New Fighting Tomahawk Designs

Bubbanumber1 you have informed everyone here of your thoughts about these hawks...great we will take it in to consideration and thought when dealing with Sayoc...now you can stop trolling and pissing in this thread...if you feel it needs to be discussed more.... start you own thread please.....

and I do not have a dog in this fight either way...I am just sayin
 
Thanks to everyone else for keeping this thread positive and staying focused.

Here is recent pic of some Sayoc Tactical Group instructors - our "fantasy warriors"

bj_sayoctactical.jpg


At the time of taking - this pic has one active Philly PD, SWAT, one active SF, former Marine, SEAL, BJJ instructor and a MMA/UFC legend. They are not the students, they are the actual Sayoc instructors.

STG has many more active/former SOF within our group, not in the pic. It continuous to grow in number due to the methods working well on the field and word of mouth spreading amongst the community.

We like to laugh at ourselves too because hanging out with this diverse group is a three ring circus! :)

“I’ve trained with many experts over my 24 years as a Navy SEAL and the information I’ve found to be the most efficient and well-rounded is the Sayoc Kali knife fighting techniques. You will acquire an exceptional proficiency with a knife beyond anything you thought possible.”

Michael Jaco
Originator / Head Instructor for the Navy SEALs Combat Fighting Course
 
winklerny0802jq3.jpg


Highlighted sections on the RnD Hawk are some features that went into the design of the Hawk head.

Held high under the head, the hawk head can be used in very close quarter similar to the Karambit.

The front spike allows an initial wound channel entry and the edge complements it by creating an even larger less manageable wound without having to retract the hawk once it penetrates.

We added enough clearance underside the bit/cutting edge and angled it out so that will not dig into the user's hands when gripped high. It adds an effective penetrating beak. Sharp force trauma first before chopping or slicing come into it.

The Bit is also angled so that it has the back cut options at very close range without having to commit to wide slashing strokes. It has to clear the initial gouge that the front spike hawks will cause. With a high hand grip the handle can trap a limb just enough so that the edge or spike can do the initial damage.

The Back spike is not made to be as sharp, it is for more blunt force trauma or for accessing the natural "grab" points of the body. We received feedback that sharpened back spikes snag on the gear or are a concern that its too many sharp edges to contend with in the dark.

Much thought (and effort on Mr. Winkler's part) went into making sure the beak at the front spike's end would not cut into the user's wrist when held facing in the opposite manner (back spike forward). He had to run thru several protos which were more pleasing aesthetically but had to be set aside for practical purposes.

Held in the back spike forward manner, the index finger has the same reference point as the back spike.
 
Last edited:
Kind of like this one?

http://s249.photobucket.com/albums/... Final Pics/?action=view&current=100_3478.jpg

http://s249.photobucket.com/albums/... Final Pics/?action=view&current=100_3503.jpg

This is a L6 differentially hardened head with a Noryl haft.

As I had mentioned before I am in the process (and iteration) of re-designing, fabricating, and destructive testing.

If you peruse my PhotoBucket you'll see some of my other designs.

My most recent iteration comes from what I learned after trying to wreck my previous designs.

It will not only look wicked but will be a hybrid of modern heat treating technology and hand forged and finished quality.


Respectfully

Robert



Robert
 
I have two questions about the design.

What is the design rationale behind carrying a 3-5 lb hawk that only has purpose to be used in CQC? i.e. no utility purpose.

It has been said that the hawk is to be carried like a pistol which means the handle would be parrallel to the waist. Would'nt this be an encumbrance for movement? i.e. easier to snag and catch when moving in addition to taking up a lot of real estate

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Being S-7 steel I'm sure it would take a hell of a lot to shear one of those. The impact ratings for that steel are quite high.

While they are certainly impressive looking, even futuristic in design I somewhat fear sharing my thoughts. I sometimes feel that people get a bit carried away with fantasy designs or that they have watched too many Star Wars episodes. No offense Mr. Winkler because I really speak sincerely but what can the new design do better than a typical Vietnam Tomahawk? I look at tools for their practicality, and yes, even military tools and weapons from the perspective of versatility and practical uses in the real world both war and survival. I was in the miltary in the 80s got out after six years active duty and was in the dental corp. not spec ops. So forgive me if that seems odd to put both together. It just seems logical to me.

With that said. I know a bit about survival, more than the military or tactical stuff for sure. So to get to the point. Those look like they would mess a human body up real bad or bash in a door or knock off hinges to get in and rescue someone trapped in a smoke filled room, or bash in a brick wall, open a box metal or not, locked or not and all kinds of other "war uses'. I find myself wondering how good they'd be if that is all you had on you and needed to make some shelter in a harsh environment or you needed to use the tomahawk like a knife because you didn't have a knife handy?? I guess I am also interested in the level, amount and kinds of testing behind the designs.

Oh and the reason I ask is two fold. I will pass on mentioning both but one is from something I read and kept a copy of years ago on another forum. I found it tonight in a more recent posting. Going from memory it looks to be an exact copy of what I found back in or around 2003 on Tomahawks.

Here it is for your convenience.

U.S. forces are using two types of tomahawks in Iraq: one, a high-tech cruise missile — the other, a bit more like the hatchet Mel Gibson used in the movie The Patriot.

Members of Air Force security groups, Army Rangers and special forces are some of the U.S. troops who have chosen to add tomahawks to their basic gear. So why would a member of today's armed services want a relic of the American frontier? According to one modern tomahawk manufacturer, it comes down to science, and the reasons soldiers carried them in the Revolutionary War are still valid today.

"The physics behind it make it an appropriate choice for any kind of battlefield conditions," said Ryan Johnson, owner of RMJ Forge.

"You take a knife, a knife has a certain amount of leverage that's given to you. The tomahawk can be used like a knife, but you also have that 18 inches of handle that gives you a huge amount of difference in power as far as the power of the cutting stroke. It's much more practical as a field tool because you can again use it like a knife or you can use it like an ax."

Tomahawks Also Used in Not-So-Distant History

The tomahawk was commonly carried by soldiers even prior to the Revolutionary War, but its use in modern times is not unprecedented.

According to Johnson, soldiers have used tomahawks in most of the major wars the United States has fought.

"In World War II, there were not only Native Americans using them, but also just your regular GI. A lot of these people were just carrying stuff from home, stuff that they used on the farm," Johnson said.

He added that an uncle who had served in the Korean War told him soldiers would take the standard hatchet that they were issued and grind the back down into a spike to make a "fighting hatchet."

World War II Marine veteran Peter LaGana was a pioneer in the modern military use of tomahawks. He created an updated tomahawk design and, from 1966 to 1970, sold about 4,000 of them to members of the armed forces serving in Vietnam before closing down his company.

From top right to lower left: American Tomahawk Co. founder Peter LaGana's original 1966 design for the "Vietnam Tomahawk," with drop-forged head and hickory handle; today's Vietnam Tactical Tomahawk with synthetic handle; LaGana Titanium Tactical Tomahawk. (Courtesy of American Tomahawk Co.)

While tomahawks have historically been made in a variety of patterns, LaGana chose a "spike hawk" design — which has the cutting blade common to hatchets, but a sturdy penetrating spike on the opposite side.

In November 2000, professional knife and tomahawk thrower Andy Prisco approached LaGana and got his approval to license his design and restart the defunct firm, the American Tomahawk Co. — which Prisco did in January 2001.

Prisco's revitalized firm sells several different tomahawk designs, mainly to sportsmen and collectors. But he said that among members of the military, the top-selling product is the Vietnam Tactical Tomahawk, which uses LaGana's original head design and an updated synthetic handle. LaGana died in 2002 after a battle with cancer.

Johnson, who had a childhood interest in historical weapons, says he began hand-forging tomahawks at age 12. It became a way of life for him, as he put himself through college selling hand-forged tomahawks and knives, and made it his full-time occupation once he graduated.

RMJ Forge's version of a modern tactical tomahawk, the Eagle Talon Special Forces Tomahawk. (www.rmjforge.com)

Originally, most of his customers were period re-enactors or people interested in early American history. He first made tomahawks specifically for members of the military in the spring of 2001.

The effort was sparked by a request from a friend in an Air Force security group who sent him an e-mail with a picture of an 18th-century spike tomahawk and asked if he could make an updated tactical version. Johnson's modern tomahawk is made from a single piece of steel, with synthetic scales on the grip.

It wasn't until after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks and the United States began fighting in Afghanistan that he started making them in quantity. In fact, it dramatically changed the way he does business — Johnson says his time is now almost exclusively devoted to producing the modern tomahawks for military customers, and he makes only a few historical tomahawks a month.

While these modern tomahawks do everything their frontier counterparts did, their makers say theirs are uniquely suited to challenges U.S. forces may face in urban combat.

The Web sites for both RJM Forge and ATC mention a variety of capabilities of their products, including breaching doors, smashing locks or tearing out windows to enter buildings, chopping holes in cinder block walls — and even punching through a standard Kevlar helmet.

STR
 
Going from memory it looks to be an exact copy of what I found back in or around 2003 on Tomahawks.

STR

Yea, that article was in Army Times, I remember it. And then after that, nothing, no more articles about what a great tool they are, stories of actual use, or pictures of troops carrying them in Iraq or Afghanistan, other than some hero shots sent to manufacturers and posted on their web sites as advertising. There are combat pictures of troops in WWII using knuckle knives, all manner of knives, and one I've seen shows a soldier with a Navy 1917 boarding cutlass sticking out of his pack, but after a war lasting longer than WWII I cant find a single combat picture of a troop in the field with a tomahawk, never saw one myself in an AOR, and cant find a buddy in the SOF world that has seen one, or wants to for that matter. My next door neighbor just got back last month after a year on a PRT in southern Afghanistan, saw him this morning and asked him, never saw a tomahawk while over there.

I love tomahawks, and all edged weapons for that matter, and own a bunch. With that said, its time to be honest, there are some floating around with the troops probably, but by and large they are shelf ware. One thing I know for certain is that if anything gives a troop an edge; gear, weapons or just a tactic, the next day and everyone will be doing the same, and if tactical tomahawks provided that edge every troop you see in the AOR would have one, even if they had to go private purchase. We all love tomahawks, but shouldnt let that cloud our judgement into believing that they are a common and valuable tool for modern combat operations.

One of the funniest things you see on a deployment is when everyone does a gear check and you watch the Shirt or CO toss all the useless gear the first timers show up with, and I've seen guys show up with kung foo stars, huge bowie knives, and all kinds of weird stuff they spent hard earned money on prior to the deployment, only to have the Shirt tell them its useless, or they lug it around on a patrol or two and figure it out themselves.

A tomahawk is certainly a deadly weapon, and you can train someone in its use like any other weapon, but I'd like to see a realistic scenario where someone would use it, without getting themselves killed before they could get it employed. And I'm not talking about gym fighting, but with 100 pounds of weapons and gear on, where the tomahawk is sheathed and at best slung on your side somewhere. Unlike most military members I owned several tomahawks as a collector, but never considered carrying one because I couldnt see it making the weight to utility test, and in all the scrapes I got myself into over the years I cant ever think how I could have benefited from one.

Now you find yourself in a situation where you have little time to look for a prop to turn a "body" over. The objects you can trust are the things you brought. Will you use your knife, your M-4 or a hawk designed to hook around body parts?

--Rafael--

Well intentioned, but I dont think that's very realistic. The least thing I ever saw used as a booby trap was a frag grenade, most were much larger charges. I'm not sure what good being 18 inches farther away would do, except allow you to live 1/1000th of a second longer. You want to check if a body is booby trapped you run a rope around a part of it and get WAY back and start pulling.

That's it for me, I've said my piece on this subject.
 
I have two questions about the design.

What is the design rationale behind carrying a 3-5 lb hawk that only has purpose to be used in CQC? i.e. no utility purpose.

tomcrx,

It weighs roughly one pound. That's one of the requirements that was asked - that it weighed less and was not as long on the handle. My intention was to have that "alive" feeling when you pick up a good blade that is just good to go. It doesn't feel like a lump of steel, it feels as if it will do what you want it to do - an extension of the hand. Light and fast.


It has been said that the hawk is to be carried like a pistol which means the handle would be parrallel to the waist. Would'nt this be an encumbrance for movement? i.e. easier to snag and catch when moving in addition to taking up a lot of real estate
Thanks

It can be HELD like a gun, not carried on the gear like one. I may have been too vague when I stated the hawk was "at" your side. Meaning it was beside not "on" the side of the belt because the firearm would be carried there. The whole reason this is smaller, and lighter is to reduce the encumbrance.

Hope that helps.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Nuke41.

I forgot to mention that when my son got back from his 18 month tour in Iraq I had asked him quite a bit of course once he got settled. One of the things that came up in that and other conversations was the fixed blade I gave him to take over there with him. He never took it out. Said it was too heavy. He did however take his folder and his multi-tool on him at all times along with his primary weapons of course. I found this to be a pretty common thing after that speaking to folks going there or there currently. When asked most admitted weight was a factor. Anything to reduce the weight was a must apparently. I know that those tomahawks have to have some heft to them so to me the practicality of them is in question. I believe they are there. What I find hard to believe is that they are used that much.

STR
 
I love tomahawks, and all edged weapons for that matter, and own a bunch. With that said, its time to be honest, there are some floating around with the troops probably, but by and large they are shelf ware.

Well, let's look at this logically. If we are supplying this to SOF and one person is making them - that means it is a specific request from certain units. We're not supplying the whole US armed forces, it is for groups who carry hawks and train in hawks.

I was just as surprised as you were because I was signed on to be a knife instructor . When I got there I saw hawks and knives.

Again, this is not a black /white issue. One can carry several knives on them and a hawk. Some may want to carry a totally different design and some may ask for a totally different version of this hawk for their purposes.

And I'm not talking about gym fighting, but with 100 pounds of weapons and gear on, where the tomahawk is sheathed and at best slung on your side somewhere.

We include training in full gear. We do shot timer drills with full gear on. With proper training, the individual can move pretty fast.

The carry systems on these hawks are also unique in that it takes two moves to deploy it. Pull the cord, yank the hawk - it is out. Now if you train to strike and cover a certain way you can do that in under a second. If you were pinned to a wall, you can still access the hawk.

Here's a scenario. You are in a small room and you have captives, who are already unarmed. They go for your long gun. You can't shoot because you have friendlies around you - too tight. You can access your hawk before you lose your gun. You can cut your way free for enough time to make space, and then shoot since by that time your friends would know what was up.


Well intentioned, but I dont think that's very realistic. The least thing I ever saw used as a booby trap was a frag grenade, most were much larger charges. I'm not sure what good being 18 inches farther away would do, except allow you to live 1/1000th of a second longer. You want to check if a body is booby trapped you run a rope around a part of it and get WAY back and start pulling.

That's it for me, I've said my piece on this subject.

In my reply above, I suggested the same... you run cord and step way back but it is much faster to dig the hawk in and then just unroll the cord, rather than tying it and making sure it is secure. What if the BG was not dead and he didn't have an explosive? You ended up bending too close to him and allowing him access to your weapon. What if the BG had a blade instead of a bomb? Again, perfect time to attack is when the cord is going around him.

However, I presented that scenario as a way to open up out of the box thinking.

Thanks for your insight. I can certainly understand that if you can't find a use for one then the hawk is not for you. No worries. However, we didn't come into the project by presenting hawk fighting to anyone. We were BOTH asked independently to come up with hawks.

Now if you don't believe this then that's okay too. But it is quite puzzling that you'd question why we would try and sell hawks this way.

That's a bad business plan for all involved.

First off, I never met Mr. Winkler until we were introduced by third parties - our clients. How does one even think a person of Mr. Winkler's reputation and close ties to the troops would want to be involved in that kind of caper?

Mr. Winkler and I can just design an awesome and very traditional hawk and not even state the SOF connection and make WAY more $$$ than spending countless hours working and making sure others approved and gave us input on a unique hawk - One that was sure to garner controversy. Doesn't add up.

After all, Mr. Winkler's MAIN public customer base are not necessarily TACTICAL hawk buyers. He's already busy filling his regular orders. I'm already busy working on other high end projects.

I work on films as a concept designer as my main job - I can come up with some really wild looking hawks if that was my angle. But I can do that for LucasFilm or Paramount, clients I have worked with.

When we were close to finishing the hawk design, we were not going to offer it to the public at all. Our main goal is to supply our clients with the hawks - that will keep us busy. This is extra and may help us in developing more hawks or weapons for cost to the those who need them.

So I don't know the benefit that would come to making NEW fake/fantasy hawks at all if there wasn't a legitimate need for it. I mean you and a couple of others are struggling with the same problem.

Those who are aware of my hawk work have been asking for years to put out a DVD. I could just as easily put out a DVD with any Tactical hawk out on the market and make a deal with a mass produced hawk to tag our Sayoc brand to it. Believe me that would have been easier instead of spending months on a so-called "fantasy" hawk that we were gonna try to sell as a "secret" SOF hawk.

It is only believable if the two individuals involved were up and comers, not already established in their own respective professions.

Hope that last part put things into perspective. It isn't a jab at you but I'm trying to follow your logic here as well.

regards,
--Rafael--
 
Last edited:
Thanks Nuke41.

I forgot to mention that when my son got back from his 18 month tour in Iraq I had asked him quite a bit of course once he got settled. One of the things that came up in that and other conversations was the fixed blade I gave him to take over there with him. He never took it out. Said it was too heavy. He did however take his folder and his multi-tool on him at all times along with his primary weapons of course. I found this to be a pretty common thing after that speaking to folks going there or there currently. When asked most admitted weight was a factor. Anything to reduce the weight was a must apparently. I know that those tomahawks have to have some heft to them so to me the practicality of them is in question. I believe they are there. What I find hard to believe is that they are used that much.

STR


well, i think what brother nuke41 just stated was Spot-On, correct - but perhaps a little short-sighted;

the whole reason i am making handles for tomahawks today is because of bumping into a tool that was a lot like them, the Isnag Aliwah, when i was in the jungles of the P.I. early last year; they never leave the locals' arms. - wait, that's not true - they are leaned against the wall outside when the owners are in church (about half the population was Christian, the rest, animists.) - whatever.

i didn't construct hawks for use as a weapon - they just happened to be good ones - i like hawks for their utility (to me at least).

so there is something to consider (about hawks in general, vice this tool in particular) - being used in another warfare environment, where a hawk can do more good commonly. - namely jungle or other arboreal area, which most of afghanistan and Iraq are certainly not.

there are a few other things to consider;

not everything is a tomahawk - i wouldn't call these tools by brother winkler "tomahawks" personally, because i don't think they are likely to match the optimum, sterotypical physics of what makes a proper hawk - but likewise, there is no reason to get emotional if such has occurred - they are weapons, and apparently well-thought-out ones for the purposes in mind.

a lot of the soldiers here are doing what they do best - namely - thinking like soldiers - i don't believe a weapon such as this would do a person of that noble mindset much good - but there are a lot of other guys, good and bad varieties, that could use these thingies to strong effect, i reckon.

a fast-moving guerilla could definitely benefit from less ammo and a lightweight proper tomahawk - judging by where the Second Amendment has gone (to Hell, essentially) - even the soldier mindsets might do themselves a favor by using their forsight, and calculating what good a hawk might do in a pinch, in the likely dark days ahead.

hold one of these things next to a full M4 mag, gauging weight and length in comparison, and they might not seem so silly.

these dwinkler weapons would also make decent tools - turn that head sideways and holy cow! it becomes a hammer, for instance. :D


one last thing - consider the development process, fellow-babies -

no doubt, like other hawk-typed weapons/tools that have gained a small following since 9-11, these weapons will fill a need, perceived or real - but they will also be likely to develop more - or catalyze other designers into taking design traits from them and incorporate the same into hybrid tools we may not have imagined yet.

to me, that is a plus for all the good guys.

i can think of many future developments to mention, but i reckon i'll hold onto those ideas for the sake of profit, for now. :thumbup:


vec
 
one last thing - consider the development process, fellow-babies -

no doubt, like other hawk-typed weapons/tools that have gained a small following since 9-11, these weapons will fill a need, perceived or real - but they will also be likely to develop more - or catalyze other designers into taking design traits from them and incorporate the same into hybrid tools we may not have imagined yet.

to me, that is a plus for all the good guys.

vec

Vec,

On the money - perfect.:thumbup:

--Rafael--
 
There are a lot of different weapons available to various units within the US Military. They are not all used frequently, but they still have them. Different units operate in specific situations where a tomahawk is carried. If you think otherwise you would be wrong. Knowing how to effectively use the weapons carried is very helpful. Enough so that there is specific training available to learn these skills.

Ryan Johnson has made a lot of tomahawks that have gone to Military personnel. He does a great job. I would buy one of his hawks. I would buy one of mine too. Not because I would ever probably need either, but because I like them, and if I ever did need one I would sure be glad I had it.

The weights of these Sayoc/Winkler R&D Hawks are 1.5 lbs for the rubber handled version and 1.25 for the wood handled ones. According to my postal scale.

Daniel
 
I've enjoyed the discussion and appreciate the different perspectives expressed. It is interesting that there are virtually no accounts of hawks being used in the current military campaigns. I've seen much more on the use of .50 cal sniper rifles, possibly more of a niche weapon than a tomahawk.

From my decidedly civilian perspective I've always thought the RMJ hawks, the previous tactical hawk dejure, were interesting but a little too industrial and expensive at, what, close to $400? (I can't get the RMJ site up for a price check.) The hawks shown at the beginning of this thread are even more specialized, and in a direction even less useful to me than the crash axe/demolition/breaching tool direction of the RMJ. To top it off, they are even more expensive at around $575 to $725. When I can get a custom hand forged hawk and a small matching knife for around the price of an RMJ, or a Craig Barr hawk head for well under $100 on e-bay, not to mention all the other great inexpensive hawks available, the high cost and specialization in a direction not particularly useful to me doesn't put me in the market for a Winkler/Sayoc Fighting Hawk. I know the civilian market isn't your primary intended audience on this one, just saying.
 
a lot of the soldiers here are doing what they do best - namely - thinking like soldiers - i don't believe a weapon such as this would do a person of that noble mindset much good - but there are a lot of other guys, good and bad varieties, that could use these thingies to strong effect, i reckon.

So somehow using some form of tomahawk is less noble than a rock, e-tool, knife, your hands, an empty weapon, O-Kay. While this might not be the best tool to have on your belt for nation building, for killing terrorists and insurgents who have no qualms about killing anyone, I would think any weapon that would improve you odds would be a plus.
 
I've just gotten recently interested in 'Hawks and find this an interesting thread. I ghost around this forum a lot with very little posting.

Personally I don't know shinenola about 'Hawks or Special Forces. What I do know a bit about is Line Company Marines both Rifle and Weapons. My real question here is who is this weapon being marketed to? Just from my rather limited knowledge I just can't see a regular Grunt being allowed to deploy with this weapon. Heck even having it in his or her barracks would probably land that poor Grunt in a world of shit.

If someone wants one buy it by all means I say do it but if you're active duty I'd check with my unit commander before spending your hard earned cash on it. If there is a real need by Special Forces types they'll jump all over these

I'm sure these are finely made weapons if a tad exotic so no questions there.

Just as a personal observation if I was active duty deploying to the Middle East right now I'd invest in a good crow bar from the local hardware store. Not a fancy entry tool but it'll get you there and would be a vicious if slighty akward weapon. The money saved would go a long way to beer and chicks.
 
I'm sure these are finely made weapons if a tad exotic so no questions there.

Thanks BW Skipper.

Just as a personal observation if I was active duty deploying to the Middle East right now I'd invest in a good crow bar from the local hardware store. Not a fancy entry tool but it'll get you there and would be a vicious if slighty akward weapon. The money saved would go a long way to beer and chicks.

Makes sense, different strokes and all that. I don't see anything wrong with carrying a blunt force trauma "tool". It all depends on one's comfort level and training. I think it is a disservice that we have soldiers deployed with knives and "crowbars" who have had little to no training in how to use them effectively. They have to wing it or find training on their own.

My POV is that whether you're carrying a hawk, knife or crowbar, if your life might depend on it then training properly is very important.

A simple example that most everyone can relate to is the SAVING PRIVATE RYAN scene where the US soldier is mounted on top of the enemy and he doesn't know how to use his knife. With proper training, he would easily target both femoral arteries on the lowline. However he tried to muscle it at chest level against a stronger guy. He was actually in one of the most superior positions in empty hand fighting and he had a knife... but got killed by his own weapon.

Same here, you can hand everyone a crowbar , but if the enemy was such that they knew how to fight with one better than the user - then it isn't the best scenario at all to be in. It applies to the hawk (any hawk) and every other weapon.

The reason we have the "exotic" handles/grips is to actually minimize having to retrain muscle memory that is already honed thru hours of reps. If you've shot a gun more than swing an axe, then handing you an axe without training is not a way to make the soldier better. But if you are handed an axe that feels close to the grip of a gun then you're already cut down the time of learning. If you have done thousands of mag changes, then you can use a similar movement with this hawk that will lead you to many practical applications.

Perhaps even on a subconscious level, the positive response to the look of the hawk may even relate to recognizing familiar tried and true shapes. It looks right somehow and when you pick it up - it feels right.
 
... a Craig Barr hawk head for well under $100 on e-bay, not to mention all the other great inexpensive hawks available, the high cost and specialization in a direction not particularly useful to me doesn't put me in the market for a Winkler/Sayoc Fighting Hawk. I know the civilian market isn't your primary intended audience on this one, just saying.

I've purchased a Craig Barr hawk head from them, and it's a sweet looking hawk. The main difference besides the head design/attributes is that the Sayoc-Winkler RnD Hawk is full tang. Tapered from top to the end which reduces the weight. A friend has a Craig Barr and he just put it on a regular handle... looked great.
 
So somehow using some form of tomahawk is less noble than a rock, e-tool, knife, your hands, an empty weapon, O-Kay. While this might not be the best tool to have on your belt for nation building, for killing terrorists and insurgents who have no qualms about killing anyone, I would think any weapon that would improve you odds would be a plus.

O-Kay!:D
 
Back
Top