It was vividly pointed out to me the difference between a shooter and collector. I am and Arisaka shooter I only have 5 of them and have spent more time trying to come up with a decent case for the 6.5 than reading up on them.
I may have passed on some urban legends that I have been told over my 40 plus years shooting arisakas for that I apologize. (after all I was told over and over again that the carcano would put the firing pin back into my head and I always thought that strange that country would use a rifle that dangerous for over 50 years and 2 major world wars)
Since what I wrote was apparently wrong I will quote another web site that says pretty basically what I have been told over the years, there are more sites that same the similar things.
http://www.surplusrifle.com/arisaka/index.asp
"Later versions of the Type 99 may be unsafe to shoot as the quality of the metallurgy began to decline sharply after 1942. The later (1943-45) rifles are often identified as having a fixed notch rear sight instead of the customary folding/sliding leaf sight, no provision for attaching a sliding bolt cover or monopod or mounting an under barrel cleaning rod and the lack of a chrome-plated bore. Check with a qualified gunsmith if unsure."
http://world.guns.ru/rifle/rfl22-e.htm
"Type 99 rifles are generally quoted as very strong rifles, but this refers only to the rifles, made before the late stages of the World war 2. Late-war rifles, sometimes known as Substitute Type 99, or "last ditch" Type 99 rifles, were often made from low grade steel, with no heat treatment and no finish. Many of these rifles were simply dangerous for shooters to fire."
Are these urban myths and how do we identify those which are not safe to shoot?
Login
Register
FAQ
