Proper finish as issued?

G

GUN SNOB

Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
294
What is the proper blade finish for the M-43 and or WWII models as issued? Was there a standard and did it change during the war?

I know firearms went from better to bad to worse as production demands increased. Did this hold true for the Kurkri?

I have both mentioned models and am debating how to re finish the blades. I can buff them out to mirror. stop at a sanded finish or park or blue.

Don't know if I will try to match the issue finish or not just thinking out loud.
 
Most official issue pieces were a satin finnish in WW2, No buffing used.

But so many companies made them variation went from very finely linnished, to mildly course.

Spiral
 
Yeah, those grits would be OK. Depends. It always depends upon what the owner wants. Most folks with working khuks do not reapply the mirror finish, but I know some who do, and happily, so to each his own. I use 400 grit and higher.

I wouldn't worry about today's khuks being less quality than yesteryears. Remember the British contracts were not the 'best' khuks, but the cheapest tools that met the requirements. Today's khuks are actually better in my humble opinion. You have a lot of choice. In particular for wood work, you can get a more robust khuk than in WWll.

I'm not at all disparaging the khuks of the British Empire as I write this. There is another company that makes khuks closer to the British model if a replica is what one wants.

munk
 
I wouldn't worry about today's khuks being less quality than yesteryears. Remember the British contracts were not the 'best' khuks, but the cheapest tools that met the requirements.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that my HIs (everybody's HIs) are as good or better than Mil. Surp. I was referring to finish QC during war time production.

I used Vinegar to check the hamon on the M-43 and a villager UBE and am removing the color and any deep marks left by the Kaimi. The UBE will most likely be HI polished (and a user). Just thought I might not take the M-43 as far.

I know there is not an any one answer, just looking for a guide line. Multiple suppliers, war production and on leave to much room for variance. Not to mention the GI (Tommy) and the personal care gear receives.
 
munk said:
I wouldn't worry about today's khuks being less quality than yesteryears. Remember the British contracts were not the 'best' khuks, but the cheapest tools that met the requirements. Today's khuks are actually better in my humble opinion. You have a lot of choice. In particular for wood work, you can get a more robust khuk than in WWll.
munk
Click to expand...

Thats true in someways Munk, better alloys & harder tempering is more usefull today, in WW2 they had to be able to be just about file shapened, Today we have other sharpeners.

Buffed finnish looks shinier today, but rounds evrything off but only engineers & artists notice that.

In WW2 cheapest contracter didnt win, evry contractor got the job. ;)

Pre. WW2 The cheapest contracter didnt win. Things were different then. Things had to be made to a standerd. Like old rifles.;)


Currant British army issue kukris are the worst design & lowest quality they have ever been. Typicle in Nepal if you buy a batch They cost less than $5. Many Gurkhas still carry thier fathers & granfathers issue or sometives old village pieces in war instead. They also took there time on the work you cant see untill you dismantle a kukri, today that is rare.


Kamis today can be very good & have access to grinders,buffers,drills,linnishers etc. that there grandfathers never dreamed off, but sometimes there grandfathers new more about kukri & had greater forging & hand skills.IMHO & I wont even comment on the scabbards & stiching quality.

But some old kukris they would open there eyes in awe at.;)

Sadley true crafts in evry industry in the world are not what they were 80 or more years ago.


Spiral
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top