Japanese Small Arms of World War II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nightcrawler

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
6,950
Location
Utah, inside the Terraformed Zone
I admit to being embarrasingly ignorant of the weapons used by Imperial Japanese forces during the 2nd World War. I do know that like most armies of the day, they entered the war with bolt action rifles, in their case, the Arisaka. I also know of two light machine guns, one looking like a Bren gun and the other fed from a hopper. (I believe both had bayonet mounts, a rarity on a 20+ pound weapon.)

I know they also had the Type 100 submachine gun (in 8mm Nambu) that was based on a Swiss design.

And then there were several variations of the Nambu pistol, in 8mm and 7mm, apparently. There was also a break top revolver.

Can anybody sort it all out?

-Variations of the Arisaka rifle? Calibers?
-Variations of the Nambu pistols?
-Revolvers?
-Machine guns?
-Submachine guns?
-Anti-tank/rocket launchers?

Thanks!
 
Ian in 5...4...3...2...

I know that there were more variants of the Arisaka than you could shake a stick at. Also a lot of the rifles and machineguns they had were chambered in rounds that were very similar, but different enough to be useless from one model of gun to the next.
 
Arisaka rifles and carbines:

Type 38 -- 6.5 mm, standard infantry rifle beginning in 1905.

Type 38 carbine -- Shortened type 38 rifle. A variant, for paratrooper use, was made with a hinged stock through the wrist. Not very successful.

Type 44 carbine -- Introduced in 1911, permanent folding bayonet.

Type 97 rifle -- Sniping version, with telescopic sight and turned-down bolt handle.

Type 99 rifle -- Chambered in 7.7 Arisaka and adopted in 1939.

Type 99 carbine -- Shortened version of the rifle.

Type 2 -- 7.7mm, interrupted screw breech take down, supposedly for paratrooper use.


Handguns:

Type 26 revolver -- Double-action only, break top, chambered for a proprietary 9mm round very similar in size and power to the .38 S&W round.

Type 04 Nambu -- Original semi-auto design in 8mm Nambu, adopted in 1904. Grip safety, no magazine safety, adjustable rear tangent sight.

Type 14 Nambu -- Modification of the 04, adopted in 1925, no grip safety, has a magazine safety, fixed rear sight.

Type 14 Nambu, "Manchurian" modification -- A Type 14 with an enlarged trigger guard to allow use with a gloved hand.

"Baby Nambu" -- Very rare, in 7mm Nambu, apparently originally designed for commercial sale, with most known going to high-ranking officers. Very very expensive when encountered.

Type 94 Nambu -- Horrific gun, intended originally for commercial sale, introduced in 1934, virtually nothing to recommend it.


Submachine guns:

Type 100/40 and Type 100/44. Both variants on basic theme. Blowback operated, box magazine, blowback operated. Some 100/40s were made for paratroopers with a folding stock hinged through the wrist. Not many of either type issued.


Machine guns:

Japanese had a lot of experience with machine guns, again not much to recommend them from a mechanical point of view. With one exception, Japanese machine guns required the use of either oiled cartridges or an oiling mechanism in the gun to ensure that the action didn't rip the head off the cartridge during extraction. Not a good situation in a dirty combat zone. Many light machine guns also had provisions for attachment of a baoyonet. Charge.

Type 3 (Model of 1914)/Type 92 heavy MG -- Both liberal copies of the French Hotchkiss gun. The Type 3 was chambered in 6.5mm Arisaka, the Type 92 in 7.7mm Arisaka.

Type 11 -- Introduced in 1922, squad-level gun. Fed from 5-round Mauser stripper clips that were dropped into a hopper. Theoretically a good idea, as you can get ammo from riflemen if you run out, but rifle ammo proved to be too powerful. Instead of redesigning the gun to work with the standard rifle ammo, the entire concept was defeated by adopting a less powerful round.

The Type 92 had a slightly different gas system and different kind of grips. Other than that, very similar guns. Both fed from 30-round stamped steel strips.

Type 96 -- 6.5mm, designed to replace the Type 11, but never did. Based liberally on the Czech ZB, and looks similar to that gun or the British Bren, but with few of the benefits those guns enjoyed. Hopper mechanism replaced with a 30-round box magazine. Many had provisions for mounting the same type of telescopic sight found on the Type 97 sniping rifle.

Type 99 -- Essentially a Type 96 updated to 7.7mm, but at long last provisions were made for primary extraction of the fired cartridge, meaning that rounds no longer had to be oiled before use. Altogether the most successful and reliable of all Japan's machine guns.

Anti-tank rifles:

Type 97 -- A conglomeration of ideas from European guns. Chambered in 20mm. Complex operating system using a combination of gas and blowback, with the action allowed to recoil along a slide against heavy recoil springs an an oil buffer recoil system. Fired only fully automatic, but at a low rate.
 
Japanese markings are firearms are typically a combination of the Emperor's mark, or Chrysthemum (sp?), a marking denoting the arsenal at which the gun was manufactured, a serial number in Arabic numerals, and the model number in Japanese script.


This page, however, may be what you're looking for. I think you'll like what you see.

http://www.radix.net/~bbrown/japanese_markings.html
 
Mike Irwin covered it pretty darn well. I would just add a few comments... the Type 44 is in 6.5mm, the Type 97 is in 7.7mm, and the Type 2 is a modified Type 99 - the earlier Type 0 and Type 1 paratrooper rifles simply didn't work well. The Type 100 submachinegun was pretty lousy (it simply didn't function reliably), and only a few were ever made. They also made an experimental copy of the Garand, which they called the Type 5 (the Cody firearms museum has one). The Japanese Imperial Navy actually used a modified Carcano bought from Italy, as the Army ran the Japanese arsenals and was using all of their production capacity itself.

IMO, the most interesting thing about the Japanbese weapons is to see how their manufacture changed through the course of WWII. The pre-war and early-war guns are excellent guns, and covered in widgets (receiver dust covers, monopods, anti-aircraft sights...). By the end of the war the rifles are really spartan - wooden buttplates, really rudimentary sights, lots of rough edges, much-simplified bayonets, and so on. The progression is really neat to see.

If you want to get the whole story, I recommend my Dad's book on the subject: Japanese Rifles of World War II (much of the marking data Mike linked to is exerpted from the it).
 
So is it true then that the Japanese basically had the worst small arms of any major player during the Second World War?

Amazing how much damage they did, between that and some genuinely poor battle tactics. Nothing like determination, I guess...
 
So is it true then that the Japanese basically had the worst small arms of any major player during the Second World War?

I don't think so. Their pistols were underpowered, but the pistols weren't a major factor in combat. Their early MGs were questionable, but the later ones worked pretty well. Their rifles, the most important small arms, were darn good. They got a bad rap because of the crudeness of the last-ditch production - but that's a result of their manufacturing facilities being bombed into rubble rather than any lack of skill or design. I'm impressed that they kept in the manufacturing game as long as they did, considering the damage they took from strategic bombing.

They lost to us for the same reason that the British would have lost to the Germans is we and Russia hadn't been in the war. Strategically, they lost because they didn't have the industrial capacity to produce war material (including things like merchant freighters and ASW destroyers) at the rate we did.
 
Ian,

"the Type 97 is in 7.7mm"

I've NEVER seen a Type 97 is in 7.7mm.

Everyone I've seen has been in 6.5mm.

It was adopted two years before the Type 99 rifle was formally adopted.

Sniper rifles based on the Type 99 apparently were never given a specific designation of their own.

I don't have access to my Hunnicutt book right now, but I don't recall ever seening anything in there about the Type 97 being 7.7mm caliber.
 
So is it true then that the Japanese basically had the worst small arms of any major player during the Second World War?
Not entirely. Their early bolt action rifles (Type 38) are surprisingly well made for military arms. The Japanese had a very good differential heat treating process which did a good job of hardening the parts of the action that needed hardening, without inducing brittleness. These rifles are easily the equal of a German Mauser or U.S. Springfield, and superior to Britain's Lee-Enfield.

In P.O. Ackley's book, he took a number of rifles, rechambered them to wildcat cartridges, and then tried to blow them up with overcharges. Early Jap rifles fared best - the barrels kept blowing off, leaving the action essentially intact.

On the other hand, late-war rifles apparently were made out of low grade steel with little or no heat treatment, and are generally considered unsafe to shoot with any ammunition.
 
Mike - My dad has a sniper Arisaka that I'm pretty sure is a modified Type 99. I'm probably getting its model number mixed up with the 6.5 sniper. Oops... :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top