jdk1
Gold Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,040
Here is my lite review. I havent been able to do any heavy chopping (lack of vegetation, and recovering from tendonitis); only cleaning up my Princess Palm a little. As some of you know, I began with a Tirtha (Beer Mug) 16.5 WW II model. When it arrived, I first had to reset my western eyes. Even though I knew it wasnt machine made, I had to fight the urge to inspect what would normally be machined flats for flaws. After a minute of recalibration, I inspected the khukuri and found a wonderful blade loaded with curves. This is what I really wanted: an authentic khukuri made by hand. This knife was old school. I didnt know you could actually get a khukuri like this. Well, the disease set in. It wasnt long before I acquired two more. I was looking for an M43, but Auntie was fresh out. Undaunted, she hooked me up with a package deal which made my day. I ended up with another WW II and a chiruwa Ang Khola (CAK). The specifications are as follows:
WW II by Tirtha (Beer Mug) kami:
OAL = 16 ¾ with a blade length of 11 3/16.
Weight = 1.6 lbs. (per the scale) or around 26 oz.
Handle length = 6
Blade thickness = near bolster is .393, or a little bigger than 3/8, and .365 at the shoulder.
Blade width at belly = 2.09
WW II by Murali Kami:
OAL = 16 ¼ with a blade length of 11 1/16.
Weight = 1.6 lbs.
Handle length = 5 ½
Blade thickness = near bolster is .444, a little over 7/16, and .480 at the shoulder.
Blade width at belly = 1.947
Chiruwa Ang Khola by Murali Kami:
OAL = 16 ¾ with a blade length of 11 1/8 (was originally a little bit longer).
Weight = 1.8 lbs. or about 29 oz.
Handle length = 5 7/8
Blade thickness = near bolster is .459, also a little over 7/16, and .428 at the shoulder.
Blade width at belly = 2.026
The difference in the two WW II models is interesting. The Murali version is very beefy when viewed from above! It is very near ½ thick past the shoulder. Interestingly, it is thicker at the shoulder than near the bolster. The grip is also about 1/2 shorter. I would say it is definitely a chopper, but it has a more pronounced tip than the Tirtha WW II, which I would think would be better for martial use. The Tirtha WW II is slightly blunter, with good belly very near the tip. It kind of reminds me of a caping or skinning knife. I like them both. I also noticed Muralis Cho is bigger than Tirthas. But, I dont want to get into a whos Cho is bigger
argument, so Ill move on.
The chiruwa Ang Khola is a beaut! When I first discovered HI, I didnt figure Id ever get a CAK. People wrote of how heavy they were and it seemed they were mainly for chopping. The blade didnt sing to me, but that changed after looking at them for a while and Im glad I got this one. I really like the blade profile. The tip of this CAK was damaged in shipping
. About 1/16 was bent where it repeatedly came through the container and contacted something very hard. Auntie requested I send the whole lot back, but I wanted to just keep what I had, since they seemed like good blades, and I wished to save Auntie valuable time and trouble. I worked on the tip with a file and sandpaper. It changed the blade tip profile to a little more blunt than I prefer, but I think it turned out fine. The CAK is heavier than the others, but has a really good feel. It seems it would chop through anything I would ever need to chop. I want to mention something about blade shapes here. I have noticed I have a strong preference for angled shoulders as opposed to round, crescent moon blades. This is totally about aesthetics, since I cannot speak to the performance of one as opposed to the other. The crescent moon blade does not speak to me, with one exception. I really want an M43, really bad. Anyway, back to the CAK. I have to say that the blade profile, along with the chirra, makes this blade just gorgeous.
They are all really nice khuks. It amazes me that craftsmen with hand tools and fire can make these. The feel they have is impossible to explain. They must be felt. There is magic in them. The horn handles feel very good to me and seem very secure. Some dont like the handle ring, but I do. I figure it took hundreds, if not thousands of years, for this design to develop. I think the ergonomics are pretty solid. I have no idea which one should be my go to khukuri. The weight difference is only about 3 ounces and length is very close. I guess it depends on what or where Im going to.
So, where do I go from here? Im still on the prowl for an M43, which I believe will quench my thirst for awhile. Money is tight since acquiring the two latest. Shoot, it hasnt been long since I got my first! I guess Ill circle around with the rest of the sharks and see what happens. Maybe Ill pick up a Khagas Katne so I can have an EDC (every day carry) khuk!
Note: I wanted to upload this review last night, but the site was down. This morning, Photobucket is down, so the photos will have to wait. This evening I'll post them, if I can figure out how. Many thanks!
WW II by Tirtha (Beer Mug) kami:
OAL = 16 ¾ with a blade length of 11 3/16.
Weight = 1.6 lbs. (per the scale) or around 26 oz.
Handle length = 6
Blade thickness = near bolster is .393, or a little bigger than 3/8, and .365 at the shoulder.
Blade width at belly = 2.09
WW II by Murali Kami:
OAL = 16 ¼ with a blade length of 11 1/16.
Weight = 1.6 lbs.
Handle length = 5 ½
Blade thickness = near bolster is .444, a little over 7/16, and .480 at the shoulder.
Blade width at belly = 1.947
Chiruwa Ang Khola by Murali Kami:
OAL = 16 ¾ with a blade length of 11 1/8 (was originally a little bit longer).
Weight = 1.8 lbs. or about 29 oz.
Handle length = 5 7/8
Blade thickness = near bolster is .459, also a little over 7/16, and .428 at the shoulder.
Blade width at belly = 2.026
The difference in the two WW II models is interesting. The Murali version is very beefy when viewed from above! It is very near ½ thick past the shoulder. Interestingly, it is thicker at the shoulder than near the bolster. The grip is also about 1/2 shorter. I would say it is definitely a chopper, but it has a more pronounced tip than the Tirtha WW II, which I would think would be better for martial use. The Tirtha WW II is slightly blunter, with good belly very near the tip. It kind of reminds me of a caping or skinning knife. I like them both. I also noticed Muralis Cho is bigger than Tirthas. But, I dont want to get into a whos Cho is bigger
argument, so Ill move on.The chiruwa Ang Khola is a beaut! When I first discovered HI, I didnt figure Id ever get a CAK. People wrote of how heavy they were and it seemed they were mainly for chopping. The blade didnt sing to me, but that changed after looking at them for a while and Im glad I got this one. I really like the blade profile. The tip of this CAK was damaged in shipping
. About 1/16 was bent where it repeatedly came through the container and contacted something very hard. Auntie requested I send the whole lot back, but I wanted to just keep what I had, since they seemed like good blades, and I wished to save Auntie valuable time and trouble. I worked on the tip with a file and sandpaper. It changed the blade tip profile to a little more blunt than I prefer, but I think it turned out fine. The CAK is heavier than the others, but has a really good feel. It seems it would chop through anything I would ever need to chop. I want to mention something about blade shapes here. I have noticed I have a strong preference for angled shoulders as opposed to round, crescent moon blades. This is totally about aesthetics, since I cannot speak to the performance of one as opposed to the other. The crescent moon blade does not speak to me, with one exception. I really want an M43, really bad. Anyway, back to the CAK. I have to say that the blade profile, along with the chirra, makes this blade just gorgeous. They are all really nice khuks. It amazes me that craftsmen with hand tools and fire can make these. The feel they have is impossible to explain. They must be felt. There is magic in them. The horn handles feel very good to me and seem very secure. Some dont like the handle ring, but I do. I figure it took hundreds, if not thousands of years, for this design to develop. I think the ergonomics are pretty solid. I have no idea which one should be my go to khukuri. The weight difference is only about 3 ounces and length is very close. I guess it depends on what or where Im going to.
So, where do I go from here? Im still on the prowl for an M43, which I believe will quench my thirst for awhile. Money is tight since acquiring the two latest. Shoot, it hasnt been long since I got my first! I guess Ill circle around with the rest of the sharks and see what happens. Maybe Ill pick up a Khagas Katne so I can have an EDC (every day carry) khuk!
Note: I wanted to upload this review last night, but the site was down. This morning, Photobucket is down, so the photos will have to wait. This evening I'll post them, if I can figure out how. Many thanks!
