Why do people complain about the weight of Himalayan imports kurkri? For instance my 18" sirupate kukri most people have said it's too heavy...I don't see much of the downfall with this...mostly because an axe/machete can be heavy too...any thoughts?
It depends on what you want them for, as well as your own physique. I do favor a lighter kukri than most HI kukris, but my interest in them is primarily from a martial arts point of view. People who use them for lots of wood chopping tend to prefer a heavier kukri as it bites deeper and requires less effort because the kukri's weight does the work for them. There are some people who do argue that HI kukris are non-traditional or inauthentic because they are heavy, but again this depends on time period and use. Historically most kukris have been at least somewhat weighty, but during WWI and WWII the trend was for kukris used by the Gurkhas to be lighter, and these are the kukris usually cited when saying that HI kukris are too heavy.
One of the nice things about HI is that it is possible to get lighter or heavier kukris, either by watching the deals of the day, or by talking to Yangdu to find a lighter one, or even commissioning a lighter one.
Scara is on point! I prefer lighter blades, and I look out for them on the forum. I have a Bashpati at 18" overall, and 17oz, superlight. I also have a BAS 15", at 13oz, and several Reti at well under 1 oz per inch.
I have a 1930 Nepali Army Bhojpure with a horn handle that is 27 oz and 17" overall. It is about as "authentic" as you can get but still not a light blade. To me the weight issue really comes down to having the experience to pick the right specs for the what you are comfortable with and the tasks that you are using the blade for.