The question concerning the function of Spitzhauen is equally hard to answer. The tip is so blunt as to preclude the use as a working wood implement. The double-conical shaft hole, which hardly allows a firm fixation of a handle, contradicts a function as an axe. The choice of raw material is an argument against the use on hard material. There are however macroscopic traces of wear in some shaft holes, showing that they have been hafted. Many of the Spitzhauen display traces of use, in the form of battered parts of the surface. These occur in particular at the butt and, to a lesser extent, at the tip. Only three specimens show use damage at both ends. They are, however, absent at almost half of all artefacts (Hulst & Verlinde 1979, 195). Microscopic use wear study has not been performed on either Spitzhauen or Geröllkeulen up till now.
It is, however, beyond discussion that the Spitzhaue was an implement used on a relatively soft material, modestly damaged and worn, and occasionally broken (see also Drenth & Niekus 2010). It was left or deposited in the field, rarely at a settlement site. It could even have been used as weapon. So a functional interpretation is difficult, due to lacking evidence in relation to find circumstances and absence of wear studies.