Tell me what you want maybe i'll make it, just outta curiosity. I like the smaller head, longer handle idea.
Monster Maul?
- Thread starter Menchhofer
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Long Maul
Anyone who believes in the square of velocity theory would see that velocity could be increased with an extra long handle. In reality, momentum is increased with a higher velocity. If you don't see what I'm talking about, look at a phonograph, at the same rpm, say 45, the part of your record farthest from the center travels faster...right? Same thing with a maul head farther from the operator. Now apply physics equations, or better, just common sense without going so far as making the maul unswingable or very difficult by reverse torque.
I mentioned that I made a maul with a 48" handle. It may be a tad long, maybe about 42-44 inches would be perfect for me. I'm convinced that user height is imperative here. Try standing straight up with your shoulders square and couple your hands with your arms extended towards your feet as if holding a maul at the end of a miss swing. Now measure from the top of your highest hand to the ground, that would be ideally the overall maul length ( it's about 41.5 inches on me.) If you come up with 36" or less, congratulations! No adjustments are necessary and you don't have my problem. The reason I don't like regular 36" handles is that If the maul bounces off funny I will get hit in the shin opposed to the maul head just grounding out, as it would on a shorter individual. This makes me bend over to finish out the splitting stroke...and whenever I bend over like that repeatedly it leads to back pain...ouch!
I'd like to hear anyone's results with a longer handle, just remember that a longer handle means slight more difficulty to aim accurately.
Who has an idea of where to get or how to make a monster maul head? That is one big chunk of steel, where would I start? I can probably find someone to do my welding.
David B said:
Anyone who believes in the square of velocity theory would see that velocity could be increased with an extra long handle. In reality, momentum is increased with a higher velocity. If you don't see what I'm talking about, look at a phonograph, at the same rpm, say 45, the part of your record farthest from the center travels faster...right? Same thing with a maul head farther from the operator. Now apply physics equations, or better, just common sense without going so far as making the maul unswingable or very difficult by reverse torque.
I mentioned that I made a maul with a 48" handle. It may be a tad long, maybe about 42-44 inches would be perfect for me. I'm convinced that user height is imperative here. Try standing straight up with your shoulders square and couple your hands with your arms extended towards your feet as if holding a maul at the end of a miss swing. Now measure from the top of your highest hand to the ground, that would be ideally the overall maul length ( it's about 41.5 inches on me.) If you come up with 36" or less, congratulations! No adjustments are necessary and you don't have my problem. The reason I don't like regular 36" handles is that If the maul bounces off funny I will get hit in the shin opposed to the maul head just grounding out, as it would on a shorter individual. This makes me bend over to finish out the splitting stroke...and whenever I bend over like that repeatedly it leads to back pain...ouch!
I'd like to hear anyone's results with a longer handle, just remember that a longer handle means slight more difficulty to aim accurately.
Who has an idea of where to get or how to make a monster maul head? That is one big chunk of steel, where would I start? I can probably find someone to do my welding.
stihl088: Me, chain stores? I've got the same maul since 1978. I have found that speed and accuracy in a swing will out-produce blindly throwing around 30 pounds of tool steel. Rest assured, a 32" handle will produce more speed than a 36 or 48"....assuming the user knows what he is doing. (ie: hitting wood instead of leg). Also take into account the ability (or lack thereof) to "read" a piece of wood. It all adds up.
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Nope
Geek's mind is closed. Still missing the point
Geek's mind is closed. Still missing the point
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,980
This is what I use. It's all steel, so extending the handle would be as easy as doing a little welding.
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Now were're cookin'
Mike Maas said:
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Option #2
Mike mentioned Bailey's mega maul.
I will now tell you about the other maul I have found available for purchase.
http://www.counciltool.com/product.asp?item=130ST&ID=17
Poor color choice though, that would be easy to lose in the forest.
Now... who knows about splitzalls???
Mike mentioned Bailey's mega maul.
I will now tell you about the other maul I have found available for purchase.
http://www.counciltool.com/product.asp?item=130ST&ID=17
Poor color choice though, that would be easy to lose in the forest.
Now... who knows about splitzalls???
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,980
The handle is 28" long and it weighs 18#s.Stihl088stock said:
monster
muench in ct still has em , 2033239712 ask for christine. monster mauls are nice for whacking green oak to lift it to the chipper or to take the first half 36-42dbh with one or two swings, line backer dude will still be swinging, the mm is heavy though and if you are splitting by hand I couldnt agree more that an 8 pounder is just right cuz you can pace.Menchhofer said:
Menchhofer
ArboristSite Guru
All of this talk pertaining to 8 lb maul vs the monster.........I have had best experiences with the mm. I agree, with the overkill. Best to have more than not enough in most cases.
I was taught the mm (which I have not found yet) was to be swung in a tighter arch unlike the lighter ones....I usually just raise the maul not quite vertical, and swing it down onto the piece. Yes, it does eventually wear you out even using this method, but slinging it like a eight pounder would be worse.
I was taught the mm (which I have not found yet) was to be swung in a tighter arch unlike the lighter ones....I usually just raise the maul not quite vertical, and swing it down onto the piece. Yes, it does eventually wear you out even using this method, but slinging it like a eight pounder would be worse.
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
em?
jmack said:
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Best deal:
http://www.logsplitters-ironoak.com...egory&categoryid=116&parentid=109&searchtext=
Now what to use to make the handle longer?
http://www.logsplitters-ironoak.com...egory&categoryid=116&parentid=109&searchtext=
Now what to use to make the handle longer?
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Monster Mauls
So, I guess that no one knows anything about splitzall.com/ splitzalls?
I don't think that anyone uses a splitting maul eight hours a day, rather just for personal firewood use and most everyone complains about using up too much energy and overkill. You are all a bunch of wimps! Try getting a workout without paying the gym!!!
So that means that by deduction everyone would in turn by a 6 ton gas wood splitter vs. say a 20 ton?
I mean after all, 10+ ton is really just overkill, Right? Dummmy!
You people also imply that a person will only own ONE maul. I have two axes, two regular type mauls, and two Sotz monster mauls. Pick up the right tool for the job!!! Stop using a street sweeper to clean the kitchen counter and a tooth brush on the driveway!
Don't get me wrong, if an eight pound maul works, don't stop using it. I AM ONLY LOOKING FOR INFORMATION ON Sotz monster mauls or their EXACT equivalent. Thank you to all who pointed out the available smaller versions, but I want a couple more of the original monster mauls for work involving my neighbors.
For all you non-innovative unhelpful people....THANKS FOR NOTHING!!!
So, I guess that no one knows anything about splitzall.com/ splitzalls?
I don't think that anyone uses a splitting maul eight hours a day, rather just for personal firewood use and most everyone complains about using up too much energy and overkill. You are all a bunch of wimps! Try getting a workout without paying the gym!!!
So that means that by deduction everyone would in turn by a 6 ton gas wood splitter vs. say a 20 ton?
I mean after all, 10+ ton is really just overkill, Right? Dummmy!
You people also imply that a person will only own ONE maul. I have two axes, two regular type mauls, and two Sotz monster mauls. Pick up the right tool for the job!!! Stop using a street sweeper to clean the kitchen counter and a tooth brush on the driveway!
Don't get me wrong, if an eight pound maul works, don't stop using it. I AM ONLY LOOKING FOR INFORMATION ON Sotz monster mauls or their EXACT equivalent. Thank you to all who pointed out the available smaller versions, but I want a couple more of the original monster mauls for work involving my neighbors.
For all you non-innovative unhelpful people....THANKS FOR NOTHING!!!
CNYCountry
ArboristSite Operative
trimmmed said:I can't say for the Chopper2, but the MM works. I brought home a bunch of spike-knot yellow birch that my 8lb maul did nothing to.
That said, I prefer the regular maul whenever possible. The MM takes a different swing pattern for me and never gets close to the same rhythm I get with the 8lb'er.
The MM is good for birch or other stringy crap that wants to stick together even though it's split. It really depends on the type of wood, the MM is better for some of it but I usually pick up the 8lb maul. One thing is for sure, using a MM in a full swing will make a man out of you...
I shouldn't say I have a MM, implying I have a Sotz, because I don't. I have the Bailey's mall. It is a lot shorter than the Sotz my father used to have. I think it would just be a matter of slipping the rubber grip off, a piece of pipe into the handle whose OD is very close to the MM handle ID, cut it to the right length, weld it, then maybe find a piece of pipe the same size as the handle and slip it over that and weld it. I am going to try this with mine when I get around to it.
If nothing else the short length screws me up when I switch between 8lb maul and MM with my aim.
Last edited:
woodsrider
ArboristSite Member
I have one of the original Monster Mauls from the 80's. I believe that Sotz went out of business long ago. I think I also got an orange metal "timberjack" type device from Sotz at the same time I ordered my MM (it's been a long time....). I got the high-zoot version of the MM with silicone shock absorbing material in the handle near the head.
The MM is definitely heavy and requires a modified stroke, but it does a great job of splitting stringy wood without getting stuck. I'd like to find its equivalent also, but I haven't found a good source. I thought I happened on a source a few months ago....I'll have to do some searching.
The MM is definitely heavy and requires a modified stroke, but it does a great job of splitting stringy wood without getting stuck. I'd like to find its equivalent also, but I haven't found a good source. I thought I happened on a source a few months ago....I'll have to do some searching.
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Sotz equivalent
I think there is at least a small market for an equivalent of the Sotz monster maul. I have two, one is slightly larger, and the smaller one weighs 21# total. I keep forgetting to weigh the larger one. I also have the Sotz timber jack, although I wouldn't say it is anything special. It still has the postage tag on it from '81. Never heard of the silicone filled handle, although I don't think it is necessary or would help much.
The closest thing I can find is made by Council, total of about 16# (a 12 pound triangle head) still pretty far off from the monster.
I can see why Sotz went out of business, if you make a product that can last 25 years with only a little bend to the handle, you won't get too much repeat business, this explains why so many wood handle mauls are still in production, the faster it breaks...the sooner they can make another sale!!!
I think there is at least a small market for an equivalent of the Sotz monster maul. I have two, one is slightly larger, and the smaller one weighs 21# total. I keep forgetting to weigh the larger one. I also have the Sotz timber jack, although I wouldn't say it is anything special. It still has the postage tag on it from '81. Never heard of the silicone filled handle, although I don't think it is necessary or would help much.
The closest thing I can find is made by Council, total of about 16# (a 12 pound triangle head) still pretty far off from the monster.
I can see why Sotz went out of business, if you make a product that can last 25 years with only a little bend to the handle, you won't get too much repeat business, this explains why so many wood handle mauls are still in production, the faster it breaks...the sooner they can make another sale!!!
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Another model
http://hand-tools.gillroys.com/Hamm...s/Sledge_hammers/Woodbuster_Maul-s324787.html
I just don't understand why they don't make these 36" overall like most traditional mauls are. This one has a 30" handle, The one made by council has a 34" so it's the closest yet, and probably what I'll buy. Also the most expensive. D'oh!
http://hand-tools.gillroys.com/Hamm...s/Sledge_hammers/Woodbuster_Maul-s324787.html
I just don't understand why they don't make these 36" overall like most traditional mauls are. This one has a 30" handle, The one made by council has a 34" so it's the closest yet, and probably what I'll buy. Also the most expensive. D'oh!
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
To anyone who cares...
Council's "monster maul" had a typo on their website. The item is only 30 inches overall with a 27 inch handle, not the "12# head atop a 34 inch handle" as it said before I purchased it. They have fixed it now.
Splittin' firewood sure is fun, too bad there are so many ignorant people on the subject. I wish I know more people that could help me clean up deadwood.
WOOD FIRE GOOD! GAS FIRE BAD!
Council's "monster maul" had a typo on their website. The item is only 30 inches overall with a 27 inch handle, not the "12# head atop a 34 inch handle" as it said before I purchased it. They have fixed it now.
Splittin' firewood sure is fun, too bad there are so many ignorant people on the subject. I wish I know more people that could help me clean up deadwood.
WOOD FIRE GOOD! GAS FIRE BAD!
thefeckerwest
ArboristSite Lurker
Have you a picture of that maul with the 48" handle? The handle seems too long. I have a 44" wooden handle on my maul which is about 7lb. in weight. It it was any longer it would be too unwieldy.
QUOTE=Stihl088stock;370836]Anyone know the viability of splitzall.com? How much they charge, freight, availability, etc?
Take your square of the velocity theories down to your local community college. That is true when calculating total kinetic energy. We're looking at Momentum and total Force when driving nails, splitting wood etc. So K = 0.5mv2 , M = mv, and F = M/t. At the SAME velocity (possible by me) a Monster maul has more total energy; which correlates to more splitting power than a 6# maul head mounted on a toothpick. The velocity argument is MOOT because it assumes that you can swing the smaller maul at mach speeds such that the total energy of the smaller maul is greater than the lager maul (yes, it is possible with a large variant in velocity.) Now I’ll tell you that the argument is FALSE in my case because it assumes that a “Pansy-Pete” can only lift the monster maul 12-18 inches and let it fall into the wood, but can swing the 6# maul at full bore. This is high school math, so I’ll let you plug in the numbers. I’m a chemist anyway.
Take the monster maul from behind your boots, over your head, and through wood! Bingo, same velocity, and kinetic energy is higher, momentum is higher, and total force applied to the wood is higher. Lo! One thing I forgot, the wood will actually SPLIT!!!
Same thing with that 6# maul D’oh! Bounce off! Try try again (again recall that it’s gnarly wood I’m speaking of)
Yes, monster mauls are overkill if you are splitting nine-inch clear pine, but I'm all too often working on a ribboned Black Oak stump and need more power. In fact I want a larger monster maul. A longer handle would be a great combo with about a 20# head.
Here is what I have done: I took an old 12# maul head and put a 48” steel handle on it, filled the handle with concrete and tried it out. Well, it is awesome. The head is just a little too small, but I love the handle length. (Oh, I’m 6’ 4” and it’s a short mans world) This prototype maul probably sounds absurd to all you small short guys out there?
So, with that, where can I get an oversized splitting maul that does NOT have a wood handle, I’ve broken too may toothpicks in my life. Any help would be appreciated…. If I were made of money… and could afford to have one custom made… you can already see that’s not an option. I don’t have a welder.
Is a splitzall my only and best choice?
Thanks,
Andrew[/QUOTE]
QUOTE=Stihl088stock;370836]Anyone know the viability of splitzall.com? How much they charge, freight, availability, etc?
Take your square of the velocity theories down to your local community college. That is true when calculating total kinetic energy. We're looking at Momentum and total Force when driving nails, splitting wood etc. So K = 0.5mv2 , M = mv, and F = M/t. At the SAME velocity (possible by me) a Monster maul has more total energy; which correlates to more splitting power than a 6# maul head mounted on a toothpick. The velocity argument is MOOT because it assumes that you can swing the smaller maul at mach speeds such that the total energy of the smaller maul is greater than the lager maul (yes, it is possible with a large variant in velocity.) Now I’ll tell you that the argument is FALSE in my case because it assumes that a “Pansy-Pete” can only lift the monster maul 12-18 inches and let it fall into the wood, but can swing the 6# maul at full bore. This is high school math, so I’ll let you plug in the numbers. I’m a chemist anyway.
Take the monster maul from behind your boots, over your head, and through wood! Bingo, same velocity, and kinetic energy is higher, momentum is higher, and total force applied to the wood is higher. Lo! One thing I forgot, the wood will actually SPLIT!!!
Same thing with that 6# maul D’oh! Bounce off! Try try again (again recall that it’s gnarly wood I’m speaking of)
Yes, monster mauls are overkill if you are splitting nine-inch clear pine, but I'm all too often working on a ribboned Black Oak stump and need more power. In fact I want a larger monster maul. A longer handle would be a great combo with about a 20# head.
Here is what I have done: I took an old 12# maul head and put a 48” steel handle on it, filled the handle with concrete and tried it out. Well, it is awesome. The head is just a little too small, but I love the handle length. (Oh, I’m 6’ 4” and it’s a short mans world) This prototype maul probably sounds absurd to all you small short guys out there?
So, with that, where can I get an oversized splitting maul that does NOT have a wood handle, I’ve broken too may toothpicks in my life. Any help would be appreciated…. If I were made of money… and could afford to have one custom made… you can already see that’s not an option. I don’t have a welder.
Is a splitzall my only and best choice?
Thanks,
Andrew[/QUOTE]
Stihl088stock
ArboristSite Guru
Hi, no I dont have a picture of the 48" handle, the steel pipe I used ended up cracking due to the violent use it saw and since it was full of concrete I couldn't reshape it. One of my monster mauls also started cracking, (after over 20 years of use) but I had it welded.
You are right, it was too long for regular use, but it was nice for those few hard to split pieces.
Over the years I've also concluded that the best mauls have a flat or almost flat edge. I've modified the mauls with the big round smile edge to a narrower flat edge and now they really work well.
Cheers!
You are right, it was too long for regular use, but it was nice for those few hard to split pieces.
Over the years I've also concluded that the best mauls have a flat or almost flat edge. I've modified the mauls with the big round smile edge to a narrower flat edge and now they really work well.
Cheers!
