Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Arisaka or Mauser

Now we're getting somewhere...thanks guys.

If the mum is intact, you have your answer. Arisakas used to be hard to give away ($100) at gun shows years ago. They're starting to gain in collector's value. Unless the Mauser belonged to Hitler or Himmler (and can be proven!!), go with the Arisaka.

Mine was brought back from the Pacific by my great uncle.My grandfather had it rechambered and my uncle bedded it in a 600 Rem stock utilizing half a ton of Bondo. It would shoot around 3-3.5" groups at 100 yds. I picked up a roughed out sporter stock on Ebay and finished it up. It will now shoot under an inch with 125 Nosler Partitions. My wife shot her first deer with it a couple of years ago and I have used it in Wyoming on antelope. The original safety is pretty funky but the Timney trigger negates that problem. The Arisaka is a much maligned, very solid action which handles gases very well in the case of a ruptured case. I think quite a bit of the bad rap comes from the last-ditch 99's that were iffy to downright dangerous in terms of construction. Check to see if this one has a chrome lined barrel.Just my humble opinion.

I would take the Arisaka. I've been looking for an nice affordable one for a long time because my dad faced them on Gualdalcanal. He said the 6.5 had a cracking sound much more distinctive than the 7.7. Another thing, the Japs chrome lined the bores of most of them and that was a smart thing to do in the humid climate of the South Pacific.

Also, old P.O. could attest to the strength of the Arisaka. I think they came out number 1 or 2 on the blowup tests.

Quality of the pre war rifles was excellent but of course, everyone knows about the "last ditch" Arisakas.

The was a 7.7 here on the campfire but I never got an answer to a PM or I would have bought it.

I think Jap rifles will only go up in value. Thanks..Bill.

Arisaka for sure, but leave it as is! A 1914 32ACP pistol that has been chromed, is just another 32, even if it is a Mauser.

Sounds like an old pimp gun, no thanks. Go with the Arisaka

It would be the Arisaka for me in that case, with an eye to eventual sale.

Well if you don't like the "Pass" responses I suggest you don't ask for recommendations.

Considering it's an inheritance option I suggest you take the Arisaka, that will be a tighter fit up your ass.

What S'head said.

If I were in the market between those two it would be the Arisaka.

Well I'm a bit of a japanophile so I would take the arisaka. I wouldn't alter it and if it was safe to shoot I'd take to the range with some onigiri and tea.

Lots of Arisaka's are fine shooting rifles, as good as a Mauser and most Springfields. Just not as powerful. It depends on it's condition and when it was made, plus any bore wear.

A lot of the ill opinions on the rifle are based more on crappy ammo. Late war jap ammo was simply junk, as is Norma. Normas bullet is simply too heavy for the round. I haven't heard anything on the Hornady round, but 139 grains is what the gun was made for and the Hornady is 140 grains.

On a historical note. going to the 7.7x58 round was a mistake for the Japs. Their small stature soldiers had problems with a rifle that equaled the 303 British in power. The short rifle made things much worse. They simply didn't need the range capability to go farther in the jungles.

Arisaka!!!

Thanks again guys. It's interesting to note the value of responses vs post count.
Enjoy the week.