After a discussion about this over the weekend I'm curious to know more peoples opinions on the matter. Personally I would prefer a longer axe, as I find myself using it a lot as a balance aid, it will probe deeper and go deeper in the snow so you can get more purchase on it, and for an arrest you have more leverage and your hand wont be trapped under you.
I found this thread from some web forum regardign this issue and there are some very interesting points mentioned here
Hi Smeg. I read the same MCofS thread (among lots of other info) before buying my axe recently. Taking in the pros and cons of all that info and Iain's recommendation on the WSC thread, I decided on 55cm and it turned out to be about right for me I think, because:
1. When I'm using it as a balance aid it's always on steep terrain and in my uphill hand. So the ground on the uphill side is much higher than my feet.
2. As Iain said on the WSC, if your axe is too long then when you go to arrest you may end up with your right hand (or maybe your left if you're left-handed) too far up the axe shaft and the point of the shaft can dig into the ice and wrench the axe away.
Edited to add the disclaimer: that's my understanding and I'm far from being an authority on the subject!
Hi Craig (or was it Scott??? ) Your point 2 is interesting. As someone on that thread I linked ot stated in the softer stuff its usefull to be able to get the shaft in for an arrest, which with a shorter axe would not be as easy. I' sure Dave M was saying how with a longer axe you are more likely to stab yourself, but I dont quite understand it as the way I see it a logner axe would not have the end underneath you, but sticking out the side, where it would be less likely to stab you. I hope he comes on here and explains it a little more.
Interesting point, Smeg. In the softer stuff the shaft is less likely to dig in and wrench the axe away so maybe not so important, but I suspect any benefit you might get from having your axe shaft dig into softer stuff would be small compared to the stopping power of the axe head, and it's potentially dangerous on harder stuff so for my money I'd say it's better to go for shorter and avoid the shaft digging in. You're probably more likely to need to arrest on harder stuff too because in the soft stuff your boots make big enough footholds so you're less likely to fall.
My axe is a few inches short of my ankle bone when I hold it by my side but I find it quite useable as a walking stick when the ground is steep enough to need to use it for balance. On relatively flat ground it's too short but then I don't normally need any help balancing then anyway.
When the point of the axe extends too far during braking it can, and has, caused injury to the leg as well as catching on obstructions. One of the problems is that the hand position required on a longer axe can make rotation during braking more likely. It's important to keep as much weight and pressure over the axe during braking, and that's a lot easier with a grip with hands under your body.
I've been watching the debate for many years go from long to short and back again, and in that time I've known a lot of folk using either one consistently and reliably and happily.
Which leads me to conclude that as long as you're familiar with your weapon of choice and know how to use it to best advantage it doesn't actually make nearly as much difference as the life and death arguments for and against either flavour might suggest.
Personally I use a 50 because it was my original climbing axe and old enough that it's a curver instead of the radical things available now so it's fine for self arrest. if I was to replace it for some rewason I think I'd get a 55, but the real trick is know your axe and be practised with it.
Being taller allows me to use a longer axe, a 60cm axe for me suits my purposes at the mo, slightly longer for use as a walking aid, aswell as moderatly technical on snow covered scrambles etc.
If I were to need a technical axe/adze I'd go for a 55cm.
When I packed in the Climbing thing I bought myself a walkers axe 73cm !! Absolutely bloody useless. So now I am back carrying one of my old ice axes 50cm ... feels like the real thing.
The shorter axe is much better for just slipping under the shoulder strap between my back and the rucksack as a intermediate carrying position, the big axe had to be either in the hand or attached to the rucksack like some giant antenna, and as PTC* says a complete liability for a self arrest
I've always used a shortish axe - around 50cm and I'm five nine and a half - for the reasons above, but I do take Pete's point that people manage quite happily with longer axes. I do think that once you get onto steep terrain, anything on the fringes of a grade one snow slope, short axes start to make a lot more sense, particularly if you're traversing a slope and plunging the axe with your uphill hand.
As far as balance goes, I find that a 50cm axe is fine for me, but my 45cm climbing axe is just a tad too short, so I think quite small differences in length can make a difference. Having said that, I rarely use an axe for balance on flat ground, it's more likely on a ridge line or in ascent or descent.
I've known a few people who choose to climb on alpine terrain with one long and one short axe giving them a bit of a choice.
Jeff Lowe, for one, recommends a straight shafted 60 - 70cm axe paired with a 45 - 55cm hammer for alpine use. Interestingly in his book "Ice World" he says that "If you plan to do only extreme alpine climbs you can get by with a shorter axe, buttools less than 60cm long are difficult to use for self-arrest".
Another great climber, Mark Twight, is also not a fan of short axes on moderate terrain. He says in "Extreme Alpinism":
"Hunching over 50-centimeter ice tools on a 45-degree slope compresses the diaphragm and compromises oxygen exchange. Using only ski poles, or a combination of one pole and one ice ax, [...] I climbed from the 14,000-foot camp to the top of Denali via the Upper West Rib .. and descended ... in 10 hours round trip. The moderate angle of the terrain did not merit a short tool, or even two tools. They may look cool, but they decrease speed on moderately angled slopes."
For general walking, I reckon an axe that comes within a few inches of your ankle bone is about right; it enables a relatively upright stance to be maintained on a slope, so keeping your weight over your feet, and has sufficient length to be useful to aid progression.
I'm 6ft tall and back in 1982 I followed the received wisdom and bought myself a 70cm Mountain Technology Mountaineering Axe (the dog's whatsitz of its day), which I proceeded to use very happily and successfully for ice-axe arrest and a host of easy-grade mountaineering for a decade or more. It's only downsides were the antennae effect when strapped to your pack, and the fact that it must have weighed about a kilo!
After a lay-off of a few years I got into ski-touring and back into winter hill-going generally, and wanted a light axe to take, so around 95/ 96 I bought a 53cm Grivel Air Tech, later followed by a 48cm Grivel Air Tech Racing (even lighter), and just recently one of the new Camp Corsa Nanotechs (250g) in 50cm length. The choice of length had more to do with weight and packability but they certainly are easy to work with. And fine as a support on steeper ground but no use at all as a 'walking stick' on flatter ground. One point though, and I know you have to judge when to pack them away in preference for the axe, but back in the 80s nobody used walking poles, and a walking/ski pole makes a better job of being a pole than an axe does!! (And you can even get poles with some form of pick for arresting built into the handle as a half-way house).
So now my choice would unreservedly be for a short axe. But I had to smile the other week on the Winter Skills thread when Iain (the instructor) posted
"Matt - a 70cm ixe axe is well outdated and totally inappropriate for ice axe braking as whoever you lend it to will well find out!
Anyone bringing an axe of that length will find that during ice axe braking, you will have to work hard to keep the shaft of the axe diagonally under your body - and unless you really try to keep your hand over the bottom end of the axe (the ferrule), because of the extra length of the shaft (and hence extra leverage!), it is more likely that the ferrule will dig in and the axe be ripped out of your hand.
If you find yourself ice axe braking for real, you really don't want that to happen!"
I know what he's saying, but I can't help wondering how I ever managed to stay alive for all those years....!!
I'm with Pete Clinch on this in that I believe what you do with it is much more important than raw length. Having said that, I have one of the longest lengths around at 70cm.
I'm not particularly tall, but I find I am happiest with the long shaft I have. Whenever I have borrowed a shorter length (down to 50cm), I have found my confidence lessened.
By the way, I started with a 55cm length and just graduated to a longer length.
I guess terrain would have something to do with it too. I am a walker, not a climber. For me, ropes are for adventurous use in the bedroom, not on the hill. Terrain can be steep and rough whilst I am getting to the peaks, but not more than grade 1 winter or 1-2 in summer.
God, that all sounds very nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
) Your point 2 is interesting. As someone on that thread I linked ot stated in the softer stuff its usefull to be able to get the shaft in for an arrest, which with a shorter axe would not be as easy. I' sure Dave M was saying how with a longer axe you are more likely to stab yourself, but I dont quite understand it as the way I see it a logner axe would not have the end underneath you, but sticking out the side, where it would be less likely to stab you. I hope he comes on here and explains it a little more. 
