My first traditional kukri/khukuri

Gimmick · Jan 24, 2016

Hi everyone,
I recently bought my first traditional khukuri (I will say kukri from now on). I made sure not to buy something with a lion head or too many decorations. From the pictures it seemed like the real deal. Now that I have it in my hands, it is much smaller than I expected, but I think it's quite old and it shows a lot of 'use'. It's hard to say if the scabbard or even the handle are the original ones. In any case it seems to be built as a true compact and lightweight kukri. The blade length is about 24 cm, the thickness of the spine 7.5 mm, the belly depth is 4.6 cm. The spine is nicely tapered and has a concave section near the 'sweet spot', I hope that is noticeable in the picture. The more kukri I look at, the more I appreciate this one as a masterpiece, but not because of fancy decorations or an intricate cho/kauri. You occasionaly see kukri with single/double/triple fuller (chirra) in the main body of the blade, but I haven't seen any clear examples of this concave shape along the length of the spine. And it's much more subtle than ang khola / hollow forged. Also I gather the 3 spine grooves are not that common. The horn handle has all kinds of damage and repair and has a no-nonsense brass buttcap to match the rudimentary cho/kauri. The modest dimensions and potentially unprecedented forging technique (please tell me if you know of other examples of this concave spine) make for a weight of only 325 grams!

What do you guys reckon?

It makes my CS Gurkha Kukri look huge. Shape & geometry wise though, they are almost exact copies but at a different scale, with the only difference being the CS having a slightly more pronounced point, which is how they actually wanted it to be: "With Dr. Gyi's input, Thompson designed a longer, narrower point for the Gurkha Kukri with more distal tapering to the spine. This resulted in a thinner, sharper point which can be deeply driven into thick, tough targets with minimal effort."

Whatever the age, I'm pretty happy with it. I love traditional kukri's and KLO's, so please don't take this opportunity to lecture me on how rubbish CS is and why you would only buy from whoever in Nepal

Frige · Jan 30, 2016

Hey mate, I have no idea if it's good or not because a good khukuri photo is sometimes harder to get than a picture of a yowie, I am starting to like the more lightweight kuk's though. What's it like to chop with?
I'm away at our farm now and have primarily been using three kuk's this weekend, a bone cutter for general use around camp, a CAK for hunting and killing and my ww2 model that weighs 580 grams for a 3 hour hike I did this morning.
All these Blades are between 780 and 580 grams and I wouldn't really ever want anything heavier.
Some of my blades are over 1 kg in weight and whilst they look amazing, I never use them.
What's that lightweight blade like to use?

Gimmick · Jan 30, 2016

Yes I hear the modern kuk's can be real heavy, which is impressive, but not particularly fun to carry around. I haven't used mine for chopping so I can't share any experiences. It might be that the lower weight compromises the chopping power, but I'm afraid I won't be finding that out, since my blades are just collectables. I've read elsewhere that the weakest part on traditional kuk's is the handle, the combination of partial tang and bone or horn makes for easy fractures. However, in Nepal replacing a handle was no big deal, so it didn't really matter.
I have seen plenty of kuk's over at the IKRHS forum that have around 12 inch length and still weigh 4xx grams (under 500). So all these 'sharpest crowbar ever' kuk's aren't the only solution. Then again, Gurkhas aren't the biggest of men and they had no trouble carrying WWII and BSI models around, which weigh between 550 and 800 grams, like yours.

Spyder59 · Jan 30, 2016

Nice kuk. I have the Ontario Kukri, and I love it.

Gimmick · Mar 13, 2016

I might be talking to myself here, but I won't let that bother me

Today I got my second traditional kukri. It came from a man who bought it some 30 years ago in Brunei. Now Brunei might be a strange place to find a kukri, but it does make sense:

Gurkha Reserve Unit

The Gurkha Reserve Unit (Malay: Unit Simpanan Gurkha) is a special elite guard force in the Sultanate of Brunei. It was formed in 1974 A.D and maintains approximately 2,000 Gurkha.[1] Unit members are all British Army veterans. The unit functions primarily as a praetorian guard that protects the sultan, the Royal Family, and major/important oil installations. They also work as a special forces directly under the command of the Sultan as well as alongside Special Forces Regiment and Special Combat Squadron.

It is subordinate to the Security and Defence Section of the Brunei Ministry of Home Affairs.

And there is this: British Forces Brunei including 2nd Battalion, Royal Gurkha Rifles

It's obviously not a British Military Style kukri, no rivets or full tang, though the scabbard is kind of military style. It has nice details and it even has some brass inlay on the blade itself. It is pretty large, but surprisingly light. My CS Gurkha Kukri weighs in at 600 grams on my kitchen scales, this new much larger one at only 630 grams. CS is 43.5 cm overall with blade length of 31 cm, while this is 48 cm overall with a blade length of 37 cm. Belly depth 5.2 cm, spine width 8 mm. Balance is really nice, almost feels lighter than the CS. I couldn't be more pleased with my purchase!

philllll · Mar 13, 2016

Cool! That new one from Brunei looks like very nice quality, definitely not tourist junk. Nice find.

Gimmick · Mar 13, 2016

Here are two pictures of a similar, but even more luxurious kukri, which makes it likely my kukri belonged to an 'elite' gurkha from the Gurkha Reserve Unit in Brunei.

"The Kukri is a regimental marked Kukri from the 7th Gurkha Rifles, being the 7th Duke of Edinburgh's Own Gurkha Rifles. Most likely a presentation piece of the day."

Shavru · Mar 14, 2016

Brunei is indeed not an unusual place to find Ghurkas. Ghurkas have been an important part of the British Army since 1815 (while the British East India Company and therefore the British Army were fighting AGAINST the Kingdom of Nepal). As a part of that Army they have fought literally around the world particularly within the British Empire. Primary Ghurka regiments have been historically and/or currently based in Malaysia, Borneo, Hong Kong, India, Singaport and Brunei as well as the Nepalese army.

Here is a link to one of HI's pages with the first set of pictures and information about Kathimoda or Kathimora Style Khukuri's I think you will enjoy reading
http://www.himalayan-imports.com/khuk1.html

It looks like your collection is starting off well.

Gimmick · Mar 14, 2016

Yes I came across that page before. that is some fine craftmanship. In general I am more attracted to shapes than decorations. The below comes close to my ideal. I haven't decided if I like the smooth or angular back more, I need to own more examples of both

Above are WWI, but some MK II/MK43 fit my taste too. For me it's all about a nice curve and full belly but not too much. CS pretty much nailed it for me.

Gimmick · Mar 14, 2016

I notice EGKH still sells several blades with a very similar decoration to my 'brunei' kukri, but for the same blade length they weigh considerably more (almost twice as much). Only the thinner sirupate style blades get close, but are still heavier even with 1 cm less belly depth. I'm sure the 11 or 12 mm spine has something to do with that

I'm in doubt whether my small kukri is a boys kukri or a jungle kukri, either way it's probably plenty dangerous in the right hands.

FinnSetanta · Mar 14, 2016

I'm no expert, but you seem to have pretty good taste in kukris. Be warned, though - it's an addictive and expensive hobby

Shavru · Mar 15, 2016

While I won't run down CS as I have a few CS blades that I like of my own, I will say that the blade grind of CS KLOs is not really efficient for chopping. A convex grind like you see on many newer traditionally made khuks is just more effective. Khukuris over time have become thicker than they were historically as they transition from combo weapon and tool to primarily tool. That extra weight in the right spot makes chopping MUCH easier. Now if you are just collecting for the love of them then collect what you enjoy

If you really like the older blades there are lots of great ones out there but as Finn says it can be an EXPENSIVE hobby. Just watch for the tourist stuff. Lots of made in India "Aged" new stuff on the market. But with care you can find lots of great stuff. Have fun.

Gimmick · Mar 15, 2016

I am indeed wondering why the blades have moved from a 7 or 8 mm spine to 10 to 12 mm spine. It could be as you say: primary use as tool. It could just be bad examples leading to even worse examples and so on. If all prime examples are in museums and in the houses of collectors, what are modern kami's going to base their products on? Another trend is the larger bolster and the cho moving away from the bolster. What purpose could this possibly have? Besides, why as a manufacturer would you want to use more material (steel, brass) in your product, unless you can use inferior/cheaper materials?

Personally I believe it has little do to with (Western) use, and more with (Western) ignorance. I'm not saying people who buy modern kukri are stupid, but I hear so often 'I don't mind the extra weight, it makes for easy chopping and I keep it in the back of my truck so I don't carry it around much'. Is the kukri adjusting to the use, or is the use adjusting to the kukri? Can we find examples of modern villager kukri that local people actually buy and use? Are they still light weight?

That it can be an expensive hobby, I believe that instantly. Antiques dealers are always trying to make a buck. The fun challenge is finding cheap examples from normal people. For example adult 'children' that inherit a piece from a deceased parent and have no clue what to do with it, so they advertise it on the local equivalent of craig's list. That's how I got my brunei kukri. That's how I hope to get many great items the coming 30 years! (classic motorcycles and cars mostly) A lot of gathered 'wealth' is not considered valuable or desirable by the upcoming generations (who rather have a smartphone and buy eco products to ease their consience). Those that still enjoy analogue pleasures are gonna have a wonderful time.

WhiteKnuckle · Mar 15, 2016

Gimmick said:
Personally I believe it has little do to with (Western) use, and more with (Western) ignorance. I'm not saying people who buy modern kukri are stupid, but I hear so often 'I don't mind the extra weight, it makes for easy chopping and I keep it in the back of my truck so I don't carry it around much'. Is the kukri adjusting to the use, or is the use adjusting to the kukri? Can we find examples of modern villager kukri that local people actually buy and use? Are they still light weight?

Different strokes for different folks.

I'm unlikely to be engaged in jungle warfare anytime soon, but I might want to chop some firewood down into kindling. So for me a cheap EXGH makes sense, cause I'm not going to feel bad beating on something built like this:

Whereas that Brunei you picked up is beautiful (and don't get me wrong, I want one!), but would just sit around collecting dust.

Gimmick · Mar 15, 2016

Sure, if I didn't live in a city in one of the most densely populated countries in the world, and had some actual forest to legally play in, I'd certainly get a cheap chunky kukri too, because why not?
All I can do now is collect traditional kukri (and dust) and wait for WWIII lol

Spyder59 · Mar 15, 2016

Some nice kukris in this thread. Great op.

Shavru · Mar 16, 2016

Inferior materials? well, I don't believe that is correct. In reality the Western attitude of every knife should be capable of being used as a crowbar is one of the reason for the increase in thickness. If you read through the old threads you find many times were people abuse a blade then say "if it was well made it shouldn't have broken." In Nepal they would never think of doing some of the stupid "Watch this" kind of things people think a knife should be warrantied for here. They take care of their tools, which is what a Khuk is and they use a crowbar if they need one instead of a knife. As far as better materials, I will use Japanese Nihonto as an example as that is my personal expertise. The historical metal Tamahagane is produced from iron sand, it is extremely poor quality steel full of impurities and with very uneven carbon content. Yet through the age-kitae process it becomes a good enough metal. But no one with any knowledge would claim it is a better steel for swords than say T-10 or L6 Bainite or ect ect ect... So in this case (as with many) we find that historical metals are not as good as what is currently available. In Nepal the metal of choice is currently 5160 Spring Steel. This steel is low chromium alloy steel, with around 0.7 chromium - which combined with a small amount of silicon (0.2%) results in an extremely tough and durable blade. 5160 is definitely not an inferior material, in fact it is a significant improvement over previously available steels. But remember when talking "historical" steel the bessemer process wasn't invented until 1867 making the process of creating large quantities of higher quality steels possible. Prior to that small batches of steel were time consuming, difficult to manufacture and expensive. Additionally The Treaty of Sugauli, signed in 1816 at the end of the Anglo-Nepalese War heavily limited the industry imports (including steels) allowed. So it is more than reasonable to believe that steel during this time was not the best available by any means. Still with ingenuity and talent Nepali Kamis were capable of making beautiful blades, similar to the way Japanese smelters used inventive techniques to make the best use of the steel they had.

Gimmick · Mar 16, 2016

Maybe I was a bit unclear what I meant by inferior materials. I wasn't implying historical kukri have better steel than modern ones. I have no clue and based on your story they probably didn't have a lot of quality steel back then. My point was more about sourcing the steel. I've read elsewhere on this forum and on the web that kami's had preferred 'suppliers', the springs of (scrapped) Mercedes-Benz trucks and then brand X and so forth. Now that these have run out, people say they look further and further away (in India or maybe even beyond) to find decent springs. I can imagine that a kami who is looking to make some money selling 'sharpened crowbars' will need a lot of material and will not be too picky as to what he is getting. So the higher demand by Westerners and their particular taste for thick blades might mean they don't always end up using their 'metal of choice'. Again I have no proof for this, just a hunch about human nature. But that's why I said inferior slash cheaper, because perhaps the modern steel production you speak of has made quality 5160 Spring Steel more readily available and sourcing 'big' quantities is not an issue at all. But can you tell me: is all 5160 Spring Steel created equal? Isn't there a reason they had favorites?

Gimmick · May 28, 2016

Found another beauty, same quality and age as the 'Brunei' from the looks of it. Very similar style of bolster and horn handle, though the buttcap is different. And it turns out my first kukri was not that small after all, this one is has only a slightly longer blade. Nice brass inlay and decorations. The cho is beautifully done too. I'm very happy with it!

Gimmick · Jun 24, 2017

Get a load of this! I was browsing the Dutch version of craigslist when I see an ad for a kukri. It looks like they are selling my Brunei krukri! I look twice, and I see the pictures are not mine, but the shape of the blade (and grind), the overall size, even the style of the cho and buttcap look like a copy. I have to look at my own kukri to see the difference in the art on the blade (3 brass sections in stead of 2). You'd swear that it was made by the same Kami! But is it possible that two kukri made by the same hands, found their way to Holland and later to me? Well, it is at least probable. The twin is not from Brunei, but it IS from SE Asia. According to the seller, it was sourced from Burma and belonged to the 2nd Batallion of the 5th Gurkha Rifle Regiment to be exact. It does actually check out if Wikipedia is to be believed:

"The 5 Gorkha Rifles (Frontier Force) is an infantry regiment of the Indian Army comprising Gurkha soldiers of Indian and Nepalese origin. It was formed in 1858 as part of the British Indian Army and served in the First World War and Second World War. The regiment was one of the Gurkha regiments that was transferred to the Indian Army following independence in 1947. The regiment was formerly known as the 5th Royal Gurkha Rifles (Frontier Force). Since 1947, the regiment has served in a number of conflicts, including the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. It has also participated in peacekeeping operations in Sri Lanka."
(...)
"The 2nd Battalion served in the Far East in the Burma Campaign as part of the 17th Indian Infantry Division and was involved in the retreat of the British Indian Army from Burma, they were one of four battalions chosen to fight as the rearguard at the Sittang River, which formed the border with India. When the bridge over the river was blown up, preventing the Japanese forces from entering India, many of the regiment were left on the wrong side. The regiment was involved in the re-entry into Burma in 1943 where three members of the regiment were awarded the Victoria Cross. After the war, the 2nd Battalion was re-issued with new uniforms, equipment and transport and posted to Tokyo in Japan as part of the British Commonwealth Occupation Force.[8]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Gorkha_Rifles_(Frontier_Force)

Fortunately I was able to buy this beauty, so here they are together! The Brunei one as stated before has specs in [x], the Burma one is slightly larger, specs in (x).
Blade length: [37 cm] (37.5 cm)
Overall length: [48 cm] (49.2 cm)
Belly depth: [52 mm] (56 mm)
Spine thickness: [8 mm] (8 mm)
I don't have any proper scales now, but I assume the Burma one is slightly heavier.

Does all this mean this Kukri is actually WWII, and so is my Brunei one? I know the Brunei was bought over 30 years ago in Brunei, so it is at least pre-1980. But now I have reason to believe it is much older.

Hope you enjoyed this reunion as much as I did. Do you believe like me that it was the same Kami that created both kukri?