Mmmm Kay...there is no head stamp.... see for yourself.
Rimmed, semi rimmed and rimless was supposed to be relatively self explanatory of what ammo it is and what it goes to. The manufacturing info is on that little paper ticket on the side of the box. The caliber, lot, date of manufacture and some times the location of arsenal. This is what they did, it's easier to print paper than it is to stamp something.
Mmmm Kay...there is no head stamp.... see for yourself.
Rimmed, semi rimmed and rimless was supposed to be relatively self explanatory of what ammo it is and what it goes to. The manufacturing info is on that little paper ticket on the side of the box. The caliber, lot, date of manufacture and some times the location of arsenal. This is what they did, it's easier to print paper than it is to stamp something.
That's all well and good but it totally misses the point of posts 9 and 10, which is the correction of false information in post 8 that claims no headstamp usually means the ammo is not military surplus. It's a well known and documented fact that most all IJA type 89 type 92 and type 99 7.7 cartridges lacked headstamps, as did the IJN's rimmed version after late 1943.
And I still dont see any actual headstamp on the cartridges in you're photos.
Labels on boxes arent the same thing. Once the ammunition is removed and the box tossed all info about that particular lot is lost making it practically impossible to ID an out of spec batch should problems arise.
Perhaps read my post again. I was corroborating posts 9 and 10, not debating them.Then look at the pictures I uploaded. You said you cant see head stamps in the photos, the reason being for this is because none are there The point of posting those pictures is to show a Japanese military ammunition box, containing ammunition, that has no head stamps. Contrary to the incorrect information in post 8. My point was, and remains there is no head stamp on type 92 ammunition < see i made the important point in bold so no one misses it.
The paper ticket reads: Type 92 cartridges. Live, ammunition, ball. Then lot number, factory code and date of manufacture which was Feb of 1940.
Perhaps read my post again. I was corroborating posts 9 and 10, not debating them.Then look at the pictures I uploaded. You said you cant see head stamps in the photos, the reason being for this is because none are there The point of posting those pictures is to show a Japanese military ammunition box, containing ammunition, that has no head stamps. Contrary to the incorrect information in post 8. My point was, and remains there is no head stamp on type 92 ammunition < see i made the important point in bold so no one misses it.
The paper ticket reads: Type 92 cartridges. Live, ammunition, ball. Then lot number, factory code and date of manufacture which was Feb of 1940.
Have a great day
Well since you put it that way it appears I'm the one that missed the point. Thanks for straightening it for me. Merry CHRISTmas.
The information of where and when it was made was on a paper label on the waxed linen cardboard box the brass stripper came in.
As had been stated, the Japanese had More than one 7.7 7.7 semi rimmed Is loaded hotter and the Japanese put the rim on it to prevent it from being mistaken as 7.7 rimless. They did not want the MG ammo being used in rifles, i would have to agree. While you can use it if you angle and dangle it into the chamber, doesnt mean you should. While there can be debates about the strength of an action and metallurgy, realistically a type 99 is not designed for that ammo.
There are options out there for 7.7 Graf usually has some loaded in PPU brass. Hornady occasionally puts some out there. I do not recommend PCI out of indiana. Or you can load it yourself if you want to get into that but based on the fact that you have is really a collectors item and not designed for a type 99 any how, i would hang on to it. Besides it is not like they japanese are making that any more right?
The T92SR MG round came out before the T99 rimless round. The first prototype T99 rifles were chambered for the T92 SR ammunition..
Simple question Jeremy: Is the chamber of a type 99 designed to take a rimmed cartridge or a rimless? I'm not asking if it can, I'm asking which it was designed for? Pick apart what i said all you like. It doesn't change the fact that rimmed goes in the MG, and rimless goes in the type 99, as per the Japanese doctrine. The Japanese did not use them interchangeably and i would agree with them and not a youtuber.
Also I hope this gent doesn't bend his extractor. Currently that's a $30.00 part to replace, $30 that he does not have to spend if he uses the correct ammo.
Here again, Just because you can, doesnt mean you should.
Last edited by beachdog77; 03-16-2020 at 03:01 AM.
Simple question Jeremy: Is the chamber of a type 99 designed to take a rimmed cartridge or a rimless? I'm not asking if it can, I'm asking which it was designed for? Pick apart what i said all you like. It doesn't change the fact that rimmed goes in the MG, and rimless goes in the type 99, as per the Japanese doctrine. The Japanese did not use them interchangeably and i would agree with them and not a youtuber.
Also I hope this gent doesn't bend his extractor. Currently that's a $30.00 part to replace, $30 that he does not have to spend if he uses the correct ammo.
Here again, Just because you can, doesnt mean you should.
Not sure your concern...but yes the T92 heavies did shoot T99 rifle ammo just fine.
But it isn't about trying to put semirim T92 brass into a T99 chamber...it's about putting the T92 powder and projectile INTO the T99 brass and then shooting it.
The Type 92 Hotchkiss MG is said to shoot rimless 7.7 passably well (can't confirm; never tried it), but there is no question at all that it was designed for semi-rimmed cartridges, not rimless. The Type 99 rifle, on the other hand, was intended to be fired only with rimless cartridges, not semi-rimmed MG ammo.
Years ago, a friend who should have known better mailed me some fired cases that he'd shot in a T99 Arisaka rifle, complaining that they were "hard to close the bolt on". Well, of course they were semi-rimmed T92 HMG and were binding on the extractor every time he chambered one. Not only that, but the heads of the cases were swollen and mashed flat from excessive pressure, so badly that if there had been any headstamp there it would have been pressed out. I got on the phone and told him not to shoot any more of that ammo in anything, as the case heads seemed on the verge of bursting. Turned out that he'd removed them from 30-shot Hotchkiss strips, and had not noticed the difference in the rims.
PM
Originally Posted by Brewer
