I had a need for an extra-long 1" augur, so I bought the 18" WoodOwl "Ultra Smooth". I'm posing this as a quick comparative evaluation to the 3 other 1" augurs that I own: A Fisch/TFWW "modern Jennings", a Stanley/Jennings-branded "real Jennings", and the inexpensive Brazilian-made single-flute augurs that
LV sells. I tested using a 10" brace and 12/4 blocks of Maple and White Pine.
The WoodOwl and Fisch still have their factory grinds. I'd call them even (and both quite finely finished) in terms of factory grind quality. The LV's factory grind was OK but I've subsequently sharpened it. I had to significantly reshape the Jennings a while back to correct a previous owner's "unconventional" ideas about bevel and relief and restore it to NOS-equivalent geometry, so its shape is entirely my work, for better or worse.
All 4 bits use conventional cutting geometries (edge profile, bevel and relief). The WoodOwl has the steepest flutes of the 4, probably to assist chip clearance when used with a higher-speed electric drill. All 4 work fine with a brace.
From a design point of view, the big differences between the 4 are in advance rate (how fast the screw draws the but into the work) and cut depth. Advance rate has a huge impact in overall cutting effort, while cut depth impacts effort and heating/wear:
- The WoodOwl has a 0.06"/turn screw (single-threaded at 0.06" pitch) and 3 flutes, so it takes 0.02" cuts.
- The Fisch has a 0.05"/turn screw (single-threaded at 0.05" pitch) and 2 flutes, so it takes 0.025" cuts.
- The Jennings has a 0.1"/turn screw (double-threaded at 0.05" pitch) and 2 flutes, so it takes 0.05" cuts.
- The LV has a 0.07"/turn screw (single-threaded at 0.07" pitch) and 1 flute, so it takes a 0.07" cut.
Unsurprisingly the Fisch/TFWW and WoodOwl augers are very similar in use: They require similar effort to drive, heat up by about the same amount, and both leave clean holes in both species with very minimal tearing. I haven't used either long enough to have a sense of wear, but I suspect they'll end up comparable.
The Jennings is a beast to drive, and its teeth and scorers heat up more than either WoodOwl or Fisch. It's also much faster than Fisch/WoodOwl, but that's offset by the need to "rest" the woodworker and the tool between holes. It leaves a clean hole with the least tearing of all, though that may not be a fair comparison to the others as I've worked on the Jennings bit's scorers quite a bit.
The Brazilian-made LV is almost as difficult to drive as the Jennings, but it heats up significantly more, probably because it takes the most aggressive cut and concentrates all of the heat in one flute. LV cautions that this bit can overheat to the point of detempering when used in dry hardwoods, and they aren't joking. It leaves more tearing than any of the other 3 bits, though it still leaves a good quality hole IMO (far better than a hardware store auger). It's also quite a bit cheaper than either of the other 2 new options and quite serviceable, particularly if you're willing to do your own sharpening.
In terms of weight the bits aren't directly comparable as the WoodOwl is longer than the others. With that said all are made of steel with similar density, so a lot can be learned by looking at the cross section. The WoodOwl has very similar flute thickness to the two Jennings-pattern bits (Jennings and Fisch), though it has a slightly "heavier" cross-section than either due to the presence of the 3rd flute. All 3 (WoodOwl, Fisch, Jennings) are much lighter than the Brazilian-made LV. The LV only has a single flute, but it's about 5X as thick as the others.
My overall impression of the WoodOwl is that it's a very good quality modern auger, that achieves ease-of-use and avoids heating by advancing relatively slowly and taking shallow cuts. I can easily see how it would cut faster than either the Jennings or the LV on a cordless driver, by allowing the drill motor to run faster and therefore closer to its optimum. It's interesting that both of the modern high-end makers (Fisch and WoodOwl) have landed on basically the same formula.