WWII blade distal taper

[bennyjenkins]

Are they meant to have one? Mine doesn't, and as a result feels like it's quite farther along the tool side of the tool/weapon spectrum. The WWII is marketed as being a good combination of the two, but for this particular blade, that isn't the case. I'm curious if this is a manufacturing detail that has fallen away as the older kamis have left the fold. Any thoughts?

 

[Scara]

I can't speak for the older kami, though I do have a WWII by Lacchu who was an assistant to I think it was Bura. Mine does not have distal taper, and comes in at 18 inches and 28 ounces. What I can say is that using a kukri as a weapon is very different from using most knives and swords. It's a heavy blade, and not the most subtle, and it isn't meant to be wielded gently.

 

[conan11]

I love the rounded front of the WW2 for chopping . when I am almost through a log I can use the very front rounded part for chopping and stop just before I go all the way through and just push the log apart so I hit no dirt.
I would bet that a push cut with that rounded front would be devastating on a foe.

 

[Maya_steel]

Are they meant to have one? Mine doesn't, and as a result feels like it's quite farther along the tool side of the tool/weapon spectrum

I feel the same way. I have a 16.5" WWII by Bhatka. It handles beautifully and chops very well, but I've always thought the thickness and rounded tip put it more on the tool side of the kukri spectrum. I've never handled original ghurka kukris from the WWII era, but based on pictures and videos they seem to have thinner blades and more acute points.

Of course the HI WWII was designed to be extra tough and can still function as a wicked chopping weapon. It would be cool if they came out with a "fighter" version with similar dimensions to the historical originals. I recently bought a 12" Foxy Folly - a thinner blade with a sharp point - it's much more of a fighting knife. Love both though!