The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > The Smithy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 29, 2021, 05:34 PM   #1
wmpendergrass
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2021
Posts: 1
Arisaka mod 38 strength

I have a arisaka type 38 chambered for 6.5x284 Norma is it safe to shoot safely. It is a beautiful gun but I have reservations about a wwll gun. I know the late model 99s were unsafe for sporterizing.
wmpendergrass is offline  
Old December 29, 2021, 05:41 PM   #2
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 15,248
PO Ackley tried "test to failure" on a number of popular actions back in the 1950 or 1960s. The only actions he couldnt blow up were the Arisaka and Carcano. Neither were "desirable" actions for sporterizing. All of the "desirable" actions (Mausers, Springfields, Enfields, etc) failed well before the "not so desirable" ones. Few of them failed violently, they just locked up and leaked gases (although several small ring Mausers did fail catastrophically), so there's little to worry about as far as that goes. I wouldn't worry too much about a Type 38 Arisaka.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Scorch is offline  
Old December 29, 2021, 07:59 PM   #3
BornFighting88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2021
Posts: 455
Isn't the Model 38 similar to the 99 in that it is a Mauser clone?? Or was that a completely different footprint??
BornFighting88 is offline  
Old December 29, 2021, 09:03 PM   #4
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
Quote:
Isn't the Model 38 similar to the 99 in that it is a Mauser clone??
generally similar, in that it is a dual lug front locking bolt action with the Mauser type claw extractor. There are numerous differences.

The type 38 might best be considered a modified Mauser 95 more than anything else. It's cock on closing, not cock on opening like the 98.

Adopted in 1905 and while it was intended to be replaced by the type 99 (beginning in 1939) the type 38 served throughout the war, with primary production ending about 1942 and one arsenal continuing to produce small numbers until 1944.

There are no "last ditch junk" type 38s. And while there were small numbers of type 99s in that category they were only made in the very last months of the war and were not made in large numbers and are no where near as common as people today believe.

As to Ackley's famous blow up tests, lots has been made of them, nearly always mentioning how the Arisiaka was the strongest, but while its interesting information to know, it means about nothing to the regular rifle user.

So, you've got a rifle someone rechambered to 6.5mm-284. Odds are pretty good who ever did that SHOT IT. It didn't blow up then, its unlikely to blow up now. Have a competent gunsmith check it for headspace and lug set back (which should be done with any rechambered/rebarreled rifle) and everything else possible) and if it passes, use it in joy and good health.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 29, 2021, 09:06 PM   #5
105kw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 30, 2017
Location: Columbia Basin Washington
Posts: 410
It's a Mauser copy. Cock on closing, so closer to a 95 Mauser.
When the 6.5 Arisaka came to the States after the war, 6.5/ 257 Robert's was a common conversion due to lack of 6.5×50 brass.
105kw is offline  
Old December 30, 2021, 11:58 AM   #6
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,486
The 6.5x284 Norma is a surprisingly mild round AS FACTORY LOADED, not what Long Range target shooters do with it.
CIP maximum pressure is 4100 bar where .30-06 is 4050 bar. (59000 psi)

Is your Type 38 rechambered or rebarrelled?
Jim Watson is offline  
Old December 30, 2021, 12:20 PM   #7
Lavan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 1999
Location: California
Posts: 2,714
ANECDOTE ONLY !!

When I was a lot younger, my best friend was a gunsmith. He was a graduate of the Lassen Community College gunsmithing school.

He told me that one of the things they did was a blowup test on various actions and the Arisaka proved the strongest one.

Don't know the model, but I always remembered that.

Lavan is offline  
Old December 30, 2021, 06:19 PM   #8
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,402
Is it safe?
Only the person that built it can answer that question. Every Bubba'd rifle is different.

Can the action handle it, if not compromised in some way? Absolutely.

Have someone check it out thoroughly.


Quote:
It's a Mauser copy. Cock on closing, so closer to a 95 Mauser.
Yes, but no. And also no.

The Type 38 is a derivative of the Type 30 (the only actual "Arisaka"). Though influenced by the Mauser, it differs in significantly, mechanically. The Type 30 was built from the ground up for use in sandy, wet environments. The action was meant to be self-cleaning and self-protecting; using gross motor control for operation, rather than fine motor control. But it still failed to achieve those goals in many ways.

The Type 38 was Kijiro Nambu's vision of what the T30 should have been - as much as he could get away with while working on the emperor's dime and timeline, and within the constraints of ancillary equipment already in use, anyway.
His personal diaries and work notes document his thoughts on protecting the shooter, protecting the action, and simplifying the design. Though the end result was even closer to a Mauser than the starting point, the Type 38 is a product of independent/simultaneous invention, rather than a copy or clone. If you look closely at the action and its pieces, you can see many ways in which it differs, but wouldn't if it had just been based on a Mauser. Different approaches to the same ideas.

Looks similar to a Mauser. Smells like a Mauser. But is a Nambu.

The Type 99 was a further simplified T38, which mostly only came to be because the T38 was too short for their 7.7x58mm machinegun cartridge.

And why anyone would compare to the 1895 Mauser, makes no sense to me. Missing the mark. 1893 is the important one for influencing "clones" and "copies", but even then, pretty much nothing came to be before the greatly-improved G98 and its evolution into the 1924 pattern. The 95 update was mostly gas mitigation and going from square-bottomed to round bolt face (due to slight magazine improvements, and allowing cheaper manufacture).
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old January 6, 2022, 06:47 PM   #9
wachtelhund1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2007
Location: pelican lake, WI
Posts: 413
T38 Arisaka 6.5 X 57 Mauser

I have a T38 Arisaka that I bought a long while ago. It had been sporter-ized and had a very nice Bishop stock on it. I got it off GB for $150.00, no body wanted it. It was the original 6.5 Jap caliber. So, I bought a cheap Midway 6.5 barrel for $89.00. I had it chambered for 6.5X57 Mauser and mounted it to the gun. I also installed a Timmy trigger with safety. It shoots very well and regularly groups 129 gr Hornady bullets under an inch. I had the gun blued and I checkered the stock myself. I have less than $450.00 into a great shooter.

If checked out okay, I would shoot the 6.5X284.
wachtelhund1 is offline  
Old January 13, 2022, 08:24 PM   #10
xtriggerman
Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2012
Posts: 44
I guess I'll add to the blow up testing. Back in the early 80's I worked at Auto Ordnance. Directly across the road was a GS named Duffy's. The guy Duffy was well respected as a top gunsmith. I would go chat with him during lunch time and he told me after the war he worked at Aberdeen proving ground deconstructing a wide variety of arms brought back from the war. And as mentioned, the Arisaka was indestructible. He said they would weld a pin directly thew the barrel just ahead of a cartridge in battery position, load the hotest pill they could from their components and touch em off. The Arisaka would spit the barrel clean out of the receiver ring, leaving its threads behind. They then coiled the threads out and rebarreled the action and lit it up several more times with the same results. No cracks in the receivers or bolts. Its been suggested that Japan was buying their steel from Germany, who were mining the best ore in the world at the time in Solingen mines. If it weren't for the funky safety, they Could have been the action of choice for the heavy hitters.
xtriggerman is offline  
Old January 14, 2022, 10:19 AM   #11
4V50 Gary
Staff
 
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,824
Thanks xtriggerman. I knew about the strength of the Arisaka from reading books but wasn't aware of what you just wrote.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe!
4V50 Gary is offline  
Old January 16, 2022, 12:13 PM   #12
BornFighting88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2021
Posts: 455
Wow…. Just wow. Bore obstruction, and it would just pop the pipe off and you could salvage the action. Incredible.

Now that goes against what I had heard about German steel. I have read in a few places that Germany was hurting for alloying elements, and that their native steel relied on imported alloying agents to make things useable. Am I right in this??
BornFighting88 is offline  
Old January 16, 2022, 01:27 PM   #13
101combatvet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2011
Posts: 667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lavan View Post
ANECDOTE ONLY !!

When I was a lot younger, my best friend was a gunsmith. He was a graduate of the Lassen Community College gunsmithing school.

He told me that one of the things they did was a blowup test on various actions and the Arisaka proved the strongest one.

Don't know the model, but I always remembered that.

It's funny that many people believe that what the Japanese made during WW2 was junk. The NRA did some tests years ago, and their rifles held up very well; no fear there. I might add that their helmets tested for ballistic quality found that they were superior to our M1. Nothing wrong with Japanese metallurgy during WW2.
__________________
Special Operations Combat Veteran
Gunsmith, BS, MFA, Competitive Shooter
NRA Certified Firearms Instructor [9 Certifications]
101combatvet is offline  
Old January 16, 2022, 03:46 PM   #14
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
Because the Japanese did produce a small number of very crude and probably unsafe rifles in the closing days of the war somehow the belief has taken hold among the un and under educated that this was the case with all their rifles, and it certainly was not.

Quote:
Its been suggested that Japan was buying their steel from Germany, who were mining the best ore in the world at the time in Solingen mines.
Whoever suggested that is out of touch with the reality of the history. Japan was not buying their steel from Germany, other than small quantities of finished goods, no one was buying steel from Germany except Germany, and Germany was getting a lot of the iron ore to make that steel from Sweden. Swedish iron ore went to Norway, where it was then shipped to Germany. This was in fact, the strategic reason Nazi Germany occupied Norway in 1940. TO protect its supply line of iron ore.

Japan conquered Manchuria (A: because they could...) mostly to get control of the iron deposits there. And, yes, they were also buying metal and many other strategic resources from US before FDR's "economic sanctions" forbid it, and that is widely held to have led directly to war with Japan.

As to the blow up (failure) strength of any action, its nice to know, I guess, but its really irrelvant to anything except what it takes to blow up that action.

The rifles ALL survive proof testing and operating pressures are well below proof loads, so what does it matter to the user if rifle A failed at 117,000 psi and rifle B didn't fail until 128,000psi when they are going to be operated at 45-50,000 psi??

Everything has mechanical failure limits. When they are really close to the operating limits they matter quite a bit. When they are well beyond the normal and expected stress levels they don't matter nearly as much to the user.

Think of it like the red line on a tachometer. Say the line is at 6 but the dial goes to 9. All the driver needs to know is that if he runs at 6 he's not putting dangerous stress on the engine, and that if he pushes it to 9, something is going to break, probably very soon.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old February 4, 2022, 03:41 PM   #15
wachtelhund1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2007
Location: pelican lake, WI
Posts: 413
Pics of my T-38 in 6.5 X 57mm.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2ur4EuqG_o.jpg (568.0 KB, 76 views)
File Type: jpg LTHBrHdH_o.jpg (742.9 KB, 73 views)

Last edited by wachtelhund1; February 4, 2022 at 04:15 PM.
wachtelhund1 is offline  
Old March 30, 2022, 09:07 PM   #16
TRX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 24, 2008
Location: central Arkansas
Posts: 400
The original 6.5 Japanese is a very nice cartridge and easy to handload.

Note that while the 6.5 is described as having a "unique" case head diameter, later cartridges like the 7.62x39, 6.5 Grendel, and .50 Beowulf share it.
TRX is offline  
Old April 1, 2022, 07:40 PM   #17
Baldrick
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2018
Posts: 8
Arisaka type 38

this might interest you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beDl...nel=C%26Rsenal
Baldrick is offline  
Old April 2, 2022, 05:03 PM   #18
Lavan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 1999
Location: California
Posts: 2,714
The 7.7 has a tiny bit.... of kick!
Lavan is offline  
Old May 1, 2022, 12:33 PM   #19
logeorge
Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Ardmore, AL
Posts: 68
type 38 safety

I had a type 38 for a time and never had a problem operating the safety. I have rather small hands, but I could easily disengage it with my thumb. Mine did have a matching bolt and receiver, though some other parts were mis-matched. I've heard a lot of complaints about how hard they were to operate. I didn't find this to be a problem. As to the type 99 being unsafe, check Frank deHaas' chapter on the Japanese rifles in his book "Bolt Action Rifles" where he tried to blow up a 99.
logeorge is offline  
Old May 1, 2022, 01:41 PM   #20
mehavey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,869
Not to mix a linguistic metaphor...
...esta feo y fuerte....
mehavey is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.07774 seconds with 11 queries