Japanese weapons developed "too late" + those the Allies feared the most...

Let's not sell the Japanese short on developing effective weapons. After all, they started WW2 with the A6M Zero, which was THE best carrier plane on earth for several years, & maybe the best fighter period for a little while. Their carriers were the world's best til the US' Essex-class came online.

But when the war started for Japan, they were limited in weapon development by the need to make more of what they already had. And while they did invent new weapons, it was late in the war before they could make enough of them to help their war effort. Some of them are :

The Kawanishi N1K fighter, code-named "George" by the Allies. This plane could compete with Hellcats & Corsairs, but it was difficult to fly, & didn't come online til late in 1944, & then, only in limited quantities. In feb. 1945, a group of 10 expert Japanese pilots faced a flight of 7 Hellcats & shot down 4 of them with no loss to themselves. However, there were few other expert Japanese pilots by that time, & many other not-so-expert Japanese flying the "George" were shot down by their experienced adversaries. Had Japan been able to have made it sooner, it could've made the mid-war air battles much more-even.
___________________________________________________

The "Long Lance" oxygen-driven torpedo, used by subs, destroyers, & porpedo-carrying aircraft alike was a paragon of torpedoes at the time. It left no track, ran about 46 MPH, faster than any ship, & had a range of over 20 miles. it was very reliable, with few duds, & ran a straight, true line, deflected only by strong underwater currents. It had a more-powerful warhead than alnything we had. The USN respected this beast thruout the war, studying captured specimens after the war to improve the propulsion systems of our own torpedoes.

The various "Nambu" submachine guns carried by many Japanese infantrymen, struck fear into the Allies when used en masse. They could spit out a fearsome storm of lead. While not over-accurate, their danger was in their rate of fire & ammo capacity, & in banzai charges, a lot of them fired together could wreak havoc.

Japanese artillery was as good as anybody's, with great accuracy. And their huge mortars were a fearsome weapon on coral atolls where the coral surface was turned into shrapnel by these massive shells. The Japanese had plenty of them on Iwo jima, Peleliu, & Okinawa.

And no need to elaborate about the A6M Zero airplane, which was used thruout the war. It was greatly feared even late in the war by pilots of bombers, recon planes, etc. even when the Hellcat, P-38, & Corsair bested it.

 

The Japanese developed a semi-auto rifle between 1935-37 called the Koishikawa Arsenal Pederson Rifle, It had a 10-round rotary magazine which could be changed reasonably fast. It was 6.5 X 50 cal. However, only 12 were ever made, & at least two of them were used at Okinawa, found after the battle. It's unknown how many casualties they caused. They were fair in accuracy, but didn't have the range of the US M1 Garand, which is .30-30 cal.

The Japanese tried to copy the M1 Garand, making a "Type 5 Japanese Garand" with a 10-round magazine in 7.7 mm x58 cal. This round had adequate power, & had the Japanese produced these rifles in quantity, they mighta made a difference. However, only some 250 were made, & only a few were used sparingly near the end of the war. While it didn't have quite the range of the M1, it compared favorably with the M1 in many other ways, & was superior in one - it had a larger magazine capacity. It's not clear why Japan didn't produce enough of these semi-auto rifles to equip more of their soldiers with. While their Arisaka 6.5 mm bolt action rifles weren't bad weapons, they were at a disadvantage against an American unit armed with M1s.

Our boys found that 12 ga. Winchester pump shotguns provided heavy mobile short-range firepower for close-up island fighting where the enemy hid in caves, spider holes, or thickets. The Japanese didn't use shotguns likewise. And Japan didn't develop anything equivalent to the BAR, which was a very-mobile MG whose 30-06 round could penetrate brush & thickets as well as wooden walls, & some armor on Japanese light tanks.

 

Which one was it?

The Arisaka was designed by Col. Arasaka Nariakira( 1852-1915). It was improved over the years, with the Type 38 being designed by Nambu Kijiro, the designer of many other Japanese firearms.

The commonest one in WW2 was the Type 38, using the 6.5 MM x50 round. There was also the Type 99 using the 7.7 X58 round, about as powerful as the modern.308.

Those Arisakas are reliable bolt-action rifles that made their way all over Europe, with a great many being brought to the US after the war. Wonder if your friend's has the 16-petal Chrysanthemum seal stamped on toppa the receiver, which identifies it as a genuine Japanese model?

 

Thanx for your good input!

I was talking to a US Marine historian awhile back, & he didn't know why Japan didn't arm its men with semi-auto rifles. They had the tech, & had a variety of adequate SMGs. He believed their pistol deficeincy was because a great many of their men relied on swords at close range. (Guess they never heard "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight!")

If your friend's rifle is a common model, it's worth $300-$500 on the open market, being a genuine WW2 artifact. A Type 97 sniper model is worth $3000-$6000 ! Another rare Arisaka is one made for the Mexican army, identified by the Spanish writing on the receiver. There are a good many genuine WW2 models available in the US from a good many legal gun dealers. A few deer hunters like the 7.7 MM Type 99, as, when accurized & using modern ammo, it's as accurate as many other comparable rifles. But I'm sure your friend's rifle is invaluable to him & his family as a souvenir of his WW2 service !

OTOH, M1 Garands are much-more-costly, with 30-30 modelsgoing for at least $1000, with 30-06 models going for at least $1500. (Yes, they're legal to own!) An M1 Garand sniper model (almost always a 30-06) generally goes for at least $5000!

While Model 1911 .45 pistols are very common, made by many different companies, genuine WW2 specimens usually go for at least $1000. (I would buy one of these only for souvenir purposes; I have a Sig-Sauer & a Randall Gold Cup, both of which are more-accurate & lighter than an old 1911.)

 

Ole man Browning designed the .45 ACP (A utomatic Colt P istol) round for his new pistol, as the Army asked for a caliber of at least.45 for any new handgun. He designed the round to travel no more than 1000 feet per second muzzle velocity so it would expend its energy in the target & do more damage rather than penetrate it. Also, he wanted his new pistol to have plenty of firepower but still be controllable for multiple shots by almost any shooter. He perfected his pistol in 1911, hence its name. Almost every .45 ACP weapon since has been based upon Model 1911's design.

Browning was also commissioned by FN of Belgium to design a new pistol for the French military. He had sold his rights & patents for the 1911 to the Colt Co. & so had to start from scratch, working with Belgian Dieudonne Saive. He finished the basic design in 1923 & applied for a U S patent, but he died in 1926 before the patent was granted. Saive finished the design in 1935 & named the pistol in honor of Browning. It comes in 9mm Parabellum & .40 cals. It became the basis for a great many 9mms that followed, especially with its 13-round capacity. There are millions of BHP pistols worldwide, mostly made by FN of Belgium. It's still made by several companies under license.

The 9mm Parabellum, designed in 1902 by George Luger, remains the most-popular pistol & SMG round on earth ! There are umpteen types of bullet for it now !

 

Well, they had both .30-30s & 7MMs for awhile in the late 1930s, but switched to .30-06 by the time the US entered WW2. That way, they had the same ammo for the Garand & BAR. (Different loading systems, of course !)

 

You seen knowlwdgeable in firearms, so I decided to check. Indeed , There were early .30-30 models made, as well as some 7MM models. that ammo was in plentiful supply. However, BuOrd (Bureau of Ordinance) wasn't satisfied with the power and range of either the .30-30 or 7MM rounds, so, they asked for a .30-06 model, which satisfied them. And yes, they had to mofify the new models and magazines to feed rimless carts. but the power gain was well worth it.

My first source of info was my late dad, who was a quartermaster in the AAF during WW2. (After a spell as a B-17 tail gunner.) After reading your post, I consulted several "Shooters' Bibles" & World Book.

But one thing I had backwards. The .30-30 0r 7MM models are rare, & sell for much more than a common M-1.

I had an M-14 during my service. They'd tried to give me an early M-16 (.17 cal.) which shot knuckleballs, so, being a corpsman, I was able to persuade a friendly quartermaster to swap me for an M-14, which was very reliable & accurate. (The M-14 is simply an improved Garand, still .30-06 cal.) being a noncombatant, I would only have had to use my rifle as a last resort, but at least I could hit targets with it, with power.

 

I can't find any record of either the Pedersen or .30-30 being used in combat by US forces. I did find that in the '30s, Mac Arthur, while Chief of Staff, wanted it to be .30 cal as there was a large supply of .30 cal ammo available, & Gen. Shuman, speaking for the Secy. of war, ordered all work on the .276 Pedersen Garands stopped & replaced with .30-06, which caused Garand to have to do some re-designing.

And I don't think US forces used any 7.62MM UN models made after WW2.

 

The US' new Sig-Sauer M17 9MM pistol, replacing the Beretta M9 is a good move, as the M 17 's bugs have been ironed out. The M9 was simply too heavy & large to be handled with agility. While some people wanted a .45 ACP model, the 9MM, with its larger magazine capacity & light weight, seems ideal for the present, for the combat uses of a pistol.