Why did the Imperial Japanese have such a hard-on for manlet cartridges?
>>33690274
this could only be a rhetorical question
>>33690274
The 30 cal range used to be acceptable as a military cartridge all over the world. .32 acp brownings/colts/rubys, 7.62 tokarev, 7.63 Mauser etc.
>>33690274
It was the style of the day
>>33690274
>.25acp and .32acp were accepted military cartridges in the first half of the last century. While there was a move towards 9x18 and 9x19mm in Europe, the gooks never figured out proper calibers until they were decimated by .45acp and .30 caliber rifles.
>>33690274
BECAUSE THEY'RE MANLETS
Because the average jap rifleman was 5'3
Because the average chink they were removing was an anemic manlet
>>33690274
It was a hold over from older designs and lack of competition in nation.
Basically the 8mm Nambu cartridge rolled out waaay early in pistol cartridge development: 1903-04ish. 9mm Largo was considered overpowered by many at that time for comparison.
The trouble is the Japanese held little value for pistols. The officers that did ordered small caliber pocket designs. The sword was the symbol of leadership.
So when they ditched the Type 26 and improved the Nambu into the Type 14 they did some pretty good design work considering the overall goal was "we want this 1904 but easier to make, same shitty ammo please because we dont care"
So it is a 1904 mid range cartridge that stayed in the game way too long. The good news is it averages out to .380ish damage.
>>33690317
Tokarev is a pretty hot cartridge though.
>>33690274
Because .25 ACP is perfectly serviceable for shooting Chinese kids in the back of the head.
>>33692061
I thought 8mm nambu was more on par with .32 ACP?
fun fact: the JSDF had to use weaker loaded 7.62 NATO for their Howa 64's due to the smaller stature of the average Japanese male.
>>33692447
It reads like it in book form but ballistics gel showed something closer to .380
>>33690274
The Nambu was a shitty pistol, unlike most everything else the Japs ever engineered.