Arisaka action test [Archive] - Jouster2 Shooting Forums

aintright

08-09-2015, 08:30

A few weeks back I was looking up converting 7.7 to 30-06 information as I was given one . And came across an article that said a known gun magazine writer had tested the Mauser , 1917, and Arisaka actions . Arisaka winning . Tried to find it , and now can't find it to save my butt . Anyone here can verify this and who did this test ? Thank you , Kenneth

psteinmayer

08-10-2015, 03:48

I've never seen anything about that... but the Arisaka is well known to have one of the strongest actions made. It's not necessarily the smoothest operating, but it sure stands up as far as the metallurgy goes.

Oyaji

08-10-2015, 08:16

Believe it was MGEN Julian Hatcher who conducted the test you're referring to.

Tests on samples of Arisaka rifles conducted after the war showed that their bolts and receivers were constructed of carbon steel "similar to SAE steel grade No. 1085 with a carbon content of 0.80% to 0.90%, and a manganese content of 0.60% to 0.90%." During destructive tests, the Arisakas were shown to be stronger than the M1903 Springfield, Lee–Enfield, and Mauser rifles.

See this article with footnotes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arisaka

John Sukey

08-10-2015, 10:41

I remember that article. They tried to blow up an Arisaka and FAILED!

aintright

08-10-2015, 11:33

Thanks , believe you hit the nail on the head . Also found where American Rifleman did an article on some fellow who rechambered the 6.5 to 30-06 and was complaining of excessive recoil , wonder why ? Sarcasm intended there . Memory is short at times and don't rightly remember why the NRA took possession of it , curiosity maybe . A statement was made that the recovered bullets looked weird , that was probally an understatement . Bet that pressure was off the chart , but no more than the one they put a steel rod in and welded shut , seems the action held on that one too , if I remember right .
Had an Arisaka several years ago that was rechambered to 30-06 , it had one of the old scopes on it that had the windage and elevation done by adjusting the rings . It would shoot clover leafs at 100 yards occasionally . One of those you wish you hadn't sold .
The one just given too me is a shame , someone ruined what would have been a nice collectable at one time d&teed it right through the crysanthyium , spelling might be a touch off there . I understand these where rare . Anyway , I'm going to scope it eventually and see what she does , hopefully it will be another shooter . Kenneth

kcw

08-10-2015, 12:18

I have that Rifleman article someplace. If I recall correctly, a bullet was rammed into the chamber end of the barrel. Live rounds were then fired one after the other, leaving a number of bullets jammed in the barrel. I believe that neither the Arisaka or M1917 actions blew, but the headspace got set so far back that eventually neither would fire, thus ending the testing.

JimF

08-10-2015, 02:47

. . . . Also found where American Rifleman did an article on some fellow who rechambered the 6.5 to 30-06 and was complaining of excessive recoil , wonder why ? Sarcasm intended there . . . . . .

Yup . . . .See AR, May, 1959, page 52. --Jim

m1903rifle

08-10-2015, 06:23

The famous gunsmith, P.O. Ackley, also conducted some action tests and the Arisaka did well in those tests also. I will post a link to the tests if I can find it.

Rock

08-10-2015, 06:37

http://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/long-gun-legends-p-o-ackley/

http://www.peashooter85.com/post/107552691838/japanese-arisaka-type-99-torture-test-by

dave

08-13-2015, 09:42

So about 80 low number '03's blow up, some known to have been fired with 8m/m and a lot of people condemn them to the gun cabinet, but the Arisaka is the strongest action by virtue of a test of one or two rifles? Hmmm!

jcj54

08-15-2015, 04:02

Arisaka completly surrounds the cartridge with the barrel shank and has very good gas venting in event of ruptured case. 1903 has unsupported case for about 1/8" ahead of extractor groove and poor gas venting on low number rifles. Very late war Arisaka rifles were of poor quality steel, you could not get me to shoot one. I won't shoot a low number 03 either.

dave

08-16-2015, 05:04

There are those who say late war jap rifles have good steel also. I never did any tests on them (and would not know how) as most people who give such "opinions". All Mauser type rifles have unsupported heads (a few exceptions) altho 1/8" seems an exaggeration to me. The Model 70 Win. is nothing but a sportered 1903 and they have been chambered in some pretty hearty calibers. I was only pointing out that general statements can not be made on the basis of one or two rifles, '03's included. I would not shoot the late war japs or LN '03 either, merely because there is no need to, there are plenty of 'good' ones around.

Johnny P

08-16-2015, 06:04

Learned scholars like Dr. Lyon use only the 1903's recorded by Hatcher to calculate your chance of having one fail as if they were the only ones that failed, but no one knows that total number. A search through SRS reveals receivers that failed before Hatcher started his study. The total number will never be known.

aintright

08-30-2015, 05:57

Well , I scoped it , put a 3-9x40 Japan made Tasco on it and zeroed it with Rem. 180gr. Cor Lokts . Shot two three shot groups with them and 3-4 inches was the results . So I hand loaded some 165 SGK over 52.6 gr. of IMR 4350 and ran the bullet out to 3.675" and still easily closed the bolt with no show of lands contact . Grouping wasn't much better , at least the holes where true . I'm not sure if the run out was due to the 311 bore or throat erosion . I am going to get some 311 bullets and try them , or maybe drop the smith and see what his bore scope shows on the throat . As a matter of fact , I will go by the smith and let him look at it as it appears someone may have filed the muzzle flat , if this is the case I will get him to re crown it if the throat and bore look worth the trouble .
Kenneth

CHW2021

11-20-2015, 09:42

As I remember, the Arisaka was one of the final refinements of the mauser design. The improvements that made this rifle stronger than the earlier 1903 and similar rifles included a chromed bore, different steel (and more quality control during manufacture) and more efficient gas porting. Also, the breech design allowed complete case head support to increase strength.
The Arisaka rifle was well designed and updated from the earlier bolt guns of WW2.

dave

11-20-2015, 05:15

Arisaka's have been around, same basic action, since early 1900's. Not "up dated " in WW11, unless you call stamped parts and poor machining Up-dating! Chrome bores does nothing for strength and only a comparative few had chrome bores.

psteinmayer

11-21-2015, 05:28

+1 on Dave's response. The 99's quality of manufacture decreased significantly and exponentially as the war dragged on... and Japan's impending defeat! Those of us lucky enough to have an early Type 99 (Toyo Kogyo Series 31 in my case) are rewarded with an excellent rifle of impressive quality. 99's of last ditch status are almost unshootable!

S.B.

11-29-2015, 12:23

Julius(sp) Hatcher wrote the article you're looking for in one of his books.
Steve

joem

11-30-2015, 01:15

I had a sported type 99. Traded it in for something else cause ammo was expensive. Wish I had kept it now that I reload.

aintright

01-16-2016, 06:05

Griff Murphey

01-17-2016, 06:30

not so sure about this . I was going to prep some brass and order some 311 bullets and see how she did . But when I went to resize the brass it was a bear to get the die all the way down . Even then it left a significant bulge at the base of the case . I'm not sure if this is something to worry about or not . If the case is completely supported , why would it bulge ?
Kenneth

Assuming you are using fired cases from your rifle, could your chamber be oversize? Maybe you could just neck size them?
A high school ROTC classmate had at least two 7.7's that he had reamed to .30'06 so he could fire USGI blanks out of them. Could your rifle have been "reamed out?"

aintright

01-18-2016, 04:25

Sorry fellows , re read my posts and no where's did I state the rifle has been rechambered to 30-06 .
Yes , Griff , it was fired testing for accuracy , then tried resizing brass with intent of ordering some .311 bullets .
It has been a spell , and memory ain't worth diddly sometimes . Will try a couple more factory rds and resize and see how they chamber when I get home this weekend if we aren't knee deep in snow . Thanks , Kenneth

oldtirediron

01-25-2016, 08:36

I actually saw a rifle that was re-chambered to 30-06 on Between two fairly good gunsmiths on a Saturday after work-- The same old argument was made that the 7.7 case was too wide at the head and if re-chambered to 30-06 you would get a case head failure- So the next week I was at a local range in carpetersville Illinois and these two fellows were there with a Japanese rfle re-chambered to 30-06 The guy that rechambered it fired the rifle , he spun around and fell flat on his back-- The told you so's were flying around but the rifle was intact aand had no damage- Seems the one guy had re-chambered a Arisaka in 6.5 caliber instead of 7.7 !! See what a few cans of beer can do for you-- Wonder where that rifle is now, when this happened in the late 197-'s you could buy all the jap rifles you wanted for $10-00=$15.00 wach !

Guamsst

02-24-2016, 07:08

You are correct. If you want it to group. You will need the .311 bullets. 7.7JAP is basically identical to .303 and needs the larger diameter (correct diameter) bullets. Not a fault of the gun, but a fault of reloaders who don't fully understand how it works.

psteinmayer

02-25-2016, 10:23

Amen to that!

fguffey

08-04-2016, 03:04

Forget the receiver, I want the cases, if the rifle did not blow up the case did not suffer a Catastrophic Failure!

http://www.mlefiaa.org/files/CaseHead/SUMMER_2011.pdf

There is a claim rifles chamber to 30/06 blew up when firing 8mm57 ammo, but as the story claims someone chamber a Japanese rifle to 30/06 and then fired 30/06 ammo with no mention of changing the forcing cone and that leads us to believe the rifle shot .308" ammo in a .6.5mm/.264" diameter bore. And that brings us back to the 30/06 case. The 30/06 case will not tolerate that high a pressure. If the case head did not have a catastrophic failure the pressure was not there. And then the story always starts out with "This guy....etc. etc. "

And I always ask if there is anyone here that has ever taken one to those Japanese rifles apart? I have, it is something that can not be unseen. I have 6.5mm50 cases and ammo, I also have a reamer for going from 6.5mm50 to 6.5mm 257 Roberts. I form 257 Roberts from 30/06 cases, the Japanese receiver does not make the 30/06 case stronger no does it prevent it from a Catastrophic Failure! And then there is difference is design, the Japanese said their rifle was a Mauser design, The British said there P14 was a Mauser design, Springfield not so much.

F. Guffey

dave

08-04-2016, 04:33

fguffey

08-04-2016, 08:32

The us Gov't was sued and lost, (sp?) And the Germans lost the war, when it came to getting a fair settlement I do not believe they stood a chance.

I have always thought Springfield was working WWHUA as working with head up donkey and now you are telling me it is worst than I thought it was. The small ring Mauser had a small shank barrel; The Springfield 03 front receiver ring was the same diameter as the small ring Mauser but Springfield used a barrel with a larger diameter shank. That made the 03 receiver thinner. john Browning would not release the Model 94 until it would hold up to smokeless powder, he added nickel. It took Springfield 24 years to find nickel.

F. Guffey

dave

08-05-2016, 08:48

And the Germans lost the war, when it came to getting a fair settlement I do not believe they stood a chance.

I have always thought Springfield was working WWHUA as working with head up donkey and now you are telling me it is worst than I thought it was. The small ring Mauser had a small shank barrel; The Springfield 03 front receiver ring was the same diameter as the small ring Mauser but Springfield used a barrel with a larger diameter shank. That made the 03 receiver thinner. john Browning would not release the Model 94 until it would hold up to smokeless powder, he added nickel. It took Springfield 24 years to find nickel.

F. Guffey

Do not know what you are talking about. The law suit was over the magazine system (staggered box) and the use of loading clips, both patent's owned by Mauser. Had nothing to do with large ring-small rings. So barrel shank is different, total amount of metal around chamber is the same. WWHUA??? Lawsuit was way before the war!

Tuna

08-05-2016, 09:25

The US paid royalties to Germany into WW1 on each 03 rifle that was made. This also happened in WW2 but for other things like a non corrosive compound for primers. This money went into a fund kept by the government and was turned over at the end of the war.

dave

08-06-2016, 05:02

Wonder why? We just nationalized the Bayer Company, did we pay for that after the war?
The money for the magazine infringement was a lump sum, it must have been the 2-3 cents a clip that went on for awhile.

PhillipM

08-06-2016, 07:50

Springfield is a Mauser design, but of a 1893 model, the 'Spanish Mauser'. The us Gov't was sued and lost, paid Mauser much money, even tho they made changes that they thought would not infringe. Why do you think the Portugal rifle is called a Vergeuse-Mauser? (sp?)

Myth that the US Govt was sued and lost. Crozier instigated the whole thing and invited representatives from Mauser over and they worked things out, no dramatcs.

fguffey

08-07-2016, 10:25

Myth that the US Govt was sued and lost. Crozier instigated the whole thing and invited representatives from Mauser over and they worked things out, no dramatics.

And then Springfield swore they never saw a 98, the 98 had had the 3rd safety lug, the best any other manufacturer could do was use the bolt handle as a form of safety lug. when the 03 made its appearance, there is was, a 3rd lug setting in front if the rear receiver ring. That caused a problem with the height of the rear receiver ring. For me it is my favorite feature of the 03. I use the 3rd lug when determining case head clearance or the length of the chamber with a head space gage.

The gap was always there and Springfield nor Hatcher could figure a use for it.

Then there was that junket Springfeild went on when looking for a rifle and design. They could have had a Mauser or for all the money the spent they could have closed Springfield Armory and hired John Browning; instead they came home with a rifles with a bolt with one lug. It was not necessary to build the rifle with one lug but Springfield could not figure out how to build it with 2 lugs so they decided it only needed one, no other manufacturer of rifles decided one was enough but Springfield (did). Like the British with the 303 in the Orange Free states, the soldier suffered, theirs in South Africa and ours in Cuba.

F. Guffey

S.B.

08-07-2016, 12:19

All this in a discussion over Arisakas? Point of Order please! Get your history lesson on the proper forum.
Steve

fguffey

08-07-2016, 02:44

Point of Order please!

Question: Has anyone ever removed the barrel from a Japanese receiver? Has anyone on this forum ever seen a stripped down Japanese receiver? If the Japanese receiver is the strongest in the world it has to have something else going for it than the front receiver ring.

F. Guffey

jgaynor

08-08-2016, 11:59

a summary of P.O. Ackley's findings. On the 6.5mm type 38 Arisaka and other actions
http://dutchman.rebooty.com/temp/Ackley.pdf

psteinmayer

08-09-2016, 03:57

Interesting reading. Thanks very much for posting

fguffey

08-15-2016, 12:13

Question: Has anyone ever removed the barrel from a Japanese receiver? Has anyone on this forum ever seen a stripped down Japanese receiver? If the Japanese receiver is the strongest in the world it has to have something else going for it than the front receiver ring.

F. Guffey

I will assume no one has ever removed the barrel from the Type 38 receiver. I had plans that included removing a shotout barrel and replacing it with one of the most powerful chambers ever designed; and then, I changed my mind. I went with the M1917 and then I wanted a 308 Norma Mag; again, I went with the M1917 again. I have three Japanese receivers with bolts. If I was going to build something that required a stout receiver I would use one of my Mausers or P14s or one of my M1917s and then there are my 03A3s.

F. Guffey