Tomahawk Vs Hatchet (as a tool)

S

survivor

Joined
Sep 9, 2001
Messages
138
I don’t understand people who think that a Tomahawk is a useful tool for the following rezones, Hatchets have better chopping ability, Hatchet are almost always chipper, Tomahawk handles seam to fragile for long use.

But I used a Hatchet for a very long time and only recently was introduced to Tomahawk and don’t know them that well and I wanted to here from both Tomahawk and Hatchet users how do the two tools perform?:rolleyes:
 
Um...I always thought that tomahawk and hatchet were different words for the exact same thing.
 
survivor :

I don?t understand people who think that a Tomahawk is a useful tool ...
Click to expand...

I agree with you about the performance of hatchets vs tomahawks, we have discussed this matter before, a thread you might want to glance through :

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=165882

In general, hatchets have higher performance cutting edges, better edge retention and low impact durablity, more ergonomic and secure handles and a more secure head/handle attachment. Tomahawks have an edge and head which is much more durable in respect to very high impacts, and a head/handle attachment that makes for a very easy field refit of the handle, both of which are critical for throwing, and for handling heavy combat related impacts.

However, I would not go so far as to say that a Tomahawk is useless as a tool. One of the main advantages of such a robust design is that it is well suited for emergency / survival type work, especially where it may be the one tool depended on by a group of people. Hatchets (and felling class axes in general), are very specific tools, they would be readily destroyed by inexperienced users, or even by skilled users in high stress situations, Tomahawks are much more robust.

Stu, a hatchet is just a small axe. A Tomahawk is also an axe, but it refers to a specific head pattern, handle style, and attachment.

-Cliff
 
I don't have a dispute with Cliff's remarks but would like to add a couple observations. First, you also need to look at the design of the specific hawk when comparing it with a hatchet. For example, go to www.2hawks.net and www.hbforge.com and look at the different shapes. Two Hawks' Longhunter has an entirely different head shape (for chopping and other general uses) than his fighting/throwing hawks. The cutting edge is somewhat smaller, the head is heavier, and the edge is angled to match the arc of a chopping stroke. There may also be differences in edge grind, but you'd have to ask him that one. In any event, it bites really deeply on impact.

I have been meaning to carefully compare the Longhunter with one of my Gransfors hatchets (like the Wildlife model) but have not yet had a full opportunity (presently living in the city). However, based on my limited experience, I found that the longer handle of the Longhunter allowed a somewhat harder strike. However, the straight grip was not as ergonomic as on the curved Gransfors handle, and the hawk shaft transmitted a little more shock when chopping hardwood. I wrapped about six inches of the hawk shaft with paracord and will be interested to see how that addresses the grip/shock issues.

One other advantage I noticed in the hawk was that the straight shaft makes it a lot easier for me to do light cutting in a "choked up" grip. On the Gransfors Wildlife Hatchet, the curved handle was a bit limiting for me.

I'm sorry that I can't give you a final opinion one way or the other at this point, but it is certainly a lot of fun experimenting with these different implements.
 
DancesWithKnives :

First, you also need to look at the design of the specific hawk when comparing it with a hatchet.
Click to expand...

Yes, for example the ATC Next Generation looks to have taken a large step up in general "tool" class ability. It would be interesting to see it compared to the Wildlife Hatchet. It is ran much harder than most Tomahawks and looks to have a thinner edge. The handle security should be high as well because of the texture, the head/handle attachment should also be far more secure than the traditional friction fit, field replacements however are out.

-Cliff
 
Hey,Survivor,I agree with Cliff and Dances with knives.But My take on this has been,that a Hawk is a cross between a tool and a weapon,light,fast and with some reach,like a war axe,but smaller,easy to carry and with the impact resistance to be used as a wood working tool like a hatchet.Remember The people who carried these ie.Indians,Trappers,Mountainmen,ect.were very practical and had to be concerned about weight,so their gear had to be versital,a hawk not only had to be good at settling a dispute!,but building a shelter,butchering game,makeing fire ,ect. It had to be a Jack of all trades!,.......But of course I could be totaly wrong!! :cool:,take it easy guy's
Dean
 
Thanks DWK,LOL!! hell even a broken clock is right twice a day!:D by the way I'm hoping Two Hawks shows up on this one,he's got a wealth of information on hawk's, could turn into a intrasting and informitive thread.take it easy ,
Dean
 
Cliff,

I can't wait until you get your hands on one of these to hear your impressions -- it'll be intersting! The handle is as you described. Although I didn't hold one when wet, it seemed the texture is a nice combo of comfort and "grippiness." As far as replacements in the field go, I guess you could buy an extra, but looking at it as I did, I felt that a wooden handle could be fashioned and instaled easily enough using a wedge (wood, rock). Not sure though. I can't remembver if Andy said the handle is glued in or not...

Best,

Brian.
 
Andy, said he was sending one out, I'll post up an thread once it arrives and I have had a chance to get some work done. I am pretty sure the head is glued in, although that might not be the right term exactly. The problem with a field replacement handle, same as with axes, is getting the old handle out. This is usually done with a drill. This would not be fun by hand. Personally I think if you did see a break in a survival situation you would be better off making a handle and attaching it like you would a stone axe rather than trying to dig the remains out and refit a handle to the hole.

-Cliff
 
Ok but can't a machete do all the tacks that a tomahawk can and you don’t have to worry about the heddle being damaged?:confused:
 
If you open the discussion beyond the original tomahawk vs. hatchet question so as to include machetes, then you'd certainly also have to consider a khukuri (see Cliff's comparison test).
 
Large blades definately have advantages over hatchets in lighter and smaller vegetation. Machetes specifically are designed for leafy or hollow vegetation having very thin blades and are unsuitable for solid woods because they bind very easily and as well don't have the required durability. They also usually come with very poor edges that need to be reworked to optomize the cutting ability.

There are large classes of blades that are designed to cut woody vegetation such as the khukuri, parang, bolo, golok etc. . These don't do as well as an axe on solid wood, nor do they do as well as a machete on softer vegetation but do better than both of them on the opposite. They are inbetween blades when you have to do a little of both. Here is such a custom I had made awhile ago :

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/parrell_parang_side.jpg

An interesting development for such tools is the Brush Axe :

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/brush_axe.jpg

It is basically an axe with a thin replaceable blade. Because the blade length is short you can use a much thinner stock than you would on a parang class knife and thus get very high cutting ability. You also get all the benefits of a full axe handle. Being able to swap out a damaged blade is also nice as well. It is a very one dimensional tool however.

-Cliff
 
I have one of the Sandvik "Brush Axe's". The combination of weight at the head and the thin cutting blade make it perfect for clearing all manner of both light and heavy brush, vines and small (I would say up to 2 inch diameter) soft and hard wood trees.

I used mine for 3 years in the hills above San Francisco Bay where one the toughest nuts to crack is the Manzanita tree(shrub?).

A true heavy-head hatchet will bounce right off of the Manzanita. A true machete will twist in the hand too much and the cut is typically uncontrollable. I used both tools before going to the Sandvik. I think it cost $12 and each blade another $5.

I never thought of a Tomahawk, but as discussed above, the Tomahawk would seem to deliver similar performance to the Sandvik Axe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top