For many, Fiskars axes are the benchmark, but I don't see the point in overpaying. What is important, and is there in conventional models?

We are talking about the ax-cleaver. Recently, I was faced with the choice of which option to purchase for my home. Out of interest, I decided to look at people's reviews on the net, and I was surprised by some of the characteristics that people consider important ...

Friends, hello everyone. This year I took an important step in the construction and furnishing of my house and purchased a stove.

The house now has a good source of heat, which does its job perfectly, and allows you to continue the internal work in the house, in comfortable conditions.

But along with this came additional concerns.

And the main one is the harvesting of firewood.

Of course, I have not yet fully felt what it means to chop, drag, and put several machines of firewood into a woodpile, but I am slowly getting ready for this.

As part of this preparation, I decided to purchase the main tool, any owner of the stove, and a lover of firewood -

And I took, though modern, but the most common option, although I was tempted to buy everyone's favorite Fiskars axe.

But why did I give up on this idea?

❗ I must say right away that the cost did not play a major role here.

I recently purchased a Fiskars snow shovel. Although it costs more than conventional models, the money spent was absolutely not a pity. The quality of materials, lightness, ease of use, and most importantly reliability. During this winter, she has already experienced a lot, and passed the test for 100%, and the money spent is absolutely not a pity.

✅ If I was sure that everything would be the same with the ax, then I would not doubt it much.

But the cleaver ax is a different story.

Once again, I focus on its purpose. Each ax has its own tasks (camping, carpentry, fire fighting, etc.).

The cleaver must split the log, and for this you need only a few characteristics.

• The shape of the ax head has a thickened appearance to better separate the log. In this case, the sharpness of the blade is not important at all.
• The handle is elongated, due to which the shoulder of the applied force increases, and as a result, the force of impact on the log.
• Ax weight. Here a balance is needed between the diameter of the logs and the capabilities of a person (the heavier the ax, the easier it is to split firewood, but also the harder it is to swing the ax).

And how does Fiskars differ from its simple counterparts, based on these characteristics?

✔ Metal is metal.

✔ the convenience of an ax handle is an individual thing.

✔ The strength of the ax handle - yes, it plays a role. But again, in the wrong hands. And if you miss every other time and hit them on a log, then Fiskars will not live long. I still dealt with a bunch of firewood, and I hope I won’t mow like that.

✔And the lightness of Fiskars is generally considered an advantage by many. Here I would be skeptical. As already mentioned, it is the weight of the cleaver that is its main strength. Perhaps on small logs, this is not so felt, but with large specimens you can’t do without mass.

Based on all these considerations, I purchased a budget model of the cleaver.

So far, I have not loaded it to the fullest, so the main tests and conclusions are yet to come. But on first impressions, everything suits.

Friends, I'm waiting for your opinion in the comments. Be sure to share your experience, if any. It's always helpful.

Subscribe to the channel, and put likes 👍. Here is the whole history of building a house with your own hands, and everything connected with it.