.357 mag at war?

Stephanie B said:
I ordered some boxes of ammo a few months ago and they were delivered by the mailman. Apparently either the USPS is less squeamish about ammo in the mail when it comes from a commercial outlet, or they'll bend the rules a bit to get the additional revenue.
Click to expand...

Steph,

Ammo can be shipped but it must be ground. Ammo can't be sent by air. No explosives can be transported via air. When getting ammo from the states to say Nam, it didn't get there by truck. Also, the mail restrictions were much more lax back then than they were a few months ago...
 
Evidently this become more common (unofficially) after the first winter of the war when our troops discovered that the heavy quilted paddiing of the winter uniforms that the Chinese and North Korean soldiers wore gave them some protection from the M1 carbine 30 caliber load and even the 45ACP.
Click to expand...

I've seen this stated many times and till recently could not figure out how clothing could stop or even slow down a .30 Carbine. Then I found a book on Body Armor of WW1. Seems that vests made of many layers of tightly woven silk could stop even a .45 colt bullet at a distance where the velocity had dropped a bit. Thinner concealable vests were only good for stopping the occasional lead pocket pistol bullet at low velocity.
The Russians took it a step further and used a thick layered silk tunic with a nickel steel breatplate over that.
During WW 2 the Russians fielded a mass produced Manganese steel breastplate that could stop the 9mm from a pistol at close range and from an MP40 at 100 yards or so. One Russian reported that a German officer had emptied a full clip into his breastplate from across a room and no bullets pentrated, but he didn't state the caliber so it may have been a .32 officers sidearm.

Anyway I figure that if the Communists had any body armor, even captured Japanese stuff, the Japanese also having developed manganese steel armor during WW2, then the unifoorm coat would have hidden it.
Also since in China silk scrap would be cheap they could make quilted linings that had some resistence to penetration if thick enough.

Another factor that could come into play. Tests using more powerful rifle cartridges against the silk armor indicated that passing through the vest somehow stabilized the bullet and slowed it so any wound would be much less severe. In intense cold such a wound from a Carbine at any great distance might not be felt as more than a punch, the victim not even realizing he had been shot for some minutes.

PS
The Russians also developed thin titanium inserts to be placed in the inside pockets of the greatcoat, but I think that came later.
 
I would posit that anything a .357 could penetrate so could a .30 Carbine at much higher velocity. I would think an M2 Carbine (full auto variant of the M1 Carbine) would be just the ticket against circa 1950 Chinese armor.
 
Not to side track the original topic, but I doubt the most of those M1 Carbine stories are true. It's almost always someone who knew someone, or heard it somewhere. If the clothing could stop a 30 carbine round from an 18" rifle barrel, a 357 round from a 4"-6" pistol barrel wasn't going to do any better. I suspect that if it honestly did happen a few times, it was either lousy ammo or GI's using the round outside the effective range of the caliber...firing at long ranges when the GI with M1's began firing. Or they just flat missed, got a hit on a thick coat but failed to hit the body inside it.
 
Back in the mid 80's we had the option to carry a S&W 28.They were probably purchased in addition to the S&W 10,Colt off.pol,and Ruger service six that were still in inventory.As to whether they ever made it to combat?
 
I remember seeing a few of our Air Force officers carrying .38 Specials during the '91 Persian Gulf War. They were not pilots; the pilots were carrying Berettas and some 1911s.
 
Rainbow Demon: another factor to consider is that many NK & Chinese troops would tuck a piece of scrap metal inside their coats as makeshift body armor. That could also explain part of the M1 carbine ineffectiveness myth.....
 
Or they just flat missed, got a hit on a thick coat but failed to hit the body inside it.
Click to expand...
Andrew Jackson won a Duel because he wore a loose cloak that obscured his stance and body position. He was hit in the chest but not dead center. His opponent was a pro and renowned marksman. Had the opponent had a clear view of Jackson's torso he would have centered him and the duel would have been over. As it was Jackson though wounded took his time and delivered a fatal shot.

another factor to consider is that many NK & Chinese troops would tuck a piece of scrap metal inside their coats as makeshift body armor. That could also explain part of the M1 carbine ineffectiveness myth.....
Click to expand...
Theres a Japanese entrenching tool with two holes in the blade. At one time some thought these were so a soldier could use the blade as a face shield when looking over a parapet, but it turned out the holes were so you could pass a cord through it and sling it from neck or shoulder for quick use. If worn in front the blade would offer some protection for the torso from bayonet, grenade fragments, or pistol rounds.

One selling point of the M1 Carbine was that it would penetrate the various known body armor types available before and during WW2.
In USN tests the Japanese armor stopped the .45 ACP fairly easily.
Some photos from the Japanese occupation of China show Japanese officers wearing elaborate steel breastplates over their uniform tunics.

The .357 would be unlikely to out do the carbine, but would out do the .45 ACP in penetration of body armor, helmets, and the sheet metal of light vehicles, just as in civilian LEO applications.

PS
At some point a gasmask pouch was available with a pocket at the back for insertion of a thin manganese steel plate, don't know if these were ever used.
The British Manufactured thousands of reinforced fabric Chem armor vest near the end of WW1 for a final big push that proved un necessary.

Also the U S technical manuals on small arms ammunition list a number of non standard rounds for use in non regular issue handguns in inventory for un specified reasons.
 
Last edited:
Sounds reasonable to me. Just passing on what I found in a book from the 1950's. I agree with you though in that the clothing might have stopped the 45, but the .30 Carbine is a high velocity round. S.L.A. Marshall also passed on that information about the 30 Carbine not being up to snuff, but as we all know Marshall's research is viewed by many nowdays with a skeptical eye.
 
Mike Irwin
Marshalls reports on small arms in Korea was sparkly compiled from interviews of many combat veterans.
Click to expand...

Not a problem.

Starting in the seventies information began to come out about Marshall and his methodology. Some of it were from veterans that he interviewed. They stated that he led people to believe that he interviewed the vets days and sometimes even hours after the action when it turned out in many cases they interviews took place months later. Some of the men interviewed stated that Marshall had them providing details that they couldn't recall at the time of the interview.

In other words it began to appear the Marshall made stuff up.

The biggest problem arose with Marshall's assertion that his research revealed that only a very small number of troops actually fired their weapons in combat. At the time this was like a lightning bolt striking a tree. Caused the Army to revamp it's entire training program - which cost millions of dollars.

Then years later it comes out that there were some serious problems with Marshall's figures.

Now while some of it was probably the work of people who didn't like Marshall there were some problems. I suppose it could be argued that Marshall saw a problem and took it upon himself to fix it - so he inflated numbers and ommited other things. But it doesn't change the fact that there were problems and all of his research has to be looked at carefully now.

That's what I was referring to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top