How would you compare stopping capability of 110gr soft point at 1950fps (30) to 125gr JHP (357) or 230gr JHP (45) assuming the same placement? The crux of the question is: would a user of .40SW/.45acp/357 handgun gain anything from taking up an M1 carbine for *close range* fighting (under 50m)?
.30 carbine vs. 357mag vs.45acp
- Thread starter Oleg Volk
- Start date
Winchester shows a moderate pressure load that cranks a 125gr out of a .357mag at 1800fps. That gives it about the same energy as your carbine load with a little more frontal area, little bit more hole size and probably a lot more expansion.
During the Korean conflict, some who were gettin nose to nose with the bad guys on a regular basis opted to dump their select fire carbines and use captured Thompsons. Ironic that the source of the Thompsons was the North Koreans. Rational was that the .45 was a quicker stopper than the .30. Field tested on people, not jello.
With your criteria of 50m in, I think my FAL or my slug gun would work just fine.
Sam..don't shoot till you can smell their breath. Us old folks dont see the eyes too well.
During the Korean conflict, some who were gettin nose to nose with the bad guys on a regular basis opted to dump their select fire carbines and use captured Thompsons. Ironic that the source of the Thompsons was the North Koreans. Rational was that the .45 was a quicker stopper than the .30. Field tested on people, not jello.
With your criteria of 50m in, I think my FAL or my slug gun would work just fine.
Sam..don't shoot till you can smell their breath. Us old folks dont see the eyes too well.
I just don't see that .357 doing 1800fps out of a 2, 3 or 4" typical wheelgun for some reason; maybe a 7 or 8" test barrel...
For most "in house" useage, I'm thinking any gains made by going to the carbine would be lost by needing two hands on the weapon, unless in a barricaded position.
Bear in mind that the military ball load for the carbine wasn't the equal of the 110gr JSP or JHP loads available these days, tho...
------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
[This message has been edited by Tamara (edited October 26, 2000).]
For most "in house" useage, I'm thinking any gains made by going to the carbine would be lost by needing two hands on the weapon, unless in a barricaded position.
Bear in mind that the military ball load for the carbine wasn't the equal of the 110gr JSP or JHP loads available these days, tho...
------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
[This message has been edited by Tamara (edited October 26, 2000).]
All I can say is that I have used the .30 carbine, the .357 Magnum, and the .45 ACP in actual close combat. Everyone I shot with any of the three calibers promply fell down and died or ws completely incapacitated. Given adequate shot placement anyone of them will do the job. One word of caution. No hand held weapon can be counted on to give instantaneous one shot stops. If you ever have to do it, aim center of mass and keep on shooting them until they go down.
IMO, the M1 Carbine would be a nice addition for the situation presented, not necessarily a replacement for the pistol. In the 25-50m range, I'd say the typical shooter would have better results with the carbine than a pistol or revolver, it's just easier to hit a specific target with a rifle at greater ranges. Sure, we can all punch holes in paper at 25 and even 50 yards with a handgun, but that paper isn't shooting back.
As far as energy, all my loading manuals show 125gr knocking on the door of 1800FPS at max pressures in 7" & 8 3/4" barrels, so it's a pretty decent sized revolver to get the velocities up in the carbine range. I can't imagine getting anything close to that in a 4" barrel.
Tamara, as far as needing two hands, I suspect that most folks shooting a pistol at 50m will probably be using two hands too.
As far as energy, all my loading manuals show 125gr knocking on the door of 1800FPS at max pressures in 7" & 8 3/4" barrels, so it's a pretty decent sized revolver to get the velocities up in the carbine range. I can't imagine getting anything close to that in a 4" barrel.
Tamara, as far as needing two hands, I suspect that most folks shooting a pistol at 50m will probably be using two hands too.
In the very general circumstances being discussed, I'd go for the carbine. The accuracy and capacity of the carbine put it head and shoulders above a handgun. The M-1 carbine is at its best in the 15-50 yard range.
I think the posts above answer the question of one hand vs. two: you are going to be shooting two-handed in any case. The carbine is also short enough to be useful up to the point where you have to start smacking people with it. And if I'm going to be smacking people, the carbine is once again the weapon of choice.
I have all three weapons under discussion. I wouldn't bet the farm on being able to shoot a handgun very accurately beyond 15-20 yards under stress. A DA .357 would be my last choice under that scenario. Give me my carbine and a couple or five 30-round mags and I garn-fripping-tee I can do some damage. The only advantage to a handgun I see is better tracking of lateral movement up close (inside 25 yards).
The above answer was playing by the rules. I don't like rules. I like my AR15.
I think the posts above answer the question of one hand vs. two: you are going to be shooting two-handed in any case. The carbine is also short enough to be useful up to the point where you have to start smacking people with it. And if I'm going to be smacking people, the carbine is once again the weapon of choice.
I have all three weapons under discussion. I wouldn't bet the farm on being able to shoot a handgun very accurately beyond 15-20 yards under stress. A DA .357 would be my last choice under that scenario. Give me my carbine and a couple or five 30-round mags and I garn-fripping-tee I can do some damage. The only advantage to a handgun I see is better tracking of lateral movement up close (inside 25 yards).
The above answer was playing by the rules. I don't like rules. I like my AR15.