I hear that a lot, seems the word Arisaks's is a trigger word, at the first mention of the 38 or the 77 I expect the next statement repeated by some one is "The strongest receiver is the world" and I say "Forget the receiver, I want the cases that were used for the test" the cases used in the test have got to be different than the cases I have and most are Norma.
Then I am reminded Ackley welded the barrel shut then loaded up the chamber and let it go, nothing happened, the case did not rip open the barrel did not split, as to split,, do not try this, take my word for it but there are links on the Internet showing the effects an obstruction had on a barrel when a bore sight was left in the bore when fired, the barrel looked like a metal floral arrangement. The ability of the barrel to withstand pressure diminishes as the barrel is reduced in diameter.
I do not/have not taken a rifle apart to draw conclusions based on design, I do have 3 Japanese receivers with a box of barrels I could thread and install, but, to me when I look at the receiver it looks like the front receiver ting is cut beyond half way through, the Mauser is a complete ring,, the lug/extractor way stops before it gets to the receiver ring, the Japanese receiver ring has the lug/extractor way cut from the rear to the front of the receiver ring, the cut is beyond half way through the receiver for the length of the receiver, I know it is easier to make the through cut, me? I want all the metal up front I can get, again forget the receiver, I want those cases, the cases that were not destroyed when the barrel was plugged and tested.
A long time ago before A Square was sold they attempted to blow up a Model M 1917, they started with pistol powder, then added more pistol powder, then finally it let go, they called it the buck horn rifle, the barrel took on the appearance of a metal floral arrangement, the barrel at the muzzle split open, seems the pressure behind the bullet did not have time to wait for the bullet to leave.
And then no one makes a distinction between the two rifles, seems Arisaks covers them all.
F. Guffey
some of the above information is just completely WRONG. The Mauser does NOT have a "complete ring" in the receiver breech, it is cut through the right side, front to back, exactly like the Arisaka. Take a light and look in there for yourself. What you are seeing is the barrel face, not the receiver, behind that cut slot for the extractor.
The Arisaka actually has MORE material in the ring than the Mauser does, it has a second layer around the inside edge, that comes in completely around the chamber hole to the edge of the chamber and cartridge head. LOOK INSIDE with a penlight. The Mauser inside ring is nowhere near the chamber edge or cartridge head. That ring on an Arisaka was also specially and separately HEAT TREATED apart from the rest of the rifle, which is why the Arisaka is so strong. But there's even more to the Arisaka's strength than that.
If you look closely at an Arisaka bolt and breech, the Arisaka breech is recessed deeper than a Mauser, it is deeply recessed for the bolt head, like a Weatherby Mark V or Remington 700. The locking lugs on an Arisaka are also slightly back further on the bolt body than a Mauser, they are back a bit more. Compare the 2 bolts and receiver chambers and see for yourself. Recessing the locking lugs further on the bolt head, allows the bolt head to go inside the breech further, to be surrounded tighter by a ring of steel on the Arisaka, because that inside ring is extended on the Arisaka right to the cartridge head.
Both designs have the extractor cut, but in this way the Arisaka better supports and surrounds the cartridge case head.
that's about as strong as you can possibly make a controlled feed Mauser type action, without going to a push feed and small extractor on the bolt, like the Remington 700, Weatherby Mark V, or Winchester post-64 model 70. On those newer designs, once the extractor is made smaller, there can be a complete ring of steel inside the breech, because there's no longer a need for a large extractor groove for clearance of the hook end of the Mauser type extractor.
you won't find a stronger military bolt action than an Arisaka. Tests were done on Remington 700, Enfield 1917, Mauser, Springfield and they finished in that order from first to last, i.e. the Springfield action blew up first, and spit the firing pin out like a missile backwards. The Arisaka is inherently safer than the Enfield 1917, because the Enfield has a coned breech. There is a lot of case head sticking out exposed on the Enfield, when it is fired- the only thing between the shooter and 55k psi pressure, is that case head sidewall.
IMHO the coned breech is an accident waiting to eventually happen, especially to handloaders, and the Springfield, Enfield, and pre-64 Winchester all have a coned breech. This stops me from ever paying big money for a pre-64 model 70, and certainly from ever loading ammo hot for a coned breech firearm.
Something to think about if you're handloading for a Springfield 03, if that small pin ever shears off, that holds the back half of the 2 piece firing pin to the bolt shroud, the shooter eats the firing pin.
