Effectiveness of the .30 caliber carbine caartridge

Dad used a Carbine during his time in WW2 as a crewmember on an anti-aircraft gun crew. He also drove the Company C.O. around and was issued a Tommy gun, a .45 and an M-1 Carbine. I would love to get my hands on a good M-1 Carbine. What can I expect to pay for a refurbished one, say from Miltec or a specialty outfit like that?

Also, would these carbines be good for varmints?

------------------
So many a'holes-- so few bullets!------
Ford Fairlane :D

[This message has been edited by tatters (edited December 24, 1999).]
 
Korean "War" vets who were at the "Frozen Chosin" battles had nothing good to say about the M1 Carbine but their criticism was that the little Carbine didn't have the gas push to function in the extreme cold weather experienced there. To a lesser extent, the M1s and the BARs would frequently malfunction in that cold also.
For about the same price, or a little more, I personally prefer the Ruger Mini 14 RR in .223 which has as much ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards as the M1 Carbine has at the muzzle. Not a tack driver but with adequate functional accuracy and is totally reliable, going "bang" every time it is asked to. :)

------------------
OJ
NRA LIFE MEMBER
Gun control is a steady hand and hitting with the first shot.



[This message has been edited by OJ (edited December 25, 1999).]
 
tatters,
I used a .30 carbine for woodchucks one summer about 20 years ago.
I put a Weaver 4x scope on it and I handloaded the Speer "Varmint" 110 grain jacketed hollow point bullet. With a body hit up to 150 yards, they went down right now! They would probably work further out, but the bullet starts to drop like a stone out there.
That particular carbine was capable of 1 1/2" groups at 100 yards from sandbags with that round. It would not feed semi-auto in that carbine.

Neil Casper
 
I agree with O3's analysis. If the .223 Ruger Mini 14 had been availablewhen I used the ,30 caliber carbine I would have used it instead. As for the Marines in Korea at the "Frozen Chosin" I believe that a lot of their troubles were due to the fact that before Kprea the Marines had never fought in really cold weather and had not been properly trained tp maintain their weapons under extreme cold conditions.
 
Hard Ball
Check your facts the problems the Marines and Army suffered at Chosin had nothing to do with training them to maintain their weapons in cold weather, and everything to do with the COLD... The cold affected the propellants in all the small arms, artillery and mortars. The propellants in artillery and mortars did not burn consistently so rounds fell short as often as they fell on target. The lubricant in the recoil mechanism on artillery pieces was so cold sometimes it took a minute before the gun returned to battery. (result of all this trouble is, they tried not to call for artillery support unless they were desperate) I have also read where the primers and powder used in the rifles and machine guns was adversely affected too.. Sometimes the primes failed to ignite the powder charge and sometimes the powder wouldn't burn completely causing the rifle to malfunction. It was the first time that any US units tired to fight in the -40 deg. F or below temperature range the weapons, propellants and lubricants had never been tested that cold before.
 
jimc_617
I am afraid that some one has been telling war stories about Chinese cold weather gear in Korea. I can assure you that GI .30 caliber ball ammunition would penetrate any clothing they wore quite effectively.
 
4V50 Gary, the MMJ-5.7mm Spitfire is reported by Frank Barnes to throw 40 grainers at 3000 and 50 grainers at 2700. That's from Ctgs of the World, 8th ed., so nothing on more recent rounds like the FN(?) 5.7

Somewhere in my fuzzy memory Mas Ayoob reported asking a coroner what he'd keep for protection - and was told 30 Carbine SP/HP.
 
That's about as cogent and relevant as everything else that Messia Adoodi has to say. What an egotistical, overrated clown!!
 
Hard Ball,

I don't even remember where I heard that story, so it's entirely possible that it's a myth. I'm not saying the m1 carbine is a bad gun, it was quite fun the one time I tried it. However, going back to the original post, I would still recommend the Mini-14 as a better choice for a light self defence weapon. Come to think about it, would you say the Mini-14 is a downscaled M-14, or an upscaled m1 carbine?

On a m1 carbine related topic, I remember seeing a WWII movie, that I just cannot remember the title to. In it, German soldiers disguised as Polish paratroopers infiltrate England to kill Churchill. They are discovered, and a unit of US Rangers, armed with m1 carbines, attacks them. What struck me about this movie was the tactics used by the rangers, bounding overwatch I think it's called. It's the only movie I've ever seen where actual infantry tatics were shown.

[This message has been edited by jimc_617 (edited January 06, 2000).]
 
Jim: The movie is The Eagle has Landed, based on the Jack Higgins novel of the same name.

I'd say that the Ruger Mini-14 design is a cross between the M14 rifle and the M1 Carbine.
 
Alan B
You asked me to check my facts regarding a comment I made in this thread regarding the 1st Marine Division's problems with their infantry weapons during the fighting at the Chosin Reservoir in Korea in 1950. That's certainly a fair request, and I have done so. Sorry to take a few days doing it, but I wanted to check my files and some references to be sure that what I remember is accurate.

What happened at the Chosin was a series of battles as the Chinese IX Army Group attacked and attempted to destroy the US Army X Corps.
The X Corps consisted of three divisions, the 1st Marine Division, the 3rd Infantry Division, and the 7th Infantry Division. The 1st Marine Division and the 7th Infantry Division were at the Chosin. The 1st Marine Division fought on the west side of the reservoir, and the 7th Infantry Divison foight on the east side.

The Chinese committed nine divisions against them. THe weather was very cold. The battles were fought between November 27-December 10, 1950. During this period the temperature seldom rose above zero and fell to 20 to 30 degrees below zero at night.

What is significant about this is that the the 1st Marine Division and the 7th Infantry Division fought in the same environment at the same time. The conditions were the same for both divisions. Both used the same weapons: M1 Garands, BARs, M2 carbines, Colt .45 automatics, and Browning machine guns. Both used the same ammunition. Both were heavily engged. The The 1st Marine Division suffered 2,621 casualties, and the 7th Infantry Division had 2,760 casualties.

This is critical in evaluating the weapons problems reported by the Marines. They reported major problems with their BARs, carbines, .45 automatics and, Browning machine guns, stating, in fact, that all their infantry weapons were almost useless except for their M1 Garands. This certainly happened, but the 7th Infantry Division did not have the same problems. For that matter neither did the Chinese who used a mixture of American, Russian, German, and Japanese weapons. The question is why?

It's a matter of historical record that no large Marine Corps units had ever fought in severe cold weather before the Chosin Reservoir. The 7th Infantry Division had fought in cold weather in the Aleutians during World War Two a few years before. Many of its officers and NCOs were experiencd in the special kinds of maintenance needed to keep weapons functioning in sub-zero weather.

It's worth noting that the 1st marine Division stayed in Korea for the rest of the war and fought during the wunters of 1951, 1952 and 1953. They used the same types of weapons and ammunition as they had used at the Chosin. They did not report the problems they had encountered in 1950. Obviously something had changed.

The reason that the Marines had their problem and the Army division did not would appear to be that the Marines had not been trained in the proper techniques. If this was not the cause, we must come up with some other explaination; and I have never seen one proposed.

This is not a criticisim of the Marines who fought at the Chosin. They fought effectively and inflicted heavy casualties on the Chinese and broke out of the trap. If there was a failure in their training, that was not the fault of the Marines who fought at the Chosin.

Regards, Hard Ball

[This message has been edited by Hard Ball (edited January 09, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top