TUSK , Uluchet , Himalayan Imports and Gurkha House khukuris

This comparison came about mainly as Craig Gottlieb of Gurkha House asked for a comparison of the khukuris he was selling against those from Bill Martino of Himalayan Imports. Some other knives were included in the comparison as the are of similar intent and the contrasts in shape and size would be informative.

Specifications

The construction details for the various blades :

The total length on the khukuris was measured from the middle of the butt cap to the end of the blade in a straight line perpendicular to the butt cap, the blade length was measured in a similar fashion. For the Uluchet the length of the blade was taken as the height of the blade face, as normal for axes. For all the blades, the handle length is the usable grip length, the space in-between any guards and butt-caps. The thickness and width of the handle refer to where the bottom of my hand is be located using a firm grip. On the khukuris this is the thinnest part of the handle.

As for the steel specifics, the khukuris are forged to shape from carbon steels, usually springs, so they will be similar to 5160. They are edge quenched in water and thus have a differential hardening, the spine is much softer than the edge which is usually 56-60 RC. The TUSK is made from O1 using a stock removal technique and has a 62 RC edge and a spring tempered spine. The Uluchet is made with stock removal from D2 and has a uniform temper of 56-58 RC. All the knives have a very blade heavy balance except for the TUSK which is close to neutral and thus fairly light in hand compared to the other knives.

The sheaths are also very different. The natural sheaths of the Uluchet and khukuris will tend to retain corrosion inhibitors and even absorb water off of the blades. Both the TUSK and the Uluchet have open bottomed sheaths so the water will flow out while it will collect in the khukuri scabbards. The TUSK's Kydex sheath also comes with a loop on the bottom for a leg strap. Impact durability is a severe problem with the TUSK sheath as Kydex is easily fractured when cold, the leather wrapped khukuri scabbards on the khukuris are much more resistant to this type of damage and the plain leather Uluchet sheath pretty much ignores impacts. Kydex is however much more wear and cut resistant.

The G10-like grip on the TUSK is easily the most durable, It can be hammered with and on with no problems and is very cut resistant and is electrically and thermally isolated from the blade. The Zytel handles on the Uluchet are not quite as tough, but still take a dedicated effort to damage and they are easily replaced. The wooden handles of the khukuris will also resist any effort of direct damage, but can crack if exposed to extremes in humidity. Additionally the TUSK and the Uluchet can be easily be used with a lanyard. Khukuris generally are not used in this manner as the lack of control would be a problem.

UPDATE, it would have been informative to be more descriptive of the edge properties. Along with the thickness, the bevel width and angle should be included to give a complete perspective. I was still just discovering the basics of how edge geometry effected performance when this review was written.

Chips a flyin' - lots of wood work

The blades were used over a variety of wood cutting, from the limbing out small branches up to chopping down small sticks (eight inches). The TUSK excelled on the lighter chopping, with greater penetration due to the thinner profile. It could easily limb out trees and similar tasks with much less force needed on a swing. It was also the easiest to use for the lighter work because of the more neutral balance. In cramped in quarters and in precision work the much smaller Uluchet was the clear choice. While it does not have the raw chopping power of the bigger blades it performs very compares well in terms of its size and weight. The khukuris stand out when thick wood is cut as the full power of the blade heavy balance can then be used. The Ang Khola readily pulls ahead of the Service # 1. To get an estimate of the relative chopping ability on small woods, the blades were used to buck up some sticks. The details :

This was just light chopping, forearm snaps. The reason being that this was about the maximum power that could be developed with the TUSK. Even with the lighter hits, the khukuris and Uluchet were much more fluid in the wood. The Ang Khola in particular would cut much more wood in a given time, with less effort than the TUSK as it was very close in penetration and saw much less wedging. The Service #1 and TUSK cut similar amount of wood in a given time. As power was increased on the swing, taking advantage of the blade heavy balance of the khukuris and Uluchet, the Ang Khola easily pulled ahead of the TUSK and the Service #1 greatly closed the gap in terms of raw penetration, and pulled ahead in terms of wood cutting speed. The Uluchet was still behind in both respects. It is however much lighter than the other blades.

Concerning handle ergonomics the TUSK's grip excels in both security and comfort. The handle of the fifteen inch Ang Khola is next in line but is significantly less ergonomic. The grip on the Service #1 is significantly worse because its thinner and shorter it tended to move around in hand, and the point on the butt-cap would be very abrasive under such circumstances. The Uluchet's grip has a couple of sharp corners that are problematic, in particular the back of the rotation stop tended to cause a blister fairly quickly. This was later easily fixed with some sandpaper.

None of the blades suffered any extensive edge damage during the chopping. The edge retention was seen to be best on the TUSK, then Uluchet and Ang Khola and finally the Service #1 . Only the Service #1 took any significant edge damage, small dents which were easily fixed with a few minutes on a stone. The butt-cap also came loose after about four hours of chopping, the handle was however still secure.

Out of the wood lot, into the scrap yard

The knives were used to cut several sections out of the roof of an old car. The khukuris easily chopped holes in the sheet metal with the Ang Khola easily ahead of the Service #1. The Uluchet had no problems but took a little longer. The TUSK could not chop the metal effectively, and could only function as a chisel using the other blade as makeshift chisels. The khukuris worked best being a mallet as the Uluchet was hard enough to broke several chunks of the hard chrome coating off of the spine of the TUSK. The blades were then stabbed into the roof ten times. None showed any damage except the Service #1 which had about one centimeter of the tip bent three to four millimeters to the right.

After all the metal hacking, all the knives could still cut up fabrics, seat belts and foam. The Uluchet had no chipping or indentation and only needed some minor work with a ceramic rod to restore it to optimal. The khukuris showed some slight indentation but nothing severe. The Gurkha house one needed five minutes on the x-coarse DMT and the Himalayan Imports just passes on a butchers steel, light work with a fine DMT, and a few strokes with the ceramic rod to finish, around four minutes in total. The edge on the TUSK showed the most damage and needed the most work to restore. About fifteen minutes of honing was required on the x-coarse DMT bench stone and then finished with the fine. The edge still had some small chips present which took about a half hour to hone out.

Testosterone rush subsides, light cutting work

With the edges resharpened, the blades were used for a wide range of light cutting work which included skinning chicken, slicing cardboard, fabrics and rope, and cutting metal strapping. With materials that just required light surface cutting (like skinning) the Uluchet in its folded up form was the blade of choice. The balance was nice and close to neutral and the curved face eliminated any point tears. It was also the smallest blade and thus handled light precision work very well. On deep cutting the TUSK was clearly ahead due to its relatively slim profile. The the Uluchet is fairly awkward for such work, with the Ulu like profile. On loose materials that don't bind, the thick blade stock of the khukuris isn't a disadvantage any more, and they cut very well. The TUSK still does better, but not by as much. When the materials started to get harder such as stiff plastics and light metals the TUSK really pulls ahead as the serrations can easily rip into the materials whereas the other blades just slip around and cannot start a slice. In general, the more neutral balance of the Uluchet and TUSK also make them easier on the wrist will less induced fatigue.

A check for stiffness

Before going too heavy, the knives were just checked for stiffness. They were layed on a table and with on hand on the handle and the other on the spine, they were leaned on to see how they would bend. The TUSK was found to bend very easily, and could even bent to fifteen degrees with just one finger. The khukuris were much stiffer and the handle had to be kneeled on to allow enough force to just flex the blades a few degrees. The Uluchet was stiffer still, and only the grip would bend. For comparison Dennis Saccher who posts as Cobalt on Bladeforums repeated this with a few of his Cold Steel knives:

The 5/16 inch thick Recon Scout did not flex at all and just lifted my hands off the table. The Recon Tanto had some flex before it lifted my hand off the table and the SRK had very little flex before it lifted my hand off the table. By the way I put only 3 inches of the edge of my Cold Steel knives on the table because they are shorter than the tusk or Trailmaster.

As expected, the Cold Steel knives, being fully hardened are much stronger than the TUSK which has a significantly softer spine.

Pry bars, we don't need no stinkin' pry bars

The blades were locked in a stump at two different places and subjected to heavy prying. The first trial was at about halfway on the blade, and the next put the force on just just three to four inches of tip. The Ang Khola ignored both efforts. The TUSK and the Service #1 khukuri both took a permanent bend when the tips were heavily loaded. The bend extended about six to eight centimeters from the tip on both and was about three degrees with the TUSK and eight degrees with the Gurkha House khukuri. The TUSK could be resheathed the Service #1 could not. The Gurkha House khukuri was easily straightened by reversing the prying motion.

The Uluchet was tested with the whole blade embedded in the stump. The steel parts were very stiff and showed little to no bend however handle flexed easily past 45 degrees and as a result the stop pin holding the handles together at the bottom was sheared off and the handles themselves took a slight permanent bend of a degree or two. The bend was straightened by prying in opposite direction. To test the effect of the loss of the stop pin the Uluchet was used for a hundred chops into a large log. Using a loose grip and whipping chops the handles will flop around a bit, however with a tight grip the loss of the stop pin is not significant. In either case it does not effect the security of the lock.

and then just the edges take some strain

The blades were driven into a piece of 4x4 and used to break out pieces of the wood. The khukuris and Uluchet did this easily without harm and did not even flex significantly while doing so. However under just light force, pressing down with my forearm, the TUSK suffered gross blade failure. Large pieces of the blade broke away leaving a hole about six centimeters long and two centimeters deep. This was the same test that broke the last TUSK.

UPDATE, in the years since this happened, I have repeated this with many blades. I have never seen a failure of this type since, even on very cheap knives. It simply isn't possible to exert any significant amount of force in this manner and most knives will simply ignore the applied load as it isn't significant enough to even bend them significantly.

Overview

Summaries and comments on individual performances have been added to the individual knife review.