|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 13, 2014, 12:43 PM | #1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2014
Posts: 4
|
help identifying unmarked japanese rifle chamber
Hello all,
I have researched this till im blue in the face and have come up with no aswers so i thought i might ask some experts.. I recently came into a Japanese Type 99 Rifle... well actually a box of parts that resembles a rifle. Everthing is there and complete except that i am sure this rifle has been re barreled. I know because i have made of 7.7 japanese brass and it is too long by over an inch to chamber in the rifle. So i have used wax to cast the rifles chamber and took measurement, however i have not come up with anything that fits the measurement i took, everything is too long.. The closest matches i have come up with is 7.5x54 MAS which is still too long and .308 winchester (also too long but just slightly..) i am tempted to lube up a factory fresh .308 case and fireform it to get better measurements but it will mean tapping the brass case into the chamber and hoping i get it in all the way to close the bolt :/.. so not exactly the process id like to move forward with unless i have no other choice. Anyways i have added photos of the casting and measurements hoping someone can give me advice on where to go from here.. also i have done reseach on the rifle itself and traced it back to the place of manufacture for the action.. it is early 1942 and IS NOT a training rifle receiver.. the bolt is not a factory bolt as it has a curved handle but has the correct style and function of safety.. also fun note the emporers seal is NOT defaced at all Thanks you for all your help! |
January 13, 2014, 12:44 PM | #2 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2014
Posts: 4
|
images link
guess the images didnt load.. the link below will take you to all of them
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...Hc&usp=sharing thanks again! troy |
January 13, 2014, 02:21 PM | #3 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
Can you show pictures of the rifle itself, the top of the receiver, the left side and the rifle overall? It might be a training rifle, made for shooting 6.5mm blanks.
Jim |
January 13, 2014, 02:42 PM | #4 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2014
Posts: 4
|
yes i can tonight.. i thought that at first too but the barrel has rifling and i slugged it and measure .309-.310ish also i can push a 110gr vmax .308 down the barrel and get grooves on the jacket of the round. More to follow tonight
Thanks Troy |
January 13, 2014, 03:32 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 20, 2009
Location: Amity Oregon
Posts: 791
|
300 Savage??
|
January 13, 2014, 06:03 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: January 11, 2014
Posts: 19
|
When you say the .308 is too long, by how much are we talking? I saw an old Arisaka a few years ago at a gun show that was rechambered for 7.62x39... As I understand it a lot of rifles that left Japan for the Chinese mainland underwent this conversion to accept the ever abundant Soviet ammo. Just a thought, may be way off but if it sparks a light bulb for somebody....
|
January 13, 2014, 06:19 PM | #7 |
Member
Join Date: January 11, 2014
Posts: 19
|
My bad I missed the pictures somehow, one look at them answers my question, nope.
|
January 13, 2014, 06:52 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2008
Posts: 4,678
|
. |
January 13, 2014, 10:36 PM | #9 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
Those chamber measurements don't add up to 7.62x39, they look like 7.62x51 or .308. What you might have is a rifle that has been rebarrelled to .308 but with a barrel that was short chambered and whoever did the work never got around to reaming it properly. I think it best to buck that gun to our old friend "a competent gunsmith" for a checkout before doing anything like shooting it. A standard Type 99 Japanese rifle is adequately strong for .308, but so many Japanese rifles have been badly mangled, and there are those cast iron training rifles. So I don't want to give advice based on pictures.
Jim |
January 14, 2014, 10:03 AM | #10 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2014
Posts: 4
|
more pictures
Ive taken a few more pictures... so last night after measuring again i decided to see if i could make a .308 fit... it tapped into the chamber without too much force but now its stuck i knew better but just couldnt help myself.. so tonight ill try and get it out of the chamber.. However im thinking of just purchasing a barrel from ebay and having a Smith change the barrel back to the original 7.7 since i already purchased brass and reloading dies. anyways check out the other pictures and let me know what you think...
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...Hc&usp=sharing thanks all! Troy |
January 14, 2014, 10:36 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,535
|
Agree with Jim K, it looks like a short chambered replacement barrel that was not reamed to set headspace. Wax is not the best for chamber casts, but yours seems to show a rather shallow shoulder, too. Chamber probably cut undersize overall with a roughing reamer.
Anecdote: My FLG was in operation in the heyday of surplus sporterizing before GCA 1968. He said that back then, any reputable gunsmith would have a lathe. Therefore replacement barrels could be chambered to full depth. If that made for excess chamber headspace on a particular action, the gunsmith could set it back just enough to correct it. No need for a chamber reamer, just a headspace gauge. Nowadays barrels are sold short chambered so the aspiring gunsmith doesn't have to pay for a lathe. But he has to have a reamer for every caliber he offers to barrel for. |
January 14, 2014, 11:54 AM | #12 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 12, 2013
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 135
|
Okay, so it WAS a Type 99 at one point in its life. The bolt is original, just modified with a bent bolt handle. The good news is these are some of the strongest receivers ever made, and yours appears to be an early to mid-war production when the steel was still good.
Now, the real question is, what is it now? The cartridge almost appears to be a 6.5mm Japanese, not the 7.7 it is supposed to be chambered for. But the caliber is .30. Could there be a chamber insert to shorten the chamber? That would definitely explain it. Otherwise we're looking for an odd-shaped cartridge. |
January 16, 2014, 11:32 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 8, 2011
Posts: 135
|
Camber dimension is close to this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.300_Savage My FIL shot a Arisaka in 300 Savage his whole deer hunting life. Over 40 years. |
January 17, 2014, 01:19 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: South East Pa.
Posts: 3,364
|
I did not look at the cartridge specs too close, as everyone else did. It LOOKS (Hard to tell) like the barrel was set back. There should be a flange butting against the face of the receiver and I don't see that. I have done it with a .308, but the most common changeover involving barrel set back was the .300 Savage. I had one and where the necks blend it can be a little off. It may be that. At 100 yards it shot great, but it left a ring in the brass where the necks blended together.
|
January 17, 2014, 03:00 AM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 7,172
|
Looks a lot like a .300 Savage to me.
|
January 17, 2014, 09:25 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,535
|
The neck looks short for a .300 Sav.
|
January 17, 2014, 10:37 PM | #17 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
Still hard to be sure but I am now leaning toward .300 Savage, partly because when so many of those rifles were being converted, .308 didn't exist, while .300 Savage was very common.
Jim |
|
|