Help Identify

TheSaint · December 3, 2013, 10:44 PM

Hello guys'

I'm new to the forum. I visited my Father over Thanksgiving and he gave me a few of my Grandfather's firearms. I received a Remington 1100 duck hunting shotgun, a US Army 1917 357 Magnum and an old Weihrauch 44Magnum single action revolver which he calls a Saturday Night Special.

I'm having trouble identifying this rifle. Any help is appreciated.

Please forgive the pics. They were taken with my phone.

TheSaint · December 3, 2013, 10:46 PM

TheSaint · December 3, 2013, 10:50 PM

Wyosmith · December 3, 2013, 10:55 PM

That is a WW2 Type 99 Japanese Arisaka

Jim Watson · December 3, 2013, 11:07 PM

And a late war rifle, roughly made with a lot of corners cut as Japan was losing.
Known as the "last ditch" rifle.
Not common, too bad it was left to rust.

TheSaint · December 3, 2013, 11:21 PM

Do you think it's worth restoration?

BillM · December 3, 2013, 11:46 PM

As others have said, it appears to be a "last ditch" Arisaka.

I'm a little curious about your 1917 Army .357 magnum. The model
1917 (both S&W and Colt) was chambered in 45 ACP using moon clips.
It would also fire 45 auto rim.

The .357 magnum didn't come out until 1934----

Unspoken · December 4, 2013, 12:01 AM

Looks like a trainer Arisaka to me.

gyvel · December 4, 2013, 01:56 AM

At the very end of the war, the Japanese industrial machine had taken a lot of hits from Allied bombing. This rifle reflects the desperate conditions that existed in Japan at that time.

If I were to "restore" it, I would only "smooth" out the rust using copious amounts of turpentine-soaked 0000 steel wool to give it an even, smooth patina. Rebluing it would defintiely not enhance the value of it.

Another technique for smoothing rust is to use a Dremel with a carbon steel brush, also with a lot of turpentine or thin oil. Generally, if used lightly, you can also blend small rust spots on blued guns without disturbing the blue.

Regarding your 1917 .357, it is probably a gun that was converted using a .357 barrel and cylinder from Numrich Arms. This was common in the 50s and '60s when these guns were $29.95.

**44 AMP** · December 4, 2013, 06:52 AM

Arisaka, without doubt. Which arisaka is another question.

The bolt handle is the late war "last ditch" style. The overall finish of the metal work is consistent with the last ditch rifles, BUT, there were also "drill rifles" and training rifles. Many of these were made of cast iron, not steel!

Also the complete lack of markings, including the "mum" (not defaced, appears never to have been there) lead me to suspect its a drill rifle, not one ever intended for shooting

TheSaint · December 4, 2013, 09:37 AM

Thanks a lot. I will have the rifle evaluated by a Gunsmith before I waste time and effort on it.

I will concentrate my efforts on the .357 and the Remington 1100.

James K · December 4, 2013, 10:14 AM

Based on several indications, I am inclined to agree with Unspoken that it is a trainer, not a real rifle. Those "rifles" were intended only for firing blanks and should never be fired with live ammunition.

The bolt head appears to be cracked, further reason not to fire it under any circumstances.

Still, it is a WWII souvenir and would make a good wall hanger.

Jim

tahunua001 · December 4, 2013, 12:04 PM

looks to me like you may have a last ditch arisaka. it does have a lot of features I do not recognize but the fixed sight and the lack of finish work on the bolt handle and safety knob suggest a last ditch effort type 99. the japs were getting desperate towards the end of WWII and their quality control went way downhill.

Baba Louie · December 4, 2013, 01:59 PM

I agree with last ditch Arisaka.

Do a google image search using those terms and see whatcha come up with.

And for the love of all that's steel, wood and holy, give that warrior some oil please!

tahunua001 · December 4, 2013, 02:43 PM

hmmm, going through the comments here I am seeing a number of things I missed in my assessment.
1. the lack of a mum, it wasn't ground off, it was just never there, this would support that it was either a drill rifle or a training rifle. doesn't make sense to be a trainer though since that is such a poorly manufacturered rifle that a japanese conscript would likely not know what to do when he got a real rifle.

2. the cracked bolt head. that is definitely not safe to fire. I suggest some steel wool to unbugger the rust a bit, oil it up well and hang it on the wall.

Jim Watson · December 4, 2013, 03:03 PM

I cannot find anything about a Type 99 blank-only trainer.
The Type 99 did not come out until 1939 when Japan was already at war in China. I suspect they were running cadets and recruits straight to live fire training by then.

The "crack" in the bolt is at the location for the ejector slot. I can't imagine what would have hammered it into that S curve.
Certainly not shootable. Not worth repair or restoration

Pictures of well preserved "last ditch" rifles show rough construction and a lot of shortcuts, but they have a pretty good blue job.
I found a photo of one such with no Mum, but it did have some Oriental Chicken Tracks as to maker.

I'd start with the milder approaches to rust removal. If you could get it out of the stock and find a long narrow pan, a month or so soak in oil, penetrating oil, or transmission fluid followed by a rubdown with rough cloth or fine steel wool would be a good start.
Chemical rust removal will leave an unnatural gray color.
A wire wheel, unless one of the fine ones made for rust bluing, will leave unsightly brush marks.

RJay · December 4, 2013, 05:01 PM

I'm also curious about that 1917 357.

James K · December 4, 2013, 06:05 PM

A Model 1917 in .357 would not be too unusual, as the New Service was made in that caliber and Colt sold barrels and cylinders in both .38 Special and .357 as well as doing factory conversions. The butt markings identifying a converted gun as a Model 1917 would remain, of course, in spite of a conversion.

On the Japanese rifle, there are anomalies that don't fit even a last ditch rifle. One is the cast trigger guard; even the latest guns I have seen have the normal stamped guard. The other is a lack of any markings, including the "mum". Yet all the trainers I have seen were copies of the Type 38, with two gas ports. But whatever it is, I think we all agree that it should not be fired.

Perhaps The Saint could take a look through the barrel and see if it has rifling.

Jim

RJay · December 4, 2013, 07:48 PM

Jim, you are undoubtedly correct in reference to the 1917, I reason I said I was curious is none of my reference show either the Colt or S&W Model 1917, US Army being chambered in .357.

Pahoo · December 4, 2013, 08:03 PM

Quote:

And a late war rifle, roughly made with a lot of corners cut as Japan was losing.
Known as the "last ditch" rifle.
Not common, too bad it was left to rust.

Going to throw in with Jim Watson on this one as I have seen these before and they were rough. One that I saw and held, also had it's bayonet and scabbard/frog and what a piece of junk. .....

Only because or their rarity, would I restore it !!

Be Safe !!!

tater134 · December 4, 2013, 08:53 PM

Guys that rifle doesn't look like a trainer to me. The receiver shape looks like a Type 99 Naval Special rifle which uses a cast iron receiver and a bolt that locks into a barrel extension. If you look at the photo of the breech area you can see the barrel extension sticking out of the receiver ring. Do some searching on google and gunboards.com for Naval Special Type 99's and you will find photos of rifles like yours. These are extremely rare and have very low production numbers. I recommend not attempting any cleaning or restoration until you have some more information on what you have.

TheSaint · December 4, 2013, 09:24 PM

Wow. Thanks for the info guys. I will post more pics when I return from my travels.

I also have a weird revolver with Asian markings. I have an idea what it is but I'm not certain.

TheSaint · December 4, 2013, 09:44 PM

I'm thinking Webley Mark VI.

tahunua001 · December 4, 2013, 10:53 PM

that's the closest thing I can find to it as well but the grips seem off.

Jim Watson · December 4, 2013, 11:06 PM

Webley Mk II, III, IV, or V.
All very similar with progressive upgrades from about 1897 to 1916.
Maybe a tribal copy, right down to the British proof marks.

Not a Mk I or Mk VI which have distinctive butt shapes different from models in between.

December 3, 2013, 10:44 PM	#1
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11	Help Identify Hello guys' I'm new to the forum. I visited my Father over Thanksgiving and he gave me a few of my Grandfather's firearms. I received a Remington 1100 duck hunting shotgun, a US Army 1917 357 Magnum and an old Weihrauch 44Magnum single action revolver which he calls a Saturday Night Special. I'm having trouble identifying this rifle. Any help is appreciated. Please forgive the pics. They were taken with my phone.

December 4, 2013, 12:01 AM	#8
Unspoken Member Join Date: October 12, 2012 Posts: 99	Looks like a trainer Arisaka to me. __________________ Proverb for Paranoids: The innocence of the Creatures is in inverse proportion to the immorality of the Master. -T. Pynchon

December 4, 2013, 01:56 AM	#9
gyvel Senior Member Join Date: August 30, 2009 Location: Northern AZ Posts: 7,172	At the very end of the war, the Japanese industrial machine had taken a lot of hits from Allied bombing. This rifle reflects the desperate conditions that existed in Japan at that time. If I were to "restore" it, I would only "smooth" out the rust using copious amounts of turpentine-soaked 0000 steel wool to give it an even, smooth patina. Rebluing it would defintiely not enhance the value of it. Another technique for smoothing rust is to use a Dremel with a carbon steel brush, also with a lot of turpentine or thin oil. Generally, if used lightly, you can also blend small rust spots on blued guns without disturbing the blue. Regarding your 1917 .357, it is probably a gun that was converted using a .357 barrel and cylinder from Numrich Arms. This was common in the 50s and '60s when these guns were $29.95. Last edited by gyvel; December 4, 2013 at 02:02 AM.

December 4, 2013, 06:52 AM	#10
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,846	Arisaka, without doubt. Which arisaka is another question. The bolt handle is the late war "last ditch" style. The overall finish of the metal work is consistent with the last ditch rifles, BUT, there were also "drill rifles" and training rifles. Many of these were made of cast iron, not steel! Also the complete lack of markings, including the "mum" (not defaced, appears never to have been there) lead me to suspect its a drill rifle, not one ever intended for shooting __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

December 4, 2013, 09:37 AM	#11
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11	Thanks a lot. I will have the rifle evaluated by a Gunsmith before I waste time and effort on it. I will concentrate my efforts on the .357 and the Remington 1100. Last edited by TheSaint; December 4, 2013 at 09:44 AM.

December 3, 2013, 10:46 PM	#2
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11

December 3, 2013, 10:50 PM	#3
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11

December 3, 2013, 10:55 PM	#4
Wyosmith Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2010 Location: Shoshoni Wyoming Posts: 2,713	That is a WW2 Type 99 Japanese Arisaka

December 3, 2013, 11:07 PM	#5
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,543	And a late war rifle, roughly made with a lot of corners cut as Japan was losing. Known as the "last ditch" rifle. Not common, too bad it was left to rust.

December 3, 2013, 11:21 PM	#6
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11	Do you think it's worth restoration?

December 3, 2013, 11:46 PM	#7
BillM Senior Member Join Date: January 20, 2009 Location: Amity Oregon Posts: 791	As others have said, it appears to be a "last ditch" Arisaka. I'm a little curious about your 1917 Army .357 magnum. The model 1917 (both S&W and Colt) was chambered in 45 ACP using moon clips. It would also fire 45 auto rim. The .357 magnum didn't come out until 1934----

December 4, 2013, 10:14 AM	#12
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Based on several indications, I am inclined to agree with Unspoken that it is a trainer, not a real rifle. Those "rifles" were intended only for firing blanks and should never be fired with live ammunition. The bolt head appears to be cracked, further reason not to fire it under any circumstances. Still, it is a WWII souvenir and would make a good wall hanger. Jim

December 4, 2013, 12:04 PM	#13
tahunua001 Senior Member Join Date: July 21, 2011 Location: Idaho Posts: 7,839	looks to me like you may have a last ditch arisaka. it does have a lot of features I do not recognize but the fixed sight and the lack of finish work on the bolt handle and safety knob suggest a last ditch effort type 99. the japs were getting desperate towards the end of WWII and their quality control went way downhill. __________________ ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar. I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin

December 4, 2013, 01:59 PM	#14
Baba Louie Senior Member Join Date: September 23, 2001 Posts: 1,552	I agree with last ditch Arisaka. Do a google image search using those terms and see whatcha come up with. And for the love of all that's steel, wood and holy, give that warrior some oil please! __________________ A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington, January 8, 1790, First State of the Union Address

December 4, 2013, 02:43 PM	#15
tahunua001 Senior Member Join Date: July 21, 2011 Location: Idaho Posts: 7,839	hmmm, going through the comments here I am seeing a number of things I missed in my assessment. 1. the lack of a mum, it wasn't ground off, it was just never there, this would support that it was either a drill rifle or a training rifle. doesn't make sense to be a trainer though since that is such a poorly manufacturered rifle that a japanese conscript would likely not know what to do when he got a real rifle. 2. the cracked bolt head. that is definitely not safe to fire. I suggest some steel wool to unbugger the rust a bit, oil it up well and hang it on the wall. __________________ ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar. I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin

December 4, 2013, 03:03 PM	#16
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,543	I cannot find anything about a Type 99 blank-only trainer. The Type 99 did not come out until 1939 when Japan was already at war in China. I suspect they were running cadets and recruits straight to live fire training by then. The "crack" in the bolt is at the location for the ejector slot. I can't imagine what would have hammered it into that S curve. Certainly not shootable. Not worth repair or restoration Pictures of well preserved "last ditch" rifles show rough construction and a lot of shortcuts, but they have a pretty good blue job. I found a photo of one such with no Mum, but it did have some Oriental Chicken Tracks as to maker. I'd start with the milder approaches to rust removal. If you could get it out of the stock and find a long narrow pan, a month or so soak in oil, penetrating oil, or transmission fluid followed by a rubdown with rough cloth or fine steel wool would be a good start. Chemical rust removal will leave an unnatural gray color. A wire wheel, unless one of the fine ones made for rust bluing, will leave unsightly brush marks.

December 4, 2013, 05:01 PM	#17
RJay Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2005 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,936	I'm also curious about that 1917 357. __________________ Ron James

December 4, 2013, 06:05 PM	#18
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	A Model 1917 in .357 would not be too unusual, as the New Service was made in that caliber and Colt sold barrels and cylinders in both .38 Special and .357 as well as doing factory conversions. The butt markings identifying a converted gun as a Model 1917 would remain, of course, in spite of a conversion. On the Japanese rifle, there are anomalies that don't fit even a last ditch rifle. One is the cast trigger guard; even the latest guns I have seen have the normal stamped guard. The other is a lack of any markings, including the "mum". Yet all the trainers I have seen were copies of the Type 38, with two gas ports. But whatever it is, I think we all agree that it should not be fired. Perhaps The Saint could take a look through the barrel and see if it has rifling. Jim

December 4, 2013, 07:48 PM	#19
RJay Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2005 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,936	Jim, you are undoubtedly correct in reference to the 1917, I reason I said I was curious is none of my reference show either the Colt or S&W Model 1917, US Army being chambered in .357. __________________ Ron James Last edited by RJay; December 4, 2013 at 08:52 PM.

December 4, 2013, 08:53 PM	#21
tater134 Senior Member Join Date: August 22, 2009 Location: NE,PA Posts: 390	Guys that rifle doesn't look like a trainer to me. The receiver shape looks like a Type 99 Naval Special rifle which uses a cast iron receiver and a bolt that locks into a barrel extension. If you look at the photo of the breech area you can see the barrel extension sticking out of the receiver ring. Do some searching on google and gunboards.com for Naval Special Type 99's and you will find photos of rifles like yours. These are extremely rare and have very low production numbers. I recommend not attempting any cleaning or restoration until you have some more information on what you have.

December 4, 2013, 09:24 PM	#22
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11	Wow. Thanks for the info guys. I will post more pics when I return from my travels. I also have a weird revolver with Asian markings. I have an idea what it is but I'm not certain.

December 4, 2013, 09:44 PM	#23
TheSaint Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2013 Posts: 11	I'm thinking Webley Mark VI. Last edited by TheSaint; December 4, 2013 at 09:53 PM.

December 4, 2013, 10:53 PM	#24
tahunua001 Senior Member Join Date: July 21, 2011 Location: Idaho Posts: 7,839	that's the closest thing I can find to it as well but the grips seem off. __________________ ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar. I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin

December 4, 2013, 11:06 PM	#25
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,543	Webley Mk II, III, IV, or V. All very similar with progressive upgrades from about 1897 to 1916. Maybe a tribal copy, right down to the British proof marks. Not a Mk I or Mk VI which have distinctive butt shapes different from models in between.