Short Development History of Type 95 Gunto

[ghp95134]

Nick,

Is it possible that the mysterious fuchi stamp {一} could be for 東一造 (Tokyo First Arsenal) that you identified in the above two documents?

I know, I know ..... don't over speculate!!! Yeah, I know. Just thinking out loud.


--Guy

[Nick Komiya]

Wow, is NASA already using out-loud-thought activated word processing?

In contrast, figuring out markings is no rocket science and there are quite a few documents about markings and serial number regulations, so it should all become clear in due course.

Here is a sample of the origins of a much loved mark.

[Nick Komiya]

Gunto markings and their stamping locations were stipulated by regulations issued on 1st July 1924. The chart below is the Gunto section from that regulation.

The serial numbering system with a maximum of 5 digits and preceded by Hiraganas of　イロハニ, etc to represent larger numbers, came into effect on 9th November 1940. Thus that system expressed "100,000" as イ-0, and "3456789" as エ-56789. This system must be common knowledge, so I will omit further details.

I should only mention that for Type 95 Guntos, that regulation assigned the numbering range of 1 to 100,000 to the Kokura Arsenal and the range of 30,001 to 400,000 to the Incheon Arsenal.

Furthermore, if Guy's hunch about the cherry blossom mark with number 1 inside is correct and it did stand for the 1st Tokyo Arsenal, it should follow that these markings can only be observed on examples after 1st April 1940, and not before, as the Number 1 and Number 2 Tokyo arsenal designations were introduced on that date.

[Nick Komiya]

Here's another Type 95 Spec change that can be roughly dated.

In January 1941, the army made a summary listing of B-spec materials adopted to tide over the China Incident shortages. After things like rubberized ammo pouches, Type 95 parts that were being converted to chrome plated steel from the original spec in copper were listed, also showing the names of the manufacturers making those parts.

[Shamsy]

Hi Nick,

May I first start by saying a huge thank you for releasing the new information on the Type 95. I have been reading your posts but never actually signed up to the forum until recently. However, since you released the new material it has really reinvigorated my love of the NCO (not that it was exactly waning...). With so little specialist information available I've been fortunate to meet some great people who have dedicated their time and shared their experience with 95's to help me expand my knowledge. Hopefully I have been able to share what little I have in return. But this is the sort of information that cannot necessarily be learned through experience, so we are very fortunate that you have given your time to provide it.

I collect pretty much only 95's exclusively now. I have a couple of rare military swords I've held onto, but my first Japanese sword was a 95 and I have loved to collect and study then since. I suppose what I am ineptly trying to say is thank you and please do provide anything and everything you can find on these swords, because folks like me truly, sincerely appreciate it.

[Nick Komiya]

I am flattered, thank you and welcome to the forum.

You asked for anything and everything, so here's something that should be a hint for another thread in which the internal wood inside the grip is being suspected as replacement.

Back in November 1939, because of the China Incident, they had to set up B-spec materials for making the swords and at that time the scabbard liner and grip inner wood material specs were expanded to include other species.

Before, only magnolia was accepted, but Katsura (Caramel Tree) and Japanese Linden (Tilia japonica) were added as acceptable substitutes at that time. Shown below is the full spreadsheet for those changes which I omitted earlier, when I touched upon the changes briefly.

There are also many sword belt changes shown for the Type 95, but I don't own any, so all the parts names are lost on me and I have no idea what changes they are talking about, sorry.

[Nick Komiya]

And here is another spreadsheet of changes from 24th June 1939, in which the most notable change was the change in the cord wrap pattern of the grip, but the Mekugi hole position, Mekugi screw configuration, wood inlay size for the grip were also changed at the same time. Unfortunately I only have one Type 95, so I have no examples to refer to to see what they mean with the screw configuration changes. If anyone could show before and after photos of the screw, I would appreciate that.

[dunit35]

Great information Nick.

When my wife finds our bank statements I'm blaming everyone on this forum. If I haven't been on here in over a week, you know what happened to me.

[Shamsy]

Hi Nick,

I can assist with the screw configuration question. Basically, the copper handle swords were cast in such a way that the ito wrap would actually imitate that of an actual wrap (i.e. it has a starting and termination point and wraps around the tsuka). However, because this results in each side not appearing to be homogeneous, when it came to the addition of the second screw on the early aluminium handles, the screw entered on one side through the diamond of imitation same, but exited in the middle of the ito wrap on the opposite side. Not a good outcome at all! To solve this there were two approaches taken. Most arsenals chose to adopt a pattern that mirrored from one side to the other, but Gifu (for a time) chose to 'move' the ito slightly in their cast.

I've attached some pictures that hopefully clear up my rambling. You can see the copper handle has the ito as one continuous wrap, as does the early aluminium handle. The last sword handle is identical on either side, hence the screw passes through two diamonds of same.

I will add that the style of screws used on the earliest aluminium hilts is different to later patterns. It is flatter and larger. I've seen a few early swords in the 7,000 range and this holds true with those, so it is not a replacement (though sadly mine is broken, which also seems to be a systemic problem).

[Nick Komiya]

It's a bit challenging to collate two photos facing opposite directions, but your highly visual description made it clear enough for me, thank you.

Including the earlier spreadsheets I provided, which also discussed latch spring mechanism changes, that kind of info on detailed spec change dates at the parts level should keep collectors engaged for a while. I am glad I am out of that kind of addiction, otherwise I'd be pulling my hair out over missing configuration "A"springed variants as well as the magnolia lined Sayas, etc.