Hook blade knives for utility/self defense

reverse "S" curved knives do not excell at stabbing, no matter how much you want to fantasize
Click to expand...
Question: How does the configuration of the edge of the knife affect the stabbing ability?
 
Satin,
You are correct about certain people carrying & using traditional hawkbills as weapons of choice!Florida was one of those areas.I still carry one,as a backup to my Gunting. Sometimes it's all I can carry!
jim
 
Satin, I'm in agreement with most of what you say, barring one point:

Eagles, bears, large cats, etc, do *not* use their claws to kill, they're used to hold their prey down. This is why the hook is used, in goes in deep and stays in, providing far superior grip to a simple triangular claw.

With regard to knives, blades in this style excel at slashing, and just like nature's claws, if they do enter a large meaty mass, they won't come out too easily (You have to rip it out rather than simply draw out). Great for trapping/holding if you're that way inclined.

Edited - Bad syntax and typos, need coffee ;)
 
While it's true that you CAN stab with hawkbills (by essentially hooking it in, similar to the way you do it with a bowie but in reverse), it is tricky, counterintuitive, and still probably not as good.
The idea here is to go for streamlined, straight lines on a knife and a pointy, low-resistance tip up front are the ideal stabbing weapon, I also believe in the tanto but that's a little different and not what we are really talking about.
It's also true that Hawkbills do pretty well with little amount of training and CAN be effective, just not AS effective.
one2gofst, I have stabbed no one, but I have read and heard various resources that support this theory to a great extent, mostly from military sources (personnel, records, etc.).
One last thing, if the opening calls for a slash, regardless of what knife you are using, by all means slash, just stab when ya can.
 
Youngcutter,
Be advised a slash happens with a str, blade,a Rip occurs with a Hawkbill! One can be closed rather easily with stitches, the other can't!
jim
 
Originally posted by Joe Talmadge
For utility, there are a number of things I typically do that a hawkbill would work well on. I've long considered getting an Emerson LaGriffe for this reason. There also things a hawkbill wouldn't work well on, so I'd still keep my regular knife as well.

For defensive use, I don't want to give up the ability to thrust, so I stay away from hawkbills. I've thought of picking up a curved blade, hawkbill or matriarch, to supplement a straight blade in some cases.

I guess for me, the conclusion is, these curved blades might be nice supplements to a regular blade, but not a substitute.
Click to expand...
[my emphasis - JD]

I think Joe put it best. :)

I carry a G-10 Harpy daily in addition to other knives. I wouldn't feel comfortable carrying only a hawkbill, but it adds a lot of versatility.

For utility, a hawkbill will be able to do a lot more than hawkbill-haters would have you believe, but it certainly won't be able to do everything. Hawkbills are great for tip work, rope, cardboard, plastic, splinters, electrical work, stuff like that. Sal designed the Harpy as a fishing knife (no, not a filleting knife). But they won't do everything. I can't for the life of me figure out how to cut a sandwich with one. A hawkbill is a great utility knife as long as it's not the only knife you've got on you. But I've got a buddy who sometimes carries a serrated Harpy as his only knife, and says it works fine for him.

For defense, hawkbills will slash better than straighter blades, provided that they're sharp. What they gain in slashing they lose in stabbing and you'll have to decide for yourself what kind of defensive blade works better with your training and fighting style. I would prefer a blade that can stab and slash, and I consider the price paid for slashing performance to be too great to choose to rely on a hawkbill for defense. I think the Civilian (and Matriarch) is the best slasher ever invented, bar none. If all you want to do is slash, there is not a better choice out there. To me, a slash-only knife is only half a knife, just like a stab-only ice pick is only half a knife. Both can be devastating weapons, but neither will be as versatile as a blade that can do both. When I look at the way my Harpy "fits" the curve of my arm, though, it gives me shudders. You could strip an arm clean to the bone with one of those in no time.
 
To : ALL

Thanx to ALL you guys. Thus far alot of good input ; what
I seek in a hawkbill for defense is the ability to slash alone.
When I was stationed at Ft. Benning,Ga. alot of the instructors
there ( some of who(m) seen hand-to-hand combat ) would have
concurred with YoungCutter & medusaoblongata as to the effectiveness
of the "take'em out" effect of the "manual" stab. I seek merely to
repell the attacker with numerous slashes & copious blood ; as I can't afford a good attorney "take'em out" isn't really an option, so I have to hope my attacker wouldn't be so bold as to run cryin' to the police
after he had the temerity to attack me. The old pirate's sayin'"Dead men tell no tales" may apply in some places, but not so much in America, with it's forensic science & police investigators ( the latter of who(m) I would hope would be on MY side if the attacker
went to them ). My first choice for a good, all around stab/slash tac
would have to be the Terzoula "Starmate" ; but that's not what I seek at this moment.

A.E.T.
 
one thing i would point out in the slash vs. stab debate is that a big part of the effectiveness of a stab (or any puncture wound) is dependent on depth. if a blade is long enough to penetrate clothing, skin, fat, muscle, etc. to reach a major organ than you are in business...if not then you are simply perforating your target and causing the blood to drain out. because of local laws, most of us carry knives with 3"-4" blades. in my opinion (and this is mostly from my research on bullet damage, so please correct me if i am wrong) it seems unlikely that a 3" knife (even with flesh compression)would reliably penetrate deep enough to stop an attacker by hitting an organ. instead, you'd be poking relatively shallow holes in him waiting for him to fall down from blood loss. in the case where you are limited to a small knife (and therefore counting on bleed-out, shock, fear, or pain to stop or hopefully just deter an attacker) i think hook blades are worthy of consideration because they excel at causing nasty, painful wounds that bleed much more than a shallow stab. that being said, there's no reason that you can't perform effective slashes with a straight blade...i just don't think it's fair to write off slashing or hook blades because they don't stab well. if you happen to have a knife with a 9" blade next time you get in a knife fight (which I hope is never :) ), then by all means base your attack around stabbing. however, if you have a 3.5" folder, then you might want to consider how effective a stab is going to be before you get into contact range with an attacker.

blah blah blah...

anyway, this isn't meant as an attack on anyone or their ideas, just a another point to consider. personally, i carry a lagriffe as a backup to my pistol and larger folder. i am convinced there is no more effective blade for it's SIZE and WEIGHT. i'd much rather have a 2" hook blade than a 2" straight blade for defensive purposes (although i'd much rather have a 12 gauge than any knife).

one minor point i would make about hook blades is that for me they are much more difficult to sharpen well. this point alone makes my hook blades back-ups rather than primary EDC blades. i realize however, that this has alot to do with your individual sharpening skills / equipment (i prefer diamond stones).

i hope never to have to test these theories,
e.
 
Originally posted by shortgoth
Satin, I'm in agreement with most of what you say, barring one point:

Eagles, bears, large cats, etc, do *not* use their claws to kill, they're used to hold their prey down. This is why the hook is used, in goes in deep and stays in, providing far superior grip to a simple triangular claw.
Click to expand...

Actually, big cats can & do do kill with their claws, a mountain lion for example, will drop down onto a deer, and sink their teeth into its neck, and tear at the spine with the claws on their back-feet... they can break the neck with their teeth, but tearing down through the back, kills also. And if they get a deer (or similar animal) rolled over, they will rip its underside open to kill it.

I was tired when I posted anyway tho, dunno why I threw bears in there, too sleepy to think straight. :p :footinmou (not that a slap from a bear couldnt do a good job if he got his claws into you tho... but thats more a power issue.)
And eagles hold with their claws of course.

Oh well...
 
You're not alone, there are plenty of people who believe that if you're carrying a short blade then it should be curved, but if it's a long blade, then make it straight. The theory is that the very short blade isn't much good at anything, so sacrificing one particular strike in order to get another strike to at least be acceptably effective, makes sense. It's an interesting view, and one that I think I concur with. The wiggle room is what is "short". I'd rather carry a 2" curved blade, like that LaGriffe, than a 2" straight blade. But by the time you're talking about a delica, 3" blade, I'm thinking I stick with a straight blade.

There's a few interesting points here. First, 3" is plenty long enough to reach some choice spots. Second, while I wouldn't count on it, I also wouldn't discount the psychological effect of cutting, and a straight thrust is so fast that it could bring me plenty of advantage. In addition, the thrust is so much faster -- at least for me -- that there are times when that's the best opportunity that presents itself, and I don't want to give it up.

I'll also note that here, I've about reached the limit of my knowledge

Joe
 
GearGOON raises a good point which I had not considered.
For whatever it's worth I have faith in 4" or longer of blade to get the job done, but 3"... you are right, you'd be better off just slashing like a demon.
As for AET's theories on political correctness in a knife fight, if that's your attitude I won't argue with it. Much I hate to classify myself so obviously, I'm alot more of a "Rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6" type, I don't look for trouble, but sometimes I think certain things are worth their respective sacrifices.
That's just me.
 
Originally posted by Joe Talmadge
First, 3" is plenty long enough to reach some choice spots.
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree.
I don't stab people, but given that quite a bit of blood goes to a person's liver and kidneys, I believe a sharp stabbing blade of 3" would definately be able to cut enough to cause a fast bleed out. I remember that in biology, I was told that the kidneys will have 25% of a person's blood at anytime (althought they utilize very little when they're doing their job as filters). One jab into that and the BG would probably buckle in a couple of seconds because of just the massive blood loss.
As to selling out a slash... remember where the carotid artery and jugular vein? That also pumps quite a bit of blood. Also there are times where a stab may not be easy to do. I would believe anyone would have a hard time trying to stab someone putting you on chokehold from behind, but given that a hawkbill cuts like no tomorrow, one slice down the arm would definately make them back off, if not bleed like crazy and immediately lose some function of the arm by severing a nerve.
I'm not here to attack any views. In fact I found that the opinions are great.
 
i certainly don't disagree that a 3" blade is long enough to get to some vital bits...but what if a guy is wearing several layers of clothing (or even worse a heavy wool or leather coat) or just has some fat on him? imagine a big overwieght biker type BG (no offense to biker types in general :) ), he could easily have 3" or more of fat between his skin and any surface organs...add some clothing onto that and your chances of getting to anything vital (in the torso area)with a small knife start to look pretty slim. if i remember correctly, the FBI requires a minimum of 9" of penetration (after passing through heavy clothing or auto glass barriers) in ballistic gelatin from it's service pistol rounds. i could be wrong on the specific depth requirement, but the point is that in many cases you need to get pretty deep to have a good chance of mucking up a vital organ. for me, pondering this starts to make alternative targets look pretty attractive...neck, face, eyes, forearms, hands, and thighs are all USUALLY less protected than a person's torso and they all are vital in their own way. for example...in the little knife training i've done, i was suprised at how easy it was to effectively strike at my opponents foreams and hands...one good slash could cause grievous damage and make it impossible for him to continue holding his weapon. this technique also allowed me to remain mostly outside of his stabbing range....

dang, i'm rambling again...i quess my comments don't have much to do with the hookblade debate...more what to expect from a short blade. anyway, i'm not trying to be a rag on anyone's comments. i also don't want to portray myself as some kind of expert...if my little training has taught me anything, it's to be totally committed to winning and to keep things as simple as possible. i quess that's why i like the lagriffe...it's simple, very intuitive to use and almost impossible to take away from me. however i also feel the same way about my primary folder (MOD tempest)...stout blade, strong lock and excellent grip...

i'm gonna shut up now,
e.
 
Hey YoungCutter :

I'm NOT "politically correct" ( I don't think ANY of us on this
forum are!;)) I'm merely basing this on what some WWII vets told me
about bayonet fights ( REAL stabbing affairs!): stick an opponent
with a bayonet ( or any large blade ) and try pulling that sucker
out! If we take a look at WWII training films showing bayonet practice
( we did this at Ft. Benning too! ;)) we see the "dogfaces" putting their foot on the "practice" dummies to pull out their bayonets
( read : stabbing implements ) I tend to be "real world"; when someone
I talk to who(m) bayoneted ( stabbed ) about 20 japs in the Pacific
and came up against this problem, I would tend to think this would apply on the streets as well. I don't envision myself trying to pull
my Endura out of an opponent I stabbed who(m) is trying to run away
from the conflict ( this DOES happen )No, YoungCutter, as we used to
say in the Army : "This is NOT Hollywood!" ;)

A.E.T.
 
Allen --

I get the feeling you and I are having this exact same discussion over at Spyderco :) Anyway, sounds like you're leaning towards the hook blade, but one last comment. Regardless of what your friends told you, I've seen a few inside videos from prison (instructor got it from CO student), in none -- that is, 0 -- of the attacks did the knife ever stick, and in one of them a guy must've been stabbed 20 times. This doesn't seem to be at all uncommon, thrusts not sticking. There's no reason to doubt your friends, but maybe a 7" bayonet has sticking problems that a 3" knife doesn't...

Joe
 
Hey Joe :

As you stated in my thread "Ever stabbed anyone?" the average
prison "shiv" is 2"-3" in length, enough to to start hitting muscle tissue & such ( or poke holes ), I'm looking at the "big gash" versus
a 1 1/2"-2" hole caused by a stab ;) What I don't understand is people
like YoungCutter ( or is that YoungStabber? ;)) that call others "politically correct" and then talk about the "law" which now-a-days is a tool of the "PC thugs". He also states he doesn't carry
"weapons" ; O.K. wise@$$, if a cop stops you, asks you if you have any
"weapons", and you say no, and he finds your knife, you're going to have one hell of a time explaining how your knife may not constitute
a "weapon". Especially if the Prosecutor shows your impounded knife
( a wicked looking "Griptillian" lets say ) and paints a horror story
to the judge about juvenilles & knives. I further chastise YoungStabber about "being judged by twelve" ; today, most juries don't
number twelve unless it's a serious charge, even most high priced
attorneys will "plea bargain" for a reduced "sentence" rather than try
a case out. I mean, if you have $10-$20,000 you'll get your jury trial, and theres also the reality of making "bond" which in a murder
case ( which is what would happen if you killed someone with your knife ) would be about $50-$100,000 or 10% = $5,000-$10,000. This is hard reality, and works the same when you shoot someone, which an attorney friend of mine did in Orange, Ct & it cost him mucho $$$$
and he STILL did 8 months! PLUS he now has a "record" because of this
scenario. I know we all like to "dream" of what we would do, but the consequence(s) are horrendous ( and costly ; especially if you can't afford to be "bailed out" and can't afford a high priced "oil driller"
( read : attorney ;))) I just hope those like YoungStabber keep these
things in mind BEFORE they have to "face the music". ;)

A.E.T.
 
Ok so maybe i'm semi-PC.

And just because a knife CAN be a weapon doesn't mean it is.

I don't carry anything illegal, I don't carry for personal defense, I don't carry with hostile intent. In the state of Illinois, because I carry my knife with the exclusive mindset of a tool, I am not guilty of possession of a dangerous weapon with intent to harm, this means the posession isn't a crime.
I don't like hawkbills for self-defense or utility, so I don't carry them. If I just so happen to be attacked by some fella and things get so desperate that I feel it is necessary to stab him and the DA indicts me, there's not alot I can do about that, it's tough sh!t.
The DA who will prosecute you won't give a flying &*%$ whether you used a hawkbill or a straight blade, he will try to paint you into a corner. Again, there is nothing you can do so that's tough sh!t.

You can't control everybody and everything, carry what you will, do what you have to, and if someone else has a problem with that, then it's just tough sh!t.

I wouldn't put my knife into play unless it were absolutely necessary, particularly since I am rather good at defending myself unarmed.

When it hits the fan, ya do the best ya can, and that's all you can do.
 
There is one last thing I'd like to mention before this becomes a full blown pissing contest.

Allen, you asked for our opinions, you got them. Forgive me if my accusation of you being "PC" struck a nerve, I suppose if you were really "PC" you'd be talking about some low-grade pepper spray instead of a knife.
If you want to carry a hawkbill for self-defense then by all means, go for it. I'm not really saying your way is WRONG, I'm just saying that in my eyes, it's not as right, there is a middle-ground yknow.
God willing you will never have the need to use your knife in that fashion anyway, if you do, it is unlikely you will be dealing with a particularly determined attacker, and as such, several relatively shallow slashes may very well be enough. I'm not about to tell you how to live, and all I ask is that you extend me the same courtesy.

Good luck with your selection and I hope you never have to use it.
 
As to the point about the FBI using bullets that after heavy clothing or auto glass, it still need to penetrate 9"...
Yes I do see why they need it. But put an average guy up and I'd believe that from his belly to the back is less than 12". 3" should be enough to go through some fat, muscle and struck the vitals. This depends on your opportunity to do so. If you so happen to face a BG with some thick fat layers, then of course you'll have to scale the length of the blade up.
Also, most bullets used by LEOs are hollow points, which means they'll have a much bigger area in contact to flesh than a knife does. This may explain why perhaps 3-4" is enough to do some serious damage. And don't forget bullets have to go through quite a bit of stuff... air friction, barriers, clothing, fat layers, etc.... In fact I'd argue 9" is not enough. I think there was a Miami shoot out between the FBI and Pratt (couldn't remember the specifics) where a shot had gone through the BG's arm, through his ribs, and up, but stopped before the heart. He was fatally wounded but he had to bleed out internally before he fell, which cost a couple of agent's lives anyways. I remember the depth of penetration for that was like 9". That explains why bullets have to go through a much longer distance than knifes because it's used differently. With knives, most people (who aren't trained much) would probably go for the broad side, which is much easier and to be frank, much more likely to cause greivous damage.
I'm babbling too. I need to get back to work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top