>>391082>the tomahawk requires different techniquesThe 1/3 hold I described goes for weapon use as well. I'm not claiming it's "proper" technique, only more effective...for any use. It's certainly not a workaround; try it yourself and tell me you can't tell the difference. Different tools require different techniques, imagine that?
>not being very well designedThis is an issue specifically with modern tomahawks. We (modern, western people) tend to make unexceptional edged tools. Because they're no longer an integral part of our daily life and culture, the design is somewhat abstract and unoptimized for its use though ignorance of actual needs. Axe handles are a perfect example:
(I can't post the link, but google "devolution of axe handles" at axe connected)
>it's more weapon than tool.>implying there is only one way to accomplish a goal>implying weapons are not a subset of tools (tools for killing)I get where you're coming from. The hawk is not the equal of the hatchet in terms of wood-processing ability. You're also right to think the hawk is more weapon-oriented than a hatchet or axe. They're designed for different purposes. The hatchet is a specialized woodworking tool; the tomahawk is more like the Colonial multitool.
>Certainly nowadays there's no reason tool-wise to chose a hawk over an axe.The desire to learn, broaden one's skills, and try different tools. I've got axes, tomahawks, and machetes. There's overlap between them in terms of use, but they're all better at different things. Becoming skilled with them, so that I can use the best tool for the job, seems to me a worthwhile pursuit.
