What is this???

[Rifleman]

Thanks to all for the help and information, I really appreciate it!!!

[madsenshooter]

Thanks for making some of the collector types here drool!

[psteinmayer]

I'm definitely drooling!!!

[Rifleman]

My Dad brought these to me today, the cert allowing my grandfather to return home with the Jap rifle and these two metal tags. The small one has "Jap Zero" scratched on the back, I have no idea what the larger one is...any one able to translate?

[Guamsst]

What's interesting to me is that this Navy T-99 doesn't have the anti-aircraft rear sights like the early infantry models. Sailors would be more likely to fire on aircraft than soldiers.

........is the rear stock, which should have a joint running parallel to the grain. This was because the Japanese didn't have wood in a sufficient size to make a whole stock... so they spliced the rear of the stock............

By the time these rifles were being produced the AA sight had already been written off as all but pointless. I agree though that Navy would have better chances with them......but they took real AA guns with them wherever the ship went.

The stocks were not spliced due to the available "size" of the wood. That is basically an urban legend like Garand clip ping causing the deaths of so many soldiers. The reality was a two fold benefit. 1. The most direct reason, was that by changing the direction of the wood grain (the splice always has the same angle on the wood grain) they reduced the chances of chipping the stock. 2. a minor benefit but not a necessity was that yes, they could use smaller pieces of wood. This opened up the amount of lumber suitable for rifle stocks but they had more wood than steel and after invading China they had more wood than they would ever need.