Hehe, today I picked up my first one at Menards for $13 .
I have to say it kicks butt over a wedge.
I tried it on a log a little over 2' long and about 1.5' across,
I think it took 6 wacks and it was done and I'm a little guy .


I'm having fun with the maul I bought. I managed to break the wood
handle today.

I was trying to break some bigger pieces of firewood into smaller ones
and the handle cracked. I guess I'll take it back and trade it in for
a fiberglass handled one.

Also, I was banging on a bigger piece that was kind of odd shaped.
Maybe that was where the handle started breaking, but I didn't notice
it.

Anyway, I was able to put a big crack in the one piece of odd-shaped
firewood, but not break it all the way through.

So, when I go back to get the fiberglass handled maul I think I'll pick
up a wedge as well.

Anyway, it was fun and I didn't get hurt!

- Bobby



**********End Of Post*************

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 23:20:59 GMT, >
wrote:

>Hehe, today I picked up my first one at Menards for $13 .
>I have to say it kicks butt over a wedge.
>I tried it on a log a little over 2' long and about 1.5' across,
>I think it took 6 wacks and it was done and I'm a little guy .
>
>
>I'm having fun with the maul I bought. I managed to break the wood
>handle today.
>
>I was trying to break some bigger pieces of firewood into smaller ones
>and the handle cracked. I guess I'll take it back and trade it in for
>a fiberglass handled one.
>
>Also, I was banging on a bigger piece that was kind of odd shaped.
>Maybe that was where the handle started breaking, but I didn't notice
>it.
>
>Anyway, I was able to put a big crack in the one piece of odd-shaped
>firewood, but not break it all the way through.
>
>So, when I go back to get the fiberglass handled maul I think I'll pick
>up a wedge as well.
>
>Anyway, it was fun and I didn't get hurt!
>
>- Bobby
>
>
>
>**********End Of Post*************
>
If you had posted in a logical manner, we would have known it was the
end of the post without that notice at the end.

1. There is no way to distinguish the text you posted from the text
you're replying to. Please configure your newsreader to indicate what
is quoted text and what is your text. Convention is that quoted text
is preceeded by a right-leaning caret > or a number of them, while
original text isn't preceeded by anything.

2. Please note that my follow-up places a caret in front of your text,
but also places it in front of the text to which you were replying. To
people using threaded newsreaders (translation: sane people), that
makes it appear as if you said both what you said and what he said.
Very bad ting, mon.

3. Stop top-posting. If you don't know what I mean by "top-posting",
then google it.