Printable View
Back when I had a convenient place to shoot longarms, I tried shooting my 6.5 Japanese rifles. I tried a Type 38 long rifle, carbine, and Carcano Type I with Norma factory ammo, all with mediocre to lousy results. As I recall the bores looked fine and I don't remember anything visibly wrong with the sights. Is this typical?
I spoke with a fella quite some time back that was into those rifles. He liked them because they were cheap. He told me that of the few he's shot he never had any super accuracy with them.
I dont know a carcano that was shooting good. The most have poor accuracy. Older guys told me " The carcano`s are mostly like new because they didnt fired one shot, they where thrown away when the brit`s come in sight"
To clarify, I'm speaking of the Type I rifles that were subcontracted to Italy for the Japanese Navy and Special Naval Landing Forces.Quote:
Originally Posted by gunner
Now that you mention Carcanos...long ago on the old site I remember someone claiming that Italian Carcano rifles can be super-accurate...but first you have to slug the bore to find its true ID, then tailor bullets to match it. I wonder if the same is true of Arisakas as well?
The Japanese rifles I have fired, both 6.5 and 7.7 had adequate military accuracy, but only one shot well (about 1.5") and that was a late war Type 99 with a tacked on wood buttplate and a cylindrical bolt knob. I am not sure what that proves, if anything.
Jim
I have never gotten consistant good groups from any of my Japanese rifles, either 6.5 or 7.7, with reloads and even worst is the accuracy I get with cast bullets.
Try as I do, every cast bullet type and/or powder or load I've tried has alway been a failure at getting decent groups. The same bullets and powder loads in my Enfield and Ross rifle shoot excellent groups. Ray
We tend to forget most mass produced Military rifles of old are meant to hit body mass,not bench rest standards.
I'm not saying your rifle is not an exemption to the rule and isn't a tac driver NO-NO!:nono:
Carcano accuracy:
the problem with Carcanos is, that having got a super-cheap rifle, the owners want to shoot with super-cheap ammo - and get poor results.
The topic of loading for the Carcano has been covered on the Ammo & Reloading forum in some detail.
The acceptance criterion for the M91 (the Italians do NOT call it a Carcano) was a 6-shot group of MAX 5cm wide x 6 cm high AT 200 METERS!
That is 1 MOA quality.
See "Il Novantuno Mnnlicher Carcano", Wolfgang Riepe, ISBN 3-932077-30-X / ISBN 978-3-932077-30-2. Page 86.
And my M91/41, otherwise known as Roma, 'cos that's what it says on the butt, produced three 1-1/2 MOA groups at 100 meters (2 shot by me, one by a friend) as soon as I got the right bullets.
In general, every milsurp I have tried had, at best, a mediocre performance with off-the-shelf ammo and needed "personalized" ammo to get satisfactory results. The only exception to date was the Swiss G96/11, which performs superbly with the standard Swiss ordnance GP11 ammo, and is the only milsurp for which I do not have to reload.
I do not have an Arisaka, but have little doubt that the same applies - look around the forum and you will find some tips. Many milsurps do better with a flat-base bullet than with a boat-tail, because of a generously cut chamber plus a long/worn throat. And neck-sizing only is often advisable, both for accuracy and case life.
Patrick
It is pobably a good thing they are not real accurate. An old friend had one he brought home from the Pacific in 1945. In the 60's he served on the Border patrol in Texas. Occasionally he would get a call from work to come get his kids. They would sneak out with the Arisaka and go down to the river and lob shots at people crossing the river to see how fast they could run. Try a stunt like that today and see how many years you get.
I suggest not judging Arisaka accuracy on the basis of lead bullets, which do not take well to Metford rifling.
Jim