|
Post by randomnobody on Sept 19, 2015 22:06:27 GMT
I've seen quite a lot of that "new" one on eBay, selling as antiques. I think I found it on a forum somewhere, a post several years old, saying it was an old Windlass model; or, perhaps, from whoever Windlass used to source their stuff from. Thought about picking one up, just because it's the closest I've seen to a proper original, but I can't justify the prices sellers are asking for the condition they're in, and advertising them as "antique" is just laughable.
That bottom one puts me in mind a LOT of my bigger dagger...
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Sept 20, 2015 0:38:05 GMT
Here are mine: I bought the top one new, in the late 1980s. Horn grip. Maker unknown. 745g, scabbard is 210g. The bare blade is old, with forging flaws, delaminations, cracks in the spine from being stood on by camels or similar. The blade isn't quite straight, but is straight enough to be usable if I put a grip on it. The rim around the tang is a separate piece, soldered(?) on. 670g. The bottom one is recently acquired, supposed to be late 19th century. Scabbard has strips of iron/steel around it, and tin chape and throat. Horn grip with nails/studs. 515g, scabbard is 252g. As can be seen from the weights, the modern one is heavy for its size. Not unusably so, but it does carry a lot of that extra weight around the tip. To compare the three, the thicknesses of the spines and blades (halfway between edge and spine) are, at the base of the blade, mid-blade, and near the tip are:
| base | middle | near tip | Top spine | 10.4mm | 10.3mm | 9.0mm | Top blade | 3.8mm | 3.8mm | 3.0mm | Middle spine | 9.5mm | 9.5mm | 6.9mm | Middle blade | 3.7mm | 2.8mm | 3.1mm | Bottom spine | 8.9mm | 8.2mm | 5.4mm | Bottom blade | 2.8mm | 2.9mm | 2.7mm | Hey, Timo, does this look familiair: www.ebay.com/itm/Antique-Vintage-Old-Russia-Russian-Turkish-Indo-Persian-Short-Sword-Kinjal-/321737944126?hash=item4ae9136c3eThis auction's been up and down numerous times since this thread started, and likely long before. It's one of three, maybe four, that I've seen selling a very similar piece as antique, and the price is usually $250+... (Drat, your photo was an attachment so it didn't copy; oh well)
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Sept 20, 2015 5:06:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Sept 20, 2015 15:53:05 GMT
I think that might have been the same thread I'd found in some of my early searches. Lots of good info there, a great read. That other one has some serious bling issues. I wonder if the steel is any good, but I'm not $400 worth of curious.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Nov 3, 2015 22:57:18 GMT
Resurrecting this thread for anybody who might have been interested in the Windlass model, guy on eBay's got one up for auction starting at $125 plus shipping, 3 days 18 hours left as of this posting: www.ebay.com/itm/Charay-Khyber-Sword-Knife-Museum-Replicas-Windlass-Steelcrafts-Charas-Churea-/351568014290?hash=item51db162bd2:g:C6YAAOSwA4dWN5lsHis picture really illustrates my biggest gripe about this piece well: That spine. Just looks like they started with a thick bar and ground each side down a bit and called it done. According to the guy's measurements, the spine itself is 5/16" thick, whereas the blade proper is 3/16" thick. That's only 1/16" either side, and if I had to guess, I'd wager on little to no distal taper, and it goes all the way to the tip just like that. It just looks awful. I keep browsing hoping to find one super cheap to do a proper writeup (alongside Deepeeka's [ kultofathena.com/product.asp?item=AH3452 or deepeekausa.com/khyber-knife.html depending who has the more accurate, current photos...] versus my antiques, for giggles...but... ugh...I just can't like this... thing.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Nov 26, 2015 19:42:03 GMT
|
|
worldantiques
Member
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiques
Posts: 81
|
Post by worldantiques on Jan 2, 2016 1:57:41 GMT
These are your basic Indo-Persian knife/dagger shapes and names, a choora is not a karud and neither the choora or karud is a pesh-kabz etc. While a few examples will blur these descriptions this is generally correct. Choora Karud Pesh kabz Kard Khanjar Jambiya Khyber knife Khanjarli Chilanum
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jan 2, 2016 14:26:02 GMT
Thank you for the info. Am I correct to assume the primary distinction between karud and choora is in the hilt, then? Likewise, a pesh kabz and karud differ by the curved versus straight blade? You wouldn't happen to know if there is a name (I've not been able to find one) for that sudden, rounded drop of the edge into the hilt on the choora and karud? What can you tell us about the term "salawar yataghan" in regards to the Khyber knife? Very nice examples, by the way. For anybody else, I'm watching a couple on eBay...just saying.
|
|
worldantiques
Member
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiques
Posts: 81
|
Post by worldantiques on Jan 2, 2016 18:36:07 GMT
Thank you for the info. Am I correct to assume the primary distinction between karud and choora is in the hilt, then? Likewise, a pesh kabz and karud differ by the curved versus straight blade? You wouldn't happen to know if there is a name (I've not been able to find one) for that sudden, rounded drop of the edge into the hilt on the choora and karud? What can you tell us about the term "salawar yataghan" in regards to the Khyber knife? Very nice examples, by the way. For anybody else, I'm watching a couple on eBay...just saying. The choora hilt is distinctivly different than a karud, it has grips composed of two or three sectors of metal, ivory, horn or a combination of all, with the pommel tips extending down. The karud has a massive handle with full slab grips. The karud and pesh differ in the blade with the karud being straight and the pesh being curved. In the 1800s the khyber knife had several names, charah or chhura was common, salawar yataghan is another 1800s name from at least 1880, it is mentioned in "An Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms: Being a Classified and Descriptive Catalogue of the Arms Exhibited at the India Museum, Earl Wilbraham Egerton Egerton, 1880. "Affghan yataghan" goes back farther to 1860, it may refer to the khyber knife or the Afghan sword. Baily's Magazine of Sports & Pastimes, Volume 85, Baily bros., 1906.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jan 2, 2016 19:21:39 GMT
Good stuff, thanks for sharing.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 7, 2016 4:22:00 GMT
Bought another one, will update when it arrives. Shouldn't have, but I kind of maybe have a problem. So yeah. What's money, anyway?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2016 2:40:38 GMT
Seems like one is never enough. When I try to change up the game and try a different flavor, it just leads to less money and space. I have a twelve step program but that just leads to a dozen new toys. We are doomed, in the end, so why not appreciate what appeals..
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 19, 2016 0:22:54 GMT
No tracking updates on the new one in over a week. I'm getting itchy again. Luckily, nothing is available anywhere I look.
Now I'm window-shopping lohar, thinking it's time to finally get a long flyssa, or a yatagan, or a pulwar...I should probably have a dhal...
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 24, 2016 22:45:40 GMT
After spending ten days in limbo, presumably with US Customs, my "new" Khyber has now spent the last four days hanging out in New Jersey, apparently. Each hour passing without an up date only serves to boost frustration; WHY ISN'T IT MOVING??
Excuse me while I assume the fetal position and twitch uncontrollably.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 27, 2016 19:52:48 GMT
After a grueling wait, just shy of three weeks, my "new" Khyber is finally in. It's narrower than the others, and light weight compared even to the smaller of the other two. Some pics: Updated family photo: Specs: Weight in Scabbard: 1lb 12.3oz/804g Weight of Sword: 1lb 1.8oz/507g PoB: 5.75"/14.5cm OAL in Scabbard: (app.) 31"/78cm OAL Knife: 27"/68.5cm Blade Length: 21.75/55cm Blade Width (at grip, midway, 1" before tip): 1.9"/4.9cm, 1.33"/3.4cm, 0.42"/1cm Blade thickness (at grip, midway, 1" before tip): 0.09"/0.24cm, 0.1/0.25cm, 0.08"/.2cm Spine width (at grip, midway, 1" before tip): 0.35"/0.9cm, 0.35"/0.9cm, 0.18"/0.35cm Grip Length: 4.87"/12.5cm Grip thickness: 1"/2.6cm Most interesting thing about this knife is that it's clearly seen use. Chipped and rolled edge aside, there are gouges, or what katana folk would recognize as "kirikomi" in the spine toward the tip. Handling is very user-friendly, probably due to the narrower blade. It's only just a few hairs shorter than my biggest, but weighs over 9oz/260g less. Spine an blade thickness differ by about a millimeter. Such minute differences create a very different sword, indeed. I think this one also has the most drastic taper of the bunch, so that quite likely helps.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Mar 5, 2016 1:23:32 GMT
I noticed the other night that my latest acquisition was not so smooth in and out of the scabbard, so I checked the obvious places and eventually discovered some significant warping along the blade. I immediately set to straightening it, didn't even think to get photos first, and I've found that it's incredibly easy to bend. Odd for a T-section spine, I would think. Perhaps this one was not so well tempered, or has had enough abuse in its life that it's just a bit soft now. Given the sheer number of nicks I'm inclined to think this one was simply a bit soft. One of the worst spots is actually so neatly in line with those gouges in the spine that I have to wonder if it wasn't the same encounter that did both. You can see it in the photo in my previous post, along with the very rolled tip. Gotta give it credit, though, it handles like it's not even there. Super light in the hand, even more so than its shorter bone-hilted cousin. I still prefer the biggest of the bunch, that kind of authority in the swing is just hard to resist. It's heavy, but once you get it moving, it's not stopping. These other two feel far more finesse-friendly, but I don't think they'd hit as hard. Still kind of wanting to pick up a Windlass and/or Deepeeka model, and maybe one of that other mystery maker like Timo has. There are two Windlass models on eBay for about $300 with shipping, one from Poland and one from France, I think? Anyway, that's quite steep and thus a deterrent, considering my last two antiques cost the same. Likewise, whoever made the other one, there's one on eBay for another $300+ here: www.ebay.com/itm/222021502986?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AITI should find out which shape the current Deepeeka models will come in, whether its the more accurate profile shown on Deepeeka's own website and most retailers (see here: deepeeka.in/khyber-knife-155.html ) or the weird profile shown on Kult of Athena here: www.kultofathena.com/product.asp?item=AH3452Either way, at over two pounds, that Deepeeka is FAT. Sure, the Windlass weighs a few ounces more, but it's also four inches longer. Anyway, I'm torn on picking up one more antique, or moving on to another type of sword; either a flyssa or a yataghan...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2016 20:50:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Mar 5, 2016 21:35:09 GMT
I'll have to have a look at that link later.
Windlass' design is so close, but misses on some critical points. For starters, I've never seen an original (granted, I've only seen photos of a few dozen or so) with an upward-curving tip. All I've seen have had either straight or recurved spines, and mostly-straight edges, save the gradual taper. They also fell a bit short with the T-section spine, instead settling for a very minor sort of rectangular section that isn't very wide and doesn't really taper like it should, especially at the tip, where instead of disappearing into the point it just keeps going beyond it, at the same dimensions as it started. They missed in the grip, too. To call it fat would be oversimplifying, but they seem to have given it a shape closer to the dagger patterns, with the reverse taper widening toward an almost ear-style pommel section, rather than the straight cylindrical grip section into a sort of hook or "beak" style pommel section like original "sword-length" patterns. For the daggers, this shape works nicely in a reverse or ice pick type of grip, but is less kind to the blade-forward grips in my own limited scope.
I quite like the shape and size of the grips on my originals, they are comfortable and allow for easy handling, except maybe the latest is a bit thin for my liking. There is some wiggle to the slabs, too, which adds to the feeling of frailty, but the grip is suitably secure, nonetheless.
I would very much like to see some other manufacturers have a go at the design, but it's such a small niche that I can't blame them for not. I once thought perhaps Cold Steel might have a shot, as Lynn Thompson put out a video following a visit from Nidar Singh Nihan (a subject we shall not get into) wherein he excitedly extolled the virtues of numerous Indian weapons, including what was referred to as a "choora" and a pesh kabz, even. But I have seen no indication that he intends to reproduce either in the years since, and I'm thinking even if he did, it would just be a gussied-up reissue of the Windlass...
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Mar 12, 2016 17:57:36 GMT
So I perused that thread a few days ago now, and it got me thinking about what I've been seeing and pondering on my biggest Khyber. I'm not entirely sure if it's some level of "temper line" to use the common expression, or just an odd pattern of oxidation along the edge groom whatever might cause it. I'd intended to get some photos up for discussion, but kept not getting around to it, and now that I've had some time this morning, one men trying to get my camera and lighting to cooperate with me, largely unsuccessfully. My room is awful for lighting. I have only a central ceiling fan, with "daylight" brightness CFL bulbs and two side-by-side windows in one wall. I tried going outside door that natural light goodness, but it's cloudy today, so that didn't go well. My "good" camera, old as it is but still better than my current cell phone, died on me while I was trying to work out angles and settings. I think I've done okay with my phone, though; a recent update to the software seems to have made autofocus and exposure metering a little better, plus I tweaked the exposure a bit in manual mode, anyway. The photos are quite dark as a result, but I hope they show what I was trying to show. First up I have ten photos covering the big three Khybers. Starting with the largest, which shows the most "activity" of the bunch: Second is the bone hilted model, which has only a faint sort of cloudy line just above the edge bevel (really hard to get a photo of): Finally, we have the latest addition; the one with the super-easy-to-bend blade. This one I couldn't see anything on: For comparison, here is a series of other blades with "hamon" to include two antique wakizashi (in poor polishes), a Citadel Trapper, and a Kris Cutlery scramasax:
|
|
Luka
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,848
|
Post by Luka on Mar 12, 2016 19:51:10 GMT
It's hard to say if it's a temper line or a different polish where the blades were sharpened...
|
|