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
Arisaka action test
Collapse
X
-
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."I was home... What happened? What the Hell Happened?" - MM1 Jacob Holman, USS San Pablo -
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/ArisakaComment
-
-
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 . KennethComment
-
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.Comment
-
Comment
-
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.Comment
-
-
-
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.Last edited by jcj54; 08-15-2015, 04:06.Comment
-
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.You can never go home again.Comment
-
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.Last edited by Johnny P; 08-16-2015, 06:05.Comment
-
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 .
KennethComment
-
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.Comment

Comment