Valiant Goloks, Review, Test and VS Kukhuries

I agree with Cliff, ideal is expensive... :( I'll certainly hesitate to ruin a knife that costed me ~200$ without a good reason.

In regard to testing, also, different testers will lead to different tests. Some like to chop, to split wood, to make a path through bush, or to trim or get a tree down or even do destructive testing. When you look at the quantity of tools mankind has created to perform these tasks, it is obvious that there is not one answer, and that the final choice is often very personal/cultural.
Also in account there will be the personal preference of the tester...
Though one may try to be the most objective as possible, total objectivity is a view of the mind.
As long as you review the caracteristics of a blade it is OK, when you fall into using it, then personal taste come into account.

You simply need to be careful when comparing such different blades not to generalize to style (khukuris vs goloks), as the differences seen can easily be from variations within a style rather than from one specific type of blade to another. The disclaimer does cover this, though still such generalizations do leads to misinterpretations very easily. This is a minor point though when compared to the information presented in the above review and the thread on Knifeforums. And it is obvious that there is no intended bias.
Click to expand...

Cliff, I totally agree with that :cool: . The title I did not choose appropriately on purpose, but as an eye attracting feature ;) Now sure I forgot that the title is part of the overall review impression...
As I said, these blades are all good, and all have advantages (and therefore inconvenients).
The two hand-made ones definitively show very good craftmanship, which is a factor I appreciate...


Now the point I retain from all the discussions I had from this review, is that my technique is probably more adapted to a machette-like Golok/khukuri/machette than to an hatchet-like kukhuri/bolo/hatchet.
The tester is part of the test.
 
Yes, personal abilities and epxerience certainly play a key role, I never thought about this much, its simply a traditional viewpoint (here) that this is ignored. However some designs are much easier to use than others, and take less skill or experience. This is obviously valuable to someone starting out.

-Cliff
 
Singularity, no I won't be reprofiling the blade. I probably should add that there are two reasons for not reprofiling the blade. One is that I had just reprofiled a M43 khukuri that had some time ago had an accident with a hidden nail embedded in a tree (damage was described on the HI forum). I thought I had hammered out the problem perfectly but when tested on these same ironbark trees the blade folded. So I don't know whether my reprofiling expertese is all that good. Maybe it was the M43's blade. I don't know. The second reason I won't reprofile the blade is that I'm still happy with the Golok for machete type work (I continued using it on lantana). The chip in the blade hasn't affected its effectiveness in this area and as you had pointed out it is very comfortable to use. I just won't use it as a chopper in future - well, at least not on ironbark trees.

As for feeling anything different when the chip occurred, the answer is no. I initially thought it was cutting through the ironbark tree really well and was quite surprised and somewhat saddened when I looked at the blade. Until the chip appeared I did think the Golok was really something very special. It still is (especially considering its price) but I am now wary of using it as a chopper. I'm sorry, I don't know how to check hardness. Like you, I should also add that the service I received when purchasing the Golok from Valiant was very good.
 
It took me a while to find my way back to this thread - I've been missing good points!
I'm really interested in Glen's comments about the chipping. I'm surprisingly lucky with my blades since I've had no problems on tough stuff here and lots of chopping. Spence over on the other forum managed to put a wave in his edge but no chips - on some pretty tough wood. From what I've seen of the two blades I have, they'd sure be more likely to dent or wave, than chip. Pretty hard to compare individually made blades, though - we just need enough user comments from people who've really put the blades through some tough stuff.
I'm pretty impressed with the chopping capability of the small surv. golok - but the weight of mine is 1lb 2oz - same as a GB Wildlife hatchet. The weights on the site include the sheath, so the large SG isn't much heavier in terms of blade weight. Basically here we're in heavy knife, light hatchet territory. Add even a few ounces with hatchet or knife blade, and there's going to be a vast difference in chopping power.
I'm also curious as to what ironbark trees are used for. I'm about to look things up - but sometimes common uses of trees are not the ones important to us..
I'm sure glad to see the factor of the user brought up! Not being a user of heavy knives (other than machetes), but an avid hatcheteer - I'd always seen the benefit of a lot of experience with axes and hatchets, but considered that with a heavy knife - well - what I knew about hatchets would more than get me started. Right! I honestly was very puzzled because I was very impressed with what I was able to do compared to the same weight of good hatchet. Occasionally though, I'd get some super hit which totally puzzled me in what was cut. Gradually I've been learning the techniques, and now I'm seeing an overall increase in performance. Maybe I'm slow to learn - but learn I do in the end. It was a lot of fun too! I've never chopped with a kuk, despite growing up with them on the wall. Something new to learn there too, and a lot more fun..
 
Glenn,
Hardness could be checked with a new file, but if you have no previous reference or comparizon, forget it.

These Goloks are meant to be hardened on one cm, so one mm reprofiling should not soften it, but it may be a lot of work.

Jimbo, the same, I get more and more efficient with the blade.

BTW, Cliff has started another thread on this golock in the same forum space.
Cheers,
 
Thanks Glenn!
That is wierd. The strange thing we'e noticing with honing is the tendency to have a burr which just hangs on. Some tough steel. If the chip had been about 3mm or less then it would be explained by coarse grinding. An uneven edge with coarse grinding scratches will often tear out like that. My favorite cheap Moras will do it every time - but never after they've been sharpened. The cheaper blades from Valiant of course have the same grinding problems - due to their price.
It's a tough one - 1mm doesn't sound like much to bring out, but even with a belt grinder, that's a lot of work on a blade that size. Let's wait and see what Cliff is able to do with his blade - but my bet is still that if you can get the edge ground back that it won't chip again.
 
Yesterday, I played with the Hitam in the garden.

Hitam:10" 1/4 convex blade, 1/4" thick, total 17"1/4, 740 gr total.

First impression:
The handle is nice, and confortable, though seems made for a huge hand. The blade shows forge hit marks, and forge planning. The edge is sharp, needs just a touch to be razor sharp.
The wooden clip was for some reason glued on the free side, one shot of a chisel freed it. the inside of the sheath was covered of some sone powder/ abrasive, and needed a wash (I suppose it is the polishing compound). The 4" from the handle are not sharpened, and rather thick (1 mm edge), going slowly to a fine edge.

Hitam in hand
hitam-13.JPG

Thickness
hitam-14.JPG


Gobal use feelings:
Very nice grip, very comfortable. Penetration is OK, not to the level of the Survival golok. The sheath is nice, and equipped with a clip
Still, I find this blade much more confortable than the HI Chiruwa AK, though the chopping ability is less. The machete job is a pleasure, though I like a longer blade.

I'll say overall a good light and compact compromise for outdoors.

unvoluntary extreme testing:

I was wacking this cypress trees in the garden (these are 8" diameter trees), Cleaning 2 to 3" inches dead branches at head height.
Real wacking job, as these when you hit there are bits and dust flying everywhere, specially in your eyes, so the faster the better.

I felt like hitting something that stopped slowly my movement and inspected the blade afterwards, The was one small dent!
I wonder, look at the tree, and discover a thick 2mm iron wire, going through the branches, with a big and deep nick in it and going V were I hit it.

The blade is ok, the dent is 1/3 rd of mm or less, will disapear next few sharpening sessions. The edge was a bit dumb for 1" up to the tip, as I did my "saber" hit. I tried to take picture, but it would not appear on the pict.

When I compare the dent to the strength of the blow, the damage is really minimum.

I also hit some stones in the ground while cuttin low, and the result was a rolled edge near the tip (the angle). Light hammering and pushing the steel back dit it, ans with a bit of sharpening, the nick disapeared.
(use a small hammer to bring an edge back, and go slowly!)

The garden being the garden, it turns out that I had to dig some 8" hole in the ground, and found the blade quite convenient to do this. There were stones, damage is a duller edge, but not to the extent of what I expected...

End of test:

The blade was doing less, in the end, due to ground digging, and iron wire encounters, as well as stones whacking, the efficiency was much diminished, which seems normal to me..

conclusion
So this blade tested great! specifically for a 30 $ US blade!

The previous was done with blade in NIB state,

Next

The blade performed well, but to my taste is a bit too convex near the edge in some places, and it feels in terms of penetration.

It inspired to me some improvements:

The Hitam is a good blade, 10 cm from the handle are not sharpened, and pretty thick.
I also found the convex grind a bit too convex, so I reprofiled, as well as sharpened the blade on the whole length.
The reprofiling I did with 120 grit, rotative grinder, hands free...
The other modification is a piece of leather in the mouth of the scabbard, to retain the blade when gravity is reversed ;-) I also epoxied the inside of the mouth of the scabbard, to secure the two pieces together, and narrow the hold on the blade.

I have to test the modification now, it is much much closer to the survival G profile (check cliff's thread).

reprofiled
hitam-08.JPG

sheath
hitam-04.JPG
 
Ok, I did more tests today.

The reprofiling & sharpening did great, a good 20% increase in performance.

I did hit the wire again, again same minimal damage.

I got a blister on the little finger where it touches the handle.

Therefore, this is the new handle:

hitam-10.JPG

hitam-11.JPG


You can see my mighty field burnisher, and heavy/coarse sharpener, reprofiler.
 
Here's a comparison of handle size on survival golok and kelapa - which is much shorter but of similar weight:
sgkelapa.jpg

Sheath fronts:
gsheathfr.jpg

Sheath backs:
gsheathbk.jpg

The sheaths go under belt, with belt through loops to secure. So I haven't mixed up front and back. Notice the buffalo horn bands for adjustment.
 
This is very fascinating and exciting, and not only because this are blades I can afford! :)
What is the source of these "spring steels", does any one know? The Himilayan Imports khukries are made of spring steels recycled from old Mercedes Benz trucks, if I remember correctly. Is this something similar?
Martin
 
Hi Martin;

All the details are here:
Big Knives thread
Eventually I'll move some of the stuff here - but unfortunately I'm still wildly trying to get finished work before my vacation. The info from Suwandi is is in bold so it's easy to pick out.
Simple spring steel in these - the issue of note is the clay zone hardening/tempering.
I sure like my survival golok!
 
Thank you for the link, however I read the whole massive thing (very informative! ) but found no indication of where they get their steel. Also recycled leaf-springs from trucks? I am only curious, that's all.
Perhaps I missed it, that is a VERY long thread! I will try writing to Mr . Suwandi directly-
Thank you,
Martin
 
Singularity,
Great review and pics!
QUOTE: Have you tried checking hardness with a file around the chip?


QUOTE: Hardness could be checked with a new file, but if you have no previous reference or comparizon, forget it.

A file can be used, but it is not very useful, unless, as you stated have experience and know the hardness of the file.
Another crude method to measure hardness is the scratch test; this is done by scratching the unknown steel with a steel of a known hardness, if the unknown steel is able to be scratched, than it is softer than the known steel.
 
Martin:

It is meant to be spring-steel. Honestly, I do not think that M-benz spring steel will be superior to any other. I am pretty sure it is recycled spring-steel, as you'd hardly get antything better for 30 $US!
From my own tests, the spring holds as well as the Himalayan imports at equal hardness. The blades are differentially clay tempered, so they seem quite resistant too. What I find better, is that instead of leaving the blade unhardened, except the edge, like on the HI khuks, this clay hardening leaves the blade to a spring temper (some 45 RC) while the edge is at 55-58. Of course, there has been some reports of chipping... I generally test the hardness before use, and would not hesitate to draw the temper if too high, as to do this, I just need a torch and a bucket of water...

Frank:

I slightly disagree on the file testing. ;)
The hardness of the file will only tells you what is the maximum harness you can test.
You can use a file without experience, but then you need different blades with known hardness say ranging from 55 to 61. Any commercial blade will do, then you test them with the file, and get a feel of it, then you test the new blade.
Or you test the new blade, and try to find one you own and know the RC that would behave the same under the file.
FYI the Hitam must be just a little under my survival golok, I'd say between 54 and 56 RC

In the previous pictures, you'll see a stone on a handle, and a little file. This file, I use to test the harness, and as a burnisher (the handle). This little file is very precise in feelings.

I went into these modifications, because I like tuning things, not because it was really needed... I modify most my knives, and when they cost 30 $, I really have no reason not to do it.:D
 
Singularity :

The hardness of the file will only tells you what is the maximum harness you can test.
Click to expand...

The harder the file the crisper the action, thus when going by feel, which you can do with enough experience, you have to take into account the hardness of the file. For example a very hard file on a hard steel, will feel similar to a softer file on a softer steel. This is why people usually use a specific file for hardness checking thus you can build up a consistent level of resistance based on hardness.

-Cliff
 
Thinking about this - it really is essential to have one testing file now. Lots of files are just case hardened and vary dramatically. Lee Valley occasionally has sales on some old Nicholson triangular files - but lots of stuff sold in Canada is pretty poor.
 
Cliff:

The harder the file the crisper the action, thus when going by feel, which you can do with enough experience, you have to take into account the hardness of the file. For example a very hard file on a hard steel, will feel similar to a softer file on a softer steel. This is why people usually use a specific file for hardness checking thus you can build up a consistent level of resistance based on hardness.
Click to expand...

Well surely one day you'll change file. second, I never found a file whose hardness was anounced, and the whole purpose is to avoid the rc tester. So I still prefer my comparative method of trying to find a blade in the ones I own that behaves the same. It has the good advantage to be quite independant of the file.
 
Sigularity & Cliff,
You both make some good points regaurding file testing. The point I wanted to make is that files have widely differing hardness levels, so knowing it's approximate hardness (either by a hardness test or using it on known hardness samples), along with experience, is the way to (crudely) find hardness with a file test.
Another potential pit-fall with file testing, by comparing the "feel" of samples with known and unknown steels, is the differing wear resistance and alloy contents of the steels, 440V, 425M, and 1075 all at a 55RC hardness, are not likely to "feel" the same when you file them.
If you get a good Machinest's file, if the hardness is not specified you could probably get the hardness range from the manufacturer, in any case, hardness should be above 60RC or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top