Some time ago Kohei wrote to me and asked if I'd test a Tora Khukuri. There has been curiosity and questions about this new company. Recent examples from Auction were not entirely flattering. Kohei knew I chopped wood and wanted an honest appraisal on a regular Tora blade. I didn't approach this lightly; many of you recall the story of the guy who was on his way to buy a throwing Hawk and just stopped in Himalayan Imports for a quick look at what the hell was a Khukuri?
I never got the Hawk.
I've been curious about other khukuris, especially Tora, as people said they had an excellent product. People also said they had a substandard product.
I was curious enough to pay the shipping to get the blade over here. It was a friendly and generous gesture on Tora's part to provide the 'specimen', and to their advantage if the blade survived my testing, as you and I share a high regard for one another.
Of course, Tora did not know I'd broken a couple HI blades two years ago, shortly after finding the place. Single handedly, I might add.
It was my idea if there was a catostrophic failure I would not review the blade; other than that, all bets were off.
I asked Rusty if he thought it was alright to test this Khukuri. He said, sure, bring it on out and tell us what you find.
There are no pictures, and I apologize. I spent some time getting shots of wood being cut, close ups of the blade's construction, etc. But my computer does not recognize my camera, and I wanted to get what I'd learned out now.
Yesterday I finished the last step of my usual test of a new Khukuri from HI. The finisher. I swung the blade as hard as I could at several different conditions of Pine. The first wood is hard and filled with resin, the second half green, and the third just a standard dry piece. The WWll khuk from Tora is still whole. This is about the most heavy duty khuk they have. It weighs 26oz and is a tad less than 19.5" in length. The thickest part of the blade's spine is .284" , just over 1/4" The blade is an inch and 3/8's wide in front of the cho, and about 2.5" wide at the broadest portion of the blade. It looks very much like a HI M43 on a diet.
The wooden handle is very attractive with lively grain, as are the Karda and Chakma. It does not have the end cap of HI but rather an elongated diamond shaped plate of metal peened to the end of the tang. You would enjoy looking at that- it is different. This plate centers the handle but does not go to the edge- which is exposed wood. The Khuk is beautiful.
I'd heard Tora blades came sharp. This was but not as sharp as expected. Soon after chopping though, the edge was sharper still, and I presume it lost a burr. It did not have the mirror finish of HI. It was well polished but had a satin finish- like you'd get with 800 or 1000 grit sandpaper. The edge was obviously convex. Fit and finish were excellent, as was the meeting of the scabbard with the knife. It has the bolster Yvsa likes. (The scabbard is brown and the frog like that of a BAS, btw.) But the blade did have very slight depressions and images from the hammer. It had a single light fuller. It was not as clean/level a surface as an HI, though it reminded me very much of a Kesar Chitlangi I have, which shows the same very slight uneveness.
I cut through a half green 6" diameter pine log with the Tora WWll, and a 2.5 pound 20" HI Villager. I also brought out the Kesar Chitlangi as at 25 oz and 19.5" as it was close to the Tora spec. Only the Villager would penetrate deeply enough to stick- the other two did not on the initial cut.
The Villager went through the log in 3 minutes. I took my time and turned the log as I cut for each of the blades. The WWll went through in 5 minutes. I didn't time the chitlangi but it acted similar to the WWll
I tried the test again and to my surprise this time the two blades tied at 3 minutes. That's not fast to you guys, but my back is giving me moderate to severe pain this last month, and the important part of the test was to try and duplicate the same conditions for each. This was one of the questions to be answered: Does a thinner blade cut as well as a thicker one? Actually though, the edge profile for the khuks was very similar despite the differences in weight and spine thickness. I use the heavy Villager for lopping off branches, usually with one blow, from a fallen tree. The WWll could not do that, but then, the Chitangi couldn't either. So a question might be better phrased as, "how much weight should you have to cut what type of material?"
So, what did I find out? Not that much. This blade has an entirely different aspect to it than does an HI. It is thinner. Blade speed is quicker, with less effort but you make more strikes for chopping. In a way it's like the Big Bore Vs Small bore cartridge comparison. Historically khukuris have thinner blades than do HI, don't they? It's a large chopping knife leaning towards the machetee, and HI is a large knife leaning towards the axe. I've heard from forumites who were here before me that many wanted a more slender blade from HI. And I think the blades have become more slender- but not as slender as Tora. That's good; because I like what HI does. If my WWll is representative of Tora, I like what they do too.
The edge held, and is still sharp. And because it's slender it does something my HI's have not- it actually 'rings' out sometimes when striking wood. I got a real kick out of that.
It would be interesting to see how far the Tora would go before destruction, but I'm not Cliff Stamp. If Tora wants to find out, that would be the route.
This is not a tourist blade. I think there's room in the world for Tora to offer a fine product. I like mine and so does my son, though his favorite khuk is still in the safe.
On a final note, I brought my UBE out and wacked away at the logs. It was a cutting fiend. It would stick on the first cut like the Villager. Makes me think all these blades should be judged on an individual basis.
munk
I never got the Hawk.
I've been curious about other khukuris, especially Tora, as people said they had an excellent product. People also said they had a substandard product.
I was curious enough to pay the shipping to get the blade over here. It was a friendly and generous gesture on Tora's part to provide the 'specimen', and to their advantage if the blade survived my testing, as you and I share a high regard for one another.
Of course, Tora did not know I'd broken a couple HI blades two years ago, shortly after finding the place. Single handedly, I might add.
It was my idea if there was a catostrophic failure I would not review the blade; other than that, all bets were off.
I asked Rusty if he thought it was alright to test this Khukuri. He said, sure, bring it on out and tell us what you find.
There are no pictures, and I apologize. I spent some time getting shots of wood being cut, close ups of the blade's construction, etc. But my computer does not recognize my camera, and I wanted to get what I'd learned out now.
Yesterday I finished the last step of my usual test of a new Khukuri from HI. The finisher. I swung the blade as hard as I could at several different conditions of Pine. The first wood is hard and filled with resin, the second half green, and the third just a standard dry piece. The WWll khuk from Tora is still whole. This is about the most heavy duty khuk they have. It weighs 26oz and is a tad less than 19.5" in length. The thickest part of the blade's spine is .284" , just over 1/4" The blade is an inch and 3/8's wide in front of the cho, and about 2.5" wide at the broadest portion of the blade. It looks very much like a HI M43 on a diet.
The wooden handle is very attractive with lively grain, as are the Karda and Chakma. It does not have the end cap of HI but rather an elongated diamond shaped plate of metal peened to the end of the tang. You would enjoy looking at that- it is different. This plate centers the handle but does not go to the edge- which is exposed wood. The Khuk is beautiful.
I'd heard Tora blades came sharp. This was but not as sharp as expected. Soon after chopping though, the edge was sharper still, and I presume it lost a burr. It did not have the mirror finish of HI. It was well polished but had a satin finish- like you'd get with 800 or 1000 grit sandpaper. The edge was obviously convex. Fit and finish were excellent, as was the meeting of the scabbard with the knife. It has the bolster Yvsa likes. (The scabbard is brown and the frog like that of a BAS, btw.) But the blade did have very slight depressions and images from the hammer. It had a single light fuller. It was not as clean/level a surface as an HI, though it reminded me very much of a Kesar Chitlangi I have, which shows the same very slight uneveness.
I cut through a half green 6" diameter pine log with the Tora WWll, and a 2.5 pound 20" HI Villager. I also brought out the Kesar Chitlangi as at 25 oz and 19.5" as it was close to the Tora spec. Only the Villager would penetrate deeply enough to stick- the other two did not on the initial cut.
The Villager went through the log in 3 minutes. I took my time and turned the log as I cut for each of the blades. The WWll went through in 5 minutes. I didn't time the chitlangi but it acted similar to the WWll
I tried the test again and to my surprise this time the two blades tied at 3 minutes. That's not fast to you guys, but my back is giving me moderate to severe pain this last month, and the important part of the test was to try and duplicate the same conditions for each. This was one of the questions to be answered: Does a thinner blade cut as well as a thicker one? Actually though, the edge profile for the khuks was very similar despite the differences in weight and spine thickness. I use the heavy Villager for lopping off branches, usually with one blow, from a fallen tree. The WWll could not do that, but then, the Chitangi couldn't either. So a question might be better phrased as, "how much weight should you have to cut what type of material?"
So, what did I find out? Not that much. This blade has an entirely different aspect to it than does an HI. It is thinner. Blade speed is quicker, with less effort but you make more strikes for chopping. In a way it's like the Big Bore Vs Small bore cartridge comparison. Historically khukuris have thinner blades than do HI, don't they? It's a large chopping knife leaning towards the machetee, and HI is a large knife leaning towards the axe. I've heard from forumites who were here before me that many wanted a more slender blade from HI. And I think the blades have become more slender- but not as slender as Tora. That's good; because I like what HI does. If my WWll is representative of Tora, I like what they do too.
The edge held, and is still sharp. And because it's slender it does something my HI's have not- it actually 'rings' out sometimes when striking wood. I got a real kick out of that.
It would be interesting to see how far the Tora would go before destruction, but I'm not Cliff Stamp. If Tora wants to find out, that would be the route.
This is not a tourist blade. I think there's room in the world for Tora to offer a fine product. I like mine and so does my son, though his favorite khuk is still in the safe.
On a final note, I brought my UBE out and wacked away at the logs. It was a cutting fiend. It would stick on the first cut like the Villager. Makes me think all these blades should be judged on an individual basis.
munk
The steel was too soft.
