Arisaka type 99

mooman13 · September 6, 2011, 03:02 PM

My neighbor fought in the Pacific during WWII. He brought back a type 99 Arisaka but decided to sporterize the rifle right when he got back home and has regreted it, he now wants to attempt to return it back to its military state but he has no idea where to even begin looking for all the proper hardware and stock for the rifle. I thought I would post here and ask you guys if you would happen to know any information on the topic. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

doofus47 · September 6, 2011, 03:33 PM

If you troll (in the fishing sense) gunbroker.com long enough, you will see stocks as well as "parts guns" come to sale for arisaka rifles.

Ebay also moves a good amount of arisaka small parts.

Between the two, you should be re-built in about a year.

good luck

edit: I see that their stocks are currently sold out, but numrich also keeps a fair amount of Arisaka small parts lying about:
http://www.gunpartscorp.com/

mooman13 · September 6, 2011, 03:44 PM

Thanks very much. My fiences' dad has a book that sells the hardware and stock but comes out to be over $200 in the end. Might have to order one part a week till I help him get it rebuilt if we go that way. Just going to have to troll the internet

muddinman_04 · September 6, 2011, 04:42 PM

I have an uncut T99 stock and handguard, but it's been sanded. It's complete though minus metal. What arsenal and series is the rifle?

I also have a monopod rear band, but again that would matter on what series the rifle is.

Does he want to go as far as putting a monopod and dust cover on the rifle (if it's a series that originally had them)? I may have a dust cover as well, but they are matched by serial number.

mooman13 · September 6, 2011, 05:56 PM

Nagoya Arsenal and it is a series 2. If the stock is sanded then couldnt you just put a coat of finish on it and make it look, I guess the only word I can think of is "glossy".... I would like to try to talk him into the dust cover but I dont know if he will go for it depending on the price.

muddinman_04 · September 6, 2011, 06:06 PM

PM Sent

Gunplummer · September 6, 2011, 08:07 PM

They used shellac for a finish. You used to be able to pick up yellow shellac at Sears.

mooman13 · September 6, 2011, 08:45 PM

Gunplummer,

Thank you for that helpful tip.

mooman13 · September 8, 2011, 12:19 AM

I'm trying to find an exploded view of a type 99 but all I can find is pictures of the type 38. I need this to be able to locate all the parts that I am missing. Anyone able to locate one that I'm just missing?

doofus47 · September 8, 2011, 10:51 AM

muddinman:

Quote:

putting a monopod and dust cover on the rifle

Ok, i'm going to say this (not to start a shooting war, but just cause I think these things and I wonder if other people do...)

Does anyone find it ironic that Japanese soldiers often took these items off of their factory-issued Arisakas? And we spend lots of our free time trying to find them to put them back on?
:-)

muddinman_04 · September 8, 2011, 10:59 AM

What report have you seen that says a Japanese soldier removed any part of his rifle??? These rifles were property of the Emperor and removing or modifying it in any way would have meant BIG trouble for the offending soldier.
If you have proof to substantiate your claims that the Japanese soldier was the one to remove these items, PLEASE post them as I am yet to see any reports that it was nothing more than American GI's removing these parts after capture.

tater134 · September 8, 2011, 12:38 PM

Quote:

What report have you seen that says a Japanese soldier removed any part of his rifle??? These rifles were property of the Emperor and removing or modifying it in any way would have meant BIG trouble for the offending soldier.
If you have proof to substantiate your claims that the Japanese soldier was the one to remove these items, PLEASE post them as I am yet to see any reports that it was nothing more than American GI's removing these parts after capture.

+1!

tater134 · September 8, 2011, 12:42 PM

..

jtb1967 · September 8, 2011, 02:56 PM

The long standing story has always been that Japanese soldiers removed dustcovers because of the rattle they can make. Since I never served in a Japanese unit in WWII, I couldn't swear either way

I have seen folks put monopods on rifles that probably never had them to begin with based on the lack of pods "dings" on the stock.

Geezerbiker · September 8, 2011, 04:25 PM

My father told me a story about landing in the South Pacific in a place where Japanese troupes had previously been and there were all sorts of dust covers and mono-pods on the ground. It seems they these were the first things to go in service...

The only original T99 Arisaka I've had had an even patina where these parts would have been and there was no sign of wear marks to make me think the rifle had been used with them in place. This rifle also had the the aircraft sights removed. Anyway once I got it I realized that it wasn't as important to me as I thought it would be so I sold it and bought something else.

Tony

doofus47 · September 9, 2011, 09:57 AM

Quote:

What report have you seen that says a Japanese soldier removed any part of his rifle??? These rifles were property of the Emperor and removing or modifying it in any way would have meant BIG trouble for the offending soldier.

Have sold off my arisaka stuff, but will look for the reference.

mooman13 · September 9, 2011, 10:16 AM

My neighbor says that when he first landed if the pacific he would see the dust covers and monopods scatterd throughout the islands. He said you could hear them clank around (on the rifles that kept them) when the enemy soldiers were working the bolt right before they started to open fire on him. If I had something that would start to give away my position I would dump it too.

muddinman_04 · September 9, 2011, 01:38 PM

They never dumped them...that is an old wives tale. They don't clank around when on the proper rifle. I have several of them with the original dust covers and they make absolutely no difference in sound when properly installed on the rifle.

IF the Japanese did remove them, they certainly would not have just thrown them away! There has been talk about the Japanese removing them during the end of the war for scrap drives, but again, that has been nothing but pure speculation. Logistically, it would be quite a feat to take all of those dust covers to the homeland for scrap.

I'm sticking with what the pros say about it. The majority of them were removed by American GIs when the bolts were removed to ship them home.

James K · September 9, 2011, 07:13 PM

Hi, muddinman,

Being something of a skeptic, I am going to turn things around. What solid, documented, absolute, proof do YOU have that Japanese soldiers did NOT, EVER, remove those dust covers and bipods?

The bipod does not actually rattle, but it is something of a nuisance and could easily catch on gear or foliage; I can see that it might be removed by troops. The dust cover rattle would make little difference to the noise level when working the bolt and firing, but they do rattle (or at least mine do) when the rifle is shaken, as it would be when being carried on a march.

I have no doubt that some concern about making noise in certain situations was paranoia but, as an example, U.S. troops routinely taped their dog tags together to keep them from rattling before going on patrol.

Jim

muddinman_04 · September 9, 2011, 08:22 PM

James,
Please allow me to rephrase my previous point. I'm not saying that the Japanese did not remove the cover. I am only saying that I would be VERY surprised if they were removed and just discarded or thrown out. Maybe taken off the rifle and put away (in a breadbag or personal bag of some sort) before heavy combat or a patrol...yes, I could see that as (although negligible) the dust covers do slightly rattle when the rifle is being cocked, but it would be replaced after use. Could they have been removed for scrap drives? Possibly, but again that wouldn't make much sense to take them off and have to ship them from some island to the homeland.

I don't have any proof that they didn't remove them. This is not a black and white, cut and paste topic. However, with the strict rules and regulations of the Japanese Imperial Army and the Emperor, I would find it HIGHLY unlikely that there were a bunch of soldiers out there in the field being issued these rifles and throwing parts away on them. Especially with the need for steel increasing at the War's end.

I'm an open minded guy and if pictures surfaced or a document arises showing that they did in fact remove them and throw them out then I would believe it.

James K · September 9, 2011, 11:53 PM

Well, you made an absolute, unequivocal statement; I was just wondering how you knew with such certainty since I doubted you were in the Japanese Army in WWII. (FWIW, I wasn't either.)

The fact is that unless you have interviewed Japanese veterans, you don't know a darn bit more than I do about what the Japanese did or didn't do, and anything we post is a combination of reading, war stories and rumor. FWIW, I don't believe that Americans found piles of dust covers and bipods, or that they were sent back to Japan as scrap. If they were thrown away, it would likely have been done by individual soldiers wherever they happened to be when they got tired of the darned thing.

If you want war stories and baloney, get on the topic of the ground "mum" sometime. WWII vets never admitted getting rifles out of depots in Japan after the war; every single Arisaka was captured in desperate hand-to-hand combat with Tojo, if not Hirohito himself. "So how did the crest get ground, grandpa?" "Oh, well, you see..." and the fun begins.

Jim

muddinman_04 · September 10, 2011, 05:06 AM

You are misconstruing my point. It would be ludicrous to believe that Japanese soldiers were throwing their dust covers and monopods away. There are several reasonable explanations as to why they are missing on some bringback rifles and throwing them away is not one of them.

I stated that the Japanese did not dump them. I don't have to be a Japanese War Veteran to know that; just someone with a good sense of history and common sense toward the topic.

Quote:

If they were thrown away, it would likely have been done by individual soldiers wherever they happened to be when they got tired of the darned thing.

No way!!! The rifle was the property of the Emperor. It was one of the only pieces of equipment to be marked so! Removing and discarding any accessories (no matter how useless) would have been in direct defiance of the Emperor himself. No Japanese soldiers would have wanted that heat over a worthless dust cover!

crazy charlie · September 10, 2011, 09:14 AM

If I were you I'd go to www.surplusrifle.com. and cut to the quick to find out if it is worth salvaging. There is a wealth of info on this site and a good source or leads to sources for parts and information.

muddinman_04 · September 11, 2011, 01:13 PM

Also try going here: Japanese Collector Boards.

There are many authors and professionals that frequent and participate in the boards there.

Magnum Wheel Man · September 13, 2011, 07:27 AM

I just picked up a ( I think ) type 38 carbine with full length wood, & an un ground mum, still has the anti aircraft sights... no idea how much of it is original... but the rifle is pretty interesting... I've yet to shoot it... but hopefully will get the chance before the snow flys ???

September 6, 2011, 03:02 PM	#1
mooman13 Member Join Date: September 5, 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 23	Arisaka type 99 My neighbor fought in the Pacific during WWII. He brought back a type 99 Arisaka but decided to sporterize the rifle right when he got back home and has regreted it, he now wants to attempt to return it back to its military state but he has no idea where to even begin looking for all the proper hardware and stock for the rifle. I thought I would post here and ask you guys if you would happen to know any information on the topic. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Last edited by mooman13; September 6, 2011 at 03:22 PM.

September 13, 2011, 07:27 AM	#25
Magnum Wheel Man Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2006 Location: Southern Minnesota Posts: 9,333	I just picked up a ( I think ) type 38 carbine with full length wood, & an un ground mum, still has the anti aircraft sights... no idea how much of it is original... but the rifle is pretty interesting... I've yet to shoot it... but hopefully will get the chance before the snow flys ??? __________________ In life you either make dust or eat dust...

September 6, 2011, 03:33 PM	#2
doofus47 Senior Member Join Date: June 9, 2010 Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent Posts: 2,483	If you troll (in the fishing sense) gunbroker.com long enough, you will see stocks as well as "parts guns" come to sale for arisaka rifles. Ebay also moves a good amount of arisaka small parts. Between the two, you should be re-built in about a year. good luck edit: I see that their stocks are currently sold out, but numrich also keeps a fair amount of Arisaka small parts lying about: http://www.gunpartscorp.com/

September 6, 2011, 03:44 PM	#3
mooman13 Member Join Date: September 5, 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 23	Thanks very much. My fiences' dad has a book that sells the hardware and stock but comes out to be over $200 in the end. Might have to order one part a week till I help him get it rebuilt if we go that way. Just going to have to troll the internet

September 6, 2011, 04:42 PM	#4
muddinman_04 Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 98	I have an uncut T99 stock and handguard, but it's been sanded. It's complete though minus metal. What arsenal and series is the rifle? I also have a monopod rear band, but again that would matter on what series the rifle is. Does he want to go as far as putting a monopod and dust cover on the rifle (if it's a series that originally had them)? I may have a dust cover as well, but they are matched by serial number.

September 6, 2011, 05:56 PM	#5
mooman13 Member Join Date: September 5, 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 23	Nagoya Arsenal and it is a series 2. If the stock is sanded then couldnt you just put a coat of finish on it and make it look, I guess the only word I can think of is "glossy".... I would like to try to talk him into the dust cover but I dont know if he will go for it depending on the price.

September 6, 2011, 06:06 PM	#6
muddinman_04 Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 98	PM Sent

September 6, 2011, 08:07 PM	#7
Gunplummer Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2010 Location: South East Pa. Posts: 3,364	They used shellac for a finish. You used to be able to pick up yellow shellac at Sears.

September 6, 2011, 08:45 PM	#8
mooman13 Member Join Date: September 5, 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 23	Gunplummer, Thank you for that helpful tip.

September 8, 2011, 12:19 AM	#9
mooman13 Member Join Date: September 5, 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 23	I'm trying to find an exploded view of a type 99 but all I can find is pictures of the type 38. I need this to be able to locate all the parts that I am missing. Anyone able to locate one that I'm just missing?

September 8, 2011, 10:59 AM	#11
muddinman_04 Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 98	What report have you seen that says a Japanese soldier removed any part of his rifle??? These rifles were property of the Emperor and removing or modifying it in any way would have meant BIG trouble for the offending soldier. If you have proof to substantiate your claims that the Japanese soldier was the one to remove these items, PLEASE post them as I am yet to see any reports that it was nothing more than American GI's removing these parts after capture.

September 8, 2011, 12:42 PM	#13
tater134 Senior Member Join Date: August 22, 2009 Location: NE,PA Posts: 390	..

September 8, 2011, 02:56 PM	#14
jtb1967 Junior member Join Date: September 29, 2004 Location: WV Posts: 454	The long standing story has always been that Japanese soldiers removed dustcovers because of the rattle they can make. Since I never served in a Japanese unit in WWII, I couldn't swear either way I have seen folks put monopods on rifles that probably never had them to begin with based on the lack of pods "dings" on the stock.

September 8, 2011, 04:25 PM	#15
Geezerbiker Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 2011 Location: Willamina, OR Posts: 1,908	My father told me a story about landing in the South Pacific in a place where Japanese troupes had previously been and there were all sorts of dust covers and mono-pods on the ground. It seems they these were the first things to go in service... The only original T99 Arisaka I've had had an even patina where these parts would have been and there was no sign of wear marks to make me think the rifle had been used with them in place. This rifle also had the the aircraft sights removed. Anyway once I got it I realized that it wasn't as important to me as I thought it would be so I sold it and bought something else. Tony

September 9, 2011, 10:16 AM	#17
mooman13 Member Join Date: September 5, 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 23	My neighbor says that when he first landed if the pacific he would see the dust covers and monopods scatterd throughout the islands. He said you could hear them clank around (on the rifles that kept them) when the enemy soldiers were working the bolt right before they started to open fire on him. If I had something that would start to give away my position I would dump it too.

September 9, 2011, 01:38 PM	#18
muddinman_04 Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 98	They never dumped them...that is an old wives tale. They don't clank around when on the proper rifle. I have several of them with the original dust covers and they make absolutely no difference in sound when properly installed on the rifle. IF the Japanese did remove them, they certainly would not have just thrown them away! There has been talk about the Japanese removing them during the end of the war for scrap drives, but again, that has been nothing but pure speculation. Logistically, it would be quite a feat to take all of those dust covers to the homeland for scrap. I'm sticking with what the pros say about it. The majority of them were removed by American GIs when the bolts were removed to ship them home.

September 9, 2011, 07:13 PM	#19
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Hi, muddinman, Being something of a skeptic, I am going to turn things around. What solid, documented, absolute, proof do YOU have that Japanese soldiers did NOT, EVER, remove those dust covers and bipods? The bipod does not actually rattle, but it is something of a nuisance and could easily catch on gear or foliage; I can see that it might be removed by troops. The dust cover rattle would make little difference to the noise level when working the bolt and firing, but they do rattle (or at least mine do) when the rifle is shaken, as it would be when being carried on a march. I have no doubt that some concern about making noise in certain situations was paranoia but, as an example, U.S. troops routinely taped their dog tags together to keep them from rattling before going on patrol. Jim

September 9, 2011, 08:22 PM	#20
muddinman_04 Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 98	James, Please allow me to rephrase my previous point. I'm not saying that the Japanese did not remove the cover. I am only saying that I would be VERY surprised if they were removed and just discarded or thrown out. Maybe taken off the rifle and put away (in a breadbag or personal bag of some sort) before heavy combat or a patrol...yes, I could see that as (although negligible) the dust covers do slightly rattle when the rifle is being cocked, but it would be replaced after use. Could they have been removed for scrap drives? Possibly, but again that wouldn't make much sense to take them off and have to ship them from some island to the homeland. I don't have any proof that they didn't remove them. This is not a black and white, cut and paste topic. However, with the strict rules and regulations of the Japanese Imperial Army and the Emperor, I would find it HIGHLY unlikely that there were a bunch of soldiers out there in the field being issued these rifles and throwing parts away on them. Especially with the need for steel increasing at the War's end. I'm an open minded guy and if pictures surfaced or a document arises showing that they did in fact remove them and throw them out then I would believe it.

September 9, 2011, 11:53 PM	#21
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Well, you made an absolute, unequivocal statement; I was just wondering how you knew with such certainty since I doubted you were in the Japanese Army in WWII. (FWIW, I wasn't either.) The fact is that unless you have interviewed Japanese veterans, you don't know a darn bit more than I do about what the Japanese did or didn't do, and anything we post is a combination of reading, war stories and rumor. FWIW, I don't believe that Americans found piles of dust covers and bipods, or that they were sent back to Japan as scrap. If they were thrown away, it would likely have been done by individual soldiers wherever they happened to be when they got tired of the darned thing. If you want war stories and baloney, get on the topic of the ground "mum" sometime. WWII vets never admitted getting rifles out of depots in Japan after the war; every single Arisaka was captured in desperate hand-to-hand combat with Tojo, if not Hirohito himself. "So how did the crest get ground, grandpa?" "Oh, well, you see..." and the fun begins. Jim

September 10, 2011, 09:14 AM	#23
crazy charlie Senior Member Join Date: February 29, 2008 Location: PA Posts: 229	If I were you I'd go to www.surplusrifle.com. and cut to the quick to find out if it is worth salvaging. There is a wealth of info on this site and a good source or leads to sources for parts and information.

September 11, 2011, 01:13 PM	#24
muddinman_04 Member Join Date: February 14, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 98	Also try going here: Japanese Collector Boards. There are many authors and professionals that frequent and participate in the boards there.