Council Tools 6 lb Sledge-eye Maul

[wap13]

Once touched up how does the CT compare to the wetterlings?

So far I have not found a match for my wetterlings for the type of wood I split, but I'm always looking for better tools. The head shape or maybe I should say wedge profile of my GB keeps it from performing well for me. I would grab my fiskars before the GB.

 

[svk]

@CTYank Wow, grumpy much?

I'm not/never have pushed the Leveraxe at all. I'm simply facilitating the transfer amongst members to make sure it doesn't get stolen like the last one. You can see my evaluation of it buried a few pages back in the thread. I clearly outlined the pros/cons of my time spent with it. Also, I did notice that in the LA thread that you felt necessary to plug your own choice of tools multiple times and offered nothing of substance to the actual conversation. Then when you had a chance to use the Leveraxe you stood close enough to get hit by a split but instead chose to run your mouth and wouldn't even give it a try. Yet you come on here and pretend to promote openness and acceptance of other opinions. A bit of hypocrisy there?

And once again when I put a little quip about you and Fiskars in the same sentence WITH a smiley face that means it is a joke. Lighten up.

Yes I would like an unbiased comparison of the available tools out there because if theres a better general purpose splitting tool than the Fiskars, I want to own it. On that note you are anything but unbiased. When we were cutting together I got an earful about your thoughts about your "few swings with that plastic thing" yet you are posting on here about all of it's shortcomings. Curious how you gleaned all of that insight with a few
swings? I would have liked to have split some wood with your axe to get a feeling for it but you were so concerned that I might hit the ground once so I put it away.

I don't care if a tool is made in Finland, Sweden, US, or even Iraq or if the handle is wood, fiberglass, or metal. I just want what works best for most purposes. Go ahead and push your traditional tools all you want. I'd rather just make firewood.

 

[spike60]

I'd still like to see an unbiased shoot out of all of the major tools on the market in several different species/lengths of wood. Big Ox, Mueller, Wetterling, Hults, Fiskars, whatever CT is pushing that week, and any Stihl/Husky/Walmart knock offs that are around. But there also should be two categories: stock and modified. A cheap tool that has serious time on a grinder most certainly should perform better than one off the shelf. With all of this chatter about splitting tools someone should be able to get this done.

The more tools you try, the more interesting things get. So, a shootout, (splitout?), between them would be fun. But the unbiased part is kind of tough since we are all biased by our own preferences. You and I seeing the Fiskars in different lights is a perfect example. We will all prefer the one that performs best in our own hands. Much of this is what I'd call a good fit for the individual. Weight, handle shape, overall length have a lot to do with that. Species of wood, size of wood, wet and green, dry, frozen. There are so many variables. Enough that IMO, having a few different tools is a good way to go.

Now, the design and dimensions of the tool head as we've been discussing here could be looked at a little different in the sense that some have more engineering thought put into them than others. And those that do will generally perform better than most of the cheap stuff. And like John says, some of the cheap tools can be altered to make them perform better. If we're going to mod the saws, why not the mauls?

I think that it would be great for any of us to sample a bunch of different tools. But I don't see a shootout where it ends with determining a winner or anything along those lines. It still is really going to come down to personal preference, and most of us are likely to pick what we already like because that's what we are used to. The best part of such a contest would be that someone gets their hands on a tool they hadn't seen before and says, "Hey, I really like this; I'm gonna get me one of these." So, the winner is the user himself.

 

[mdavlee]

I've got a husky maul on the way. I've got an x27 but it sets more than not. It works good in poplar but even ash it wasn't doing as good as the $29 12 lb maul from Lowe's my dad grabbed.

 

[svk]

The more tools you try, the more interesting things get. So, a shootout, (splitout?), between them would be fun. But the unbiased part is kind of tough since we are all biased by our own preferences. You and I seeing the Fiskars in different lights is a perfect example. We will all prefer the one that performs best in our own hands. Much of this is what I'd call a good fit for the individual. Weight, handle shape, overall length have a lot to do with that. Species of wood, size of wood, wet and green, dry, frozen. There are so many variables. Enough that IMO, having a few different tools is a good way to go.

Now, the design and dimensions of the tool head as we've been discussing here could be looked at a little different in the sense that some have more engineering thought put into them than others. And those that do will generally perform better than most of the cheap stuff. And like John says, some of the cheap tools can be altered to make them perform better. If we're going to mod the saws, why not the mauls?

I think that it would be great for any of us to sample a bunch of different tools. But I don't see a shootout where it ends with determining a winner or anything along those lines. It still is really going to come down to personal preference, and most of us are likely to pick what we already like because that's what we are used to. The best part of such a contest would be that someone gets their hands on a tool they hadn't seen before and says, "Hey, I really like this; I'm gonna get me one of these." So, the winner is the user himself.

You are right on here.

Heck if we could get ten guys from the forum to each put some time in with all of the major players in multiple species/lengths of wood and post their thoughts I'd pretty much take the consensus as gospel. Apply a bell curve and throw out the far outlier from each side. Those middle 8 probably hit things pretty close to true as possible.

As far as buying a cheapie tool and having to grind the sheat out of it to get it to perform...well we can leave that to the retired guys who don't have other things to worry about like work and raising kids .

 

[CTYank]

Once touched up how does the CT compare to the wetterlings?

So far I have not found a match for my wetterlings for the type of wood I split, but I'm always looking for better tools. The head shape or maybe I should say wedge profile of my GB keeps it from performing well for me. I would grab my fiskars before the GB.

The "touch up" I've done on a CT so far is actually more a sharpening than anything else, like you would do with any new axe, but just looking at the edge maybe 1/8" back from the edge. As reported earlier.

After that, it's functionally equivalent to the 2.5 kg Wetterlings. Mind you that Wetterlings has an abbreviated wedge profile extending ~1.5" back from the edge. The CT has a subtle bulge on either face ~1.25" back from the edge. I'd have to see more than one to see if that was design or by accident; the fact that it's so similar on both sides says design. Both tools work well for splitting rounds.

Big difference to me is the metallurgy of the poll. Really tough stuff on the CT, a bit more malleable on the Wetterlings. So, if you have to drive a wedge or help another maul into a nasty round, the CT would be my choice. The area of the edge on either is durable, assuming that you never put it into dirt.

The prime selling point when you boil it down: for the price I paid for a Wetterlings, I could have gotten 4.5 Council mauls. The CT is not "cheap", but a very reasonably priced tool, the best value I've found yet in a wood-splitting tool.

About the wedge profile, the flat 30 deg wedge shape of the 3 kg Mueller works very well, so your problem with GB is a question.

 

[wap13]

I am not familiar with the mueller, never seen one up close much less used one.

My GB probably splits about as well as my fiskars but weighs more so I just dont use it much. The taper is much slower on it if that makes sense. And for the hard woods I split it wants to stick worse than the wetterling that gets fatter quicker from the edge to the poll. The GB isnt bad by any means its just not my tool of choice for the stuff that I split. In someone else's hands it may outperform my wetterlings, it just doesn't suite me as well. I can say that of the two, the fit and finish of the GB is better.

 

[woodchuck357]

I pulled out most of my splitting tools yesterday and not counting stuff I made or radically altered, I have 17 different types ranging from a 4 pound ax to a twelve pound German made splitting maul. Some were given to me but most were bought at auctions and yard sales. Although a few would have been very expensive had I purchased them new, the one I spent the most money on was the x27.
I have several pole hafted mauls including a council tools maul. The thing that could improve the way it splits would be to remove the flair from side opposite the haft. That adds to the resistance as it enters the wood and contributes little to the split.
I didn't count chopping axes eventho I do most of my splitting with them.
The 12 pound splitting maul is a real maul with a wooden haft, not a monster maul type.

 

[zogger]

I pulled out most of my splitting tools yesterday and not counting stuff I made or radically altered, I have 17 different types ranging from a 4 pound ax to a twelve pound German made splitting maul. Some were given to me but most were bought at auctions and yard sales. Although a few would have been very expensive had I purchased them new, the one I spent the most money on was the x27.
I have several pole hafted mauls including a council tools maul. The thing that could improve the way it splits would be to remove the flair from side opposite the haft. That adds to the resistance as it enters the wood and contributes little to the split.
I didn't count chopping axes eventho I do most of my splitting with them.
The 12 pound splitting maul is a real maul with a wooden haft, not a monster maul type.

Pics of your splitting fleet plz!

 

[svk]

Pics of your splitting fleet plz!

Yes definitely please share!

I really need to get a picture of my fleet also. Additionally I've got three Hults Bruks axes that I was thinking about throwing on here to do some horsetrading for who knows what. The only non splitting hand tool I use frequently is my lightweight cruiser axe on canoe trips.

 

[Chris-PA]

I like different axes of varying weights and face angles for different jobs. I have not found one-size-fits-all, although my favorite is an axe head I found out in the woods behind the garage at our old house. It's about 4lbs (now) and is basically an axe head that's been sharpened too many times for felling, but has a nice angle for splitting. It works best for most things, but then there are times it just won't do the job. Sometimes a thin-faced sharp axe works best, other times it just sticks no matter how you try to twist it.

I almost always go with two different tools, and you get a feel for which ones you'll need. Sometimes I have to crack it with a heavy tool and finish it with something sharp, and other times it's just the opposite and I crack it with an axe and blow it apart with a maul.

 

[CTYank]

I like different axes of varying weights and face angles for different jobs. I have not found one-size-fits-all, although my favorite is an axe head I found out in the woods behind the garage at our old house. It's about 4lbs (now) and is basically an axe head that's been sharpened too many times for felling, but has a nice angle for splitting. It works best for most things, but then there are times it just won't do the job. Sometimes a thin-faced sharp axe works best, other times it just sticks no matter how you try to twist it.

I almost always go with two different tools, and you get a feel for which ones you'll need. Sometimes I have to crack it with a heavy tool and finish it with something sharp, and other times it's just the opposite and I crack it with an axe and blow it apart with a maul.

Yup. Definitely multiple tools. Often a 3 kg bruiser and a 2.5 kg speedster. And a couple HF wedges- they're pretty good steel now, from India. One of them can prop open a nasty piece on one side, while you nail it with a maul opposite.

A few pix to ease disputes about touching up Council 6-pounder, here first is as-rcvd:

The edge was too dull for my taste, and you can see the "shoulder" about 1/8" behind. Looked a bit abrupt to me. See the bump?

A couple pix after a few minutes of sharpening & smoothing the shoulder, and some quality-time assaulting ash, cherry and BL. In these pix and the previous, I hope you can see the slight thickening up to about an inch and change behind the edge.

Prime reason for using miniature sanding drum in a Dremel was the hardness of the steel. A file bounced off it. Took 10 min, max, Steve.

As it is now, my plan is to exercise it as-is for some time, unless someone I trust has a better idea of course.

 

[mikey517]

Finally got time to try the Council Tool maul. Like CT, and based on his post, I took a Dremel and put a sharper edge to the blade. Out of the box, it felt too dull. I didn't go into any shape altering, just a sharpening.

I tried it on some red oak rounds the were 16" x 16", and were freshly bucked two day ago.


Now, I'm the first to admit that my main splitting tool is an Ariens 27t hydraulic. I never had much luck, or got much enjoyment from hand splitting. But at Spikes GTG I watched guys who knew what they were doing and had a good technique. So I wrapped a bungie and started at the edge instead of dead center.
I worked around it and the round split nicely. I was pleasantly surprised.

The maul is very solid, very well put together. 6lbs. feels just about right for this 66 yr old noobie. Did not need excessive effort to split the round, although on one swing, I cut right through the bungie. Remember, I am a devout moron!.

I worked for about 45 minutes at a slow pace, switching back and forth with the X27, and did about 4 rounds (including stacking).
I can see using the maul on "larger" rounds, and the X27 on some smaller stuff when I'm just killing some time, but the hydraulic will be fired up when I've got a lot to split.

All in all, for $25.00, the CT maul is a real deal.

 

[svk]

That's a good review there.

I like the comparison too. I think I prefer my 6# to my 8#(currently MIA in the garage somewhere) for the bigger stuff. The 6 has a little more "umph" than a Fiskars in heavy stuff but you can get a lot better speed than an 8. Swinging an 8 or larger wears a guy out even a younger guy like me.

 

[El Quachito]

I prefer a #6. Never used an #8 much but it feels heavy for my taste.

So if everyone does the same grind to a new maul, why does the manufacturer make it that way in the first place?

 

[svk]

I prefer a #6. Never used an #8 much but it feels heavy for my taste.

So if everyone does the same grind to a new maul, why does the manufacturer make it that way in the first place?

Was just thinking that myself. Why not charge $5 bucks more and put a real edge on it?

 

[zogger]

Was just thinking that myself. Why not charge $5 bucks more and put a real edge on it?

Bean counters.

 

[mikey517]

I put the edge on because it felt like a dull blunt(?) if that makes any sense. When I bought the X27 (spontaenous purchase; BJ's Wharehouse had an unannounced sale of $39.95) the edge was almost razor sharp, and I liked the way it split. I used the Dremel because the shape of the wedge was too thick for the Fiskar's sharpener, or any other conventional sharpener, so I followed CTYank's post and just added a nicer edge. I didn't try it on wood straight out of the box, but used it after the Dremel treatment, and the rest is history!

And bean counters are ruining the world!

***EDIT to add pics***
Council Tool 6# maul out of the box - no modifications




I didn't think to take any pics after sharpening, just went out and tried it!

 

[ppkgmsy]

Interesting posts. I had always used an 8# maul. I bought a 6# a year or two ago for my young son so he could practice splitting. I found I like the lighter weight for general use. I still have the larger maul for the more ornery pieces.
I'll admit I never thought about putting a better edge on a maul. It makes perfect sense. I'm off to the wheel to sharpen. Thanks, guys.

 

[CTYank]

I put the edge on because it felt like a dull blunt(?) if that makes any sense. When I bought the X27 (spontaenous purchase; BJ's Wharehouse had an unannounced sale of $39.95) the edge was almost razor sharp, and I liked the way it split. I used the Dremel because the shape of the wedge was too thick for the Fiskar's sharpener, or any other conventional sharpener, so I followed CTYank's post and just added a nicer edge. I didn't try it on wood straight out of the box, but used it after the Dremel treatment, and the rest is history!

And bean counters are ruining the world!

***EDIT to add pics***
Council Tool 6# maul out of the box - no modifications
View attachment 379799
View attachment 379800
View attachment 379801

I didn't think to take any pics after sharpening, just went out and tried it!

The "bump" in the center of the faces, to about 1" back from the edge seems to be by design, since 2 of 2 such CT mauls I've seen have the same. Could be one of their "speed secrets" for spreading the split faces apart- sure seems to work, to me. @spike60 might be interested, as a serious student of split-ology.

Polishing down the small shoulder back 1/8" from the edge to blend it in seemed to help, too. Took all of a couple minutes. Not just prettifying it.

I caught on about sharp edges on splitting tools from the 3 kg Mueller that arrived 3 yrs back. That, and flat faces.