|
Post by legacyofthesword on Apr 14, 2018 1:56:16 GMT
Is hefty weight a defining characteristic of kukris? Thick blade? Or is it all in the shape of the blade?
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by mrbadexample on Apr 14, 2018 2:03:28 GMT
Shape. I own one with an arsenal date of 1879, and it is very light. About the weight of a heavier kitchen knife. Granted, it is an exception from what I've seen, but light ones did exist.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 2:09:16 GMT
Is hefty weight a defining characteristic of kukris? Thick blade? Or is it all in the shape of the blade? Thoughts? I've heard CS Kukri machete described as KLO, or Kukri Like Objects, but as long as they have the word "machete" at the end, I feel it is an accurate description. I think anything 3/16" thickness or greater to be pretty much a kukri, provided it still has the distinctive blade shape.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 2:18:50 GMT
Shape. I own one with an arsenal date of 1879, and it is very light. About the weight of a heavier kitchen knife. Granted, it is an exception from what I've seen, but light ones did exist. I think the people of Nepal use small, light knives with the same distinctive shape for kitchen/edc duty, but the general term "kukri" is primarily used to describe a pretty thick and heavy chopper. Cold Steel kukri machete are NOT kukri...which is why the word machete is attached for distinction, as they do have blades that do fit (to me, anyway) the kukri definition.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Apr 14, 2018 2:30:53 GMT
Like with a lot of knife styles, there are different types of kukri. Different forms, different functions...all still kukri.
I've got a Khukuri House 15" sirupate that's a monster. Pushing two pounds, half an inch thick at its bend; just a huge, heavy knife. I've also got a much smaller, 10" service issue model that weighs in well under a pound and is about 1/4" thick at its fattest.
Then I have a mini. 3" blade, 1/4" thick, weighs a few ounces. They're all kukris.
As far as I'm concerned, any recurved knife with the karda/cho/whatever is a kukri. It's that little notch that makes the style to me. Not so much the size or weight, even the silhouette; those vary by type.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Apr 14, 2018 3:18:49 GMT
Defining a kukri precisely is a "Plato's man" problem [1]. To define a kukri solely in terms of the profile will let in things you probably don't want to call a kukri. But criteria such as heavy, thick, kaudi/cho, Nepalese, kukri-style handle, etc. can't be used as absolute restrictions either, since then you would exclude things that you probably want to call a kukri. Heavy? It isn't hard to find kukri with weights of 200-250g, without getting into tiny kukris. These light ones can have 8-10" of blade, so while on the small side for kukris, they're still large knives. Thick? I've seen from 5mm through to 12mm (for "normal" sized kukris, not tiny or giant ones). Kaudi/cho? There are old and new kukris without a kaudi/cho, some Nepalese and some Indian (and some modern, like Cold Steel). For an example (maybe a borderline example): www.ikrhs.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1403Nepalese? Even if we want to exclude modern Chinese etc. made ones as "replicas", we have plenty of old Indian and Afghan ones. Handle? Apart from the usual kukri handles, we find tulwar-hilted and kora-hilted examples. Do we count kukri-bladed socket bayonets? Functional? Do we count decorative Indian lion-headed kukri with unhardened blades as kukris? Most people would. 1. Plato defined man thus: "Man is a two-footed, featherless animal," and was much praised for the definition; so Diogenes plucked a rooster and brought it into his school, and said, "This is Plato's man." On which account this addition, was made to the definition, "With broad flat nails" (Diogenes Laërtius (1895), C. D. Yonge (Translator) The lives and opinions of eminent philosophers, (London, George Bell & Sons).).
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 4:26:45 GMT
Defining a kukri precisely is a "Plato's man" problem [1]. To define a kukri solely in terms of the profile will let in things you probably don't want to call a kukri. But criteria such as heavy, thick, kaudi/cho, Nepalese, kukri-style handle, etc. can't be used as absolute restrictions either, since then you would exclude things that you probably want to call a kukri. Heavy? It isn't hard to find kukri with weights of 200-250g, without getting into tiny kukris. These light ones can have 8-10" of blade, so while on the small side for kukris, they're still large knives. Thick? I've seen from 5mm through to 12mm (for "normal" sized kukris, not tiny or giant ones). Kaudi/cho? There are old and new kukris without a kaudi/cho, some Nepalese and some Indian (and some modern, like Cold Steel). For an example (maybe a borderline example): www.ikrhs.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1403Nepalese? Even if we want to exclude modern Chinese etc. made ones as "replicas", we have plenty of old Indian and Afghan ones. Handle? Apart from the usual kukri handles, we find tulwar-hilted and kora-hilted examples. Do we count kukri-bladed socket bayonets? Functional? Do we count decorative Indian lion-headed kukri with unhardened blades as kukris? Most people would. 1. Plato defined man thus: "Man is a two-footed, featherless animal," and was much praised for the definition; so Diogenes plucked a rooster and brought it into his school, and said, "This is Plato's man." On which account this addition, was made to the definition, "With broad flat nails" (Diogenes Laërtius (1895), C. D. Yonge (Translator) The lives and opinions of eminent philosophers, (London, George Bell & Sons).). So, would you also define CS Kukri machete as kukri? I think blade thickness and a certain size is a general hallmark, but I suppose at some point it all becomes kukri to me.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 4:37:50 GMT
Is hefty weight a defining characteristic of kukris? Thick blade? Or is it all in the shape of the blade? Thoughts? Hefty weight and thickness are GENERAL characteristics...or it can, of course, all be kukri. Maybe hyphenations, like kukri knife, kukri machete, kukri sword, etc...
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Apr 14, 2018 6:26:39 GMT
So, would you also define CS Kukri machete as kukri? I would not. I think that the CS non-machete kukris www.coldsteel.com/gurkha-kukri-in-01-steel.html are borderline, and their kukri machete is even further from a proper kukri. I wouldn't call their kopis machete a machete, their barong machete a barong, their gladius machete a gladius, either. I wouldn't call most tactical katanas katanas. Clearly, I'm some kind of conservative traditionalist. Some people would. Some people are happy to call recurved folders (like www.coldsteel.com/rajah-ii.html also from CS) "kukris". If, instead of a single "kukri" category, we had "traditional kukri" and "Western kukri", then maybe the machete could be a "Western kukri".
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Apr 14, 2018 14:38:58 GMT
Kukri is a general term applied to many knives, some are true kukris and too many, as Howler put it, KLOs. Weight is not the determining factor. Combat kukris have thinner blades making them lighter and more nimble. There are those designed as a farm tool that have thicker blades and are more massive. And of course points in between, but weight is not a criteria.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 19:05:00 GMT
So, would you also define CS Kukri machete as kukri? I would not. I think that the CS non-machete kukris www.coldsteel.com/gurkha-kukri-in-01-steel.html are borderline, and their kukri machete is even further from a proper kukri. I wouldn't call their kopis machete a machete, their barong machete a barong, their gladius machete a gladius, either. I wouldn't call most tactical katanas katanas. Clearly, I'm some kind of conservative traditionalist. Some people would. Some people are happy to call recurved folders (like www.coldsteel.com/rajah-ii.html also from CS) "kukris". If, instead of a single "kukri" category, we had "traditional kukri" and "Western kukri", then maybe the machete could be a "Western kukri". Those CS non-machete kukris (don't have one, but wish I did) are pretty amazing. In fact, Ka-Bar, Condor and Ontario have versions that are amazing tools. But, yeah, it probably should be "traditional/authentic" kukri and non traditional, and even that breaks into various categories, including the thin CS MLO/KLO's.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 19:10:21 GMT
Kukri is a general term applied to many knives, some are true kukris and too many, as Howler put it, KLOs. Weight is not the determining factor. Combat kukris have thinner blades making them lighter and more nimble. There are those designed as a farm tool that have thicker blades and are more massive. And of course points in between, but weight is not a criteria. Your right on the weight thing, though even "light" combat examples are relatively heavy, as I was imagining/comparing to the 2.8mm stock KLO and tiny knives some companies turn out with a downward curved blade and label (laughingly) "kukri", which really should NOT conjure the image of what a kukri is into a persons mind. The "traditional/authentic" label can probably be (and is) used pretty well in the labeling of kukri, though I have seen some modern companies put out examples that are real nice and I wouldn't mind having.
|
|
|
Post by legacyofthesword on Apr 14, 2018 19:54:12 GMT
So general consensus is that kukri's don't necessarily have to be too heavy, but they shouldn't be really light either. ...I'm just wondering where edelweiss is. This seems like the kind of thread he'd just love.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Apr 14, 2018 20:41:38 GMT
Probably still collecting data... Which, frankly, I look forward to seeing.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Apr 14, 2018 21:09:28 GMT
Kukri is a general term applied to many knives, some are true kukris and too many, as Howler put it, KLOs. Weight is not the determining factor. Combat kukris have thinner blades making them lighter and more nimble. There are those designed as a farm tool that have thicker blades and are more massive. And of course points in between, but weight is not a criteria. Your right on the weight thing, though even "light" combat examples are relatively heavy, as I was imagining/comparing to the 2.8mm stock KLO and tiny knives some companies turn out with a downward curved blade and label (laughingly) "kukri", which really should NOT conjure the image of what a kukri is into a persons mind. Old fighting kukri - ones designed more as primary weapons, to be used with a shield/buckler, to be used with a matchlock rather than a modern cartridge rifle or MG - can have weights similar to kukri machetes of similar length. Compared to these fighting kukris, the CS kukri machete is very short, so let us compare with the CS magnum kukri machete: 17" blade, 5" handle, 20.1oz. Two old fighting kukri (not mine, and photo not available thanks to Photobucket): 1. 21.5" blade, 6" handle, 24oz 2. 18.5" blade, 4.5" handle, 29oz While the machete kukri blades are thin, they're also slabs with edges ground on, while kukris have wedge-section blades, often hollow-forged. A rectangular blade is about twice the weight of a flat wedge-section blade of the same width and same thickness. The machetes are heavy for their thickness.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 14, 2018 21:26:28 GMT
Your right on the weight thing, though even "light" combat examples are relatively heavy, as I was imagining/comparing to the 2.8mm stock KLO and tiny knives some companies turn out with a downward curved blade and label (laughingly) "kukri", which really should NOT conjure the image of what a kukri is into a persons mind. Old fighting kukri - ones designed more as primary weapons, to be used with a shield/buckler, to be used with a matchlock rather than a modern cartridge rifle or MG - can have weights similar to kukri machetes of similar length. Compared to these fighting kukris, the CS kukri machete is very short, so let us compare with the CS magnum kukri machete: 17" blade, 5" handle, 20.1oz. Two old fighting kukri (not mine, and photo not available thanks to Photobucket): 1. 21.5" blade, 6" handle, 24oz 2. 18.5" blade, 4.5" handle, 29oz While the machete kukri blades are thin, they're also slabs with edges ground on, while kukris have wedge-section blades, often hollow-forged. A rectangular blade is about twice the weight of a flat wedge-section blade of the same width and same thickness. The machetes are heavy for their thickness. So more thickness than weight, if one is to even make a distinction, as any of those traditional kukri are incredibly thick at the spine. I have often wanted to purchase a HI or similar, as they are very beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Apr 14, 2018 22:18:36 GMT
Even HI are known for being very overweight for kukri, so they're not really a fair comparison here.
Taking examples from KHHI, who are also on the beefy side, their Nepal Army model (9" blade) is 425 grams. I have their 15" sirupate and they list it at 750 grams. I can tell you, it's fat and feels like it.
Looking at the antiques listed on Atlanta Cutlery, they say an old (pre-1890) Bhojpure (known as a heavy kukri) has a 17" blade that is 2 1/2" wide and 3/8" thick. That's pretty beefy. No weight listed, but I can imagine 700 grams or more.
They list WW1 issue models as 17 1/4", 2 3/8" wide, and 13/32" thick. That sounds hefty, too.
I wish Oriental Arms would list a weight on their stuff...
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Apr 14, 2018 22:50:43 GMT
Looking at the antiques listed on Atlanta Cutlery, they say an old (pre-1890) Bhojpure (known as a heavy kukri) has a 17" blade that is 2 1/2" wide and 3/8" thick. That's pretty beefy. No weight listed, but I can imagine 700 grams or more. That's 17" total length; blades are usually about 13". These are usually 500-650g. The bigger ones with 15" to 16" of blade are usually 800-900g. A bunch on lengths, weights, thicknesses for various old Nepalese military kukris: chinesemartialstudies.com/2012/11/05/identifying-and-collecting-the-nepalese-military-kukri/So more thickness than weight, if one is to even make a distinction, as any of those traditional kukri are incredibly thick at the spine. I have multiple examples as thin as 5mm at the base of the spine. Not what I'd call incredibly thick. 8mm to 12mm is common for big kukris, at the base of the spine, but I don't think that's unusual for traditional knives of that size (very common for Philippine bolos). Sure, there are thinner-based knives out there, but there are enough in the 1/3" to 1/2" range that I'd call it normal enough, rather than "incredibly thick".
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Apr 14, 2018 23:02:08 GMT
Oh, right. They looked pretty big in the pictures, so I just assumed the length was blade. Overall makes them significantly smaller, then. I'm not sure how common it is, but as far as thickness, I know my sirupate gets thicker into the bend and then thins out again to the tip. I don't know the exact measurements off hand, might get them when I get home.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,250
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Apr 15, 2018 0:09:46 GMT
Even HI are known for being very overweight for kukri, so they're not really a fair comparison here. Taking examples from KHHI, who are also on the beefy side, their Nepal Army model (9" blade) is 425 grams. I have their 15" sirupate and they list it at 750 grams. I can tell you, it's fat and feels like it. Looking at the antiques listed on Atlanta Cutlery, they say an old (pre-1890) Bhojpure (known as a heavy kukri) has a 17" blade that is 2 1/2" wide and 3/8" thick. That's pretty beefy. No weight listed, but I can imagine 700 grams or more. They list WW1 issue models as 17 1/4", 2 3/8" wide, and 13/32" thick. That sounds hefty, too. I wish Oriental Arms would list a weight on their stuff... Thick, robust, beefy seem to at least be a general theme, though you (and others) pointed out that it is not always the case. I do know that there are ceremonial/execution models that can take a buffalo head off.
|
|