There were Two versions ofthe Type89 Flexible Aircraft MG. Variant #1: Single Barrel, upsized version of Type 11, without hopper, but with a Pan Magazine similar to the Vickers K ( GO) magazine, 67 rounds, T89 7,7x58SR. Variant #2: Binary Flexible Aircraft MG, Two T89 Single Guns, with Gassystem facing each other, and Hopper Ratchet Loading System for Two Banjo shaped Chain drive magazines using 5 round Clips ( Special for SemiRimmed Case). Clips mounted on chains, andfed to Ratchets, whi stripped rounds downward into gun; empty strippers discarded outwards. Both these guns were later issued with T92 7,7x58 Ammo, as the new T92 Loading was more efficient in Aircraft use. Packs for Airforce Use ( 10x5 clips) were marked for use in T89 and T92 MGs. The fixed Vickers Type 89 gun was a clone of the Vickers Aircraft Gun with a Perforated Barrel Jacket like a BMG. Some of these were used as Ground Guns in late 44 in Philippines. During the early 1940s, a Rimless version of the T89 was produced in small numbers and found in China, IJ A Airforce. One thing to note is that originally Semi Rim MGs will fire Rimless T99 cartridges Successfully. As he Headspace Datum ( shoulder) is the Same, and the massive bolt Extractor claw will grab a Rimless case well. DocAV Gunboards.Com
Might had been a logistical nightmare for the Japanese in the field for not having a uniformed type of 7.7x58mm cartridge to fit on all 7.7 fed weapons.
A trick some reloaders use is to reshape the brass from a 30-06 round for 7.7. Picked up a box of 20 at a gun show 20 years ago and they worked fine. Have a hundred brass cases I never finished converting still on my reloading bench.
My favorite gun is the Arisaka 99 and 38, but mostly the Arisaka 99. I have 5 7.7x58 bullets with the original clip from ww2, and coincidentally, this video was uploaded on my birthdate!
You are the most helpful person of the year for me right now! I've had the type 92 rounds for ages and I couldn't figure out what the hell they were! Than I ran across this video and damn am I glad I did.
The last edition 7.7mm for the Type 99 had a longer bearing surface to give the rifle accuracy. That science was perfected by the Swiss and Finns earlier.
I would guess that modern ammo manufacturers are too lazy to make the proper historically correct bullets so they just use bullets that are already commonly available on the US market. Although maybe it has more to do with people not knowing that the original Type 99 Rifle Ball load was 183 grains, many people still think it was 174 grains.
However I should say that the Imperial Navy/Special Naval Landing Force apparently did use 174 grain bullets in their 7.7x58 ammo, possibly the same bullets they had been using for their 7.7x56R/.303 machine gun ammo.
The reason for the 150 grain is due to people wanting a lower recoil load for these old rifles while still maintaining as close to "stock" ballistics as possible. 174gr was used primarily in the naval forces and sometimes in the army while 183gr was the mainstay of the army. Precision Cartridge does sell 180gr 7.7 ammo. I use 150gr 7.7 any time Im shooting an unfamiliar T99, Ill usually fire 40-60 rounds of that prior to the 174gr or 183gr.
Short answer $ money$. Making a bullet for one round that only surplus guys shoot is not cost effective. I like 150gr because it lightens the recoil but still has a good punch.
That's pretty cool. I have the same kind of box with the ammo on clips, though not sealed and not in great shape. I wish I can remember how much I paid for mine exactly (it was a few years ago), but I reckon yours could be worth upwards of $50-$100 or maybe even more. Don't take my word for it though, check with some real experts (perhaps on a forum like Gunboards or the International Ammunition Association) if you want to get a more accurate estimate.
emu4286 thanks for the reply. I did more research and it turns out I think it might be for the type 11 7.7 cal machine gun. The top print says type 89... and the bottom says type 92... in the front of the box. The fact that they're in clips and could fit into an ammo pouch is making me think it's for the type 11. Are these semi rimmed? I don't want to open it haha but the curiosity is killing me. I don't come around too much sealed Japanese ammo boxes.
If you're talking about the Type 11 light machine gun, that was in 6.5mm... but the Type 89 flexible aircraft MG was based on the Type 11 and was indeed chambered in 7.7 and its ammo came on clips, as I said in the video, so perhaps it could be for that. And the Type 89 ammo is indeed semi-rimmed. But if it's also marked Type 92, that's rather odd... you could have something rare or unusual. Might be worth taking some pics and posting on one of the forums I mentioned if you want some opinions from real experts instead of an amateur like me, haha.
Unfortunately the book seems to be very hard to find, I bought my copy a few years ago. I did a Google search for the book and it seems like the website "japanesemilitaryfirearmsparts.com" has some copies available, for $60 USD.
Swedish Mauser 6.5 clips work the best, almost as snug as original and fairly cheap. Thats what i use for my T 99. www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01ILAWK5I/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o05__o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I also heard another rumor stating the different and multiple types of Japanese rounds in WWII was due to the never ending infighting between the Imperial Japanese Army and the Imperial Japanese Navy. The Army/Navy refused to use one or the other's rounds and/or weapons and decided that despite being chambered for the "same" round, each round and weapon would be designed specifically for the Army or Navy use and were intentionally designed to be noninterchangeable.
Yep, no doubt that was a significant factor. I remember reading that before the war, Army and Navy personnel fought a few actual skirmishes that resulted in several men dead. Also, rather amusingly, the book I show in the video does mention that while the Navy did use the Army's 7.7x58 round for their Type 4/5 autoloading rifle (the Japanese Garand copy), they produced their own loading in their own arsenals that used the same 174-grain bullet and the same propellant as their 7.7mm rimmed ammo instead of just using the Army's ammo.
It baffles me why Japan's two important military factions would rather fight against each other than unite against a common foe. I mean even at the near end of the war, the IJA and IJN were more likely to still want to kill each other than to kill the Americans. I can't imagine being a Japanese infantryman issued a Type 99 Last Ditch, and given 7.7mm semi-rimless, but the Type 99 you were issued wants 7.7mm rimless and therefore you have a rifle that has no bullet to use, and bullets which you have no weapon to use it for. Oh my god the logistical nightmare both the IJA and IJN created because a refusal to share logistics in a time of war where logistics can win or lose you a war.
So 7.7x58mm ( type 92 )bullet diameter is 7.89 while the 303 is a 7.92 diameter this means the 303 would be putting extra stress on the bore of a Arisaka 99 wearing rifling faster. So Wiki has started a rumor and is saying that the 303 is interchangeable with ALL 7.7x58mm. Including the (type 99 7.7x58) bullet listed as a bullet diameter of 7.7mm on Wiki. so dose wiki have this wrong and it is not the best idea to interchange and use these bullets? Can you Measure the bullet diameter and weights are and see what the real diameters are for the sake of proper history and reloading data if you could make this video it would help me and others greatly?
I've never done any reloading before and am certainly no expert on it, but measuring bullet weights and diameters does sound like something I can do if I get my hands on the right equipment. I'll see what I can do within the next few months or so.
Hey, just to let you know I haven't (totally) forgotten about your request; I should be able to get my hands on some reloading equipment (bullet puller, calipers and scale) pretty soon and most likely I'll be able to make a video by the end of January, possibly sooner.
I obtained a basically unissued Type 99 about a year ago (bring back) and have been working on it in terms of accurizing for about 6 months. Essentially, although about half reloading manuals indicate that the Type 99 takes a 0.312 bullet, the other half indicate 0.311. It all depends on the lands and grooves in the specific barrel because of the different factories that manufactured the rifles and put the chrome sleeves in the barrel (same thing applies to LE 303, which I also have). So, insofar as my Type 99 slugs with soft lead a bit tight at 0.312, I use a 0.311 174 grain HPBT bullet (Sierra Pro Hunter)--many others do as well. Thus, both the Type 99 and the LE 303 can use either a 0.311 or 0.312 bullet, depending. The Type 99 does takes about 4-5 grains MORE of powder (A4350) for the most accurate load, relative to the LE303, so it does have more power with the exact same bullet. The Type 99 also weights less and shoots better than the LE303. In terms of what you can do...1) Float the barrel under the handguard FIRST. 2) neck size the brass ONLY after the first fire forming. 3) use magnum LR primers (as they did in the old mil rounds). Many times the factories did NOT adjust elevation on the rifles. (This is especially true on the Type 38 6.5mm, which I also have) You can use a SKS front sight adjusting tool that works perfectly for the Type 99 front sight blade. The battle sight on the Type 99 is NOT zeroed at 300 meters and that is a common urban legend...it is zeroed at 100 meters; bottom of ladder is 200 meters, and the ladder takes it the rest of the distances. Finally, if you want to get real serious about accuracy, look at the locking lugs on the bolt--you will probably need to both hone and lap them for a precise fit/contact with the receiver because the milling on the interior face of the receiver is extremely rough--more contact is better. That gets into harmonic issues, as does floating the barrel.
The concern I believe was not rifle wear but rifle performance and soldier usability. The Type 99 barrels are chrome lined which makes them very durable but there was no need to overpower the rifle with excessive loading pressure. They were pretty hard hitting without huge recoil, a great combination for a very light rifle. I own a number of Type 99's and they aren't going to win a beauty contest like any Type 38 in good condition would but they are damn good rifles and did their job.
There were Two versions ofthe Type89 Flexible Aircraft MG.
Variant #1: Single Barrel, upsized version of Type 11, without hopper, but with a Pan Magazine similar to the Vickers K ( GO) magazine, 67 rounds, T89 7,7x58SR.
Variant #2: Binary Flexible Aircraft MG, Two T89 Single Guns, with Gassystem facing each other, and Hopper Ratchet Loading System for Two Banjo shaped Chain drive magazines using 5 round Clips ( Special for SemiRimmed Case).
Clips mounted on chains, andfed to Ratchets, whi stripped rounds downward
into gun; empty strippers discarded outwards.
Both these guns were later issued with T92 7,7x58 Ammo, as the new T92 Loading was more efficient in Aircraft use. Packs for Airforce Use ( 10x5 clips) were marked for use in T89 and T92 MGs. The fixed Vickers Type 89 gun was a clone of the Vickers Aircraft Gun with a Perforated Barrel Jacket like a BMG.
Some of these were used as Ground Guns in late 44 in Philippines.
During the early 1940s, a Rimless version of the T89 was produced in small numbers and found in China, IJ A Airforce.
One thing to note is that originally Semi Rim MGs will fire Rimless T99 cartridges Successfully. As he Headspace Datum ( shoulder) is the Same, and the massive bolt Extractor claw will grab a Rimless case well.
DocAV Gunboards.Com
Live in Katy Tex.Can’t find type 7.7 Arisaka bullets?
How fucked do you want you logistics to be?
IJA: Yes
Are the rounds interchangeable ?
Might had been a logistical nightmare for the Japanese in the field for not having a uniformed type of 7.7x58mm cartridge to fit on all 7.7 fed weapons.
A trick some reloaders use is to reshape the brass from a 30-06 round for 7.7. Picked up a box of 20 at a gun show 20 years ago and they worked fine. Have a hundred brass cases I never finished converting still on my reloading bench.
Has anyone ever fired the Type 92 7.7X58 Flat nosed. Explosive round ? Love to see a video of that..
My favorite gun is the Arisaka 99 and 38, but mostly the Arisaka 99. I have 5 7.7x58 bullets with the original clip from ww2, and coincidentally, this video was uploaded on my birthdate!
Very informative thanks just got my first type 99 and was looking for info on the ammo thanks again
Glad I could be of assistance.
You are the most helpful person of the year for me right now! I've had the type 92 rounds for ages and I couldn't figure out what the hell they were! Than I ran across this video and damn am I glad I did.
The last edition 7.7mm for the Type 99 had a longer bearing surface to give the rifle accuracy. That science was perfected by the Swiss and Finns earlier.
I suppose japanese wwii rounds are berdan cased?
Like the military rounds here in Europe.
I would assume so.
I was unable to see the markings around the primer of the Japanese Yokosuka produced 303 round @ the 10:08 mark. Can you tell me the markings on them.
There's a "7.7" followed by a character that looks like a backwards "E" (which I believe is the kana for "Yo" as in Yokosuka) followed by "97-12".
do you know how many grains of powder and if possible what type
the type 99 rifle bullet had ?
The book I mentioned in the video says 43 grains of square flake nitro-cellulose. Hope that helps.
I found a round, its marked HC TS 42 xvi. Idk what type of round it is but it has a rim like the British cartridges but no slot
Why is modern ammo that they make for the 7.7 not 183 grain but eather 150grain or 174 graim but not the original load of 183 grains ?
I would guess that modern ammo manufacturers are too lazy to make the
proper historically correct bullets so they just use bullets that are
already commonly available on the US market. Although maybe it has more
to do with people not knowing that the original Type 99 Rifle Ball load
was 183 grains, many people still think it was 174 grains.
However I should say that the Imperial Navy/Special Naval Landing Force apparently did use 174 grain bullets in their 7.7x58 ammo, possibly the same bullets they had been using for their 7.7x56R/.303 machine gun ammo.
Good point
The reason for the 150 grain is due to people wanting a lower recoil load for these old rifles while still maintaining as close to "stock" ballistics as possible. 174gr was used primarily in the naval forces and sometimes in the army while 183gr was the mainstay of the army. Precision Cartridge does sell 180gr 7.7 ammo.
I use 150gr 7.7 any time Im shooting an unfamiliar T99, Ill usually fire 40-60 rounds of that prior to the 174gr or 183gr.
Short answer $ money$.
Making a bullet for one round that only surplus guys shoot is not cost effective.
I like 150gr because it lightens the recoil but still has a good punch.
can you help me tell what type of ammo i have i think i have type 92 but its not rimmed and it dose not have the Ogiv that the type 99 round has
Could be a round for the Type 97 tank machine gun or Type 99 LMG.
Just picked up a sealed 15rd box of 7.7 on clips. Box has all writing intact. Roughly, how what is the value? In very good shape.
That's pretty cool. I have the same kind of box with the ammo on clips,
though not sealed and not in great shape. I wish I can remember how much
I paid for mine exactly (it was a few years ago), but I reckon yours
could be worth upwards of $50-$100 or maybe even more. Don't take my
word for it though, check with some real experts (perhaps on a forum
like Gunboards or the International Ammunition Association) if you want to get a more accurate estimate.
emu4286 thanks for the reply. I did more research and it turns out I think it might be for the type 11 7.7 cal machine gun. The top print says type 89... and the bottom says type 92... in the front of the box. The fact that they're in clips and could fit into an ammo pouch is making me think it's for the type 11. Are these semi rimmed? I don't want to open it haha but the curiosity is killing me. I don't come around too much sealed Japanese ammo boxes.
If you're talking about the Type 11 light machine gun, that was in 6.5mm... but the Type 89 flexible aircraft MG was based on the Type 11 and was indeed chambered in 7.7 and its ammo came on clips, as I said in the video, so perhaps it could be for that. And the Type 89 ammo is indeed semi-rimmed. But if it's also marked Type 92, that's rather odd... you could have something rare or unusual. Might be worth taking some pics and posting on one of the forums I mentioned if you want some opinions from real experts instead of an amateur like me, haha.
Thanks for your help!
Also heres the link to my post in a form. It has pics of the box if you're curious www.surplusrifleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=187&t=147575
great vid!
where do I get the book?
Unfortunately the book seems to be very hard to find, I bought my copy a few years ago. I did a Google search for the book and it seems like the website "japanesemilitaryfirearmsparts.com" has some copies available, for $60 USD.
OK thanks
I've heard you can use 1903 Springfield stripper clips in a Type 99 Arisaka. Is this true?
Swedish Mauser 6.5 clips work the best, almost as snug as original and fairly cheap. Thats what i use for my T 99.
www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01ILAWK5I/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o05__o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I also heard another rumor stating the different and multiple types of Japanese rounds in WWII was due to the never ending infighting between the Imperial Japanese Army and the Imperial Japanese Navy. The Army/Navy refused to use one or the other's rounds and/or weapons and decided that despite being chambered for the "same" round, each round and weapon would be designed specifically for the Army or Navy use and were intentionally designed to be noninterchangeable.
Yep, no doubt that was a significant factor. I remember reading that before the war, Army and Navy personnel fought a few actual skirmishes that resulted in several men dead.
Also, rather amusingly, the book I show in the video does mention that while the Navy did use the Army's 7.7x58 round for their Type 4/5 autoloading rifle (the Japanese Garand copy), they produced their own loading in their own arsenals that used the same 174-grain bullet and the same propellant as their 7.7mm rimmed ammo instead of just using the Army's ammo.
It baffles me why Japan's two important military factions would rather fight against each other than unite against a common foe. I mean even at the near end of the war, the IJA and IJN were more likely to still want to kill each other than to kill the Americans. I can't imagine being a Japanese infantryman issued a Type 99 Last Ditch, and given 7.7mm semi-rimless, but the Type 99 you were issued wants 7.7mm rimless and therefore you have a rifle that has no bullet to use, and bullets which you have no weapon to use it for. Oh my god the logistical nightmare both the IJA and IJN created because a refusal to share logistics in a time of war where logistics can win or lose you a war.
very true nice job
So 7.7x58mm ( type 92 )bullet diameter is 7.89 while the 303 is a 7.92 diameter this means the 303 would be putting extra stress on the bore of a Arisaka 99 wearing rifling faster. So Wiki has started a rumor and is saying that the 303 is interchangeable with ALL 7.7x58mm. Including the (type 99 7.7x58) bullet listed as a bullet diameter of 7.7mm on Wiki. so dose wiki have this wrong and it is not the best idea to interchange and use these bullets? Can you Measure the bullet diameter and weights are and see what the real diameters are for the sake of proper history and reloading data if you could make this video it would help me and others greatly?
I've never done any reloading before and am certainly no expert on it, but measuring bullet weights and diameters does sound like something I can do if I get my hands on the right equipment. I'll see what I can do within the next few months or so.
YOU ARE WONDER FULL YOU ARE A GOD AND I WILL KILL ANY ONE YOU TELL ME TWO lol thank you
Hey, just to let you know I haven't (totally) forgotten about your request; I should be able to get my hands on some reloading equipment (bullet puller, calipers and scale) pretty soon and most likely I'll be able to make a video by the end of January, possibly sooner.
I obtained a basically unissued Type 99 about a year ago (bring back) and have been working on it in terms of accurizing for about 6 months. Essentially, although about half reloading manuals indicate that the Type 99 takes a 0.312 bullet, the other half indicate 0.311. It all depends on the lands and grooves in the specific barrel because of the different factories that manufactured the rifles and put the chrome sleeves in the barrel (same thing applies to LE 303, which I also have). So, insofar as my Type 99 slugs with soft lead a bit tight at 0.312, I use a 0.311 174 grain HPBT bullet (Sierra Pro Hunter)--many others do as well. Thus, both the Type 99 and the LE 303 can use either a 0.311 or 0.312 bullet, depending. The Type 99 does takes about 4-5 grains MORE of powder (A4350) for the most accurate load, relative to the LE303, so it does have more power with the exact same bullet. The Type 99 also weights less and shoots better than the LE303.
In terms of what you can do...1) Float the barrel under the handguard FIRST. 2) neck size the brass ONLY after the first fire forming. 3) use magnum LR primers (as they did in the old mil rounds). Many times the factories did NOT adjust elevation on the rifles. (This is especially true on the Type 38 6.5mm, which I also have) You can use a SKS front sight adjusting tool that works perfectly for the Type 99 front sight blade. The battle sight on the Type 99 is NOT zeroed at 300 meters and that is a common urban legend...it is zeroed at 100 meters; bottom of ladder is 200 meters, and the ladder takes it the rest of the distances. Finally, if you want to get real serious about accuracy, look at the locking lugs on the bolt--you will probably need to both hone and lap them for a precise fit/contact with the receiver because the milling on the interior face of the receiver is extremely rough--more contact is better. That gets into harmonic issues, as does floating the barrel.
The concern I believe was not rifle wear but rifle performance and soldier usability. The Type 99 barrels are chrome lined which makes them very durable but there was no need to overpower the rifle with excessive loading pressure. They were pretty hard hitting without huge recoil, a great combination for a very light rifle. I own a number of Type 99's and they aren't going to win a beauty contest like any Type 38 in good condition would but they are damn good rifles and did their job.
I nit...it's not pronounced "yoko-sooka", it's "yo-kooska". Very informative...thanks!
Liked and subscribed!
не томи показывай!