SN1

J

Johan van Zyl

Joined
Oct 11, 2000
Messages
372
Blackdog, good to have you back. You intrigued me with your remark on another thread about the SN1 being your favourite.

Now here I am spouting ignorance once again, in my questions I would like to ask you (or other forumites) about the SN1. The SN1 is the current Gurkha military knife, used by Gurkha units etc. But surely the SN1 history does not go far back! In WW II I think it did not exist. The khuk Craig markets as the "WW II" is larger than the SN1, but otherwise it look the same.

So am I correct in the following assumption: "The knife we now know as the SN1 was developed from the WW II, probably in the 1950's. It is very much like the WW II except it is smaller. As such the WW II is the SN1's precursor."

Please let me know if I'm looney in this assumption. I know no better, as this has not yet been discussed as far as I can recall.
 
You're quite right, actually. The SN1 is a result of equipment downsizing. Over time, issue khukuris have tended to get smaller and smaller as (perhaps sadly), the tradition of the Gurkha with his khukuri has slowly been replaced or modified in the "modern" queen's army. No disrespect intended toward the queen, or the british, or the gurkhas. But that's the way the decrease in size was explained to me.

------------------
Craig Gottlieb
Gurkha House
Blade Forums Sponsor
 
A good point. I think Johan has just turned on the GH History Channel again. Go for it, buddy!
 
Maybe they mean post-WW2 as being synonymous with the 1950's. I wonder if the same thing could have happened in a transition from WW1 to WW2. The WW1 era khukuri pics on the forums seem to be more than a little different than the WW2.

Whether or not the SN1 is a downsized WW2 or just another khukuri that was adopted is an interesting question. If one looks at the GH Catalog, the Gangawal is very, very close to the SN1.

I remember asking Craig once if he could get a custom rosewood handled SN1 for me, and it was out of the question for Lalit. He feels the SN1 is a design that should not be changed. Evidently the Gurkhas feel the same way. The GH "Jungle Fighter" is only a tactical variation on the same theme.

Anyway, while the 1950's seems like a reasonable guess, it's only that. Kamagong, you've asked a good question that I hope will receive some clarity real soon. Thanks....Dan

BTW, I do believe that I'm catching the history bug that Johan's got.

[This message has been edited by Lt. Dan (edited 04-20-2001).]
 
The spray and pray bug has stricken us.
Look at the downsizing of the bayonnet.
Can anyone even use a rifle as a blunt instrument anymore?
Can anyone answer the question,"What is the spirit of the bayonnet?".
 
Johan,

Although I appear to be outnumbered in my Khukuri of choice (The SN-1), I can only say that in my opinion it is the best compromise between size/weight and performance for my intended use.

I tend to look at knives, especially Khukuri's, in a different way than most folks. For a long time, the tools I had at my disposal were those I could carry with me. When everything you have is carried on your back or pulled along behind you, your view on what is important boils down to pounds, ounces and inches.

In my daily work environment, knives could be more important than shoes if things got "extreme" (which they sometimes did). Knives were tools that saw hard use and were often used as trade goods. You might be amazed at what a decent knife can be traded for in some places. If I had the choice between two 16 oz fixed blades and a single, 2 pound fixed blade I would choose the lighter knives. It may take a little longer to perform some tasks (like chopping) but the task could still be accomplished with the lighter knife and I had a spare knife to use or trade. The SN-1 is light enough to carry all day but heavy enough to do anything I may ask of it. Such is my theory of Khukuri relativity
smile.gif
.

As to why the issue Khukuri has been downsized over the years; I really don't know. I would suspect it has to do with the way we fight our wars today as compared to 50 or 100 years ago. The average combat soldier today still carries an enormous load on his back, but because of the "downsizing" of his ammo, food supplies and other equipment he is able to carry more of the essentials required to sustain himself for longer periods of time. Again, it's my theory (and probably full of holes), but i'm sticking with it, I think
confused.gif
.

Blackdog
 
Ah yes, Blackdog, you've uncovered something of interest here. The downsizing from WW1 to WW2 to SN1 reminds me of the recent history of our own service rifle cartridges: .30-06 to .308 to .223! Perhaps the WW2 was considered to be "over-bore". This tactical logic makes for interesting debates, and trade-offs like you mention are a result. With the average Gurkha being 5'3", who am I to be critical of this military decision? Besides the SN1 is the standard issue, but in the field these warriors can use any khukuri they choose.

The SN1 blade is even more graceful than the WW2 to me, and may be better suited to their needs. After all, nobody driving a big desk in D.C. made this decision for them, so it's not like the M-14 to M-16 situation. I wonder if there really is a best one-size-fits-all khukuri. Even if 2 guys are the same size, they might chop differently and different khukuris could be their best choices.

Now, you bring up an interesting point that runs counter to conventional popular knife thinking when you say you prefer a lighter blade, even if you have to work harder to do a bigger job. Many folks say it's easier to use a big knife for a small job than vice-versa. I can see your thinking behind this if you're carrying a SN1 for many days at a time. That's not the same as just going back to the truck to get another khukuri for a bigger job.

Lastly, you're hardly the underdog in sticking with the SN1, as the Gurkhas make for darn good company.
tongue.gif
 
Hello

I was doing a research today and came across an information that may be of your interest.
I found a short article about the gurkhas fighting in Borneu, in 1966, their harness is shown along with line drawing and a caption saying something like "1944 model harness and equipment" - and there is a khukuri in it, of course. If the book refers to the equipment as 1944 issue, I suppose we should assume they still were usin WWII style khukuris as far as 1966, correct?
Anyway, the information is not conclusive as it could refer to the harness only.
Just something else for you to consider.

------------------
Ivan Campos
Full-time knifemaker...finally!

http://www.bitweb.com.br/users/campos
 
Ivan,
I believe you are on the right track. The Gurkha Rifles by Nicholson shows a drawing labelled "Rifleman, Borneo, c. 1960" which depicts a WW size khukuri (worn at the left rear, strangely enough). Chappell's The Gurkhas has a photo of the 19th Gurkhas deplaning in Cyprus in 1974. It clearly shows a SN1-size khukuri (with what appears to be camo tape on the scabbard) worn at the customary right rear.
Anyone have any images from the period 1966-74?
Berk
 
I'll scan the book and post it sometime tomorrow... if someone send me a khukuri for the job! You can't blame me for trying!
I have to get the book at my uncle's house so expect the scans for late afternoon.

------------------
Ivan Campos
Full-time knifemaker...finally!

http://www.bitweb.com.br/users/campos
 
Ivan: Thanks for the work! I personally think they did a dis-service (no reverse pun intended) downsizing - I LOVE the WWII.

------------------
Craig Gottlieb
Gurkha House
Blade Forums Sponsor
 
Sorry for the delay.
Here it is and the caption says clearly: "This 1944 standard combat equipment was used by the 7th in Borneu", and then the descrition of it.

View


Hope it helps.
Waiting for free khukuri now...



------------------
Ivan Campos
Full-time knifemaker...finally!

http://www.bitweb.com.br/users/campos
 
Kamagong, thanks for your question about my "1950's" statement. Lt. Dan immediately answered the question perfectly on my behalf. Thanks buddy! Yes, it was only an assumption - I have no evidence whatsoever to support the statement. I only assumed the transition period (for there MUST have been a transition) to lie approximately in the 1950's. Something may still crop up in the forumites' contributions to narrow it down. Nothing conclusive yet, I fear...
 
CRAIG: Can you ask Lalit when the Gurkhas changed their issue khukuri to the SN1?

(And would you also ask about the origin of the Cheetlang, while you're at it?!)
 
Some time ago I came upon the following. Someone wrote about the BAS (British Army Service). I can only assume it refers to (is the same as) the SN1. "This is the style currently used by Gorkha forces. A similar knife is issued in the Nepalese Army." Another extract reads: "There is a standard issue knife for both the Gurkha Regiments in both the British and Indian Armies. This is like HI's BAS without the scrollwork on the buttcap. Our Gurkhas are allowed to carry any khukuri while in battledress and some of these knives are the older, larger blades from WW II." I think these extracts are relevant to this topic.
 
Well, it stands to reason that since HI used to buy khukuris that were made by TBs people, the "BAS" is very similar to the "SN1." However, since HI had no involvement with Lalit, one could say the knives were different (it's Lalit, and not TB, who actually does the selling to the Gurkhas). Does the HI BAS (or should I say, did it) have the year made and "NEPAL" on the blade? That's what, in my opinion, differentiates a military style khukuri from the real mccoy. Also, please don't take this post as a slam on HI! It's not my intention to make trouble here.

------------------
Craig Gottlieb
Gurkha House
Blade Forums Sponsor
 
Craig, thank you for your enlighening answer. I don't believe you intended any slam at all and no offense should be taken by anyone. While I'm replying and have the space, let me add on a quickie. I got hold of an ivory khukuri kagas katne. (yes, the WHOLE khukuri is elephant ivory!) It's about 6 inches long. With your permission, I'll send along a colour photo of it to you by snailmail and request you to please post the pic for the appreciation of the forum.
 
Can I just step in on the point about the 1944 Standard Equipment in Ivans posting. It refers to the 1944 pattern web equipment illustrated not particularly to the knife. 44 pat webbing was on issue fron WW2 up till the late 50's & early 60's. 1954 pattern came in slowly to the british troops and the gurkha's, although first class soldiers, were never treated better that second class when it came to equipment issue. The normal position for the kukri was at the left rear, i would suggest that the drawing shows it on the right because the is also a large (& heavy) parang or machete on the left as well as the standard issue bayonet, putting the kukri there as well would have been Bl**dy uncomfortable as well as making the whole load lopsided. There is a story about 44 pattern webbing (if youll excuse me going way off topic), which was always notoriously uncomfortable, that it was designed by a woman who hated men and thought that it was an excellant form of revenge. Total bollocks of course but interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top