Let's design last ditch anti-Zombie Blades/Tools + 2 examples if piercing perfection

Slender, stabbing, high-penetration weapons may not be the best choice for killing zombies. I've seen a lot of LIVING people who have been stabbed through the brain, or shot through the brain with a cross-bow bolt, or suffer some form of skull/brain penetrating impalment, and they not only survive but remain conscious and talking while they are being treated.

My understanding is that to kill a zombie you need to destroy a specific part of their brain, not just "stab em in the head" as if such an act were a magic "zombie-stopper".

Depending on how long the zombie has been dead their skull might be significantly weakened by decay and decomposition. So for an "older" zombie I wouldn't think that penetration with a larger, wider blade would be a problem. And a larger, wider blade would certainly inflict greater trauma and be more likely to destroy the right part of the brain.

Of course if we are talking about a fresh zombie, like a living person who just died, then their skull might be harder to penetrate. Oh well, who ever said that fighting zombies would be easy.

For the record, I'm not a zombie fan. I prefer "infected" like in the movie "28 days later". ;)
 
killgar said:
Slender, stabbing, high-penetration weapons may not be the best choice for killing zombies. I've seen a lot of LIVING people who have been stabbed through the brain, or shot through the brain with a cross-bow bolt, or suffer some form of skull/brain penetrating impalment, and they not only survive but remain conscious and talking while they are being treated.

My understanding is that to kill a zombie you need to destroy a specific part of their brain, not just "stab em in the head" as if such an act were a magic "zombie-stopper".

Depending on how long the zombie has been dead their skull might be significantly weakened by decay and decomposition. So for an "older" zombie I wouldn't think that penetration with a larger, wider blade would be a problem. And a larger, wider blade would certainly inflict greater trauma and be more likely to destroy the right part of the brain.

Of course if we are talking about a fresh zombie, like a living person who just died, then their skull might be harder to penetrate. Oh well, who ever said that fighting zombies would be easy.

For the record, I'm not a zombie fan. I prefer "infected" like in the movie "28 days later". ;)
Click to expand...

Good points all around,I do think that a 28 days later type of infection will be easier to survive,just because they're not dead and will need food and water so at best I'll have to be holed up for a month,maybe month and a half,with zombies from something like Return of the Living Dead I might surviving will be a hell of a lot harder.I really wish the type of zombie would be specified whenever a discussion starts because for a slower zombie I think a heavy weapon is ideal because you can take out several while if its a fast zombie I think a lighter weapon is preferred because you have to run and the chance of you getting taken down by a zeek is much higher.I think that if I had to pick a weapon for the slow scenario i'd be my CAK,if its a fast scenario Im going to have to with a tactical tomahawk (RMJ,Trenchhawk or the Benchmade one).
 
There was an old Zombie Squad thread about how to turn a SKS spike bayonet into a probe/last ditch weapon where they visited a hardware store, and made a handle and D guard for it.
 
Ramil839 said:
Good points all around,I do think that a 28 days later type of infection will be easier to survive,just because they're not dead and will need food and water so at best I'll have to be holed up for a month,maybe month and a half,with zombies from something like Return of the Living Dead I might surviving will be a hell of a lot harder.I really wish the type of zombie would be specified whenever a discussion starts because for a slower zombie I think a heavy weapon is ideal because you can take out several while if its a fast zombie I think a lighter weapon is preferred because you have to run and the chance of you getting taken down by a zeek is much higher.I think that if I had to pick a weapon for the slow scenario i'd be my CAK,if its a fast scenario Im going to have to with a tactical tomahawk (RMJ,Trenchhawk or the Benchmade one).
Click to expand...

I have to disagree.

A) "Rage" zombies are the most scientifically plausible, meaning they're a more likely threat than any actual "living dead" types.
B) "Rage" zombies, as shown in the series they represent, can not only run for indefinite amounts of time, but also still think and process information, making them far more dangerous.

Personally, I'd rather have 2-3 stumbling idiots chasing after me than 3 working-minded psychopaths. ;)
 
VolundoftheForge said:
I have to disagree.

A) "Rage" zombies are the most scientifically plausible, meaning they're a more likely threat than any actual "living dead" types.
B) "Rage" zombies, as shown in the series they represent, can not only run for indefinite amounts of time, but also still think and process information, making them far more dangerous.

Personally, I'd rather have 2-3 stumbling idiots chasing after me than 3 working-minded psychopaths. ;)
Click to expand...

I fully agree,i guess i should've worded my statement better and used a different example,my survival scenarios would change drastically depending on the SHTF at that moment,for rage virus i'd stock up on as much stuff as possible and wait,if its night of the living dead i'd have no option but run because ill eventually run out of food and escaping 1000-50000 zombies will be difficult to say the least,slow or not.
 
My point regarding "infected" versus the "living dead" is that I prefer movies about "infected". Not only because they're more scientifically realistic, but because the speed and enhanced strength of the "infected" is a much more frightening scenario than slow moving, stumbling, rotting corpses.

I'm reminded of the movie "Quarantine" which I saw agin recently. The "infection" was an enhanced version of rabies, which is already pretty scary stuff to begin with.
 
killgar said:
My point regarding "infected" versus the "living dead" is that I prefer movies about "infected". Not only because they're more scientifically realistic, but because the speed and enhanced strength of the "infected" is a much more frightening scenario than slow moving, stumbling, rotting corpses.

I'm reminded of the movie "Quarantine" which I saw agin recently. The "infection" was an enhanced version of rabies, which is already pretty scary stuff to begin with.
Click to expand...

We need a thread on zombie survival tactics.
 
If you have enough room to wield it:

tinker-great-sword-of-war-600x285.jpg


In more cramped space something like a gladius would be my first choise. With a short sword I would prefer to have body armor or shield for protection to avoid being bitten.
 
LOL, I'd just grab a hold of my 12 ga. and put my "tac" clothing on.. load my shotty up and grab all of my ammo.... got over 250 shells on hand should be good enough to get me to a place to restock on ammo...

Now if i happen to run out of ammo... well then i guess an esee junglas would be my go-to wepon..? I mean, you got some wieght on that bad boy and lenght.. so you can chop through a zombies brains pretty easy.. problly in 1 clean swipe to be honest...

But hey... I would camp out in my house until i ran out of food and had to scavange! (haha)..
 
I'd want something choppy and long to go through necks and suchlike, but I wouldn't want something that would tend to stick in the head. Maybe something like a bhuj

ph-0.jpg


Or perhaps a parang ilang, since it was specifically designed to take off heads.

Bt8ZB.jpg
 
Ramil839

what are those blades you have.

HI import xxxxxxxxx... looks like a WWII but they don't make that in 20"

and the others....
 
I'm thinking you should take a golf club, hack off the head & sharpen the end.
 
A piercing weapon takes less energy and less room to use. To chop you have to swing which means you have to have room not only to start the swing but also to follow through then recover. Lots of energy. Something like a short spear would give you reach and can be used in a fairly confined area where you don't have side to side room to swing a blade.

With the right design that same spear head could be used in a chopping motion too.

Something else to consider, dead or not your bone structure still has to remain intact to stay ambulatory. Remove a portion of a leg, shatter the bone and the walker should go down. A crawler should be less of a threat and easier to stay away from then a walker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top