Gold Bullet member
Type I rifles should not have Japanese markings...for the most part. I imagine someone with way more knowledge will know of a few exceptions.I took a look. There are no Japanese markings at all, cancelled or otherwise?
Fourbore:Many or most have had some degree of sanding and refinish of sorts. I could do one today and no one would know. It does not seem to matter as much.
FB:I need to tone it down a bit. I appreciate the slack cut.
That’s not a good sign. When rifles like this go off to an unknown ending, it gives me no small concern. I hoped that it would end up in your hands, or ADogs, or someone else’s that knew it’s value. That it may end up in some quack’s mitts is disheartening.Note that the buyer of the Type I is the same person as the one who bought that Type 38 "experimental rifle" that was (and is) the subject of past and present threads.
Good to know. Every example I’ve seen regardless of original finish was just in the end a Carcano. Even a fine antique quality Italian Carcano falls short in the smoothness and beauty department. At least in my eyes. I sold both my Type I. Never did anything for me. I like the history but man what dogs they were. I’d love to examine a mint example just to see.I have two in my collection that have a great degree of finish/blue. Nothing crude about them
Guyssssss! We've got a turd in the punch bowl!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^I dont know anywhere near, what the more informed members of this website know. Get that out right up front. I have accumulated a few Carcano from the recent Italian import. Many or most have had some degree of sanding and refinish of sorts. I could do one today and no one would know. It does not seem to matter as much. I have read here, that a refinish Araska was a big deal, because one of the main points of these guns was the bad looks and bad finish. A pretty Arisaka does not look right. My own idea also considers that these were such cheaper-than-dirt guns for so many years, the buyers could be real picky. The current MUM loving, refinish ignoring buyers seem to anger some?
Now we have a Carcano, no doubt, if you say so, it is over price. History unknown. Cancelled? But; these were not ugly guns from the start and it may have been sold to a Carcano collector rather than a card carry member (scratch that), rather than a Japanese arms collector.
I took a look. There are no Japanese markings at all, cancelled or otherwise?
The most you will find is rack markings on the buttstock or unit markings on slings.Type I rifles should not have Japanese markings...for the most part. I imagine someone with way more knowledge will know of a few exceptions.
Blasphemy! These are not PURE Japanese blood linage rifles. Axis contract junk. I must report you to the Emperor immediately!I have a type I. It’s a nice gun. Subjectively it feels nicer and more high quality than any Italian Carcano or, dare I say it, any Arisaka I have held.
I have some good or better condition Type 38s, carbines, and a 44. Also have a Type I and a bunch of Carcanos. Mostly the freshly imported carbines, but did pick up a nice condition non-import (IIRC) 91 long rifle as well.Indeed, all in good fun!
Sadly every type 38 I’ve held has been a fairly rough specimen, as has every type 99 (and I’m not even including last ditch rifles or school rifles.) I only own one, a type 99 sniper, and it’s nice, but I have to say I feel like the Italians finished the type Is to a higher standard. Arisakas are great guns from a design standpoint, just, IMO, don’t seem to exude quality and craftsmanship the way a good Mauser or even a Mosin does.
I am most definitely keeping my eye out for a nice prewar type 38!
The type I is a bit boring to look at because of the lack of markings…I got mine because a buddy thought it was a postwar refinished Mauser and didn’t want it. But the bluing is nice, the machining seems well done, and the bolt is way smoother than a carcano because they use that mannlicher style magazine, whereas the Mauser style doesn’t seem to drag on the bolt when it’s cycled.