RagingBullet
Inactive
I had one more question about the series mark on the left of the serial number. i am just now looking at it but i cant be sure what mark it is.
My Arisaka, real or reproduction?
- Thread starter RagingBullet
- Start date
carguychris
New member
Not sure about the mark on the left, but I've been looking for one with the that combination of manufacturer marks on the right, because I'm fond of that company's cars, particularly the RX-7 and the Miata. 
(Toyo Kogyo = Mazda. No kidding.)
(Toyo Kogyo = Mazda. No kidding.)
Your rifle looks like a "real" Arisaka.
My dad and an uncle had several Arisaka rifles, both the 38 and 99. Some were sporterized with new barrels chambered for different cartridges, e.g., .22-250, and "modern" sporter stocks. They were very accurate and fun to shoot. I sold all of them at gun shows many years ago. I still have several of my dad's long guns (including a very nice Winchester Model 92 .25-20) which are far more valuable and mean much more to me than the Arisaka rifles.
Edit: The "flower" was partially ground off of the receiver of all of those Arisaka rifles..
My dad and an uncle had several Arisaka rifles, both the 38 and 99. Some were sporterized with new barrels chambered for different cartridges, e.g., .22-250, and "modern" sporter stocks. They were very accurate and fun to shoot. I sold all of them at gun shows many years ago. I still have several of my dad's long guns (including a very nice Winchester Model 92 .25-20) which are far more valuable and mean much more to me than the Arisaka rifles.
Edit: The "flower" was partially ground off of the receiver of all of those Arisaka rifles..
Last edited:
It's a real Arisaka, and it's been refinished. the nice matt gray finish on the metal is a dead giveaway. ALL the originals were polished and blued. Quality of the work changed over the course of production due to wartime pressure.
The early rifles all had "all the bells & whistles" that were later dropped from production to simplify, speed up, and reduce production costs.
The sliding "dustcover" over the action, that traveled with the bolt, was the first thing dropped I think. It was unpopular with the troops (it rattled) and was often removed in the field, and thrown away.
The rear sight was a ladder/peep, with the AA wings, and there was a wire monopod mounted on the fore end.
The last production guns had none of those features, and also deleted some others as JamesK has mentioned.
The pic of the Hiroshima rifle shows the differences clearly. The rear sight is a simple fixed peep, being the most obvious.
The grinding off or just defacing of the Imperial crest (the chrysanthemum) was a "saving face" gesture. By removing the "mum" the rifles could be surrendered without impugning the Emperor's honor.
Stories vary about when & where this was done, Some say in Japan, by the Japanese, some in Japan by US or Japanese under US direction, some stories say it was done in the US at the ports the rifles entered.
All three might be true, one almost certainly must be, for any specific rifle.
Some surrendered rifles did slip through without getting ground. Generally an unground mum is a good indicator that the rifle was captured (battlefield pick up) rather than being surrendered at the end of the war.
A good indicator, but NOT proof positive, alone.
The early rifles all had "all the bells & whistles" that were later dropped from production to simplify, speed up, and reduce production costs.
The sliding "dustcover" over the action, that traveled with the bolt, was the first thing dropped I think. It was unpopular with the troops (it rattled) and was often removed in the field, and thrown away.
The rear sight was a ladder/peep, with the AA wings, and there was a wire monopod mounted on the fore end.
The last production guns had none of those features, and also deleted some others as JamesK has mentioned.
The pic of the Hiroshima rifle shows the differences clearly. The rear sight is a simple fixed peep, being the most obvious.
The grinding off or just defacing of the Imperial crest (the chrysanthemum) was a "saving face" gesture. By removing the "mum" the rifles could be surrendered without impugning the Emperor's honor.
Stories vary about when & where this was done, Some say in Japan, by the Japanese, some in Japan by US or Japanese under US direction, some stories say it was done in the US at the ports the rifles entered.
All three might be true, one almost certainly must be, for any specific rifle.
Some surrendered rifles did slip through without getting ground. Generally an unground mum is a good indicator that the rifle was captured (battlefield pick up) rather than being surrendered at the end of the war.
A good indicator, but NOT proof positive, alone.
Jim Watson
New member
As far as the refinish, looks like Parkerizing, and the stock varnished, too; we turned over a lot of Arisakas to South Korea. They were routinely rechambered to .30-06, but were ALL of them converted?
Tidewater_Kid
New member
To me it looks parkerized which would not be original. The rear sight wings were removed on later series to speed up production so having them missing could be correct. Depends on the series.
Looks like a nice rifle to me.
TK
Looks like a nice rifle to me.
TK
Gunplummer
New member
I had a South Korean Arisaka. They were parkerized in some weird greenish color.
Good question. Why are there art forgers? Because someone thought they could make money from it, I suppose.
Certain rare variations of guns are worth big bucks to collectors. "Faking" a rare variation has been done more than you might think. Often this involves taking one of the common versions and remarking it with the rare version markings. Luger fakes are notorious.
The OP has a nicely refinished mid war (or later) Arisaka. Its not the late war model, or a last ditch version. Just a standard gun, with some of the original parts missing (dust cover, monopod, etc.), refinished later by someone who knew what they were doing.
tahunua001
New member
I agree with L cutler. either 33rd series or 2nd series with an uneven stamping but given the depth I would say 33rd is more likely, when combined with the other late war features.
http://oldmilitarymarkings.com/japanese_markings.html
http://oldmilitarymarkings.com/japanese_markings.html
Its a real Arisaka.
In order to be a counterfeit / fake it would have to be presented as something that it is not, and as far as I can see, it was just represented as an Arisaka, which, it is.
While I'm not an Arisaka collector, I know that there are some ultra rare variants that are worth considerable money, and were valuable, even when the standards rifles were dirt cheap.
The OP's gun isn't pretending to be one of those.
Some forgers/counterfeiters are smart and crafty, some less so...
With guns, counterfeit markings to fake a more valuable version is most common, and while I don't know of any cases where a gun was made from scratch to counterfeit a valuable gun there might have been some. WHY anyone would I don't know other than the expectation of significant profit.
Sometimes, that expectation goes unrealized. Two storied about counterfeiters who were less than brilliant come to mind.
First one, the Feds found a guy who was counterfeiting $1 bills. No other denomination, just $1 bills. The Fed watched him for years, learned how he did it, but never prosecuted him, because they learned it was costing him $1.06 to create each fake $1 bill. Some Feds DO have a sense of humor.
The other one was a guy who was making fake $5. He was cutting Lincoln's picture out of a real $5, pasting it on a $1 and running them through a change machine (that took them) and getting $5 in change. So he was spending $6 to steal $5! They did bust him, though I think the charge was felony stupid, more than counterfeiting.
In order to be a counterfeit / fake it would have to be presented as something that it is not, and as far as I can see, it was just represented as an Arisaka, which, it is.
While I'm not an Arisaka collector, I know that there are some ultra rare variants that are worth considerable money, and were valuable, even when the standards rifles were dirt cheap.
The OP's gun isn't pretending to be one of those.
Some forgers/counterfeiters are smart and crafty, some less so...
With guns, counterfeit markings to fake a more valuable version is most common, and while I don't know of any cases where a gun was made from scratch to counterfeit a valuable gun there might have been some. WHY anyone would I don't know other than the expectation of significant profit.
Sometimes, that expectation goes unrealized. Two storied about counterfeiters who were less than brilliant come to mind.
First one, the Feds found a guy who was counterfeiting $1 bills. No other denomination, just $1 bills. The Fed watched him for years, learned how he did it, but never prosecuted him, because they learned it was costing him $1.06 to create each fake $1 bill. Some Feds DO have a sense of humor.
The other one was a guy who was making fake $5. He was cutting Lincoln's picture out of a real $5, pasting it on a $1 and running them through a change machine (that took them) and getting $5 in change. So he was spending $6 to steal $5! They did bust him, though I think the charge was felony stupid, more than counterfeiting.
Post #45; Thanks Jim W. for clearing something up my brothers and I have wondered about for a long time. Though I mentioned earlier that I shot my first deer with a 7.7, a couple of years later I acquired another Arisaka that was chambered in '06. It was much easier to buy ammo for of course, but we knew the Japanese rifles were never chambered in '06 (until now). We were thinking the rifle started out as a 6.5, and then re-bored, rifled and rechambered in '06 by some gunsmith in the U.S. for sporting purposes and ammo availability. Is that how it went for those Korean bound rifles? However the caliber change happened, at least I can tell my bros what the deal was from so many years ago when I had that rifle (early '70's).
BTW, that rifle shot very well, so well that my oldest bro wanted it. He traded me straight across for a Model 94 Winchester in .32 Win. Spl. (pre 64, too). I shot my first good 4x4 whitetail with that Winchester, and my oldest son has it now. He's killed deer with it, too. I asked my oldest bro fairly recently if he knew what happened with the '06 Arisaka, and he told me he couldn't remember who ended up with it. Geeze, that was a long time ago in our family's gun world. But again, now we know the story on the '06 chambered Arisaka; an old mostly forgotten question cleared up.
Happy Thanksgiving to all on TFL
BTW, that rifle shot very well, so well that my oldest bro wanted it. He traded me straight across for a Model 94 Winchester in .32 Win. Spl. (pre 64, too). I shot my first good 4x4 whitetail with that Winchester, and my oldest son has it now. He's killed deer with it, too. I asked my oldest bro fairly recently if he knew what happened with the '06 Arisaka, and he told me he couldn't remember who ended up with it. Geeze, that was a long time ago in our family's gun world. But again, now we know the story on the '06 chambered Arisaka; an old mostly forgotten question cleared up.
Happy Thanksgiving to all on TFL