Arisaka identification

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Blindstitch

New member
I was at Cabela's last week and saw a small custom Arisaka. All the tag said was 7.7 on it an no model number.

It looked like a carbine and was very short. Maybe even as small as an 18-20 inch barrel. I believe the rear sight elevation only went up to 500.

The question I really have is did they put any markings on these guns to identify the cartridge fired out of them? Like I said the tag showed 7.7 but it didn't look right. I own a type 38 6.5mm and i'm thinking Cabelas might have mislabeled it.

I really want to pic up another 6.5 and this one would fit the bill. I have thought about bringing a dummy round and asking them if they would test it. Or calipers to mic the barrel.

I didn't take a picture but I believe it looked like this one I found on the internet that identifies as 6.5. Don't really want a 7.7 if I can avoid it but it wouldn't be the end of the world.

Arisaka_Type38.jpg
 
Well that helps some. I forgot to mention there's a scope mount over the mum area. Now that makes me wonder if they tapped the gas hole to mount the scope. It's a 5 or 6 inch weaver style one piece mount.

Guess I'll see if it's still there tomorrow.
 
Going by the rear sight and the finger groove in the stock, that picture is a 6.5 carbine. It may not be the original caliber. They were popular rifles to convert years back. Some were recut to 6.5x.257. You are right to check the chamber if there is a scope on it. The "Blow holes" are drilled at an angle, so I doubt they tapped them. When I used to put scope bases on Arisakas, I milled small slots in the bottom of the bases so the gas could still escape.
 
The rifle definitely looks like the 6.5 rather than 7.7. My dad had both, I inherited them and sold them at a gun show. Many, many years ago my uncle, a reloader who also owned a couple of sporterized Ariska rifles, loaded rounds for the 7.7 with bullets that were too small in diameter. They were very unpleasant to shoot since the cartridge neck didn't seal the chamber. I think it was worse for my dad and me because we both shot left-handed so we had none of the protection provided by the left side of the action.
 
Hey guys that picture is just a sample but I believe it's the same type carbine. I made up a dummy round of 6.5 to take with me to Cabela's today and wasn't sure if they would pitch a fit if I tried to insert the round in the chamber but I placed the dummy cartridge in the muzzle end and only most of the bullet went in (not any of the case). Checking the dimensions of the 6.5 neck I think I remember it at .288 of an inch so inserting that into a muzzle of a .312 hole should have swallowed it up to the neck.

So I assume this has to still be a 6.5. I don't quite have the OK to buy it yet but it's on my list. So what model is it really. Also I believe I can see bits of the two vent holes which would also mean 6.5.

Here are actual photos.

Also what is the rounded carving on the right side for? I notice the stock picture shows a gap there to just not rounded.





 
That is a good question. That is a Japanese made stock, the Chinese stock does not have the cutout. That gun definitely started out as a 6.5x50, but as I said before, the chamber could have been recut to something bigger. I still use one that I recut to 6.5x55, and a LOT of sporters were recut to 6.5x,257. Recut means the chamber was changed on the original barrel.
Looks like the safety was messed with too.
 
Gunplummer,

If I took a 6.5 jap cartridge and dropped it in a 6.5x257 do you think it would fall deeper and be apparent that it's the wrong cartridge? Looking at the specks it should be 4-6mm longer to most parts of the Arisaka case but maybe the rim prevents that.
 
Yes, it will be easy to see. It probably is still a 6.5x50. Once you go to longer cartridges with those guns the feed ramp and magazine well is usually altered.
If it is not priced that high, it is a deal either way, although the scope mounting is a little hokey looking.
 
The gun shown in #1 is a Type 38 carbine. As in most armies of the time, the Japanese issued carbines to the cavalry because the long rifle was too unwieldy for use by horsemen, even though it would be used when dismounted. (The pistol or saber was used when mounted.)

The milled trigger guard and floor plate release definitely mark it as a Type 38 (6.5), not a Type 99 (7.7). That is a good collectible as the carbines are fairly uncommon.

The notch in the stock is so rain on the receiver cover will run down and off to the side rather than down into the magazine well. Both it and the receiver cover are examples of the extreme thought and refinement the Japanese gave that rifle; the features might have been unnecessary, or even a drawback, but the designers addressed issues others didn't think about.

FWIW, military rifles rarely have the caliber on them. The soldier was issued a rifle and the matching ammo. He didn't need to know or care what some collector would call his rifle 100 years in the future.

Jim
 
Yeah they only want $200. I just have to find the money and space for it. The wife said no because of space so she says. So I'm trying to find room for an Enfield #1 mark 3 permanently at a friends house. I bought it for a steal and never found out what I wanted to do with it.

If I get the Arisaka I will be inspecting that scope mount and see if I can make it more solid.
 
One more thing - as shown in the OP's photo, the bolt handle on Arisaka rifles was straight and at 3:00 viewed from the butt of the stock. Every Arisaka I've seen that has been "sporterized' in any way has a modern bolt handle curved down and to the rear like the rifle in Post #7.
 
That is not a Cavalry rifle. I had a few and they are Type 44, and marked so, with folding bayonets. All the type 44's I owned had the wood on the left side worn down, some almost to the receiver and barrel. This was from the Cavalry troops riding with the rifle slung across their backs. I have never seen a Type 38 carbine worn that way.
 
The 6.5 Arisaka that my dad had also had a folding bayonet. The bayonet was not shaped like a knife, had no handle, and, if I remember correctly, it was longer than American military bayonets. The rifle did not show any wear indicating it was carried across a soldier's back while riding a horse.
 
I blame my grandfather for getting me on the Arisaka kick. This was his Type 38
that he built and I have been chasing deer around the woods with it. It is the most
accurate rifle I have. This year it was successful in bagging me a nice 8 point.

Such horrible elders. First he gets me into reloading before i'm out of grade
school and now this. :)

 
Hi, Gunplummer,

The Type 44 was an improved Type 38 carbine. It was designed so mounted troops would not have to carry a separate bayonet and scabbard. But before the Type 44 came out in 1911, the cavalry used the Type 38 Carbine.

At some point, they also issued a short rifle, supposedly also for the cavalry, with a 25 inch barrel vs the 19 inch on the carbine. Unlike the carbine, the so-called "cavalry rifles" were cut down rifles. Since these seem to be better finished than most Type 38's, some collectors think they were intended for some kind of elite troops or even honor guards, rather than for ordinary troops, mounted or not.

AFAIK, the Type 99 was never made in a carbine version beyond test guns; it was found that the more powerful round had too much recoil in the light carbine and of course the Type 99 was an intermediate rifle intended for both infantry and cavalry, a trend that Britain, the U.S. and Germany had already followed.

Jim
 
Yeah they only want $200.
Click to expand...

FYI, Cabela's buys guns, and offers 2/3 of what they think they can sell them for, so they are probably in to that rifle for under $150. Depending on how long it has been on the shelf, you may be able to get it for less.

My T38 carbine was also listed for $200 at Cabela's, I took it home for $175:

t38_right_s.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top