I got my AC "Bhojpure" Pre- 1890 kukri today!!!!

Yvsa

Yvsa

Joined
May 18, 1999
Messages
15,395
What a beautiful old warhorse!!!!
Like the WW I its blade defies a file to cut it and the sweet spot is much longer than I expected!:)
The kukri weighs in at 1 7/16 pound or 23 ounces!!!! And is 16 1/2" oal with a 13 inch blade and a 4" handle including the bolster right to the edge.
The blade is 3/8" at the bolster and 5/16" half way down and tapers down to 3/16" at 1 1/2" from the point and is 1/8" at 1/2" from the point which is 1/16 inch.
The discrepancy in the lengths has to do with the angles the kukri is measured at and is not a typo.:)
This blade is Thin, flat ground down to 1/16" and then convexed. The blade isn't marked with anything, but there's some suspicious looking marks on the top of the wood handle.
But it does have a non standard cho which is somewhat viewable in the scans I made and sent to Dean.
Perhaps he will post them for us before long.
It is Much thinner than my WW I from AC. all in all a beautiful kukri that I'm very proud to pass on to my heirs at some time.:D

Edited for spelling, used the spell checker this time.:rolleyes:
 
pix
attachment.php
 
Looks like their model D (#1-137) with the interesting cho I discussed concerning this model. I also think the grip is unique.
Even with the lack of a shoulder there are certain features that do not indicate a bhojpure. The grip on a bhojpure is not as robust, the depth of the blade at the "waist" (ahead of the cho) is much thinner emphasizing the belly.
The depth of the belly on the bhojpure: 2 5/8",
the depth of D is 2 3/8"

I think this may be another of the many variations and think you have another nice kukri, but I wouldn't classify it as the bhojpure you ordered. I would let AC know this since you had to pay $30 for something you didn't get.
compare.jpg
 
Thanks Dean!!!!:D
Do you mind telling me what software you do that with? I have Paintshop Pro 8 that I think I can do such things with, but haven't learned enough about it yet.

Again the discoloration is an anomaly of the scan and it isn't there on the kukri.
This is the cleanest blade I have of the three antiques I've accululated.
There's absolutely No pitting from rust!!!! There are use marks on the blade which is incredibly dull compared to the WW I model!!!!
Some of the marks appear to be from hitting the side of the kukri on a sharp object several times.
Then there's the deeper marks that look as if maybe 80 grit sandpaper was lightly rubbed along the flat mostly from point to handle.
All in all most of the finish is as my HI user's are with a nice satin finish put on by a maroon Scotch-Brite pad and not used for a while, developing a nice gun metal grey patina.:D

The non-standard cho doesn't show up well with the scan, but you can tell it's wider on one side than the other. On the wider side the cho comes up to the wider than usual uvula;) from there about 1/16" down it has a small 0.030" x0.020" square filed into the side and from the bottom of the corner generated there it angles off at a about a 45 angle about 1/8" long and from there it straightens out parallel to the other side and continues to the bottom.
Probably wasn't worth the effort to try and describe it. Perhaps I can draw it on a piece of paper so that it lays perfectly flat, scan it and send it to Dean for posting. I'm getting ready to sell a couple of kukris off and with the money from them I'm gonna at least get a Premium account so I can do my own Pix. Dean's been great but I don't want to continue on like this much longer.:D
 
Originally posted by John Powell
Looks like their model D (#1-137) with the interesting cho I discussed concerning this model.The depth of the belly on the bhojpure: 2 5/8",

I think this may be another of the many variations and think you have another nice kukri, but I wouldn't classify it as the bhojpure you ordered. I would let AC know this since you had to pay $30 for something you didn't get.
Click to expand...

John with all due respect the scanner lies somewhat. It is indeed the "B" #1-135 Bhojpure kukri and the blade is 2 5/8" wide. My last one was the "D" #1-137 from AC.:)
When I draw up the cho as mentioned in my post above I will also draw the unusual looking marks that's where a buttcap would be for your information. They may not mean anything but sort of appear as a Y E with the "E" having a curious mark coming down and intersecting the top of the "E", curious to say the least.:)
I like this cho and am really pleased I got something non-standard.:D

Edited to remove pic, no need for two.:rolleyes:
 
YVSA, the top kukri is the first D you showed, the next is the one we're talking about. The front part of the blade and the curve of the spine is like a true bhojpure, but the grip is all wrong and the width of the neck is too thick. The mark on the pommel is not found on any bhojpure (yet)and the edge extension ahead of the cho has not been found on any D models (yet). I have been handling a lot of these in the last few weeks and will stick with my identifciation. Like I said before, it could be yet another variation.

I'm not saying you haven't gotten a nice kukri, I'm just saying it's not what you ordered and should be compensated.
comparisson.jpg
 
John with all due respect the scanner is lieing!!!! The top one you just posted has a definite angle to the blade while the bottom one is a nice arc from the handle to the point, these are reassembled by Dean's software program and not totally accurate.
The handle is shorter and somewhat fat at the butt, but the butt has also suffered a great loss of deinition as well because of a large chip off of one side either wear or removal of material by the original owner much as what some do to the HI buttcaps for being too pointy.
The one I received today actually looks just like the top one in your previous post and the bottom kukri exactly like the "D" kukri at the bottom I received last week.:)
I'll send you a couple of the original scans without the blades and handles reassembled by Dean on his software program.
 
It's hard to tell, but I suspect at least some of the markings on the pommel/butt may be nagari numerals (i.e. the traditional style/set of writing numbers in sanskrit, hindi, nepali, etc. - Yvsa I know you and others know what I mean, just a note for lurkers, etc.)

interesting that there appear to be 3 separate characters - as I understand it most of butts have only been marked with a single numeral? JP will know more.

--B.
 
This is worse than classifying hominid skeletons!

My AC "Bhojpure" is a hybrid of the two you show below, John:
compare.jpg


Mine has the straight, short sword of Shiva of the Type D, but a narrower waist like the Bhoj. Its handle is between the two pictured in terms of robustness -- a bit thicker than the Bhoj, but of a similar shape and definitely more gracile than the Type D. It is bigger at the bolster, but only because the blade (on the handle-side of the cho) is wider than the blades "waist" where the pictured Bhoj is nearly the same width at the waist and bolster.

The handle "ring" is very subtle on mine, almost the same width as the rest of the handle on the bolster side; but the handle behind the ring is much smaller and then tapers back out to the butt. So instead of a sharp ring as shown, I have more of a step.:confused:
The cho on mine looks like Yvsa's but symmetric and not jagged or like the Bhoj but with a bigger uvula.

I haven't noticed any markings at all on mine, but then again the WD-40 only took off the "moist" cosmoline, and there is still a lot of crust on the khuk.
 
Originally posted by donutsrule
This is worse than classifying hominid skeletons!
Click to expand...

That's for sure D/R!!!! Unlike the scan and reassembly shows of my Bhojpure it's only 1 7/16" at it's waspish waist and swells out to 2 & 5/8 inches!!!! And it's the one with the non-standard cho I drew.

My WW I is 1 1/2" at its waist and swells out to 2 & 1/2 inch. The cho on it appears to be maybe a little non-standard, but I haven't made up my mind if it's made that way or the result of being beaten around. At the bottom of the uvula, for want of a better word;), it sorta appears to have a small cut on one side making it sort of a Fleur-Dis-Les design.
Terry's supposed to be by later this morning and maybe he can shed some light on it.;)
 
Yvsa,
I know this is tricky, but To be true, I must say I think your Bhojpure is actualy the unnamed type D, but highly unusual in having a realy good but fairly gentle curve to the blades top profile rather than a shoulder.Thus making it resemble a Bhojpure! (which has a tighter curve much accentuated by the much thinner waist & slimmer handle.}

Based on your pix, statements & measurments of The waist, handle,cho & markings all imply the D model to me. But a very interesting & possibly rare one!

It might be usefull for us all if you could do a scan of the bolster & blade curve in one to show the true curve present if its the scanner etc. that warping the image.

The cho is a recognised design that John has discused before.

Also is the handle fairly rectangular in profile or is that the scaner as well?

Overall It looks a damn good piece to me! & As long as your pleased with it, I thats the main thing!

Spiral
 
Here's another way to check: put the blades on a flat surface, (let the grip and bolster hang over the edge of a table)trace the outline and lay them on top of each other. You will see the difference.

Stubborn cuss ain't ya? The handle is not correct, chips, wear or not. Scans are more accurate than photos. DD's composite looks spot on. If you blow up his pictures to exact size I imagine it would match your kukris exactly. The waist isn't thin enough and that cho is found on D. Are there hybrids? Absolutely. Replaced grips? Maybe. Is that a bhojpure? No.

Unless these pictures are manipulated they show the differences very clearly. Call AC and tell them you didn't get what you expected and can prove it. They have been very good about replacing these knives.
 
I forgot to mention, mine is also between the two above in terms of the general curved shape of the overall khukuri, but is closer to the official bhojpure -- the D seems to have a slight peak at the back of the spine right above the Sword of Shiva while mine is a continuous curve. What you think, John?:confused:
 
Are the guys at AC interested in these differences, or do they think y'all are a bunch crazy khuk knuts, and when you replace one you're having another spin of the wheel?:p
 
Without photos I can't give you any opinion, but I have now handled 12 of these and have seen the variations. I consider the classic D and the bhojpure as the ones I have showed. I am using the overall shape of the blade and the much smaller grip as basic criteria. The cho, pwankh and pommel marks vary too much to classify them as one or the other models.

I have no idea what they think at AC, but from what I've heard they have replaced every kukri sent back. If I was management I would either categorize them more carefully for shipment plus make it clear in the advertising that you may not get the exact model shown.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top