Curves vs Angles

Loki

Loki

Joined
Mar 23, 2000
Messages
740
With 15 or so Hi's around I've noticed that I really prefer the blades with a curved spine (like the GRS) rather than the angled one (BAS, AK, etc.). The curves just seem "sexier." I also prefer the partial tangs to the full tangs. So with that I'm offering my advice on product improvement. ;) I'd whould like to see the BAS, WWII, AK, and Sirupati families offered with the curved back. Also an M43 with say a 15-16.5" blade and a partial tang. Call it a M2003? :) Just some thoughts on a lazy afternoon. :cool:
 
You know, why is it that the kamis at H.I. cannot or refuse to make khuks that are like those their forefathers used to make? Everytime I see an old khuk posted on the forum (as a pic) I can't help but wonder why the current trend at H.I. are for overly-heavy blades, angled backs, and oversized brass habaki bolsters?

I'd really like to see a move back to the traditional shapes of the old khuks. With a continuously curved profile, a smaller steel bolster and steel buttcap (brass bolsters/buttcaps are ugly), and a significant reduction in blade thickness, and thus blade weight.

The khuks being turned out by H.I. are quite a bit different from the khuks that J.P. and others own or have taken pics of, and frankly I love the older khuks more than I do the H.I. stuff.
 
In short, it's a repeat here - Uncle Bill and the kamis have a love/hate relationship because of cultural and language problems.

Remember that Pala is 80 years old and spends less time in the shop. Gelbu fills in but is younger and less respected.

Get Yangdu on the phone with Gelbu and things could get changed around. When Uncle gets home and discusses things with her they should be able to work things out, now she's taken a more active part in the business. ( I hope. Pretty sure they can be. )
 
Looks like others besides me have taken up the cause.:D

Just don't call the rat tail tangs partial tangs because they are not. They are full tang knives that just have their tangs hidden.
A partial tang knife is one that the tang doesn't go all the way through on, like the Hanuman's, Garuda's, kardas and chakmaks.
Doesn't mean they aren't good, just that the large khuks need a pin put through the handle to be secure for 100 years or more.:)
 
I agree. There is certainly something to be said for the overbuilt Ang Kholas and BAS's, but I too would dearly love to see some of the older styles made by HI. They have a wonderful character.
 
Those older style knives would be expensive to make. It would take alot more work to reduce the steel bar stock, and they would also have to upgrade the fittings, and sheaths. Are we willing to pay 2-3 times as much for more traditional looking knives?

n2s
 
My beef with the H.I. line is because they're slowly becoming modern interpretations of classic knives by smiths who are making them for customers overseas, and thus think that they know what we want.

Let me put it this way. What do you think of when you see a 'tactical katana'? You know, the ones made out of 440C bar stock, hollow ground at the edge, with no tsuba, with a grip wrapped in paracord in a poor imitation of tsukamaki, complete with a high impact kydex sheath?

My first reaction would be to take the 'tactical katana', that modern interpretation of a nihonto, and throw it into a furnace, so I can have the exquisite pleasure of watching it melt into its base components. Nothing comes close to matching the beauty and functionality of a real nihonto, or a japanese-style blade from the likes of Howard Clark, Rick Barrett, and others. To make a modern katana like in the example above is to sacrifice too much quality for ease of manufacture.

Now, I'm NOT saying that H.I. khuks are as bad as my 'tactical katana'. I'm just saying that certain aspects of the traditional khukuri were sacrificed in the name of production speed. Brass is certainly easier to work than steel, and is more plentiful, and cheaper to boot. Angled blade profiles are easier to produce than the continuously curved profiles of classic khuks. Thicker steel blades ARE easier to produce than thinner steel blades - Bura had once said that he was the ONLY kami who knew how to make a thin blade without screwing it up, so it seems to me that a thinner blade is harder to achieve than a thick blade, which leaves more room for error.
 
The HI blade style is great as a fighter, for that kind of use I prefer the blades the way they are with the inside curve and outside angle, however for a nice display piece with Hi quality and durability a fully curved blade would be a great addition to have
 
I agree with what everybody above says. On the other hand knives with the things mentioned above ARE available, just not from HI.

The GK bonecutter I have has a more traditional tang and handle. I think the bolster is steel. Thickness of blade is still about like HI knives but it is traditional in most other ways. Also the cho is closer to the bolster and the edge retention is way better than any khuk i have.

I don't own one YET, but according to an e mail I got from the guy from Tora Khuks their blades are thinner like you all say you want. Of course have no idea how they are tempered, but check out the really curved one they have on ebay. It looks fairly traditional, and far as I can see they have the bolsters you guys like.
 
Originally posted by Yvsa
Looks like others besides me have taken up the cause.:D

Just don't call the rat tail tangs partial tangs because they are not. They are full tang knives that just have their tangs hidden.
A partial tang knife is one that the tang doesn't go all the way through on, like the Hanuman's, Garuda's, kardas and chakmaks.
Doesn't mean they aren't good, just that the large khuks need a pin put through the handle to be secure for 100 years or more.:)
Click to expand...

Yes, partial was a misnomer. I meant hidden. The tang needs to run the full length of the handle. :)
 
As to "thinner" blades, the four old (pre-1918) Nepali khukuris that I am fortunate enough to have are 11/32" - 7/16" thick -- pretty stout. The oldest is the thickest. In comparison, the 1917 Indian Khukuri military that I have is "only" 5/16".

I also have two old village models -- no effort to take forging scale off the sides of these. While they are both close to "sirupati" in shape, they have definite "shoulders." They are 11/32 and 3/8" thick, respectively. They do taper rather quickly away from the spine, so the overall weight is less than one might expect from the thickness at the spine.

Seems to my highly inexpert eye that the "Hanshee" is more a pure weapon. The others styles, like my villagers, are better all-around tools.

Still, I'd like an HI "Hanshee" and an HI with the lovely curve of soem of the older khukuris.
 
Hollowdweller:

I just checked ebay, and Tora Khuk's 1850 Military Issue Khukuri looks like the item which there is so much recent demand for. Personally, I wasn't in the market for one of those thin, flat-bladed army-surplus khuks until JP posted so many good looking pictures of them. Now I am getting the bug to try one out.

However, I am also prepared to be less than impressed by the cutting/whacking power of one of those. I still have an Atlanta Cutlery chiruwa-type khuk, and while it chops well enough the thin (1/4") flat blade is what prompted me to seek out the burlier HI product.

Also, I am probably in the minority but I like that habaki bolster. In situations where I'm taking the khuk in and out of the scabbard frequently, the bolster is in gravity-contact with the top of the scabbard. When I am climbing over deadfalls and want the khuk secured, I push the bolster down into the scabbard opening (about 1/2" deep) and the khuk stays in there tight. This is a nice feature that traditional bolsters don't offer.

In addition, I don't think the white metal bolsters are steel. Blueing solution wouldn't touch the white metal bolsters on my two Villagers, so they must be made of something else.
 
Cliff, the Tora "1850" is 20" OA and 1/4" thick - signicantly less thick than the genuine article - more like the thickness of the "genuine military" khuks being peddled on line.
 
YVSA, my friend, I must disagree with your statement, "Doesn't mean they aren't good, just that the large khuks need a pin put through the handle to be secure for 100 years or more".

I have quite a few century old kukris that are large, heavy with tangs that go up less than halfway into the grip that are rock solid. No pinning neccesary. I have no idea how they would react to some torture test, but that old laha is secure.
 
JOHN, my friend I meant the new ones, not the old ones as the new ones are what we're talking about here. Even Bill recommends pinning the new ones. YMMV, but if I had a new partial tang I would pin it.
The old ones I have will be left alone as I feel the craftsmanship on them are about 10 times better than the newer ones.:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top