I have a thing for WWII rifles. I like them, and I have a habit of buying them anytime I see a good deal and some spare cash. I've long planned to own just about all the major players, regardless of how good they are.

Different rifles from the period seem to be popular for different reasons-

Garands are popular because they were the one semiautomatic standard issue rifle of the war, they have an excellent trigger and sights, they're accurate, 'Murica, and PING.

Enfields are popular because they were very rugged yet smooth, they have a quick action with a 10 round capacity, and they've been in use everywhere ever since. Much like the British Empire of old, the sun never sets on the Lee Enfield.

k98s are popular because they are tough, feed reliably in really bad situations, and they have long been one of the quintessential hunting rifles.

Mosin Nagants are mostly popular because they have historically been very plentiful and cheap, as has their surplus ammo. They're crude, but they're not bad rifles.


And that leads us back to the Arisaka, more specifically, the Type 99s. Type 99s aren't exactly found on the used gun rack at every FFL, but ~3.5M of them were manufactured, and many of them are still around. The examples I've seen for sale over the years don't sell particularly fast, and aside from ultra clean or otherwise rare examples, they don't sell for much. Only the Mosin Nagant and the roughest of Enfields sell for cheaper, and some variants of the Mosin Nagant have surpassed the Type 99 in price. And before today, I've never seen one at the range.

The Type 99 is a Mauser-style controlled feed action with a big claw extractor. Unlike the 98 pattern Mausers, the Type 99 uses a cock on close system like the Lee Enfield or the Swedish Mauser. There are two features in particular that I think really distinguish the Type 99. The first is the fact that the Type 99 is the 1st standard issue rifle to have a chrome-lined bore. I've looked at a lot of military surplus rifles, and I've seen a lot of dark bores and a lot of straight up sewer pipes, but all of the Type 99s I've seen have very well preserved bores with crisp rifling. That's a huge advantage, at least in my book. The other difference is the sights. Most rifles of the time period use open irons, except the Garands, 1903A3s, and the No. 4 Enfields which use peeps. Open irons work, and some people are very effective with them, but I'm not as much of a fan of them on rifles. The peep sights on the American rifles are excellent target sights, but the rear peep aperture is tight enough to slow acquisition time. The No. 4 and No. 5 Enfield sights are the opposite. With the leaf flipped down, the aperture is large and open, but the front sight post is tiny (you could use the front sight ears in a pinch). The sights on the Type 99 Arisaka are a nice middle ground. The rear sight is unfortunately located in front of the action, but aperture is well sized. The front sight has a triangular shape. You can point it towards the target for a quick shot or settle in and focus on the tip for a tight shot.

I'm not the sort to push my luck with high pressure loads, but it's probably worth mentioning that the Type 99 Arisaka was tested by both P.O. Ackley and the US Army Ordinance as being the strongest action of WWII.

The trigger is above average, but I'd put it behind the Garand and K-31. The pre-travel is short, and the break is crisp if a little heavy. The bolt cycles smoothly. The only part of basic operation I don't like is the big palm operated safety, but that's a downside with most of its peers.

How does it shoot?





I only have two boxes of 7.7x58, so I only fired 10 rounds. The recoil was average, and the sights and the trigger combined to make this a nice rifle to get behind, especially on a nice day like today.



I fired two 5 round groups at the 25 yard line. I shot the center target first, then the bottom left target.




It's hard to draw a big conclusion from 10 rounds fired at 25 yards, but it looks like this rifle delivers when I do my part. I really look forward to stretching its legs when the opportunity and the ammunition presents itself.

And the ammunition is the elephant in the room. You can go to a gun shop or sporting goods store and buy high quality hunting ammo or average to reasonably priced modern production ammo like PPU in .303 British, 8mm Mauser, .30-06, and 7.62x54r. 7.7x58mm? Not happening. The only options for acquiring 7.7x58mm Japanese ammunition are reloading your own, ordering from internet specialty shops like Graf's when it's even available, or getting really lucky at a gun show. I've probably had my Type 99 for a year or so, and today is the first time I've been able to shoot it.

From where I sit, this problem is circular. 7.7x58mm ammo is rare because it is not popular, and it is not popular because it is rare. The economy of scale just isn't there. And that's the part that really confuses me. Millions of these quite good rifles were built, many of which came to the US after the war, and nobody is shooting them. If people were buying 7.7x85mm ammo and sending it down range, the commercial market would have picked up where the surplus left off, just as it has for the other cartridges of the war. But, that didn't happen, and I can't quite work out why.

I like the jap but prefer a 6.5 over the 7.7. The rifles ackley tested were 6.5 weren't they?

Wildly inconsistent quality. Arisakas were literally made in peoples homes all over Japan. That's why they never caught on. When you buy a Mosin or Garand or Enfield you know what you're going to get. When you buy a Mauser the only variation is in fit and finish - it degraded later in the war, but in function they were exactly the same. When you buy an Arisaka, you could get a work of art, or a turd.

I have a Type 38 and ammo is stupid expensive.

Fine addition to the collection and all that, but it's not going to the range every month. Or year.

Alot of them got rebored to 30-06 chamber dimensions

I think the Arisaka is one of the better Mauser derivatives. It got a bad rap, probably due to the last ditch rifles. In addition the Arisaka's main opponent was the M1 which makesthe Arisaka look poorly by comparison. I need to borrow dad's Type 99 of these days and have a shoot-off with my Garand.

That appears to be the result of effective propaganda.  You didn't want to tell US troops they were up against a first rate bolt action rifle, perhaps the strongest in the world.  Uncle told US troops (and the public) that Japanese technology was crap.  Racism probably played a part as well.

The Mauser 98 action had already been encountered in the 1st WW, and gunsmiths had already had proven success with sporterizing it.  Millions of duffle cuts inflicted by eager GIs sending home the spoils of war.  The 99?  Not so much.

Your thinking of the "last ditch" type 99s that were made in 1945. The late 1930 Arisakas are some of the finest military bolt rifles ever made.

Ammo is the main issue.




That, and it's not as cool as 7.5 French.

Precision Cartridge is about 10 minutes from my house. The owner is a member here.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

I have one that was rechambered in 30 06 it is surprisingly accurate. It was sporterized unfortunately.

I've got a Type 98 that my wife's grand-father gave me. It's a blast to shoot, but damn is it hard to feed.

Yeah , ammo availability

The handful I have looked at were pretty rough .
Reasons seemed to be (in no particular order )

Late war production
Battlefield trophy
Letting junior run around the woods playing army after uncle George couldn't find any ammo .

I didn't start buying milsurps until 1980 and most anything I have seen were nasty rough or premium high priced stuff

Thanks for the story.

Shot one a long time ago, coworker had it.  The cartridge was bad or the gun had excessive headspace and blew brass shrapnel in my eyebrow.  I don't trust the damn things and it's one of the reasons I always wear eye protection.  It's too late for eye protection after you lose your eye

As you mentioned, ammo is hard to find, and it has a poor safety design.  The Japanese were also rumored to have produce some kamikaze specials.  Originally only those w/ intact makings(a chrysanthemum) were considered collectibles and the majority that were surrendered had the markings ground off.

The simple reason is because there was never a glut of cheap surplus ammo available for it like there was for 8mm, .303, 7.62x54r, and to a lesser extent 7mm, 7.5 french, 6.5 carcano, 7.65 Argentine, 6.5 swede and 8x56r.

When was the last time at the range you saw someone shooting 7.63x54 greek mannlicher, 6.5×53r, 8mm lebel, or 8x50r?

This.  During the last year of the war, they were basically cranking out pieces of wood with a metal tube attached.



 

There one at a pawn shop near that I might have to look at DAMN Afrom


Nice write up OP.

I found the ammo at Graf's. I've never looked into the company until just now. Interestingly enough, they don't list 7.7x58mm on their web page.

They used PPU brass, and I'm not sure about the bullet, but it looks like a standard soft point.

Graf's is sold out, and I don't know if anyone else carries it. Precision Cartridge should make more. There's a hole in the market, and they could fill a good part of it.

Load your own using x54 for components.

6.5 is only slighly more difficult to load for.. Brass can be made from 260 rem rather easily.

I would love to own one but no damn ammo,  sucks.

Norma and Hornady are your friends.

And the cycle repeats itself.

Reload... It becomes very cheap..

 

Many of the Arisakas out there are in tough shape.  Ammo has always been an issue.  Solid, underrated rifles however.

Basic cheap single stage press and you will turn out enough ammo to pay for itself in short order.


7.35 carcano..6.5 jap..6.5x55...303 Brit..7.7 jap.

Did you read anything, or are you just working towards post 200,000?

I like my Japanese Rifles.



Type 38, Type I (I Shiki) and Type 38 Cavalry Carbine.

I wouldn't mind owning one, but only if it's early war 100% correct with an intact mum.

 
Yep. Ammo is the issue.

A little known fact, they were the Mexican service rifle at one time.

I've had a 1939 toyo kogyo for 3 years and never shot it. It's got a bubbed' up stock, however the metal itself is decent.

Those are all 6.5s, right?

Arisakas were not made in peoples homes.  These were factory built weapons that degraded primarily in cosmetic quality as the war went on and strategic materials and manpower diminished.  Even the end of war Type 99's were safe to shoot and accurate, they just looked crude as hell as some components were deleted or simplified and the machining and finishing were as minimal as possible.

I believe the main reason you do not see much 6.5 or 7.7 Japanese ammo produced is because there were thousands of "training" rifles produced for use in Japanese elementary and high schools to teach basic military drill to students.  These weapons look the same as the military rifles, to someone who is not knowledgeable, and they will come apart if fired with live ammo which they will chamber.  Your average person cannot tell the difference between these weapons, but a major indicator is a smooth bore.

If you have a smooth bore Japanese bolt rifle, do not fire it.

They are.

I have two Type 99's, I just don't have a picture of them at the moment.

The ones I have seen have the chrysanthemum deface, late war models are poorly built, and the good ones are probably rotting on a pacific island somewhere.

03 and 98 FTW

Their site states they have a 1000 round minimum and no 7.7 Jap is listed.

I was wondering what 1k rounds of 7.7 x 58 would run. Hypothetically speaking. I reload for my Type 2. It gets some attention at the "Old Military Bolt Gun" shoots I've been to.

Norma used to make ammo in 7.7. Grafs has runs of brass mfg. by Privi from time to time.


One good one is in my safe.





Got the Nagoya source bayonet for it on Ebay. Repro sling and cleaning rod.

The chrysanthemum on my Type 99 is gone, but that doesn't effect the serviceability of it as a rifle.

It does hurt the value, which helped me get a deal on it, but it's also an interesting talking point.

If I ever see the right deal on another Type 99 that's correct, I'll probably buy it, but keep shooting this one.

I've got a stripper clip loaded up with 5 rounds of 7.7 that my father took off a Japanese soldier that no longer needed it.
Okinawa was a brutal battle.
This rifle was in the family for years, my dad traded it off in the '60s for something.   Wish I had it.

Just throwing this out there, but I'm about 8 minutes from Grafs if you ever need anything or question whether they have something. I usually go in there once or twice a week.

I was in there late last week and I'm quite certain they had 7.7 jap ammo on there clearance rack.

I'll hold off since I have several hundred pieces of 7.7 brass, but I hope someone takes you up on this.

Ammo is the only real issue. The pre-war rifles are fantastic quality.

I honestly had no idea they could be good shooters.  I have one and have never fired it.  Bought it more for historical interest.

The junk that came out of japanese factories immediately after the war didn't help much either, especially as it flooded the market around the same time as the Arisakas.  It took some time before Japanese goods lost their junky reputation.

ammo is so damn expensive...and hard to find

I don't like how the over pressure port is on the top of the receiver. I guess it's designed to blind lefties and righties alike.

I've got an M-44 Mosin stamped 1944 that I bought specifically because it was uglier than hell with prominent machining marks and a dead minimum of unnecessary fluffing and buffing. Right out the door and to the front. Works like a champ, shoots better than it has any right to, but it's a historical artifact more than anything to me.

There's something kind of cool about that in general I think.  

Pops has a last ditch carbine with the mum still on it, we will never shoot it.  He got it at an auction for less than a 100 bucks.  

I'm a little over 150 miles away, so unless they have a good amount of it at an awesome price, it probably wouldn't be worth me physically making the trip.

If you see anything really interesting, please do say something.