>>1125318>It is lighterThen get a proper hatchet with a low/equivalent weight head; the durability and profile will give you better mechanical advantage and more durability. This is a foolish consideration though, as hauling an extra half pound or so of head around with you will make the work a lot easier.
(as an aside, if you're going with a stupidly light head, you might as well just take a decent bush knife with you, like a Skrama, and get way more performance for the weight)
>it does well for most axe tasks short of fellingI can paint my house exclusively using a lil' babby paint brush, but I'd still prefer to use a roller. The ability to complete a task is irrelevant to whether it's efficient or not.
> And friction fit makes haft making easyHow many times have you had to rehaft a tool in the field? I'm /out/ deep into crown land and mistreat the shit out of my axes quite frequently; you'll usually spot signs of wear on a tool long before it breaks if you pay attention and keep up with maintenance. Even if the worst came to worst, I could figure out a way to remount the head to do whatever needed doing without too much trouble.
If you're attached to friction fitting, you still have a number of western options which thrash the shit out of tomohawks in utility/efficiency.
I never said you couldn't complete basic camp tasks with a tomahawk; if that's all I had on hand, I'd gladly use it. It's just that there's zero reason to when it's just as easy to take a hatchet in with you instead.
>>1125359>>1125353these are the only redeeming qualities of tomahawks, and the only acceptable objections to my remarks
A+
