Japanese action, these made in Italy for Japan. The receiver, bolt and trigger assembly are a close copy of the Italian Carcano action.
Action Strength
Almost every gun buff interested in military bolt-action rifles, or in just the actions, knows that the 38 and 99 Japanese Arisaka actions are strong. Many articles have been written about the strength and safety of these actions, and many blow-up tests have been conducted since the late l940s when someone discovered that all Japanese rifles were not junk. P.O. Ackley, in his book Handbook For Shooters & ReloadersVolume II, describes tests he conducted on various military bolt actions, and the Japanese actions were still going strong after most of the others had failed. This book is recommended reading for anyone interested in action blowup tests.
Of all the material I’ve read about the strength of Arisaka actions, the most astonishing report of the toughness of a Type 38 Japanese action and rifle appeared on page 52 in the May, 1959 issue of The American Rifleman. This describes a Type 38 6.5mm Arisaka which was rechambered to accept the 30-06 cartridge. The 6.5mm barrel was NOT rebored, only the chamber was enlarged. The fellow who did the rechambering accomplished it by grinding down the pilot of a 30-06 reamer so it would enter the bore. After rechambering he test fired it. Nothing much happened, so he used the rifle on a hunting trip and killed a deer with it. Because the rifle kicked so hard he took it to a reputable gunsmith who discovered what the owner had done with it and what he was shooting in it. Because the rifle was still intact after firing a number of 30-06 cartridges, the gunsmith sent the rifle to the NRA. The NRA staff then fired some more 30-06 rounds through it, and it seems incredible that neither the barrel nor the action burst, for just imagine firing .308” bullets through a .264 ” groove diameter barrel! If one were to deliberately plan a torture test or blow-up test on the 6.5mm Japanese rifle one could hardly think of a better scheme, even though it is a little crazy. That this particular rifle did not burst, or even appear to be strained by this abuse, certainly proves that the bolt, receiver and barrel were made of the best heat-treated steels. It also shows that the breeching and locking system is excellent.
Type “I” action, open.
Japanese Arisaka Type 2 (1942) 7.7mm takedown paratroop rifle action, the bolt partially open. Loosening the ringed take-down nut on the right side of the receiver ring allows the barrel and forend to be slipped out of the action.
About 10 years before the above incident was reported, a friend and I put another Japanese rifle through a torture test with the sole intention of firing it until it blew up or could no longer be fired. For this test we used the worst specimen of this rifle which was ever carted home by a returning GI, a Type 99 rifle in 7.7mm caliber. This particular rifle was such a crude specimen that initially we thought it to be a Japanese training rifle. I rechambered it for the 30-06 cartridge, and purposely cut the chamber fully .010” deeper than normal.
For the test, I loaded a couple of cartridges of each of the following loads in military 30-06 cases:
No. 1. Case full of 3031 powder with a 180-grain jacketed bullet. (44 grains of this powder with this bullet is normally a maximum load).
No. 2. Case full of 4198 powder with a 180-grain jacketed bullet. (38 grains of this powder with this bullet is considered maximum).
No. 3. Case full of 2400 powder with the 180-grain jacketed bullet (This powder is never recommended for the 30-06 with this bullet, but a charge of 25 grains would be near or above maximum).
It was dusk when we made the tests. The rifle was tied to an automobile tire and wheel, pointed toward a dirt bank and fired with a long cord tied to the trigger.
We did not expect much to happen on firing both No. 1 cartridges except flattened primers, and that is about all that happened. This was just a good “proof ” load. We did, however, expect something to happen to the rifle when the No. 2 loads were fired, but aside from the rifle bucking in its hitch, the primer pockets expanding, the web splitting, and the case heads spreading to a snug fit in the bolt face recess, nothing unusual happened. We could see a little spurt of flame coming out of the vent hole, but that was about all.
When we fired one cartridge of the No. 3 load, things happened! We noticed streaks of flame coming out all around the action, most of it concentrated around the top and right side of the receiver ring and from the bottom of the action, as the rifle bucked and bellowed from the shock.
When the dust settled, we rushed to see the damage and were surprised to find the barrel, receiver and bolt intact. The extractor was gone, the bolt-stop was sprung, the follower, follower spring and floorplate were gone, but the bolt and the firing mechanism were still in place. The bolt could not be opened by hand, and on trying to open it with a stick of wood the bolt handle broke off. On returning to my shop for closer examination, it was found that the right side of the receiver over the full length extractor cut was slightly bulged and that the barrel appeared to have moved forward out of the receiver about one thread. Since the bolt could not be opened we unscrewed the barrel from the receiver, after which the bolt was easily removed. The head of the case seemed to have melted over the bolt face, for it was practically welded in place. After knocking off the case and turning the barrel back into the receiver, the rifle was still in a condition to be fired! In fact, later on another shooter fitted this same barrel to a good 99 action and found that the chamber had not expanded at all. This experience thoroughly convinced us that the Japanese Arisaka actions are extremely strong. A large ring Model 98 Mauser action might have survived this test as well or better, but I suspect that most of the other military bolt-action rifles, as well as some of the commercial bolt-action centerfire rifles, would not have stood up as well.
Barrel and forend assembly removed from the receiver-stock assembly of the Type 2 Japanese paratroop rifle. Note the lug and notch on the bottom of the barrel shank which engages behind the tapered wedge in the receiver.
An action from one of the several different Type 38 military training rifles. This one, with breech cover, is an example of one of the better-made actions, having a regular bolt with full-sized forward locking lugs and regular extractor. However, it has a cast iron receiver, trigger parts and trigger guard. A distinctive feature of these actions is that the tangs are made integral with the receiver and trigger guard.
Of the Type 38 and 99 actions, the 38 is perhaps the stronger for the following reasons: 1) its left (top) locking lug is only partly slotted for the ejector, leaving it with a solid rear face to contact the locking shoulder in the receiver. The lug is not only stronger but there is less chance of it battering a depression in the locking shoulder as often happens in rifles having a fully slotted left lug; 2) the mill cut for the extractor in the receiver ring is no longer than needed. In the last test described above, it is to be noted that the receiver ring bulged along this cut, which in the Type 99 receiver extends all the way through the ring; 3) the barrel shank threads are coarser and, in my opinion, afford a stronger joint between the barrel and receiver than achieved by the use of finer threads. It is also possible that a better steel and heat-treatment was used in making Type 38 actions, but I’m not sure about this. It is usually assumed that any rifle made during desperate wartime conditions might have inferior steel and/or improper heat-treatment compared to rifles made under ideal conditions, but nothing of this nature seems to have affected the late Type 99 version we tested.
As
