*blocks your path*

>muh max functionality
back to /ARG/ you cuckold

Because us propoganda got everyone thinking anything Japanese is shit and the japs destroyed all the ammo they could for them so there was no way to prove the common thinking wrong until relatively recently, but decades of misinformation still hold strong in people's minds

Ammo is an absolute bitch to find, and when you do it's $50 a box unless you get that shit from Precision Cartridge Inc.

I honestly don't know dude, if I was to guess it would be the availability of ammo. The rifle is incredibly well built when you take into account the quality of the materials used in it's construction.

Give it another generation and so. When the last K39, k98, South American bolter and Mosin have become generally unobtainable the Jap rifles will start to climb in price at the very same rate. And once people are willing to pay enough, the ammo might return to the market as well.

>a shittier round?
Lol no. 6.5 Jap is a round that was too advanced for its time.

You're giving to too much credit, it's a worse 6.5x55 and that round is older too.

>Japan faces Chinamen with 8mm G.88s
>outraged by Chinese fire and it's also more lethal
>Japan adopts what is basically rimless .303 Brit to compensate

What the fuck is up with the 6.5 and 7mm revisionism in the last couple years? Every one of the countries that adopted these "superior" rounds, replaced them with larger rounds before going intermediate with select fire weapons.

>Why is this thing so underappreciated?
Because introducing a bolt-action service rifle in 1939 was retarded.

It's no revisionism, you can't put your own biased spin on fucking physics. Classic example is SOME of the Boers outranged Mk.6 .303 with 7mm Mauser, of which they had SOME. But there's more to it than external ballistics, or terminal for that matter, looking back at the Japs maybe the fucking Japs couldn't fucking shoot? They certainly didn't shoot well in WW2 by all accounts I've read. Now back to the .303 vs 7mm Mauser; fast forward to 1914 and the BEF shoots the shit out of the enemy at long and short ranges with a big, fat, slow .31 cal. The difference is they learned 'em to shoot straight.

From my own experience inna infantry when you get ineffective fire and shitty shooting the first place you look is the asshole behind the rifle, then look at whether he's failed to maintain his rifle and then, at the end of all things, consider whether the fault is the firearm or the ammo.

Expensive af ammo (~$1.50/round)
Post-1941 quality is terrible, progressively getting worse over the next 4 years of production
Unless you reload they're only good as a historical display piece

Because of the "Last Ditch" versions.

Early production models are fantastic rifles: light and easy to handle. The 7.7 Jap Ammo is fine, ballistics are close to the 30-06 or 308. I reload it with the same projectiles I use for my .303 Brit loads and usually get a 150grain bullet at ~2200fps. That's good enough for most things, hunting in North America, self-defense, etc. I wouldn't take on the Big 5 with it, but it's still pretty good.

The Last Ditch models are mostly safe, but very crude. At least with Mosin Nagants (a very crappy rifle in and of itself) the war production models still LOOK like they were produced by an actual arms factory whereas the late war Type 99s look like something thrown together in a garage by a layperson.

because you have to make the Ammo yourself at this point.

And 6.5 Swede is just a gimped 6.5 Verguiero.
And thus ammunition technology and developed stayed the same and nothing ever changed ever, nor did the way armies fight change in any way at all.
Oh wait, no. That's completely wrong.

6.5 and 7mm projectiles (and their .25 and .280 imperial counterpats) offer the best overall ballistic performance, with 2-3 the projectile weight of 5.56 and 5.45 rounds while maintaining light recoil and longer point blank range, without greatly sacrificing weight and capacity like 308 and other similar rounds.

This

Tens of thousands of them got brought back by GIs and for decades they were just "Jap crap" - the losing side's rifle, made by a country that in the '50s and '60s was known mostly for making cheap trinkets. It wasn't until the 80s and 90s that the current cyberpunk-and-anime-fueled wave of Japanophilia began to take shape at all. In short, Japanese stuff is cool now, but it wasn't for a very long time, and Japanese milsurp is just beginning to really get sone cachet going as milsurp values start to rise.

Y'all got one of these?

Also, what does this say?

Attached: IMAGE_181.jpg (1216x2048, 425K)

My point was that they didn't stick with those rounds in spite of being really damn impressive on paper

Yes, because the way infantry fought was different and so were the doctrines that they employed.

The 6.5x55 Swede was developed in 1891. The Verguiero in 1904.

>Also, what does this say?
It's gibberish put on by a GI or a dealer. Too bad, because I think it's an original one. You shouldn't store those muzzle covers on a muzzle as they tend to warp or crack.

6.5 jap was ballistically superior to 7.7 from an infantry perspective and should have been modernized to remove the rim instead of replaced.