steel stock (larger edges just get a longer length of steel cut off at the start). The other advantage of the wrapping over punching is that the shape and size of the eye are mostly formed without having to stretch the hole to size with a drift. The little drift that they do use is mostly there to support the eye as the cheeks are drawn out and to tidy the shape up a bit. Again a punched eye would require more power to drift the eye to shape. As to why they choice to wrap rather than split and insert an edge, goodness knows! Most likely it was how the founding smith liked to do it and the process became their trademark.

As the 20th century wore on, good steel became so much cheaper that it was less costly to use and waste it than the extra fuel and time taken to do it the old way. Chances are that they went out of business because the hadn't moved with the times fast enough and their competitors had long since given up on the idea of seperate edges.



I make smaller axes from a single piece by punching the eye and then larger axes by welding edges into/onto mild bodies. I do it that way because it is simpler and faster for me to make an axe by punching a good lump, but as I do it all by hand (no big power toys to help) once the block gets about a certain size, it is just too much hard work. So for larger axes I use mild steel that is softer to move (and punch the hole in) before sticking a good steel edge in. It also means that I can buy a couple of different sizes of cheap mild (or get some 1" plate flame cut into the right size/shape by a friendly fabricator who has it in stock) and not have to buy several dimensions of steel that would take me 5 years to work through a 4m length of. I've also been known to weld several bits of mild together before sticking an edge in, simply because it was the only way to make up the size or shape that I wanted (such as that Dane Axe I did for Wayland a while back).
 
Thanks for the explanation, Dave!

Just about all of my axe collecting (to see how various shapes worked) has been centred on axes made by large scale production. I've always been curious about the demise of smaller companies in Canada - or as most often happened, their takeover and move to be part of larger US factories. Now I can see that without the large equipment and investment, they simply couldn't compete.
 

joshiecole

Member
Apr 30, 2012
28
0
london
As to why they choice to wrap rather than split and insert an edge, goodness knows! Most likely it was how the founding smith liked to do it and the process became their trademark.

As the 20th century wore on, good steel became so much cheaper that it was less costly to use and waste it than the extra fuel and time taken to do it the old way. Chances are that they went out of business because the hadn't moved with the times fast enough and their competitors had long since given up on the idea of seperate edges.

In the late 19th century there was considerable debate about whether the overcoat method or the inserted bit method was superior. In the great little book American Axes by Henry Kauffman it describes why the overcoating technique became the dominant technique.

The overcoat technique was not limited only to those firms who chose to wrap a piece of mild carbon around an eye drift. Warren Axe and Tool were (at least until 1921) using the overcoat method with a poll that was punched and drifted, not wrapped.

As for why they went out of business, Emerson Stevens stayed open until 1965, quite an achievement for a shop using 19th century craftsmanship. After WW2, came the era of mass production and foreign production. People were using axes far less and so were less demanding about quality. It became impossible for many of the best axe makers to compete on price. Some formerly excellent axe makers started producing lower quality axes from one piece of mid-carbon steel (Kelly) and using more up automated machinery. Others outsourced to Mexico and other places. Many just went out of business.

An industry that had grown up around one of the world's major industries, died with it. The demand for a serious high performance tool was no longer there.
 

Dave Budd

Gold Trader
Staff member
Jan 8, 2006
2,895
321
44
Dartmoor (Devon)
www.davebudd.com
Thanks for the extra info. By the 19th century I've mostly lost interest when it comes to tool development (I'm an archaeologist rather than a tool historian). i'll have a look at that book (I may have it in my library?), I didn't realise the wrapped edge was a common practice :) I guess my knowledge is more European based, the American axe crazes have pretty much past me by when the rest of the world and it's archaeology offers so many ideas!

Any chance of a little extract or summary as to why the two methods were chosen according to that book?
 

joshiecole

Member
Apr 30, 2012
28
0
london
...the American axe crazes have pretty much past me by when the rest of the world and it's archaeology offers so many ideas!

Any chance of a little extract or summary as to why the two methods were chosen according to that book?

axe%20overcoat%201_zpswoj1jjy4.png


axe%20overcoat%202_zps4v3syfuc.png


axe%20overcoat%203_zpsh6x82udf.png


Yes, I know what you mean. It's funny how some things pique our interest and other things don't. For me the American tradition is fascinating because of its historical connection. I like the pioneering, the canoeing the mountain man, the homesteading. I suspect that if most of us are honest, the things we're most interested in are deeply connected to our imaginations, the books we read growing up, or the movies, whatever.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE