Zombie Apocalypse Survival: Ax vs. Gun | MythBusters - playithub.com
Published: 11 months ago By: Discovery
By: DiscoveryPublished: 11 months ago
6, 408 Likes 382 Dislikes
During a zombie apocalypse, is it better to kill a zombie with a gun or an axe? With guns loaded, Adam and Jamie work to find the best method to kill a group of zombies and survive... maybe!
Saturdays 8/7c on Discovery
Did you miss the latest episode of MythBusters? Catch up on Discovery GO!
Watch full episodes!
Subscribe to Discovery:
Join us on Facebook:
Follow on Twitter:
Check out some classic MythBusters testing results:
Guns make a lot more noise which intern attracts more zombies to your location
Guns need ammunition, with that many zombies you would soon run out of bullets and then you are stuck with a lump of metal. Also Guns are heavy and even if you have a lot of guns on you and lots of ammunition that is going to slow you down a lot. Even if you have a bunch of ammunition thats not gonna last you long in the Zombie Apocalypse, yeah it will help you a couple times when there are hordes of zombies but when a whole population has been infected it won't take long for you to run out.
Finally Where are you going to get all these guns from? Now before you say " I live in america and we have easy access to guns or I own a gun" Remember that there will be a lot of like minded people who's first instinct is to get to a gunshot or police station. Most likely all of the Ammunition stores will be raided during the first couple days of the apocalypse when everyone is panicking. And if you own a gun thats great but as stated above you will eventually run out of ammo and the sound will draw more zombies to your location.
Guns can be great short term but a melee weapons doesn't need ammunition and is silent. You are better of having a bunch of belle weapons that a bunch of guns. But the Choice is yours...
2) axes deteriorate more than guns do
3) Glocks, xd's, 1911's (modern), ppq's, and most h&k's have tests where thousands of rounds are put through them without "jams" so I hardly find it necessary to take them into account in this test. Especially with the shotgun
4) what did you test this once? sounds like a 5th grade science fair conclusion from what evidence you have
This was a fun test as a "game" but it in no way proved anything conclusively. How can anyone even argue that a melee weapon is better than a gun in the first place? Melee immediately becomes a backup weapon when guns are available. When stealth is needed may be an exception but that's a whole different story.
What are the chances of there being between 58 and 67 zombies?
That's wasted energy.
Also, instead of the typical overhead axe chop he would get more done by rotating the body and using horizontal attacks. Rotational force is more efficient against multiple opponents.
I wouldn't choose an ax in this case and wouldn't choose a gun either. If I had to pick, I would go ax or a hatchet. If the zombie are toxic to the touch, a gun or ranged weapon is the only safe way to engage them.