TM type 89 Review

[Jagdraben]

Yeah, but that doesn't really effect the operation of the rifle.

 

I mean, look at the pistol grips on the two: they're shaped damned near identically.

 

Also note the similarities in the shape of the reciever and the shapes where the reciever of both guns meet the foregrip.

The trigger guard and mag wells are differntly shaped and it's entirely likely that there are many internal differences because of the addition of the three-round burst and different set-up with the fire selector switch.

 

EDIT: Note that the top gun, the AR-18, is the AR-18 that was produced under license by Stirling.

Edited September 17, 2006 by Jagdraben

[sekiryu]

The pistol grip is the only similarity I see.

[sekiryu]

What's the cyclic rate of the AR18? I can't seem to find it anywhere and I want to compare it to the 89

[HairyMan]

The Type 89 looks and sounds [from this review] really nice. Are there any videos of it being fired? It looks very similar to the AR 18, which Arnold uses in Terminator.

 

if only TM could make an AR 18 aeg, then I could pull some Terminator one handed shooting [i tried that with a TM SPAS 12 in a 1 vs 1, I got one shot off before I got hosed hahah].

[Jagdraben]

What's the cyclic rate of the AR18? I can't seem to find it anywhere and I want to compare it to the 89

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

800rpm. According to Jane's.

[sekiryu]

800? I think the Type 89 is like 650-850...why a 200rpm gap?

 

As for videos, YouTube has two of the real thing firing...once I get the time I think I'll do a video review of it.

[Jagdraben]

Because no one outside of Japan has really gotten their hands on them? And the Japanese are being tight-lipped?

 

Maybe because it, like the AN-94, has a variable cyclic rate depending on the mode of fire selected. (AN-94 on full-auto: 700-800 rpm. AN-94 on two-round burst: 1200 rpm.)

[sekiryu]

All I know about its gas system is that it uses a piston and can fire rifle grenades

Edited September 19, 2006 by sekiryu

[Jagdraben]

Which describes just about every automatic rifle ever made.

Edited September 19, 2006 by Jagdraben

[sekiryu]

Excluding those that use delayed blowback (FAMAS, G3) and direct gas (M16).

[Shinden]

Well the 89 was specifically made for Japanese soldiers, therefore the size of the AR-18 will not match up with the 89. It was also tuned down for lower recoil and while keeping the 3 round burst effective and prolonging the life of the weapon, thus keeping it reliable and controllable. It has the patent from Eugene Stoner's AR-18, but everythign outside is made differently to fit the size of the soldier's hands, height, and weight. It also had to be used as an all around weapon, so the AK47 design and the Colt M4A1 design was combined to make the 89. You will notice couple similiarites between the two rifles.

Edited September 20, 2006 by Shinden

[Jagdraben]

I was under the impression that I had noted the similarities and the dissimilarities and that it would go without saying that many of those dissimilarities would be linked to the smaller stature of Japanese soldiers.

 

Neither the M4 nor the M4A1 existed at the time the Type 89 was developed.

 

The AK-47/AKM/AK-74 likely did not much influence the design of the Type 89. They did, however, influence the design of the AR-18 (which was designed to be a simpler, easier to mass produce, cheaper, and more reliable firearm than the AR-15/M16). Unfortunately for Armalite and Stirling, there wasn't much of a market for them, because it was cheaper to buy US surplus M16s than to set-up a factory for them. Of course, the little bit of misfortune for Howa in not being allowed to produce the AR-18 initially paid off with a little bit of fortune in the Type 89. And since Abe Shinzo seems to be the chief candidate for Japan's next PM, it's entirely likely that Howa Industries will reap further profit by being able to sell the Type 89 (or modified versions of it) abroad.

 

Howa Industries bought the license to the AR-18 in the 1960s. They were forbidden to manufacture firearms by the Japanese government, however. Obviously, given the twenty years between the license for the AR-18 being bought and the adoption of the Type 89, one would expect many differences for that reason alone. (Compare the M16A2 to the M16, for instance.)

 

Finally, all rifles are supposed to be "all round weapons". They are supposed to be the a middle ground between SAWs, DMRs, carbines, and subguns. (Oh, and the Type 89 has a barrel two inches longer than that of the M4/M4A1, three and a half inches shorter than the M16/M16A1/M16A2/&c.)

[sekiryu]

Howa Industries bought the license to the AR-18 in the 1960s. They were forbidden to manufacture firearms by the Japanese government, however. Obviously, given the twenty years between the license for the AR-18 being bought and the adoption of the Type 89, one would expect many differences for that reason alone. (Compare the M16A2 to the M16, for instance.)

 

Wait...the GSDF was formed in '54...so what guns could they use if no one could make any?

 

The buttstock on the Type 64 looks identical to the AR18's.

Edited September 21, 2006 by sekiryu

[Jagdraben]

Apparently, in Japan, if the government isn't buying, you can't make a firearm.

 

The Type 64 wasn't manufactured by Howa, AFAIK, and Howa didn't even have the license until the late 1960s (since the AR-18 didn't go into production until 1966, two years after the Type 64 was adopted and probably around 18 months after the Type 64 likely would have gone into production).

 

And, according to the Type 89 manual, Japan used M1 Garands until 1964/65. (And they still do, but only for ceremonial purposes.)

 

EDIT: Oops. I lied. The Type 64 was produced by Howa. According to Jane's. But I don't think that's right....

 

EDIT2: And apparently, the Type 89's selector switch is on the right side to prevent accidentally disengaging the safety of the rifle while slung.

Edited September 21, 2006 by Jagdraben

[sekiryu]

EDIT: Oops. I lied. The Type 64 was produced by Howa. According to Jane's. But I don't think that's right....

 

According to Wikipedia too. I found the Howa website a while back--didn't see any Type 89's or 64's, but I did see alot of farm machinery, and get this: bolt action rifles.

 

Now why would a Japanese company make sporting rifles in a country where firearms are outlawed?

 

http://www.howa.co.jp/english/profile/e_histor.htm

 

Commenced manufacturing floor scrubber.

Type 64 rifle and 81mm type 64 mortar adopted as official

equipment by the Japan Defense Agency.

 

Odd...they don't have the 89 listed.

 

 

So that's what the symbol on the real Type 89 is...

Edited September 21, 2006 by sekiryu

[Jagdraben]

According to Wikipedia too. I found the Howa website a while back--didn't see any Type 89's or 64's, but I did see alot of farm machinery, and get this: bolt action rifles.

 

Now why would a Japanese company make sporting rifles in a country where firearms are outlawed?

 

I have no idea. Possibly for export or Japanese police agencies for pest control?

 

Their export laws might be based on automatic firearms, and not on firearms in general.

 

Or maybe the Japanese government simply has to approve every rifle made by Japanese corporations?

 

http://www.howa.co.jp/english/profile/e_histor.htm

Odd...they don't have the 89 listed.

 

Because it isn't something that they view as being of particular importance? Maybe back when they produced the Type 64, it might have still been legal to export automatic firearms.

 

<img snip>

 

So that's what the symbol on the real Type 89 is...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'd think that it would be a Chrysanthemum, not a tri-pointed star-thing....

[Shinden]

Whoaaa, my mistake on the M4, true I knew it was developed later, however I got carried away. My corrections, the M16, not the M4. The Japanese were tested, however they figured the American rifle was again too long and not fit, thats why they compared with the Russian guns and the M16. The AK actually did have an influence, however it is not noticeable unless you carefully compare both guns.

 

Now for the Type-64, that was an old standard rifle, but it was again too bulky. On the real Type-89, the trademarks is accurate with the TM Type-89 gun. The trademark is the Chrysanthemum. I'm sorry about the M4/M16 error.

[Jagdraben]

Woohoo!

 

My AEG has been blessed for being used in the name of the Emperor!

[sekiryu]

Actually there is no Chrystanthemum on the TM Type 89 nor the real Type 89:

 

 

It does have Howa's emblem though.

 

I wonder what that flower with the W in it is.

[Jagdraben]

The flower is a Chrysanthemum.

 

The 'W' might mean that the rifle has been inspected by such-and-such a department or something.

[sekiryu]

That is most definatly not a chrysanthemum.

 

This is a chrysanthemum:

 

[Jagdraben]

Fair enough.

 

Whatever it is, it's worn on JGSDF caps and berets, too.

 

I think it was also worn by the Imperial Army, too.

 

EDIT: The only kamon that I know of that had five-petalled flowers on them were Chinese Bellflowers (桔梗).

Edited September 22, 2006 by Jagdraben

[Shinden]

It's a Sakura, but I don't know why I said "chrysanthemum". I thought the english word for Sakura was crysanthemum, my bad again...two times in a row.>_<

Edited September 22, 2006 by Shinden

[FarEast]

Yes it is a cherry blossom, it's the Imperial flower and appears on police force, fire brigade and all armed forces /sorry JSDF logos or patches including weapons.

[sekiryu]

I think kiku is chrysanthemum.

 

So, it's a sakurahana....

 

But I thought the chrysanthemum was the Imperial flower?