Bolt Action Rifles. Wayne Zwoll

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 for the breeching system used in these rifles, I am not sure it has much effect on the overall strength and safety of the action. This “system” is one in which the bolt head fits closely within a recess in the breech end of the barrel. This breeching system produces the same results as achieved in the M98 Mauser, in which a ring of steel is placed around most of the bolt head.

      The weak points in both systems are the wide extractor cut in this ring of steel, and the undercut in the bolt face recess. As far as strength and safety are concerned, I don’t believe this breeching method is much superior to the 03 Springfield breech system. There is no question that the 98 Mauser and Arisaka breeching would be far stronger and safer if there was no undercut in the bolt face recess, and if a flush-type narrow extractor were used so the wide extractor slot could be eliminated. When an action blows up it is usually the result of a faulty cartridge—when the head of the cartridge splits open to let large amounts of powder gases escape to the rear. In this event, I fail to see where the 98 Mauser or Arisaka breechings are any better than the 1903 Springfield breeching. In the two previously mentioned Arisaka torture tests, none of the cartridge cases used were faulty. I wonder what would have happened with the 6.5mm Arisaka rifle chambered for the 30-06 cartridge if the head of one of the cartridges had cracked or split open when fired, rather than expanding evenly. I think the results would have been different. A good 03 Springfield action with its funnel breeching will withstand considerable abuse from overloads heavy enough to cause head expansion, but if the head of the case splits with such a load then the situation is different. So that I am not entirely misunderstood, I do prefer the Mauser M98 breeching method over that of the Arisaka, and I prefer either over the Springfield.

      Another example of the cast iron Arisaka action made for a training rifle. This one has only token bolt locking lugs, a small extractor mortised into the bolt head, and receiver and trigger guard are held in the stock with common wood screws.

      Rechambering

      Type 38, 6.5mm caliber: During WWII much erroneous information circulated about “that small caliber Jap rifle.” Many believed that they were of “25 caliber.”

      Before Norma made the 6.5mm Japanese cartridge commercially available, it was common practice to rechamber the 6.5mm Arisaka rifle or carbine to the 257 Roberts case necked up to hold a 6.5mm bullet.

      Underside view of the Japanese Type 38 bolt head (6.5mm) showing: (A) gas vent hole, (B) extractor, (C) bolt face recess with undercut, (D) ejector slot, (E) locking lugs and (F) bolt-stop lug. The Type 99 bolt is the same except that the extractor slot is milled entirely through the bolt-stop and locking lugs.

      As long as Norma commercial 6.5

      Japanese ammunition and cases are available, there is no longer any practical reason to have the Arisaka 6.5mm rifle rechambered. The Norma 6.5 Japanese case is just as reloadable as any other. If you have one of these Japanese rifles and if you are not sure if it has been rechambered, better have it checked by a competent gunsmith before attempting to fire Norma ammunition in it.

      Type 99, 7.7mm caliber: here again we have the same situation. It no longer makes sense to rechamber the 7.7mm Arisaka rifle because Norma also loads this cartridge. Before Norma loaded this cartridge, it was common practice to rechamber 7.7mm Arisaka to 30-06 caliber. Of course, any rechambering is hardly practical since the introduction of Norma 7.7mm Japanese loads. Again a warning—if