Khukuri or KLO?

Status
Not open for further replies.
arbiter

arbiter

Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
468
Fellow forumites-In your opinion, what distinguishes a true Khukuri from a KLO? Origin, as in where the object was made, or by whom it was made,intended end user/owner,historic lineage,etc. Your input welcomed and anticipated.
 
To me the biggest differences are the type of steel used, the weight and thickness of the blade, and the handle. Kabar and Cold Steel make Kukri Machetes and they have the same general shape but you may find that they do not perform as well as an HI khukuri because they do not have as much weight and thickness in the blade. HI khuks that I have seen usually have blade thickness of 1/4, 3/8, 1/2 inch. Kabar Kukri Machete has blade thickness of 3/16ths for example. So it is lighter weight and may not chop as well as the heavier HI Khuk. The handles on HI khuks are wood or horn, pommel at the end, and usually rings for grip. US Kukri machetes have a poly pro or kraton handle. I don't know for sure but I think the weight and balance of an HI khuk may be different than a KLO or kukri machete. But IMO I think it boils down to when you get a Kabar or Cold steel it is a "kukri machete" so the steel is not as good quality and the blade thickness is much thinner. It retains the shape of a khukuri but you probably wont get the chopping performance out of one that you would by buying a more expensive real "khukuri".
 
For me, a Khukuri should be any of the various patterns of Nepal, made in Nepal. There are historical versions made in India that are acceptable but I wouldn't consider the current Indian manufacture now as true Khukuris, just knock-offs. All other efforts made by any commercial or custom maker would fit into the KLO category.
 
In my mind a traditional kukri is made by hand where the KLO is a modern machine made kukri. They both have advantages and disadvantatges.

The traditional kukri takes a long time to make and the quality is hit and miss at best, everything depending on unpredictable quality metal and the skill of the kami making it. The advantages are that the kukri can be made for specific tasks such as heavy choppers, light choppers or military service. Not only can they be made for specific tasks, they can also be made for specific individuals. So a heavy chopper for a big tall man will be different than a heavy chopper for a shorter man. Some down sides are poor quality scabbards, unstable wood handles and poor hardening of the blades.

The modern machine made kukri uses high quality metals, uniform designs, modern handle materials that are comfortable and last a long time and very good sheaths that hold the kukri tight, they have multiple attachment methods and they drain water well keeping the carbon steel from rusting.

Personally I think they are both very good and it comes down to individual preference. It is hard to say that one is "better" than the other.
 
zP1020825.jpg


(1st two pieces from the right; Busse TTKZ(KLO) and HI modified AK(OG) with purple heart handle, rehandled recently (Pic from lastvisiblecanary).

I look forward to score a TTKZ in the future but now i would like to get a CS version.If you can find yourself a Blackjack Reinhardt it's good slasher!
 
arbiter said:
Fellow forumites-In your opinion, what distinguishes a true Khukuri from a KLO?
Click to expand...
Woman with Nose Ring and Nepalese Kukri 1880s Source ebay.jpg
Above: Woman with real Khukuri
What distinguishes a true Khukuri? In one word - uniqueness. KLO's predictably are the same weight, balance, blade quality. Nothing wrong with that at all. But the beauty of the Kami beaten, skillfully heat treated, polished, and if you're lucky as shortwinger wrote custom made to your needs... this makes a Khukuri a Khukuri (IMO). Also, there are no two Khukuris that are the same because of the way they're made.
 
Last edited:
I know of a person who used to drop around here back in the days that has Master Bura's attention; he's probably the very few that requested him to make his customs in asian size. I was blessed to have handled one of the hybrid- the sirupati with the Chitlangi handle.
It feels totally different.
 
I always see the reference to true khukris being better choppers, due to weight, balance, grind, etc. I understand for an Ang Kola, it makes sense those are some thick choppers. But what if I do need a machete type object? Are the sirupati and chitlangi better for this than the Kabar Kukri-machete? I'm not splitting wood for the fire everyday. I'm clearing brush and small trees (<12 in), would a chitlangi be better for this than a Kabar? Why?
 
I would go with a machete for the light vegetation. The sharp thin flat blade works best to "grab" thin brush where the kukri mostly just moves it out of the way and has a hard time cutting it. The kukri machete is also a good choice, and yes the Ka-Bar and CS are both very good. I'm sure HI could make something like that but not sure what it would be called. I think both the Chitlangi and Sirupate will be too fat and heavy for brush with the larger V bevels stopping it from being effective on light flimsy brush.
 
Xylum,

The Tamang is good at doing what you want to.
Like what Bill mentioned, you will need a thin edge to slash through light shrubs like what we have here in S.E.A.
Tamang_001.jpg
 
From what I've heard, traditionally, khukuris were around 3/16" thick. The modern Nepalese ones made for export are much thicker than the khukuris which were classically made and used by Nepalis.
 
Personally, I feel that the line being drawn between Khuk and KLO is a little unrealistic.

A covered wagon made by modern manufacture is still a covered wagon; I very seriously doubt you will find people calling it a "covered wagon like object". Is it a traditional covered wagon? No, but it's still covered and it's still a wagon. The improvements in modern manufacturing do not make my Suzuki any less of a car than a Model T Ford. It still fits the definition of a car.

In my mind there are certain features that define a khukuri, if it has those features (then regardless of manufacture) in my mind it's a khukuri. If it has some but not all of the features then call it a khukuri like object. Just my thoughts.
 
Maybe it's the cho;) Most blades people consider khukuri have them, most they call KLOs don't. I've kind of gotten away from differentiating between khuks and KLOs. I have to say Bill's explaination of hand made vs. machine made makes sense to me. If a recurved blade means khukuri to you, then they're all khuks. To some it means cho, flared pommel, no sort of guard, hand forged, and made in the Nepal region. Historically, khukuri from Nepal have taken on many different shapes and characteristics. Kora handled khuks come to mind, but they're still khuks. Ultimately, it's just academic, but interesting conversation. Take care.
 
That's perfectly acceptable. Everyone is welcome to their own definition; and discovering those differing definitions is what the OP was about (I hope anyways...).
 
Duzzy said:
Personally, I feel that the line being drawn between Khuk and KLO is a little unrealistic.
Click to expand...
I am kind of new in the Khukuri World. But I have found out that verbal fights have occurred over this very "line". In other words, what is a real Khukuri? Everyone has an opinion on it. What I have done is view past pictures of Khukuris, read various books on the topic, and listen to folks who study this area. What I found is important and useful to me. But everyone must find their own answer to the question.
questions-are-the-answer.jpg
 
Traditional khukris are KLO; they were made in a seemingly endless variety of shapes and sizes. However, a real kukri is a three dimensional object, not only does it have the bent shape we see in profile, but the blade iteself has a cross dimension that makes it a very good cutting and chopping knife. This is where most KLO fail. The tendency to use factory flat steel stock and grinds leaves numerous flat surfaces which look good, but which will tend to generate a high level of friction and binding when cutting through heavy materials. To appreaciate this you need to look at the whole knife and not just the profile. The Cold Steel machete may look like a kukri in profile, but the cross section is just a thin rectangular box.

n2s
 
not2sharp said:
This is where most KLO fail. The tendency to use factory flat steel stock and grinds leaves numerous flat surfaces which look good, but which will tend to generate a high level of friction and binding when cutting through heavy materials. To appreaciate this you need to look at the whole knife and not just the profile. The Cold Steel machete may look like a kukri in profile, but the cross section is just a thin rectangular box.-n2s
Click to expand...

N2S,
Do you mean the hollow-forged surface of the khukuri itself that resists binding/reduce friction when cutting across a large surface area?
I do believe that a high bevel (Bonecutter/Ganga Ram) chops a lot more efficient with this construction. Some have claimed their Sirupatis did the same thing but i wonder if the object of cutting is similar in mass and center of gravity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top