The Ultimate tactical Hawk...?

Thanks guys for the nice comments ! :thumbup:
Also, just wanted to comment on the sheath system for this one..
it's a marvel at retaining the hawk securely, functional and beautiful.

@ mmcc100, hardly rich, just selective...comes from being a member
here for a while. ;) :)

Doug
 
awesome piece Doug by a great maker. The option package you picked for it is what i would of wanted myself:cool:
 
Another vote for the American Tomahawk V-Tac and CQC-T. Both incredibly tough and well dimensioned for CQ/H to H combat and useful in camp as well. The V-Tac is awesome in conjunction with a knife for most combat structures I have encountered.
 
Here is a nice one I picked up awhile ago from someone on the forum.
ATC Wally Hayes Collaboration. Its a real Beauty.....
 

Attachments

  • Wally Hayes A.jpg
    Wally Hayes A.jpg
    23.3 KB · Views: 247
RMJ has the loggerhead shrike now. That's what I'm saving coin for. I emailed him to see if it was on backorder haven't got a respons yet. But it appears to be in stock. Man that thing looks mean..
 
The CQC-T is probably my favourite hawk at the moment. The only problem is that the sheath it came with has fallen apart. I think it probably has lasted 2 months - and these sheaths are supposed to be jump ready - I don't think so. In my opinion, two things could make the CQC-T even better. One is a quick release sheath like on the Sayoc-Winkler hawk, the other is the option of a longer handle. If those two things were available, for anywhere near the current price this would be an unbeatable bargain.
 
Glock17JHP said:
Peter LaGana demonstrated the original Vietnam Tomahawk for the US Army, can't remember the exact year, though... I am not at home where my 'data' is. He made literally 1,000's of them for the military during the Vietnam conflict alone. This is a documented fact. The reason most people find this hard to believe is that this tomahawk was kept somewhat secret since the media would have considered the whole idea 'barbaric'. In fact, it did get out at one point, and that was the exact accusation. That is also why the VTAC is not widely known about by most people today... it is not considered 'politically corrrect'.

'Google': Vietnam Tomahawk, Peter LaGana, VTAC and Andy Prisco. ;)
Click to expand...

rofl what a concept.

Guns, knives and bayonets = Ok
Tomahawk = Barbaric.

Of course, since all of the above basically work by horribly mutilating people and making them bleed to death, there is no moral difference.

When I showed my dad my trail hawk his first comment was something about The Last of the Mohicans. I think this is fairly typical. Therefore if someone considers a tomahawk in combat to be barbaric, it's because they are thinking of Indians, and consider THEM barbaric. Ergo people who disprove of modern tomahawk use are racists.

I'm really not sure if I'm being facetious or not...
 
So, I'm not sure about self promoting my work this way, but I figure it can't hurt.

I've been trying to perfect my tomahawk design for quite a while, and though it may still need some improvements, I think it's pretty awesome right now.

badger%20claw.jpg


I'd love to have some feedback and perhaps some ideas regarding steel choice and method for heat treatment. (( rules violation ))
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Glock17JHP said:
Military Stryker units don't seem to have a problem with the VTAC's length... they had a problem (some did) with the sheath, hence the newer leather offering. Likewise, troops in the late '60's and early 70's in Vietnam didn't seem to have a problem with the Vietnam Tomahawk's dimensions, either. Do you have any documentation/pictures showing longer hawks being used in the military?
Click to expand...

Well Mr Troll, I'm not in the military, and I don't claim to be, and the tomahawks I prefer would have been of the sort the originals which existed long before photography. Back then, they came in all sorts of sizes and lengths. You and I back then could have any sort and length of hawk we preferred without having to impress any internet Chairborne Commandos. I don't give a rat's furry behind what the military currently uses. I really don't. If it works for them, that's great! But if it's too small and short, I'll use it for nothing more than a practice thrower. I'm not choosing my gear for the purpose of pretending to be some wannabe Rambo nor to impress some teenage mall ninja on the internet. I choose what works best for me. Period.

NOW... you can look up on the internet some vintage 19th century photos and illustrations and see tomahawks as large as the Missouri War Axe... and tomahawks smaller than Cold Steel's Trail Hawk, and every sort of size, length, and blade shape in between. Were these 'tactical hawks'? Yes they were in their day, and they saw a LOT more hand to hand combat back when your firearm only had one shot and you actually needed something substantial to fight with when there wasn't time to reload.
 
I've been following this thread for a while. I've come to like collecting hawks and particularly so called tactical hawks. The ones I own include the VTAC, the CQC-t, the K5, and the Trench Hawk. The ones that are on order and hopefully will reach me shortly include the Ranger Renegade, the Sayoc-Winkler Hawk, the Shrike, and a couple of VEC's long handled beauties.

I eventually came to the conclusion that to decide which hawk is the ultimate tactical hawk I had better first work out what my amateurish criteria were for the ultimate tactical hawk, and this undoubtedly will be different to the ideas of other people. But by doing this it would help me to rule in and rule out different model hawks.

My idea of the ultimate tactical hawk would be one that is carried by the average foot soldier (I haven't worried about concerns such as the type of steel etc - I leave that to others). To meet this criteria I believe the ultimate tactical hawk must be:

1. Lightweight - in my eyes that would mean that a fine hawk in every other aspect like the Cold Steel Trench Hawk would be left at home. I don't think in today's warfare situation any hawk over 24 ounces is likely to be carried by the average foot soldier on a regular basis and my Trench Hawk weighs over 28 ounces without the sheath. And my heavyweight K5 doesn't even come into contention. Even 24 ounces may be too heavy. But this criterion certainly favours hawks like the VTAC and the CQC-T.

2. A Utility weapon (breaching tool, camp tool, weapon etc.) - it must be capable of multiple functions - the more uses the better and that doesn't necessarily rule in or out a poll or a spike as being better than the other. That would mean specialist hawks like the Sayoc-Winkler hawk, wonderful as it is, would best be left to the specialist and not the average foot soldier. This also means that the hawk is able to be used comfortably wherever it is held on the handle and some are terrible in this respect. What a pity the Trench Hawk is so heavy because it is fine in this area.

3. Easy to learn to use safely and tactically - I don't think the military would want a non essential weapon that required a lot of training to use. That possibly leaves out my favourite hawk at the moment - the CQC-T. I think it is a wonderful weapon in trained hands, but not necessarily for the average foot soldier (see my previous reply in this thread).

4. Able to be quickly and easily deployed when needed. The Sayoc-Winkler hawk and the Trench Hawk appear to do this well, the CQC-T and the VTAC not as well and there are others that are terrible in this area.

5. Indestructible in all situations and environments - this would tend to make me shy away from wood handled hawks and to move more towards hawks like the all metal RMJ Shrike or the synthetic handles of the VTAC and CQC-T. This also applies to the sheaths and unfortunately my experience of the sheaths that come with the VTAC and the CQC-T is less than admirable.

6. Long handled provided it can still be easily carried - my own personal bias here, and this is where things become difficult because most of the non-wood, long handled hawks are simply too damn heavy to carry on a regular basis or aren't long enough. My definition of long handled is something 22 inches or longer. That comes from my personal use of some of the the non tactical Cold Steel hawks. I like long handles - others may not. I find long handled hawks no harder to carry comfortably than short handled hawks and I believe the long handle gives an advantage not only as a weapon but in utility use where both hands can be deployed.

7. Price must be reasonable.

So what is my choice for the ultimate tactical hawk. I still don't know. I am on VEC's wish list for a couple of his hawks and am hopeful this will include the one. The only thing I am certain of is that all of the hawks I have presently handled or owned fall short of my own criteria. For me, the CQC-t would come close if only it had a better sheath and one that allowed the CQC-T to be deployed faster and if only a longer handle was available. Ah well, I can always dream.
 
You definitely need to check out Coal Creek Forge hawks. I have two and I love them! I throw them as much as possible and rarely have to sharpen them. Steve will make them to your specs.
 
I have found this little number to be awesome, well built, full tang, quick tough as nails, rubber handle/shockproof, seem that the military uses these, though RMJ is badass this thing might give it a run for its money...oh yeah it is from the Netherlands...

netherlandtomahawk.jpg



BTW I want to grind an edge on the beard, do I need to worry about removing temper if I grind slowly or by hand? (stone or file?) sorry for the question if it seems ignorant though I don't want to ruin the useability of this piece if/when I alter it...


JL
 
Last edited:
Silly Rabbit said:
I have found this little number to be awesome, well built, full tang, quick tough as nails, rubber handle/shockproof, seem that the military uses these,


JL
Click to expand...

That's a military aircraft crash axe, issued in WWII and a little later. You can often find them on ebay for a decent price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top