Short Development History of Type 95 Gunto

[ziomanno]

Maybe it refers to the wooden insert in the 95 metal saya?

[Nick Komiya]

No, it is not of wood but steel (Gane means steel). We know that in late 1939 they changed the wooden inlay (Saya-Gi) to B-spec wood, so this might have well been a prototype leaf spring inlay like found in German bayonet scabbards, which they tried out, but did not adopt.

[ziomanno]

Oh yes, that makes sense, thanks Nick.

[Nick Komiya]

Some interesting comments I found in a top secret weapons development report from Army Technical HQ, dated 8th October 1938. It makes some very interesting criticism of the army’s B-spec program, which I will translate below for you.

“Agenda 3: Substitute Materials”
“We have been eagerly proposing and discussing material alternatives for leather, hemp and precious metals including brass. However, getting carried away in this B-spec fever and prematurely switching to lower grade materials even before we are close to exhausting those stocks, will only serve to cheapen our weapons and lead to reduced reliability, a trap we should avoid falling into. Should that lead to less respect in handling those weapons, this will certainly shorten the utility life of the hardware, and will strain our national economy even more. Because such substitutes have great impact on function, effectiveness and durability of those weapons, careful studies are required in advance and most such items cannot simply be introduced in rapid succession. However, it is indeed advisable to survey current resource limitations already in peacetime and designate wartime substitutes in advance, not to have to face panic when war does come.”

“Agenda 4: On Special Wartime Specs”
“We need to restrain ourselves from a mindset of automatically applying double standards for quality to wartime production. The influx of new and inexperienced workers into the workforce is already a serious setback to quality, so rather than lower the bar for everything, we need to discuss and consider practical limitations of the workplace on an item by item basis to find the right balance.

Well said, like professional quality control managers! I really have to say that these army guys knew when to speak up and they knew very well what they were speaking about.

[Bruce Pennington]

I was trying to remember where a discussion took place about the transition for the Jinsen Arsenal to start producing swords. I can't find it. The reason is that there is a Type 95 posted on Wehrmacht-Awards, Type 95 Japanese NCO Sword Surrender Tags Translation - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums, showing a Kokura stamped, Tokyo instpected Iijima manufactured blade that has an additional "仁" (Jin) stamp. The Kokura stamp puts the manufacture of this blade no later than 1940. So this would appear to be a gunto provided by the Tokyo Arsenal to the Jinsen arsenal for maybe an example for the team starting up production?

[ghp95134]

...So this would appear to be a gunto provided by the Tokyo Arsenal to the Jinsen arsenal for maybe an example for the team starting up production?

Bruce,

Could another speculation be that piecey-parts were transferred to Jinsen (including pre-inspected blades?) and assembled there; and during this process, the fuchi (or whatever the official army term was) was stamped?

Ending responses with high-pitched questions reminds me of "The Curse of Oak Island."

Digger: Hey, we found a nail.
Narrator: A naIL???? Could this mean the Knights Templars came to Oak Island in 1312 and dropped this naILLLL while building a flood trap 30 meters below the ground extending 300 meters to THE MONEY PIT? Could this valuable CLUE point to the TREASURE?????



-- Guy

[Bruce Pennington]

Now I remember, it was a thread started by Stegel on the Transitional tsuba - Type 95 Gunto - Transitional Tsuba

And in fact, this one has the transitional tsuba discussed on the thread. So it is another example of what Stegel was pointing out, which very well could have been what you, Guy, are thinking!

Stegel's comment on this one: "As i was saying, in the bottom photo you can see the extra hole in the guard, 90 degrees or quarter turn away from the hole in which the locking mechanism goes through.
So far every sword i've seen that has the Jinsen acceptance stamp has this particular style of guard. I call it the 'transitional' guard or tsuba, as you can envision the later side locking mechanism fitting through there. This type of guard isn't found on any of the other steel guarded swords which don't have the Jinsen Stamp.
When the Jinsen Arsenal began to produce type 95 NCO's, all were 'side-lock' variants, and as expected, non had holes to accommodate the top locking set-up.

Your sword was one that was sent to Jinsen, i believe as a sample from Kokura (and later Tokyo 1st) Arsenals, and hence the Jinsen acceptance stamp. It is unique and not very common."

[Kiipu]

Could another speculation be that piecey-parts were transferred to Jinsen (including pre-inspected blades?) and assembled there; and during this process, the fuchi (or whatever the official army term was) was stamped?

The Type 95 Military Sword did not have a fuchi but a 柄環 [pronunciation unknown]. The English translation of 柄環 can be either "hilt collar" or "hilt ferrule" depending upon where you are from. Below is the character breakdown for those that want to see the literal translation.
柄 = HEI, tsuka = hilt, handle, grip.
環 = KAN, wa, tamaki = ring, circle.

For a list of the parts used on the copper and aluminium handled Type 95's, see the JACAR document C12120578900 below.
[Data in English is under preparation] ２３．陸普第１１６４号 兵器修理区分表／（１）刀､剣､槍

[Bruce Pennington]

Thomas,
Do you know if this was because there was a distinct difference from the old fuchi and the WWII version of it? Or was it like the ashi/haikan, the military simply modernized their names for certain parts?

Update: I just noticed this may be the same word Nick Komiya revealed to us about the correct military term for "ashi" - "haikan" here: Type 94 Katana
His kanji are - 佩環 - but his english spelling is "haikan". The kanji are clearly different, but the english spelling only differs by "a" or "e".

[Kiipu]

Do you know if this was because there was a distinct difference from the old fuchi and the WWII version of it? Or was it like the ashi/haikan, the military simply modernized their names for certain parts?

The same term 柄環 was used by the Type Year 32 Sword 三十二年式軍刀 as well so it is not something new. None of the Japanese-English military or technical dictionaries I consulted, some as old as 1902, have an entry for these characters.

Update: I just noticed this may be the same word Nick Komiya revealed to us about the correct military term for "ashi" - "haikan" here: Type 94 Katana
His kanji are - 佩環 - but his english spelling is "haikan". The kanji are clearly different, but the english spelling only differs by "a" or "e".

Even though the second character 環 is the same, they do not have the same meaning.
柄環 [hilt ferrule] versus 佩環 [suspension ring].