GG&G BattleHawk

I haven't handled one but it's obviously a fighter-only design. Looks like both the point and the spike would penetrate pretty well. I like the sharpened trailing edge but it would be nice if the leading edge were also pointed/sharp so you could thrust with it a little. My old Two Hawks Warhawk has that feature.

I hope you get some input from an actual user.

DancesWithKnives
 
DWK2 said:
I haven't handled one but it's obviously a fighter-only design. Looks like both the point and the spike would penetrate pretty well. I like the sharpened trailing edge but it would be nice if the leading edge were also pointed/sharp so you could thrust with it a little. My old Two Hawks Warhawk has that feature.

I hope you get some input from an actual user.

DancesWithKnives
Click to expand...

there isn't much about fighting in that design IMHO, brother. - note the mass.

a fighter is an ounce per inch of length, or less - that hawk is more than three times past that ratio. - so if that thing is 13.25 inches long it should weigh 13.25 ounces or less, to be fast and agile enough to be considered a fighter (again, in my opinion).

beautiful work though - a good wrecker. good digger.

i met the guy who made it at the SHOT SHOW, and he and i will hopefully do something together in the future - i really liked him.

vec
 
Your point about the weight is well taken. I had not checked the weight but had focused on the edge/spike configurations.

I think this hawk was designed (in the sense of "intended") as a fighter but you are correct that there is a problem in execution of the design---they made it very heavy for its size.

Best of success in working out some new design collaborations with the maker.

DancesWithKnives
 
DWK2 said:
Your point about the weight is well taken. I had not checked the weight but had focused on the edge/spike configurations.

I think this hawk was designed (in the sense of "intended") as a fighter but you are correct that there is a problem in execution of the design---they made it very heavy for its size.

Best of success in working out some new design collaborations with the maker.

DancesWithKnives
Click to expand...

well, i don't want to sell the design short - it has its uses, and they are valid ones to me - it just isn't really a hawk.

they can do as much for us, with their beautiful machining, as we can for them, with our lightweight and strong composites, so i am hoping we can do something, especially in a curved handle - oh, mama....

it's a good tool.

vec
 
I have one. I like it. It's heavy and the sheath is top-notch from David Brown. It's a good chopper and pry. From a fighting standpoint, I wouldn't want to be hit with the flat, spike or blade. It's long enough to be used as a leverage point amongst the limbs close in and the design permits a high or low grip. It's a crusher and a piercer/cutter. The cutting edge is fairly compact. You'll need to be fairly strong to use it effectively due to the weight (it feels like a hammer in the hand to me) but it has bomber tough one-piece construction with grippy rough Micarta scales.
 
Welllll, I'm not a battle hawk kind of guy and for that money you can buy A BUNCH of hawks. Who ya gonna fight with it?? ;-))))

Regards

Robin
 
That's what bothers me about so-called "tactical" tomahawks -- way too much weight is in the handle. I never did like that design. I also don't like the flat stock type head for a regular tomahawk. Now, if someone made a "tactical" head with cheeks ramping up to the poll. . .


Re: the weight:
If it's too heavy to be a "proper hawk", it just means it's a "proper battleaxe"!
:D
 
I was given one as a gift but I haven't found anything that I feel it's particularly good at. Due to the weight I assume it would be an awesome wrecker but I haven't found anything to destroy as of yet.
 
I thought I would just ask on this thread since a few people here bought the BattleHawk. Did you get the DVD that came with it? And if so, what did you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top