What is wrong with Arisaka?

Is it the safety or just hate?

Click to expand...

Not hate actually.

But start with an almost inoperable safety, a crude trigger mechanism, cock-on-closing action, a mag box too short for much more then a .308 length conversions, and a split rear receiver bridge on the Type 38 which makes scope mounting hard to do satisfactorily.

And there was never any WWII Japanese cheap surplus ammo to be had from the getgo like there were for almost all other popular surplus rifles.

They are an O.K. mil-sup rifles when left as is, now that you can get expensive commercial ammo for them.

But they gained a bad rep after WWII because ammo was totally unavailable.
Let alone cheap mil-sup ammo.

And there was no practical way to make a fine sporting rifle in another caliber out of them like you could with a Mauser 98 or 03 Springfield because of the bolt, receiver, and safety design..

rc

It's because they're the losers' guns . The MAS French guns and Carcanos have the same stigma. And they'll never get past it because ammo will never be cheap nor numerous (imagine the unpopularity of a Mosin-Nagant in something obscure). The Mausers were popular simply because they were so prolific that they had a global reputation beyond any conflict, but were still considered cheap guns deserving no special treatment like we feel now, bought, chopped, and shot because nice deer rifles cost too much to buy or shoot.

As RC says, not the most gunsmith nor Bubba friendly platform (whereas the Mauser is nearly perfect in that regard).

TCB

by the sounds of it, it sounds like the arisaka has a lot of potential to be improved upon but only seem to be worth it if you are willing to change the caliber too

On the 38's, I went with the 6.5x257 Roberts.
Darn nice rifles, and you got a Chrome lined bore on the originals.
The actions are strong, but the safety sucks.

I think they had a reputation for having manufacturing flaws which could cause failures. I thought I read once though that in actual laboratory destructive pressure testing, they turned out to be one of the stronger bolt action designs of WWII. I can't find the article though, so maybe I imagined it. I think they also had lots of little tweaks to their ammunition through the war and at least 3 calibers which made shooting them a bit more convoluted.

Never enough cheap ammo to encourage anyone to tinker with them.

mostly it's ignorance.

1. they are cock on close so they have a bit of spring loaded resistance while closing. it's a feature that most bolt actions do not share(the only other models I'm aware of are the enfield family, the model 1917 US, and the swedish mausers). it's goofy for people that have never used it before and rather than try it out a few times most people just go for something a little more traditional.

2. the safety is a weird concept for most people. I actually like it. I used it for my bear rifle and I fount that I could easily disengage the safety while bringing the rifle to bear from strongside carry and it's a simple sweep of the palm to reset it.

3. the surplus ammo never made it to the US, it was all spent in WWII so people have been stuck buying expensive and many times special order/online order ammo to feed them.

I am a milsurp collector and my first was an enfield no4 so the cock on close concept is nothing new to me and I actually love that spring loaded resistance on closing. I just picked up my third arisaka today and though it's different than most and it's a little on the rough side I will never part with any of them. I could rationalize parting with my springfields, my M1, my mosin nagants, my MAS36, my Steyr M95... but I will never let go of any of my arisakas.

whats wrong with the arisaka safeties?.. i know the one on my mosin nagant is a pain in the ass to use too

The WW2 generation hated the Japanese, had nothing good to say about them, and this is reflected in the American attitude towards the Arisaka.

I never had the chance to shoot Arisaka's as much as my Mauser’s. The ammunition is hard to get and expensive. Arisaka actions only came from captured rifles, I tried to get an Arisaka action to convert to 6.5 X 55 but that fell through. I wish I had more trigger time behind an Arisaka because feature and design wise, on paper it is right up there with the Mauser 98 as a great action. It was very rugged, very reliable, very safe, and very strong. The shooter is well protected from gas release. The action is easy to field strip also has very few parts. It is apparent the Japanese thought long and hard about what to put into the action. This rifle was successfully used world wide, from frozen Alaska to the steaming jungles of Mandalay


I knew and talked to a lot of WW2 veterans, they all had stories of “junk” Japanese cast iron rifles. What they did not know was that these rifles were infact parade rifles. These parade rifles look like real rifles, but they are not. They came from military schools and are made of cast iron. This rifle, the barrel is a tube that is not pinned or screwed onto the receiver. It is sleeved. The store I bought this training rifle, thought it was a Japanese service rifle. I knew better. It is rather rare, and unfortunately, not worth that much. It is worth about what I paid. I have fixed real service bayonets to the front, it will chamber a real rifle round and if one is fired in the thing, it will shatter into pieces.

Lots of pictures in case you run across one, you know what to look for.

I think they had a reputation for having manufacturing flaws which could cause failures. I thought I read once though that in actual laboratory destructive pressure testing, they turned out to be one of the stronger bolt action designs of WWII. I can't find the article though, so maybe I imagined it. I think they also had lots of little tweaks to their ammunition through the war and at least 3 calibers which made shooting them a bit more convoluted

Click to expand...

not really correct here.
you are right that in labratory testing the actions were quite strong but that was just trying to blow them um by overcharging factory cartridges. there is really not a whole lot to say what they would do if rechambered and then stress tested. and there were only two cartridges used. the 6.5mm and 7.7mm there was only one model which used the 7.7 and the rest used the 6.5. aside from a few prototypes, there is no overlap so it's really not all that convoluted at all. the type 99(and variants) used 7.7 and the types 30, 38, 44, type I and type 97 all used 6.5mm.

it really seems like these are decent rifles that people just like for being japanese... im sure the triggers and the safeties can be improved, and that they can be rebarreled for something easier to find?

the safeties are integrated into the bolt body and form the end cap... really nothing you could do about it, as for triggers they are standard for the era. my mosin nagants and steyr 95 have way worse triggers than my arisakas.

I was unaware that they were "hated", but then that is how I am. I have two type 38's and two type 99's as well as two really fine bayonets. I love shooting them. The last type 38 I bought is probably one of my most accurate carbines. You guys keep on hating them so I can scoop up more at realistic prices!!!!

I like mine....I think they are not as popular because of the ammo...a very large reason the Carcano is thought to be junk as well...wrong bullet size.

They are very strong very high quality rifles, same for the MAS series of rifles....think about the MAS for a second it was the last bolt rifle made from scratch by anyone....do you think they looked at everything else before they said hay lets put that in our rifle.

Snag up those "loser" guns from the small minded at great prices. I love my guns from France Italy and Japan. If the gun is in good shape it will shoot with the best of them out there....none of these countries sent their boys off to war with crap.

"whats wrong with the arisaka safeties?.. i know the one on my mosin nagant is a pain in the ass to use too "


And nobody with any aesthetic or practical sense thinks very highly of the Mosin as the paragon of anything more than having been built by the ton. Compared to a Mauser or Springfield as the basis for a custom rifle, or compared to a Mauser or Springfield as an object mechanical excellence, or ergonomic perfection? Don't make folks who appreciate quality rifles laugh. The only reason the Mosin is "appreciated" by newbies is that they are available and cheap. After WW-II Mausers were available and cheap... and Arisaka's were cheaper than cheap. Most had been deliberately defaced, many in ways that made mounting scope bases difficult on the ground off receivers. They were considered to be junk as compared to a Mauser. From fit and finish and mechanical design and ergonomics standpoints they are junk. Historical, interesting, accurate, strong, collectable junk. Just like a Mosin.


Willie

.

I recently passed on a sporterized Arisaka at a garage sale. It was decent and only $100 but, where ya gonna get ammo? I have other guns that are far less hassle to feed and still lots of fun to shoot.

i have 30-35 surpluse mil rifles and i shoot all that are safe to fire and reload for them. the 7.7 type 99 i have is in mint military condition and is a early first series nagola arsenal made and i shoot a 180 gr .312 dia. hornady bullet at 2400fps,with that load my rifle from a bench rest will do 1.5-2.0 inch three shot groups at a hundred yards, the peep sight make this rifle very easy to shoot.i have about 150-175 casing for it, so i,m good for all the shooting i plan to do with this rifle. i don,t collect any sporterized military rifles. as a matter of fact i,m going to take the 7.7 jap doe hunting tomorrow,i,ll let you know how i do. eastbank.

There is ammo available and reloading for it is cheap and easy as long as you have the brass.

My main gripe with the Arisakas are:
1-Parts availability,
2-Ammo availability, especially for the 6.5mm,
3-(and worst) Bubba wuz here before me.

Willie Sutton said:

"whats wrong with the arisaka safeties?.. i know the one on my mosin nagant is a pain in the ass to use too "


And anyone with any aesthetic or practical sense thinks very highly of the Mosin as the paragon of anything more than having been built by the ton. Compared to a Mauser or Springfield as the basis for a custom rifle, or compared to a Mauser or Springfield as an object mechanical excellence, or ergonomic perfection? Don't make folks who appreciate quality rifles laugh. The only reason the Mosin is "appreciated" by newbies is that they are available and cheap. After WW-II Mausers were available and cheap... and Arisaka's were cheaper than cheap. Most had been deliberately defaced, many in ways that made mounting scope bases difficult on the ground off receivers. They were considered to be junk as compared to a Mauser. From fit and finish and mechanical design and ergonomics standpoints they are junk. Historical, interesting, accurate, strong, collectable junk. Just like a Mosin.


Willie

.

Click to expand...

Wow...I really like people like you. I bought a Westinghouse mosin from someone just like you for $99. Please keep your views on the mosin, it really helps people that know the history and values on these items.

theotherwaldo said:

My main gripe with the Arisakas are:
1-Parts availability,
2-Ammo availability, especially for the 6.5mm,
3-(and worst) Bubba wuz here before me.

Click to expand...

1.- What parts break or are you missing "key" parts??

2.- 6.5 jap is easy...brass is available or you can make it from .243 or .260 rem..bullets are common .264s.

3.- Well not much you can do about that but keep your eyes open and buy one GOOD complete rifle...then ENJOY!

I have several Jap rifles and they all shoot well provided they are in good condition. One of my more accurate ones is a late ware "substitute standard" T99. It's more accurate than my early war guns....

Just before thanksgiving Midway had the 6.5jap brass on sale.....IIRC it was Norma. I bought a few hundred rounds and figure I will be safe for a while.

The rifles are very accurate and a joy to shoot. They are different from the regular run of the mill stuff most are use to seeing....again like the other poster said if they are in good shape.

I had one that I sold, but I don't recall it being cock on closing. My enfields cock on closing and I much prefer it.

Dat trigger...

But there's lots to like about the Arisaka. I've got a T99 and never handled a T38, so can only comment on the T99.

1. Good sights. Sure, it's no 1903 or whatever you consider the pinnacle of rife sights. But it's got a nice long sight radius, pointy little front sight, and a rear aperture sight with two sizes of apertures.

2. Light weight. Makes most WWII rifles seem bulky.

3. Good fit and finish. Forget the parade rifles and "last ditch" series -- most Arisakas were very well made.

4. There were lots of different factories making these and they conveniently marked up the rifles with location and batch numbers. Makes things interesting for collectors. Mine is a Tokyo Kogyo (now known as Mazda) series 33.

Not to like...

1. Trigger. I need to tear mine down and understand this better.

2. Mine got rechambered into .30-06, which is a simple conversion but .30-06 bullets are a little undersize for the 7.7 Arisaka barrels. It is my dream to one day find a .30-06 to 7.62x39mm chamber adapter.

3. Trigger guard and magazine floor plate on mine are cast. Aesthetically not nearly as attractive as they would be if machined or even stamped.

4. The stocks held up really, really well but the wood just isn't as pretty as the nice walnut or birch stocks that you find on most Western military rifles. It does look distinctive at least.