Seen the new Smith and Wesson Tomahawk?

J

J.Davey

Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
1,620
I just saw it on a knife store in the center of the internet (super clever). Very similar to the Killian hawk, but about 1/6 the price. If you've seen it, what do you think? I don't think it looks too bad. Carbon steel, and it appears to have a longer spike and longer cutting edge than the Killian.
 
This?

It looks pretty nice but some of the "tactical" stuff S&W makes me kinda think they should stick to making firearms... However its good to see that its made of 1070 steel which if tempered properly should be great for a hawk and stand quite a bit of abuse. Tired of seeing stainless steel used in tomahawks and axes... :barf: It's pretty heavy at over 2.5 lbs for its 16" length but thats generally the same for all full tang hawks. Knifecenter has it listed as $63 but they usually charge a bit higher so I guess it wouldn't be a bad idea to try it out. Who knows, might actually be worthwile.
 
Browning has a hawk too for like $40 at Sportsmens I havn't seen that mentioned on here yet but its been out for months.

Unitied M48 $40
Browning Tactical $40
Trench Hawk $35
S&W Hawk $60

All of the above jumped in after RMJ, K5 etc

I'm sure they had a great effect on ATC, Benchmade,GGG and Killian($100-$300 hawks) and may really hurt those companies hawk sales. I'm more into fighting hawks and all of the "new" cheaper ones are not great for carry and fighting tactics. There ether weigh too much. There too long. Or not heavy enough in the head or balanced correctly.

I have the M48, Browning and Trench Hawk and will buy the S&W. This is soley due to me collecting hawks since Im a firm believer they are one of the best fighting tools in history and still viaible compared to spears, swords, mace, club etc....

If you want a "real" fighting hawk get a WinklerII
If you want a "real" breach/fighter/tool get a RMJ

Of the new ones the only one I even come close to liking is the M48. That said its SS and I rolled the edge on the first time out with it. At least this S&W is carbon steel like the Cold Steel Trench Hawk.
 
Eh....considering the quality of their other cutlery, I am not too sure about this one. But, I am too suprised they went with carbon steel over stainless.
 
I have used the S&W. It's a solid hunk of 1070 steel and a bit bulky and heavy in my opinion. It has a good edge geometry and a fair amount of mass so it does well at chopping, and you can sink the spike in a softwood stump. It could probably cleave through a head entirely on a down stroke, but I think in a fight recovery after a stroke would be a problem, especially if you missed. I could see it as a decent woods tool in colder timber areas where a heavy shelter or fighting position needed to be constructed. I would not want to hump one any distance while carrying a lot of other weight though. I'm probably a little spoiled by the RMJ hawks I've used. I like where their thinking was coming from, and I do think they could make a major improvement to it simply by removing some size/mass in the head. I have some pics here somewhere of it with my RMJ Shrike, I'll try to find those.
 
I doubt that these "economy" hawks have hurt the higher end... its more like they've expanded the market by bringing more users into the market and maybe some of them will eventually migrate to the "good stuff".

Then again a ATC Tactical hawk can be had for $100, but its still a big price point for most people... when all they need is a solid chunk of steel to mess around with.

I did like the looks of the M48, except the steel of course...
 
mistwalker said:
I have used the S&W. It's a solid hunk of 1070 steel and a bit bulky and heavy in my opinion. It has a good edge geometry and a fair amount of mass so it does well at chopping, and you can sink the spike in a softwood stump. It could probably cleave through a head entirely on a down stroke, but I think in a fight recovery after a stroke would be a problem, especially if you missed. I could see it as a decent woods tool in colder timber areas where a heavy shelter or fighting position needed to be constructed. I would not want to hump one any distance while carrying a lot of other weight though. I'm probably a little spoiled by the RMJ hawks I've used. I like where their thinking was coming from, and I do think they could make a major improvement to it simply by removing some size/mass in the head. I have some pics here somewhere of it with my RMJ Shrike, I'll try to find those.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see some pictures, Mist! Do you have any in-hand shots?
 
Should be getting one in the mail today.

I wouldn't want one swung at me, but it's not really a "fighting" hawk--hence the "Extraction and Evasion" moniker. It's a breaching tool made specifically for pounding through walls and doors, punching through brick and concrete, smashing through/raking out glass, etc.

Of the one-piece, "serious" hawks on the market, it looks like quite the best quality for the money (~$70 delivered). I'm not fighting in Iraq and people all over the world are starving/homeless, so spending $300-400 (Benchmade, RMJ) doesn't excite me. Rather, I'm just hoping for something that could be useful in the aftermath of a tornado, flood, fire, earthquake, etc. (especially if the end of the handle were ground to a chisel edge for prying).

I'll let you know what I think after I've had a chance try it out.
 
It looks pretty nice but some of the "tactical" stuff S&W makes me kinda think they should stick to making firearms.
Click to expand...

Almost 0% chance this is made by S&W. S&W just sells their name, hopping you will know they do NOT make this "stuff."
 
Right, Mr. Linton. This was made for S&W by Taylor Brands LLC in Taiwan. Not a problem for me, but I understand that it may be for others.

As soon as I opened my door after last posting, there was the hawk on my doorstep. So, I tried it out on an old (half dead/half live) hackberry tree and used a classic 14" Estwing hatchet for comparison.

Really, there was no comparison. The S&W hawk is so THICK that, despite being respectably sharp, it tended to leave a deep cut and then more or less bounce off the tree. (Watch out for that spike!) The little Estwing, by comparison, easily bites and sticks so that you can let go and leave it embedded in the wood. Even the S&W's spike would often leave a deep hole/slit but then bounce back rather than stick. While the head and angle grind on the S&W are visibly wider, I hadn't thought there would be such a difference in wood chopping ability--especially since the Estwing is both shorter and considerably lighter.

In short, the Estwing is an excellent cutting/chopping tool. The tomahawk, on the other hand, is best thought of as a hammer with two very focused points of contact (blade and spike). With difficulty, one can "chop" wood with it, but it's more suited to pounding, puncturing, smashing, breaking, and twisting locks/hasps, doors, walls, windshields, studs, etc. rather than cutting through tree limbs or making firewood. It's a tool Thor (or the SWAT team) can love.

If I need to chop wood, I'll pull out my Ontario Gen II SP 53 saber-ground 10" recurve bowie (or my little Gerber hatchet). If I need to smash and destroy just about anything other than a tree, I'll now pull out my "tactical" tomahawk. (I don't think I'll be messing with the handle any, since it feels good as is and I already have a dedicated pry bar.)

Hope this is helpful, especially if you're trying to pick a hawk and are deciding how much to invest. I'm now quite confident that I'll never be able to break this monster, whereas I'm not nearly so sure about any of the two-piece models. Be aware that Condor also makes a hawk that is one piece and not too excessively pricey.

Best,
Prepper10
 
I have no interest in tactical hawks but if Taylor made it and their hawks are as bad as their "Schrade" knives, I would certainly pass.

Regards

Robin
 
Like Ka-Bar, Sog, and others, they market different "levels" of product. Some of them are "value" items which are aimed at folks who don't have wads of cash to spend. However, it doesn't follow that everything they make is crap. The "S&W" hawk is a case in point, as it is a good basic design, quality steel, and apparently decent heat treatment. In fairness, it should be thought of in the context of the alternatives like Cold Steel, etc. on the lower end and Benchmade, etc. on the upper.

Are the more expensive options four times better than the Smith & Wesson, and six to eight times better than the more popular hawks on the market? For some yes, to others no--depending upon a variety of factors. Sometimes folks just seem to assume that if you pay more for something then it must necessarily be better or that if it has a certain name ("good" or "bad") painted/stamped on it then no actual thought is necessary. If only life were that simple or predictable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top