I think 2" is kind of optimistic for real capacity on the 25. The biggest stock I fed my 25 was 2.5 round of 4140. It was WAY underpowered for that! It did chew through that 4140 but it was not fast. Hank Knickmyer used to forge damascus billets that were 4x4 under a 25# LG. The issue with capacity is how fast you need to get the part finished. If you arent forging for money and the clock isnt running a 25 will do nicely. If you have clients who are paying a shop rate based on time you have to look at it a bit differently. The other concern is time at forging temp. will effect the grain in the forging. The Little Giant was not a manufacturing machine. It was intended for the small blacksmith shop. A big industrial machine like the chambersberg,nazel,bradley,beaudry ect were all rated more realisticly. In a small shop you can get by with a smaller hammer since you wont likely work material of large size. Most of us probably dont often forge material as big as 3 inch. Running an ornamental shop I found that I only rarely forged material for a client over 1.5 inch. I see the rating of a hammer as the biggest material it can work really efficently and keep hot while forging. The 25 is hard pressed to put heat back into stock over 5/8-3/4 square.

Here is a video from Matchless of a rebuilt 25lb hammer drawing 2" round. This is the maximum capacity for a 25lb hammer per the specs on the Little Giant web site. The hammer is in top shape and he is using drawing dies but I think it does a respectable job on the 2". Sure it is not the hammer for doing production forging in that size range but I can't say the specs on the Little Giant are too out of line.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5IjfCz92_I

Nice little hammer!

Forging capacity rating from Chambersburg.

Dillon, Am I reading this right? A 100lb hammer is rated for occasional forging of 3.25" square stock operating at 50 psi. For regular production forging the upper limit is 2.25" square stock at 105 psi and as the size decreases the PSI increases.

The psi is in reference to the stock not the hammer (at bottom of page). The chart group #'s are for different grade material, I believe group A is A36. Also this is a chart is for pneumatic motor driven hammers which probably have more force than most mechanical hammers. I would also say that most steam hammers probably have more force that the motor driven hammers :D

Ok I see. So if you follow the math out for Group A with 2.25" stock the 100lb hammer falls just short of the the recommended energy needed and you would be better served by moving up one hammer size.

It really depends on the operation, as you can see that 25 could really knock down the material well. It all depends on the die surface or tool used under the hammer. This is a measurable force rating for the hammers shown in a chart thats all, its pretty cool though! I always move up one size or two or three.... B)

Unfortunately what they claimed in their ads was more like "sears horsepower" not actual efficient constant use values; but more at the very edge of destruction for brief amounts of time.

You would not be happy working 2" steel in a 25# LG Shoot I was not having fun trying to work 2.5" steel in a 100# LG and I was working at welding heat.

Note re St Francis: he was probably not working knife grade steels when making that observation. High alloy steels are a LOT harder to move than mild steel.

You would not be happy working 2" steel in a 25# LG Shoot I was not having fun trying to work 2.5" steel in a 100# LG and I was working at welding heat.

Must be a real PICNIC doing it by hand with a helper, eh?

Sure it would be as long as I was the Master and not a helper with a sledge---(and I would have a minimum of *3* strikers!

Let us not forget that real wrought iron with pretty much zilch carbon content worked at welding heat is awesomely soft under a hammer too.

lovely little hammer kubiach, but i would only use that for panelbeating :P
it looks like a strongman trying to forge with a tackhammer to me!