How do you compare a tomahawk to a hatchet?

golok

golok

Joined
Oct 20, 2000
Messages
4,453
Visually, there are differences between the two but out in the field, is it advisable to carry one and not the other.

What can a hatchet do that a tomahawk can't and vice versa?
 
A tomahawk is design to be thrown, in all other areas a hatchet is directly superior, assuming quality makers for both.

-Cliff
 
In addition to throwing, some outdoorsmen might prefer a hawk for skinning/butchering work. Many hawks have an ulu-like curvature to the blade that some might prefer for game processing. Of course, Gransfors makes a Hunter's Axe that others might like better than a hawk. It's probably a matter of personal preference.

You also frequently hear the argument that it is easier to field repair a broken hawk handle than replace one on a hatchet. Fortunately, I've never had the need to make a personal comparison.
 
The edge curvature isn't tomahawk or hatchet specific, just the makers wishes. You can put a very sweeping bevel on a hatchet if you want with a flay poll.

The head / handle attachment, for ease of replacement is the essential advantage of the tomahawk. This is however only a factor in throwing as otherwise it is a non issue.

With the throwing element removed, there is a massive change to the functional durablity requirement which then allows a higher hardness of steel and thinner edge.

The handle as well doesn't need to be straight and can have the more ergonomic curve and end knob and possibly texture for security in a variety of grips.

-Cliff
 
I understand that both hawks and hatchets can (and do) have curved blade configurations. However, I see the ulu-like curve more commonly on hawks than hatchets.

With regard to the handle replacement issue, I think that my experience of never having a failure with either tool during non-throwing use probably supports your argument. However, there may be others who have had non-throwing handle failures.
 
You can break them, but it is rare outside of accidental impacts. They don't last long if they are smashed into woods. But assuming you pick a correct grain, and it is used by a skilled person, it isn't a problem.

-Cliff
 
The hawk is designed as a striking weapon while a hatchet is designed to cut relatively thick wood. Weapon users place high value on speed. As the St. Trinian's School for Young Girls theme song says:

Let our motto be broadcast
"Get your blow in first",
She who draws the sword last
Always comes off worst.

So a hawk is longer and lighter than a hatchet. It is designed to penetrate more than chop. It replaces native stone tomahawk models and light war clubs. You sacrifice some energy that you could put into the hawk if it were heavier. When you wield a hawk a lot of energy goes into swinging your arm which is heavy compared to the hawk. A hatchet is usually heavier for its size. More of your energy goes into the hatchet. It just doesn't have the reach and the balance that lets you get snappy wrist speed into a hawk.
 
Mr. Clark has pretty well pegged it. The hawk is a one or two strike "speed" weapon. It will chop, of course, but it's secondary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top