Arisaka action test

[Griff Murphey]

not so sure about this . I was going to prep some brass and order some 311 bullets and see how she did . But when I went to resize the brass it was a bear to get the die all the way down . Even then it left a significant bulge at the base of the case . I'm not sure if this is something to worry about or not . If the case is completely supported , why would it bulge ?
Kenneth

Assuming you are using fired cases from your rifle, could your chamber be oversize? Maybe you could just neck size them?
A high school ROTC classmate had at least two 7.7's that he had reamed to .30'06 so he could fire USGI blanks out of them. Could your rifle have been "reamed out?"

[aintright]

Sorry fellows , re read my posts and no where's did I state the rifle has been rechambered to 30-06 .
Yes , Griff , it was fired testing for accuracy , then tried resizing brass with intent of ordering some .311 bullets .
It has been a spell , and memory ain't worth diddly sometimes . Will try a couple more factory rds and resize and see how they chamber when I get home this weekend if we aren't knee deep in snow . Thanks , Kenneth

[oldtirediron]

I actually saw a rifle that was re-chambered to 30-06 on Between two fairly good gunsmiths on a Saturday after work-- The same old argument was made that the 7.7 case was too wide at the head and if re-chambered to 30-06 you would get a case head failure- So the next week I was at a local range in carpetersville Illinois and these two fellows were there with a Japanese rfle re-chambered to 30-06 The guy that rechambered it fired the rifle , he spun around and fell flat on his back-- The told you so's were flying around but the rifle was intact aand had no damage- Seems the one guy had re-chambered a Arisaka in 6.5 caliber instead of 7.7 !! See what a few cans of beer can do for you-- Wonder where that rifle is now, when this happened in the late 197-'s you could buy all the jap rifles you wanted for $10-00=$15.00 wach !

[Guamsst]

You are correct. If you want it to group. You will need the .311 bullets. 7.7JAP is basically identical to .303 and needs the larger diameter (correct diameter) bullets. Not a fault of the gun, but a fault of reloaders who don't fully understand how it works.

[psteinmayer]

Amen to that!

[fguffey]

Forget the receiver, I want the cases, if the rifle did not blow up the case did not suffer a Catastrophic Failure!

http://www.mlefiaa.org/files/CaseHead/SUMMER_2011.pdf

There is a claim rifles chamber to 30/06 blew up when firing 8mm57 ammo, but as the story claims someone chamber a Japanese rifle to 30/06 and then fired 30/06 ammo with no mention of changing the forcing cone and that leads us to believe the rifle shot .308" ammo in a .6.5mm/.264" diameter bore. And that brings us back to the 30/06 case. The 30/06 case will not tolerate that high a pressure. If the case head did not have a catastrophic failure the pressure was not there. And then the story always starts out with "This guy....etc. etc. "

And I always ask if there is anyone here that has ever taken one to those Japanese rifles apart? I have, it is something that can not be unseen. I have 6.5mm50 cases and ammo, I also have a reamer for going from 6.5mm50 to 6.5mm 257 Roberts. I form 257 Roberts from 30/06 cases, the Japanese receiver does not make the 30/06 case stronger no does it prevent it from a Catastrophic Failure! And then there is difference is design, the Japanese said their rifle was a Mauser design, The British said there P14 was a Mauser design, Springfield not so much.

F. Guffey

[dave]

Springfield is a Mauser design, but of a 1893 model, the 'Spanish Mauser'. The us Gov't was sued and lost, paid Mauser much money, even tho they made changes that they thought would not infringe. Why do you think the Portugal rifle is called a Vergeuse-Mauser? (sp?)

[fguffey]

The us Gov't was sued and lost, (sp?)

And the Germans lost the war, when it came to getting a fair settlement I do not believe they stood a chance.

I have always thought Springfield was working WWHUA as working with head up donkey and now you are telling me it is worst than I thought it was. The small ring Mauser had a small shank barrel; The Springfield 03 front receiver ring was the same diameter as the small ring Mauser but Springfield used a barrel with a larger diameter shank. That made the 03 receiver thinner. john Browning would not release the Model 94 until it would hold up to smokeless powder, he added nickel. It took Springfield 24 years to find nickel.

F. Guffey

[dave]

And the Germans lost the war, when it came to getting a fair settlement I do not believe they stood a chance.

I have always thought Springfield was working WWHUA as working with head up donkey and now you are telling me it is worst than I thought it was. The small ring Mauser had a small shank barrel; The Springfield 03 front receiver ring was the same diameter as the small ring Mauser but Springfield used a barrel with a larger diameter shank. That made the 03 receiver thinner. john Browning would not release the Model 94 until it would hold up to smokeless powder, he added nickel. It took Springfield 24 years to find nickel.

F. Guffey

Do not know what you are talking about. The law suit was over the magazine system (staggered box) and the use of loading clips, both patent's owned by Mauser. Had nothing to do with large ring-small rings. So barrel shank is different, total amount of metal around chamber is the same. WWHUA??? Lawsuit was way before the war!

[Tuna]

The US paid royalties to Germany into WW1 on each 03 rifle that was made. This also happened in WW2 but for other things like a non corrosive compound for primers. This money went into a fund kept by the government and was turned over at the end of the war.