Maul Comparison: Day 4, Locust speed test

Comparing splitting maul performance. Set up two rows of seven black locust logs cut from a live tree a month ago. Chose logs as clear of forks and knots as possible, and made the two rows fair and even. Then split one set with the Fiskars X27 splitting axe and the other with my homemade 30 pound splitting maul. Made the 30 pound maul to break big rounds up, but wanted to do a test in the Fiskars' home turf of small logs to be fair.

Both tools halve seven small locust logs in under two minutes. The difference in time is essentially within the variability in difficulty of the wood. While the 30 pound maul technically wins this race, the Fiskars or a traditional maul is a more appropriate tool for logs this small. Over the course of an entire woodpile, the low weight of Fiskars would reduce fatigue sufficiently to give it a distinct advantage for most people.
Data:

Fiskars X27 Splitting Axe
Log dimensions (diameter x height, back to front):
(11"x24") (10"x24") (10"x24") (12"x24")
(10"x23") (12"x24") (9"x20")
Total time to split: 1 minute 53 seconds
Average heart rate during recovery: 131 beats per minute
Peak heart rate during recovery: 151 beats per minute

30 lb maul
Log dimensions (diameter x height, back to front):
(11"x24") (10.5"x23") (9"x24") (11.5"x25")
(11"x25") (11.5"x24") (9"x19")
Total time to split: 1 minute 20 seconds
Average heart rate during recovery: 143 beats per minute
Peak heart rate during recovery: 168 beats per minute
There is hysteresis in the heart rate data; heart doesn't really get pounding until after splitting the wood. Recorded a little data right after splitting as well in order to fix that problem. Using the Fiskars is undoubtedly easier and less tiring for small logs like this, and the heart rate data agrees.
The Fiskars is light and easy to aim accurately. It propagates cracks in the wood quite well, but because of its thin profile it cannot readily separate the wood all the way through into two pieces. So fibers remain connecting the logs together. With a traditional splitting maul it's not a concern to swing through the crack and break these fibers, but because the Fiskars' efficacy is completely dependent on its razor sharp edge, breaking the fibers with the Fiskars is very likely to land the tool in the earth and dull the edge.

Wouldn't even try to use the 30 pound maul on anything smaller than these logs, because it would be too dangerous. Aim with the 30 pound maul is much more difficult, and the impact would send smaller pieces of wood flying. But in this test, the 30 pound maul does a much better job than the Fiskars of fully separating the wood fibers, which is the main reason that it wins the race.

Видео Maul Comparison: Day 4, Locust speed test канала thepowertoact