Arisaka identification

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no proof of the T-38 carbine having been cut down from full size models or ever being designed for cavalry use. I Auctioned over 200 Arisakas when I stopped collecting, and believe it or not we collectors sometimes know a little more than cruising the internet will get you. As for the wood not being worn on the model your dad had, it is possible it never saw much use. I bought a Type-"I" once that looked like it was never even out of the factory. BUT, I have never seen a T-38 carbine with any kind of specific Cavalry wear on it. Other than after the war, there are no examples of the T-38 having been modified to make it shorter. The Japanese were sticklers for marking changes/rebuilds on their guns up until the war started to go bad for them. At this point the Type-38 was pretty much a done deal. This is a rumor started because of the Chinese using the machinery and guns after WWII.


There was a slightly shorter T-99 in production for one series only.
 
Gunplummer said:
175 bucks was a good deal. The wood is worth that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't think I stole it at that price, but it was a pretty good deal.

Mum is intact, but the whole rifle has some surface patina, has the look of something that had been sitting in the back of some old Veteran's closet for 70 years.

mum2_s.jpg
 
Found room for the Enfield #1 Mark 3 permanently at a friends house in exchange for $200 which is still a profit from the $125 I bought it for so later this week I'll go see if the Carbine is still available.

Who knows maybe they'll drop the price or have a sale on by then. It would be nice to get it a little cheaper but I won't hold my breath.
 
I guess $200 is an ok price these days, but the cheap scope and mount, bent bolt handle, and varnished stock have sure eliminated any collector interest in it as a type example of a military rifle from a bygone era.
 
One mans ball of dirt is another mans pearl.

But you are right its historical value is semi gone. But it's still probably an 80 year old rifle and if it shoots find I'll be pleased.
 
I think it would be hard to find any hunting rifle at $200 or under nowdays unless you stumbled into a deal outside of a gunshop. Sometimes we forget how old we are getting.
 
$200? Are they going to slap cuffs on you when you steal it at that price?
Ok, collectors will say that Arisakas with varnished, refinished wood and post-war scopes have lost value, but the Arisaka carbine is one fine rifle:accurate and a joy to shoot.
It's the only rifle I regret selling.
 
Hi, Gunplummer,

I never said that the Type 38 carbines were cut down rifles. I said that the so-called "cavalry rifles" (not carbines) were cut down Type 38 rifles. The thinking was evidently to have an intermediate rifle, equivalent to those adopted by other countries.

Those rifles are rather rare, and the few I have seen were in very good condition. Mine (which is in my safe, not on the internet) is beautifully finished, equal to anything out of Oberndorf, and it is possible that those really were intended for some elite unit, though that is pure speculation.

Jim
 
There was no such rifle produced by the Japanese. You were taken for a ride. If I bought every Japanese "Sniper rifle" that Gran Pa took off a Japanese soldier, I would have owned 60 of them. I have actually seen and handled some of the rarest Arisakas that exist. I have seen two different (Same model) 6.5 Paratroop rifles. They are extremely rare. I have seen one TRUE last ditch Navel rifle. I have only seen pictures of the 7x57 Carbine, but apparently they do exist. I owned a Korean war 7.7 that was converted by the US Army and stamped accordingly. Really rare because the stampings were not ground off. I had receivers on rifles made in Japan, China, and Korea. I had two T-99's with no serial numbers at all (Late war). I had cast training guns and even a 7/8 kids training gun. I knew one guy I used two see at shows and trade with that had a heck of a lot more guns than I did. When collectors get together it kind of goes "Hey Man, look what I found, or "Guess what I saw". Well, guess what they did not see or find. Get off the internet and buy a copy of Fred Honeycutt's Japanese Rifles. It is the most definitive work on the Arisaka I have ever seen and it was around before the internet. The book even has notes on interviews with Japanese Ordnance Personnel. It is a good buy.
 
Well I got it. When I told the guy my concerns about it not being a 7.7 it was like he wanted to fight. He assured me I was wrong and I said I bet you it isn't. Same problem when I told him it wasn't a type 44.

But eventually after talking to their main gun guy he said I was right but couldn't test the dummy round I had. They said there is a 10 day return policy on it so I was satisfied.

I finally got it home and tested the dummy round and it's good. I checked the firing pin in store because those aren't cheap.

I also took off the scope mount to find a Weaver #70 base with two holes tapped in the front and one in the rear. I took a picture of the markings in it and the mum was intact till the mount holes were drilled.

I don't like the scope rings so those will be replace with something that doesn't look so cobbled together.
 
Does anyone know how they coat the Weaver bases. I was thinking of cutting off the unsupported front ring area. I know they're aluminum but I'm not sure if they're painted, blued or other. Or how would you recoat the end?

Any ideas are appreciated.
A new base is only $6-11 so i'm fine if I screw it up.

 
Apparently Honeycutt was "taken for a ride" as well, since he shows and describes (on Pages 52-53 of my edition) the same rifle I have except mine is in better condition and has the action cover. I say again, it is not a carbine. He calls it a "cavalry rifle" though I have always called it a "short rifle."

He does not give an estimate of the numbers made, but they are not common.

Jim
 
Weaver, if aluminum, are anodized to coat them. About the only option is to paint after removing the coating.

Well James, that just shows that writers sometimes don't know what they are talking about. There is no "Cavalry" carbine, other than the T-44. Anything else is speculation. Kind of like why the MUM was disfigured. Lot of theories, no fact.
 
Gunplummer,
I think that James is talking about a medium size Type 38 that has been called a cavalry rifle by various people within the collecting world. The give away is the step in the barrel just inside the front barrel band. They're moderately rare. I watched on on GB once. Here's the link to the rifle James is talking about:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=520143795

You might both be right. I've seen old photos of Type 44s being used by horse troops in Manchuria, but I can't remember seeing a "cavalry" type 38 in a picture. I'm not the supreme authority on anything related to Japanese military history nor Japanese rifles, I just happened to own a few over the years and did a bit of reading.
 
Hi, Gunplummer,

First you say "Get off the internet and buy a copy of Fred Honeycutt's Japanese Rifles. It is the most definitive work on the Arisaka I have ever seen and it was around before the internet. The book even has notes on interviews with Japanese Ordnance Personnel. It is a good buy."

Then you say, "... that just shows that writers sometimes don't know what they are talking about."

So first you praise Honeycutt for his "definitive work", then you say he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Your assertion that there was no Type 38 carbine is absurd, as is saying that there is no such thing as a Type 38 short rifle (aka "cavalry rifle"). Both are uncommon, even rare, but they do exist.

Jim
 
I think everybody is about tired of you James. Nobody even mentioned Cavalry rifles until you stuck your nose into it. Now, supposedly I don't even believe there are type-38 carbines. You just can never be wrong. YOU were the one that came out and said the type 38- carbine was a Cavalry rifle. The chopped rifles you are talking about have nothing to do with the type-38 carbine. I still do not believe they are legit. Just confuse the issue until it goes away. No matter what comes up, we can be sure that a short history from a quick search on the net is soon to follow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top