Kumar's King Kobra - long Khuk or Curved Sword

Joined
Jun 3, 1999
Messages
1,989
I believe 30" Kumar's King Kobra is a very interesting Khuk. I checked few times in the Khukuri FAQ - trying to search for the equivalence model - I can't find it there!

Anyhow I found few long Khuks or curved swords in Khukuri FAQ under Historical Khukuris section pix # 2, 3 & 4 ... BUT with different blade shape!

Kumar's King Kobra start to curve forward right at the center of the blade length while those in the Historical Khukuris section start to curve about 1/3 near the tip.

Check: http://www.tx3.net/~howardw/Khukuris/Historical.htm
compare to: http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum26/HTML/001292.html

My q is: Which one do you think is better in it's looks & functionality?

I personally would prefer the historical shape! What do you say ... ?
 
I say I have to feel each.

The old ones are tempting because of the possibility that the design was battle tested.

The bottom guard on the various swords was put for a reason but Bill has a point in that it's not for everyone. It's advantage and disadvantages are another conversation.

To be blunt, it's back to the individual preference. I've held talwar/tulwars with handles that were small for me. The junk talwar I have has a bottom plate that is a pain too but it is oval not circular.
 
Hi Mohd & Smoke -

I say I have to feel each.

Me too...
smile.gif


I just designed one and followed the basic idea of the "broadsword" in pic #3 (the pair with crossed blades). I can't wait to compare it's feel with very slender khukuris...


The old ones are tempting because of the possibility that the design was battle tested.

That's a point but on the other hand it might be of limited value as long as you don't want to fight like an ancient Nepali soldier (cp. http://www.tx3.net/~howardw/Khukuris/Ghurkas.htm) against "traditional" (Himalayan) opponents. It would be very interesting to know (if and) how Nepali palace guards train with any traditional swords (in a wide sense).


The bottom guard on the various swords was put for a reason but Bill has a point in that it's not for everyone. It's advantage and disadvantages are another conversation.

It's advantages are slim if you use a khukuri as a single all-around tool for everyday chores (camping, firewood and food processing, etc.) and against opponents with lesser skill. In emergency situations and against skilled opponents with blades its advantages are pretty obvious and I guess this is the main reason why you (only) encounter them among more ancient weapons dedicated to battlefield use.


To be blunt, it's back to the individual preference. I've held talwar/tulwars with handles that were small for me. The junk talwar I have has a bottom plate that is a pain too but it is oval not circular.

Keep those heavy leather gloves in mind (and it would be fairly surprising if old Nepali weapons would fit in our larger hands nicely).

Of course, any design should fit with the purpose you have in mind for the blade (martial art training vs. wilderness chores vs. weekend camping vs. ...).

I'm certain that there is a market for blades with well-designed guards...
wink.gif
wink.gif


Best wishes,
kai
 
P.S.: (Hi Mohd!)
Anyhow I found few long Khuks or curved swords in Khukuri FAQ under Historical Khukuris section pix # 2, 3 & 4 ... BUT with different blade shape!

Kumar's King Kobra start to curve forward right at the center of the blade length while those in the Historical Khukuris section start to curve about 1/3 near the tip.

The crossed ones in pic 3 (& center of pic 2) don't seem to be khukuris in a narrow sense (e.g. no cho). Does anybody know the correct Nepali name for this beast? (Seems to be closely related to the sosun pattah, right?)


My q is: Which one do you think is better in it's looks & functionality?

Both a quite different blades: e. g. I'd expect the sigmoid shape to perform a little better at thrusting (and to allow a more versatile blade use) than the common khukuri design (which OTOH should be superior at chopping). Both are primarily choppers/slashers but the former trades in some chopping ability for more (martial) versatility.

I'm sure that both blade styles will find enthusiastic followers...
wink.gif


Best wishes,
kai

[This message has been edited by Kai Witte (edited 03-09-2000).]
 
Personally, I find the traditional disc pommel of the tulwar is excruciatingly uncomfortable. However, it's a very old, common design feature also found in Sudanese swords,so it must serve some purpose. The old-time weaponsmiths did nothing without a very good reason. It's easy to see how vulnerable the base of the sword-hand would be to a fast counter-attack when raised for an overhead cut.

When I first saw the pics of the King Kobra, my immediate reaction was, "That's half-way to a yataghan..." Kumar's design looks wonderfully ergonomic. I want one of those.

As regards furniture, my ideal choice would be a slim hand-and-a-half buffalo-horn grip with the traditional khukuri pommel swell (my hands are nearer Nepalese size than Western). I certainly wouldn't say no to a crossguard. But; no disc pommel, please!
 
The background of my family lineage were farmers. Most of blades are meant for farm work such as tree felling, wood chopping & grass cutting. At the same time, in extremely unexpected situation blades are also use for weapons in self defence either against (mostly) animals or (in certain very unwelcome case) humans.

Normally, length, weight & shape of blades are given special attention so as to ensure the task will be efficiently perform using minimum energy in minimum time. Roughly, weight of >2lbs & length of <20" is very practical to fell trees about the size of 10" to 12" in diameter. Blade with weight of around 2lbs & length of 20" to 25" is more suitable to fell small trees about the size of <5" in diameter. While weight of <2lbs & length of >25" is more practical for grass cutting task. Please do correct me if you think I'm wrong.

We always prefer a backward curved blade shape for cutting grass. The forward curved blade shape will always cause the blade entangle with the grass - but it cuts more grass! Anyhow different starting point of blade curve may give diferent effect!

For weapon - some MA expert may knows better than me!

I like to have Kumar's King Kobra - not now! - I have to save 1st!

NEPAL HO!

 
Hi Tom -

Personally, I find the traditional disc pommel of the tulwar is excruciatingly uncomfortable. However, it's a very old, common design feature also found in Sudanese swords,so it must serve some purpose.

That was the very reason why I asked for input from people who might have studied traditional martial arts of this region. Bill, do you have any idea where to ask for contacting those folks?


The old-time weaponsmiths did nothing without a very good reason. It's easy to see how vulnerable the base of the sword-hand would be to a fast counter-attack when raised for an overhead cut.

I doubt that this is the main reason but you never know...

At least there have been enough antique weapons for showing off, too (e.g. those heavily decorated yataghans whose jewelery is certainly not for martial reasons). So the reasoning behind any specific design may include aesthetics, tradition (khukuri handle rings), spiritual (cho?), etc. pp. (as well as functionality).


Kumar's design looks wonderfully ergonomic. I want one of those.

It's faithful to the core khukuri concept and certainly makes a great addition to the family of slender khukuris! Any blems, Bill?
biggrin.gif


Best wishes,
kai
 
Well, here's a few things I could add. Yes that rounded pommel can be for protection if the blade was raised overhead.
It could also be for striking down in close quarters aka "hammerfist". Contrasting it to one of John Powell's pieces, I'd say it's too light to act as counter balance. In a rare scenario, a skilled swordsman can use the rounded pommel of his ENEMY's sword against him but that's rare.

It also may be kind of a 'stopper', a guide to prevent the user from doing a certain type of move (cut vs chop or something)
 
Back
Top