Why did WW2 Japan adopt a rimless, British .303?

Status
Closed
Aug 2016
977
US&A
You do understand how appallingly useless Japanese machine guns were. That's why I questioned the British design comment. As for the rest of your post. That's really not my wheelhouse so I would prefer others to engage in that part of the discussions.
You seem agitated. Not sure why. Oh well..
 
Aug 2016
977
US&A
First, that is wrong. If you think the only different between 7.7x56mmR and 7.7x58mm Arisaka is the rim, then I wonder why you're making any declarative statements at all.

"Why copy a round off an empire they hated?"

They didn't copy a rimless round. They, being the IJN, copied the rimmed round to use in their versions of British machine guns. Then the IJA, a completely different organization, changed their standard calibers from 6.5 to 7.7 because of range issues and perceived issues with terminal ballistics encountered in China in the 30s, and they too went 7.7, choosing a bullet caliber already in Japanese arsenals, that they'd already done testing on and already had various bullets for.
You seem to be deliberately taking the comments I make as literally as possible in order to find offense. That's fine. At least now I know.
 
Aug 2016
977
US&A
You do understand how appallingly useless Japanese machine guns were. That's why I questioned the British design comment. As for the rest of your post. That's really not my wheelhouse so I would prefer others to engage in that part of the discussions.

No not at all :)
I guess you just really love British MGs? Japanese machine guns weren't up to par, but "appallingly useless" is a term many marines would disagree with you on.
 

MG1962a

Ad Honorem
Mar 2019
2,527
Kansas
I guess you just really love British MGs? Japanese machine guns weren't up to par, but "appallingly useless" is a term many marines would disagree with you on.
Not really it is just I knew the British along with the US and Germans all made pretty good machine guns before and during the war. The Japanese persisted with the weird stick feed system for their machine guns. It was awkward in combat, prone to jams, and really slow on reloads.

I would also suggest that Marines would much rather have to deal with a Japanese machine gun position than a German one.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,813
USA
You seem to be deliberately taking the comments I make as literally as possible in order to find offense. That's fine. At least now I know.
I'm quoting you, if that is what you mean. You asked a question in the OP. In fact, you wrote numerous paragraphs and included a single question in it. I answered it. Now you're questioning why I answered it. Which perplexes me. If you didn't want someone answering your question, stop asking questions.
 
Aug 2016
977
US&A
I'm quoting you, if that is what you mean. You asked a question in the OP. In fact, you wrote numerous paragraphs and included a single question in it. I answered it. Now you're questioning why I answered it. Which perplexes me. If you didn't want someone answering your question, stop asking questions.
LOL
 

botully

Ad Honorem
Feb 2011
3,548
Amelia, Virginia, USA
Why does any military adopt a particular cartridge?
What makes you think they hated the British? They were allies a few years beforehand.
Yeah, I don’t get this either. They modeled the navy after the RN. Seems a weird reason to doubt the choice of cartridge. Why would they say “it fits every requirement but we really hate the British so choose another one”.
 
Status
Closed