Tomahawk vs Kukri?

wildmike said:
I have extensive experience with both.

Someone saoid above they had a kukri which a cedar tree took a chunk out of. They should have let you k now what kind of kukri it was (where it was made, what company,model etc). None of my H.I.'s has ever had any problem with either hard or soft woods. I prefer my kukri over an axe due ti its much greater versatility. The M-43's chopping performance is unbelievable as it easily ouitperforms even axes in the same size range.
Click to expand...


It was a Kabar Kukri. This one:
https://www.kabar.com/product/productDetail.do?productNumber=1249&mode=search&categoryId=1,2,3,7&categoryName=Product%20Search%20Results

It was an awesome piece, extremely versatile. Plus, with so much blade length, I was able to work around the 2.5" bad section.
 
the KA-BAR Kukri? It's actually not that long at all, compared to most other name brands. This particular model in question was meant to be short enough to keep on your belt as apposed to a backpack. Though it's a time tested design I am still not a fan of KA-BAR's affinity for semi-rat tang designs, especially on a heavy duty chopper, like so...
 
Last edited:
I pitted my HI WWII khukri against a GB Carpenter's hatchet. The khuk was pretty big and thick and held its own, but the GB hatchet was better. I've tried a few hawks, but none come even close to the GB or the khuk, mostly because they all lacked the heft I needed for heavy chopping.

I wouldn't want to clear brush with the big khuk, because it would be way too heavy. A machete or bolo or some such would be better, but geometry matters. You have to look at the geometry of the specific tool, not just the genre.
 
People are bringing axes and hatchets into the conversation. A tomahawk is more knife-like than them, which limits its splitting ability, and also reduces weight of the head. I'm not saying a hawk is useless, just less efficient for wood processing.

I say: pick what you like and spend the time to learn the tool and its capabilities, some of which will take time and persistence to bring to light. These tools have stood the test of time, so either choice will serve you well if you do your part.
 
DeaconXX said:
Other thana mid sized utility blade, I used a khukri for EVERYTHING in the woods. That is, until a piece of cedar took a bite out of it. I bought a Ranger RD Hawk as a trial replacement. I got it late in the season so I haven't put the hawk through it's paces yet, HOWEVER, it seems less functional so far. I wrote that off as learning curve.

So informally:
1. Hawk is ALOT tougher, but less useful.
2. The point on the back of the Hawk scares the hell out of me.
3. Warranty. Break a ranger, get a new one vs. Break a Kabar and you're S-O-L.
Click to expand...


um... not sure what khukri you have, but mine is a single piece of steel with riveted/glued g10 scales... you would need a sledge hammer and a vice to break it... i have broken the handles on hawks, but there's no way to break my Kuk with anything like normal use
 
holynecropostingbatman.jpg


A tomahawk is good for chopping, and maybe hammering depending on the 'hawk. A Kukri is good at chopping, though probably not as good as the 'hawk. But it can also do many knife tasks. Neither tool is a one-and-only option so take which one you have the most experience with and think will be best suited for the tasks at hand. Also take a small fixed blade like a mora or maybe something a little more substantial and also an SAK or MT.

Personally I'd probably take a kurki because I think I can do more with it and I have more experience with big knives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top