SFA or Hunters Axe ?

[Longstrider]

I've decided it's about time I treated myself to a really decent new axe and I've whittled the choice down to between the GB SFA and the GB Hunters Axe, but here's the rub..... I've not handled either. I have questions the sites selling the things simply don't answer. Things like.... Will the grip-rings on the handle of the Hunter end up making the thing uncomfortable to use for longer periods? Would the rounded poll of the Hunter be liable to split wooden stakes if you use the axe to drive them into the ground? (I know you shouldn't do this, but we are talking real-world here where some things get done that shouldn't! ) For general camp craft, is the SFA a better tool? Is the SFA thicker and therefore more difficult to keep a fine cutting edge on? And ultimately, Is the Hunter the better tool by enough of a margin to warrant the extra cost?
Both axes have 19" hafts, 3 1/4" cutting edges and 1 1/2lb heads, so why such a difference in price? Is the extra cost simply a case of "paying for the name" because the axe won some design award?

 

[Shinken]

Both are good as long as you use "feel" the limits of each one.

Bit vague i know uppy_dog

 

[Lurch]

Frankly unless you are going hunting large deer and intend to skin them in situ with an axe, and I don't believe you are, then save your cash and get the SFA instead. You won't get any benefit out of the Hunter as a camp tool.

 

[Rob]

I agree with Lurch.

The GB Hunters has some very useful features if you are out hunting large game but they wont really work as planned on the kind of things you might come across over here.

The rings on the handle will be useful in the wet (whatever causes the wetness) but could hinder you a bit when it somes to normal axe use over a prolongued time.

Lack of chamfur will probably be the most likely cause of splitting stakes rather than the slightly rounded shape of the Hunter.

My money would probably be on an SFA - which is my axe of choice and has been for years. I have handled the GB Hunter too, but i like the SFA for general use.

 

[george]

I would say get the SFA.

I have the hunters axe and I think it is great, however as you point out there are a number of things that you have to work around if you want to use it as a general bushcraft axe.

Where I feel it has a real advantage over the SFA is if I'm using it Ulu style for chopping meat and veggies etc. the rounded poll fits my hand well and it's very comfortable to use.

The grooved handle has never been a problem even with extended use and it does give a good grip.

However I don't think that these points make it worth the extra money unless you intend using it for skinning too.

George

 

[Topcat02]

I'm very happy with my SFA, never even considered the Hunters axe when I was buying.

 

[oetzi]

I have several axes and to complicate everything, here is my bit.
The GB Hunter is only more useful if you have to dress large game. Its more expensive and you will modify the handle anyway to your taste.
A good alternative, if you want a rounded and polished poll, would be the Large Hunting Axe by AS Wetterlings. ASW make axes not that much worse (in finish) compared with GB, but a lot cheaper.
My general comments on both companies products are as follows.
The handle:
If you take the time and sand the varnish off the ASW's handle (lots of work), afterwards sand-wet-dry-sand it and oil it (the latter two you have to do with the GB as well), then everything else equal I would prefer the ASW. Because the end of the handle is so much better shaped and fits my rather small hands better.
The head:
Both need time and an asortment of files and stones to give it both, an edge and the right shape.
The hang of it:
ASW's are of a sloppier fit and the handles are more often made of non-vertical-grained wood than the GB's.
Conclusion:
GB's much higher price is not justified by a much better level of craftmanship, compared with the ASW's.
I would, if I were to buy a fifth (dont ask ), only take one after inspecting a whole batch and selecting the best. This goes for both companies products.
The alternative:
If you are only after a decent axe with whom you can cut, hammer and which staqnds lots of abuse for a very very good price, then nothing beats the Fiskars 1000 at half the price of a GB.
Its butt ugly, though. While the traditionally made axes are simply beautiful and will be lovingly looked at, handled and caressed (as we blokes do generally with good tools ), they do cost a lot lot more.

 

[Pignut]

Of the GB axes, I have used both the SFA and The hunter,

For general "Around Camp" type tasks I would go with the SFA It is my axe of choice and as yet have to find a job it cant perform (Other than making a brew!)

As for sharpening, A couple of rubs on the stones and it is back to its hair splitting norm

Hope that helps

 

[Doc]

I've handled both side-by-side and preferred the 'feel' of the SFA.

For highland deer stalking there is no advantage with the hunters axe - it is only the gralloch that is normally done in the field, and a knife is a lighter and better tool for this. I suppose if you were in remote Scandinavia/North America and were doing full carcass preparation in the field you just might find a use for a flay poll.

For general use the choice is not so much GB hunters versus GB SFA, but wetterlings versus GB SFA. The Wetterlings splits wood better. The GB cuts deeper and may be better for felling/shaping.

 

[Longstrider]

Thanks for the info guys. I guess you could see from my original post that I was leaning towards the SFA, and with your comments in mind, that's what I'll be ordering. I have used no-end of different axes over the years but have never knowingly handled either a Wetterlings or a Gransfors. I've looked at the models the two companies produce and had already deided that the SFA was the size I wanted, but was just wondering about the choice because of the Hunter being the same size but more £££.

SFA it is!

 

[Doc]

You will not regret it!