I should of listen to Karda

I believe Uncle Bill used to tell the story about how the Gurkha's khukuri "training" consisted of a series of neck, belly, and leg chops. These tough little guys had the technique down. They knew how to strike with a khuk. The had been using them since they were toddlers. Control and accuracy are there, they just needed to be shown where to hit a man in the most effective way. I believe Uncle Bill used to talk about how a Gurkha was willing to "trade up" in hand to hand: Sacrifice a finger for a hand, hand for an arm, etc.

I really do think it comes down to the warrior. All weapons have limitations. I may be biased, but if you dropped a westerner with 10 years of formal katana training in a pit against a soldier from Nepal with no formal training yet armed with his khuk of choice...
 
Steely_Gunz said:
I believe Uncle Bill used to tell the story about how the Gurkha's khukuri "training" consisted of a series of neck, belly, and leg chops. These tough little guys had the technique down. They knew how to strike with a khuk. The had been using them since they were toddlers. Control and accuracy are there, they just needed to be shown where to hit a man in the most effective way. I believe Uncle Bill used to talk about how a Gurkha was willing to "trade up" in hand to hand: Sacrifice a finger for a hand, hand for an arm, etc.

I really do think it comes down to the warrior. All weapons have limitations. I may be biased, but if you dropped a westerner with 10 years of formal katana training in a pit against a soldier from Nepal with no formal training yet armed with his khuk of choice...
Click to expand...
Are you comparing a Nepali soldier to an average westerner who only had some years of sword training in his favor.
Why not ten Nepali Joe the plumbers with 10 years of gun training against a Navy seal team with weapons of their choice?

I get it the man is important. But the same man with different blades will do different damage.
Train 2 teams of average Gurkhas with different sets of blades and see who comes out on top. Than you'll see what tool is better because both team were equal except for the blade.
In an open fight one on one without body armor maybe a lighter and fast dueling kind of blade with more reach could be superior.
 
Last edited:
christcl said:
I brought my HI AK15 to class once just to show the guys since it just arrived, they flat out said that the khukuri felt like a bizarre weapon and couldn't see how anyone with a khukuri could last against a samurai armed with a katana or even karate-doka with tonfa. I've never encountered so much arrogance in any other martial arts or gun class. In my experience, those who talk the most and proclaim the loudest and most absolutest have confidence issues. People who know they are good let their results speak for themselves and aren't shaken if they see other new or different ideas that might be pretty darn awesome as well.

BTW. I would love to see a Zulu armed with that giant shield and gladius-like spear with the giant blade go up against a samurai with a katana.
Click to expand...

Quite a pity that before they jumped to such things. I've given a very small amount of thought to wargaming how a kukri would do in situations, but not much. I don't anticipate going blade to blade often, especially with weapons that see almost no use outside of martial artists going at it. Mostly I try to figure out how to use the kukri itself for fighting, and maybe when I can consider myself to have it fully figured out I'll wargame it against less common weapons.
 
Perhaps the better descriptor rather than "the Man" would be the man's mind set.

Westerners seem to put more value in life. Look at it more as a game. Loss meaning death is out of the question.

The man with the careless blood thirsty mindset will win. The trade up mentioned by Steely of the Gurkha's uses this mind set.
I'm gonna get hurt here but I'm gonna win and your gonna be dead.

Same principal perhaps only slightly less meaningful is the sheepdog versus the sheep. While the sheep stampede away in fear the sheepdog stampedes towards the wolf with the bring it attitude.

A sheepdog versus a sheep, unfathomable because a sheepdog would never hurt a sheep would be no contest.

A sheepdog versus a wolf, now ya got a battle on your hands. It's in the head and in the heart.
 
I have considered myself a sheepdog for decades now. I always hear the same thing from people that know me..."im coming to your house when the crap hits the fan" I tell them to arm, train, and practice defending themselves. I won't always be there to protect you!
 
These are the same people who vote in politicians who will take your guns. Also the same people who love violent FPS video games and brainless movies like Expendables with lots of excess gun violence, but think you're weird if you actually go shooting regularly as a hobby/sport/practice.

gurkha berserka said:
I have considered myself a sheepdog for decades now. I always hear the same thing from people that know me..."im coming to your house when the crap hits the fan" I tell them to arm, train, and practice defending themselves. I won't always be there to protect you!
Click to expand...
 
These are the same people who vote in politicians who will take your guns. Also the same people who love violent FPS video games and brainless movies like Expendables with lots of excess gun violence, but think you're weird if you actually go shooting regularly as a hobby/sport/practice.

gurkha berserka said:
I have considered myself a sheepdog for decades now. I always hear the same thing from people that know me..."im coming to your house when the crap hits the fan" I tell them to arm, train, and practice defending themselves. I won't always be there to protect you!
Click to expand...
 
Jens Schuetz said:
Are you comparing a Nepali soldier to an average westerner who only had some years of sword training in his favor.
Why not ten Nepali Joe the plumbers with 10 years of gun training against a Navy seal team with weapons of their choice?

I get it the man is important. But the same man with different blades will do different damage.
Train 2 teams of average Gurkhas with different sets of blades and see who comes out on top. Than you'll see what tool is better because both team were equal except for the blade.
In an open fight one on one without body armor maybe a lighter and fast dueling kind of blade with more reach could be superior.
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that some western weekend warrior elitist looking down their noses at the khuk would probably get their tail handed to them, and i'm not talking about a Gurkha exactly. Just someone with a lot of hands on experience that has been given rudimentary instruction on where to attack with a khuk.
 
Steely_Gunz said:
No, I am saying that some western weekend warrior elitist looking down their noses at the khuk would probably get their tail handed to them, and i'm not talking about a Gurkha exactly. Just someone with a lot of hands on experience that has been given rudimentary instruction on where to attack with a khuk.
Click to expand...
Can a weekend warrior transform into a Ninja? Usually not. What is easier to change? The weapon.

Just 2 questions:
Will a weekend warrior be better with a good tool or a bad one?

Will a Gurkha be better with a good tool or a bad one?


I really don't see why some deem it meaningless to discuss different blades only because some guys might be good with less optimal tools. Even they could be even better with superior equipment!
 
Jens Schuetz said:
Can a weekend warrior transform into a Ninja? Usually not. What is easier to change? The weapon.

Just 2 questions:
Will a weekend warrior be better with a good tool or a bad one?

Will a Gurkha be better with a good tool or a bad one?


I really don't see why some deem it meaningless to discuss different blades only because some guys might be good with less optimal tools. Even they could be even better with superior equipment!
Click to expand...

Equipment is just that... Equipment. I think you are putting to much stock in equipment. It might help in some ways but isn't the deciding factor when it comes to success IMHO. I have been a competitive shooter for years, I see all sorts of guys who need the best equipment but it affects their performance very little. A tool won't create a winner but a winner can get the most out of a good tool.

Firearm marksmanship is alot more complex than Hollywood would have you believe. Trigger control, front sight focus, breathing and a range of things come into place. Most newbies to shooting couldn't hit a target in as little as 7 yards. It takes thousand of rounds under your belt to make you a success, not the tool you use.
 
gurkha berserka said:
Equipment is just that... Equipment. I think you are putting to much stock in equipment. It might help in some ways but isn't the deciding factor when it comes to success IMHO. I have been a competitive shooter for years, I see all sorts of guys who need the best equipment but it affects their performance very little. A tool won't create a winner but a winner can get the most out of a good tool.

Firearm marksmanship is alot more complex than Hollywood would have you believe. Trigger control, front sight focus, breathing and a range of things come into place. Most newbies to shooting couldn't hit a target in as little as 7 yards. It takes thousand of rounds under your belt to make you a success, not the tool you use.
Click to expand...
So the same shooter couldn't kill more bad guys with a better gun? Interesting.
 
Ah, now this one I can definately answer Jens. No the same shooter can not necessarily kill more bad guys with a "better" gun. I for one am an extra long range shooter. I shoot at 1 mile plus distances, your average shooter couldn't hit the target at that distance with any gun, even the best ones made. I on the other hand can hit it with almost any gun that has the necessary balistics, over and over and over. The gun makes no difference, the shooter makes all the difference.
 
Shavru said:
Ah, now this one I can definately answer Jens. No the same shooter can not necessarily kill more bad guys with a "better" gun. I for one am an extra long range shooter. I shoot at 1 mile plus distances, your average shooter couldn't hit the target at that distance with any gun, even the best ones made. I on the other hand can hit it with almost any gun that has the necessary balistics, over and over and over. The gun makes no difference, the shooter makes all the difference.
Click to expand...
Range, recoil, penetration, rate of fire didn't seem meaningless to me.
Don't even have to talk about the effect of our 120mm mortar.
Lets stick with 9mm. With an Uzi (single shots) everyone of my shots went into the middle. With our 9mm standard pistol however I was happy to hit the paper target once in a while (same distance) Others observed the same. More mass probably made the Uzi more stable. Maybe I'm a good shot maybe a bad one. But I was the same guy. With one weapon I'd be killed, with the other I would do the killing. Big difference if you ask me. No?

Now I admit we are talking about blades and not mechanically complex weapon systems. How much difference can there be? Aren't they all the same? One blade fits all? Then it should really only depend on the man.

But then why does the same man carry different kind of blades at the same time? Are Samurai and others fools? Maybe a short blade doesn't fair better in buildings, a long blade doesnt give more range and impact outdoors?
I wouldn't want to use a Katana in a house, even if I'm 20 times better than a weekend warrior. I will still be severely limited by the lack of space.
Would a short sword be best against horse riders or will a Naginata blade or spear drastically increase your chances to make it out alive?

Would you want to fight fast unarmored bad guys with a slow two handed broadsword? Even if you are better than them with a heavy blade, they will kill you with faster thin ones.

Would fast and thin cutter be good against medieval knight armor or would you need something more stabby and smashy to have so.e effect through the metal?

Then there are also physical limitations and legal ones which need to be thought of. What's the max length allowed? Can grandpa really still swing the ASTK fast enough? Even if he still has the killer spirit, if his body doesn't keep up with his weapon it's sadly ineffective, no matter how much spirit and experience.

Just like with guns there are blades which are better for a person and others who are worse. The difference can be huge as in HUGE which I tried to illustrate above.

If you agree then we could discuss what would be a good defensive weapon today for normally build people.
If you disagree at least promise me to be careful of the medival knights behind the gas station ;-)
 
It's obvious you have no formal training with firearms or you would realize what we are trying to say. The Uzi is a horrible example to use. Even the best shooters in the world have an issue with that design. It is a older open bolt style gun, which means... You pull the trigger and the sear releases the bolt. The bolt is extremely heavy due to the uzi's blow back design. All that weight is transferred Foward destroying the sigt picture. I have MANY thousands of rounds through the Uzi in both full and semi auto. I started shooting one when I was 12 at a local machine gun range. I would go there every weekend and reloaded my own ammo to save cash I've fired 500 rounds every weekend since I was preteen. I also do IPSC style steel plate shooting regularly. The weapon has little to no effect on performace as long as it is functioning perfectly. Sure a light crisp trigger and good sights help but the fundimentals are the key to success.

Sharvu wasn't talking about a howitzer, my guess is she shots either .308, 300win Mac, .338 lapua, or 50 bmg. Anyone of those caliber a would take incredible skill to hit targets at 1 mile. New shooters with even the top equipment couldn't hit that target at half that distance. Wind, trajectory, the corialis effect, and multiple other varibles.

I like you bud you need some rounds under your belt before you talk gun stuff. Still love ya thought lol.
 
Lol. No formal training. True. Just Army.
Bullseye with an uzi every time doesn't sound to bad to me.
You are saying the Uzi works bad for you? Well our German WW2 style pistols were worse. (My current mp9 HK is better but I'm more trained now so I didn't compare it to the 9mm guns from back then)
Again the bad weapon would have gotten me killed since I and others couldnt hit anything and the better one well, did the killing. Same caliber...

How about longer distances? I failed with a normal G3 (7.62mm) at 200m standing my hits where evenly spread over 1 yard. Added telescope made it a bit better. The newer G36 however did much better. 1 foot spread. Still no sniper but much more likely to hit a bad guy. Even an experienced sniper would do better with a better gun. Maybe only from an 1 inch spread to 0.3 inch but still better. And again I'm no sniper and dont plan to invest years into training. I guess that applies to the vast majority of people. If a better weapon gives most people a drastic improvement, then why not? If the real sniper spends $ to increase his hit rate even marginal why not? Why pretend that science and technology don't improve and bring better results?

And by the way what's your talk about a bad Uzi design? I thought it all depends on the guy and the weapon doesn't matter?
 
Last edited:
Open bolt is a very old design and obsolete. It is a bad design, it may be reliable but so wasn't the sten which is just tube stock welded together. I own a g36 ... It's called a sl8 in the states i also own three g3 designs by HK, Vector, and SPecial weapons inc. It is also a very dated design from the 1950's

We can talk fin design and history but I am afraid you couldn't keep up lol. The mp5 is by FAR a superior weapon in the closed bolt design. It too is now a very dated design from the 50's. Delayed roller lock ia used in the G3, mp5,Hk93 and a few others. Israel has replaced the Uzi for almost a decade due to its piss poor design. They now use the Tavor in.556 and 9mm. The Galil is also obsolete. I can discuss firearm history and development but it feel my comments are falling on deaf ears. Just my opinion
 
I kind of resemble that deaf ears comment. Definitely not my strong suit.

I do control to full auto MP5's at work. Great fun to play with. Mostly left by the way side in lieu of small compact AR's in 223/5.56.

Kind of sad. I still show them love from time to time.
 
gurkha berserka said:
Open bolt is a very old design and obsolete. It is a bad design, it may be reliable but so wasn't the sten which is just tube stock welded together. I own a g36 ... It's called a sl8 in the states i also own three g3 designs by HK, Vector, and SPecial weapons inc. It is also a very dated design from the 1950's

We can talk fin design and history but I am afraid you couldn't keep up lol. The mp5 is by FAR a superior weapon in the closed bolt design. It too is now a very dated design from the 50's. Delayed roller lock ia used in the G3, mp5,Hk93 and a few others. Israel has replaced the Uzi for almost a decade due to its piss poor design. They now use the Tavor in.556 and 9mm. The Galil is also obsolete. I can discuss firearm history and development but it feel my comments are falling on deaf ears. Just my opinion
Click to expand...
So there are better and worse weapons?
Cool.
Thought so.

Even with my limited experience I noticed that. Shot better with an Uzi than an even older pistol.

Nice that we both agree now that better pistols and rifles can make a huge difference in performance of even unexperienced guys. Some are better for certain circumstances, others worse.

Could this also apply to blades?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top