Fighting rifles: Why not an M1 Carbine?

I love my Carbine. It was my first purchase after a 10/22. Maybe I watched too many episodes of "Combat" as a kid or watched too many John Wayne WWII movies. I don't know. I've loved that rifle since I was a kid and I had to have one. I bought a 1943 Inland at a gunshow about 13 years ago and I've had it every since. I've fired many thousands of rounds through it. A lot of those were 110gr lead reloads I made myself. It shoots respectable groups for a short range rifle. I can stay on a paper plate at 100 yds standing. No mater what other rifles I've bought or will by it will be my "first love".

Scott A. Vaughn
 
This is not the gospel according to Matthew, but my dad, who fought across France and Germany and spent over a year in foxholes said that nobody on the front line would carry a carbine. Even the officers, that is, the ones that had any value would carry a Garand. Even the ol General of his division. According to my pop, only the Garand or the BAR was considered a good front line weapon.

Somebody mentioned the battle of the Bulge. The Germans were masquerading as Americans and infiltrating their lines. Of course they needed American weapons to go with their uniforms and so on. My dad was there.

I like the idea of the carbine, just not the cartridge.
 
So the 30 carbine is about twice as powerful as a 110 gr 357 mag. Thats not to be sneezed at, ballisticlly speaking. Comparing that to a 223, (A 55 gr FMJ at 3240 fps=1289 fpe/muzzle and 969 fpe/100 yds.), not a huge difference!

That the 223 gives +-300 fpe over the 30 carbine in basically the same sizeish weapon is nice but moot.

The real kicker is its ability or inability to penetrate armor, which is accomplished by bullet design. Which the 30 carbine dont have and the 223 does. That makes the 223 just a little more versatile than the 30 carbine.

I'm not flaming the M1 carbines, they're cool little rifles. Poor selection of ammo for them may just leave a hole in that tactical niche though. If they made them in 44 mag or 45 WinMag (Recoil operated), then you'd have an interesting little rifle.

If I KNEW there were multiple armored BG's out there I'd want my M1A for sure, but if I were just going out to look around to check on things, I'd rather have the 223 instead of the 30 carbine. Sad to say that BG's are armored nowadays, but we do have to be realistic. Just my opinion......
 
Byron,

What was the thought hehind using the M-2 for the pointman? The 16 has more punch. I don't see any benifit using around the AnKhe AO (mountians) which had pretty thick cover.

Turk
 
Turk, we used the M-2 as it had a slower cycle of fire. As you know, the 16 rode up fast on auto. The M-2 stayed put giving the pointman the abiliity to put out more bullets in a level fire direction. Also, it had the 30 round mag. We had only the 20 loaded to 18 in the 16. Maybe it was something we told ourselves just hoping for an extra edge no matter how small.Byron
 
For years the USAF's Strategic Air Command used the M2 Carbine as its first line shoulder arm (until late 65 or early 66 I think) for the security forces. If necessary backup units could respond with heavier firepower (BAR's). The other units (non SAC) used the M1 Carbine. General Curtis LeMay was one of the forces taht got the M-16 a try out with the government. We in the marksmanship unit used to LOVE to take the M2 and put it in a M1A1 stock (folding paratrooper) and go jackrabbit hunting on the ranges with it (full auto 30 RD Mags) fired from a jeep with the windsheield folded flat:D! We used to make sure that the mags were good ones and usually they worked fine, the magazine is one of the main problems with the carbine, and jamming. Sometimes we had the linseed oil in the handguard smoking from the heat :). The carbine was very controlable on full auto in that configuration and even more so in the full stocked model. At the 50 yard line from the hip on full auto, at a shilouette target on a good day the hit ratio was over 85%-90%. Thats nothing to sneeze at. Muzzle rise was very controlable. The few drawbacks were lack of power, and a rainbow trajectory, and damaged magazine lips. The carbine was much more prone to this problem than the M-14 or the M-16.
In Spain, and some other countries, the local government restricted the USAF to shotguns for guard duty. When this happened the old M-97 Riot guns were used. The reasoning behind this was that 00 would not carry as far, or penetrate as much, as a rifle round. The one time one had to be used was in Spain IIRC. The guard fired at an intruder and a single pellet of 00 "found" the side of a B-52 right at the RN console! It would not have brought that BUFF down if it had happened in flight, but it did something like $70,000 worth of damage........in mid 60's bucks, plus left the bird with no RN system. They had to fly it in formation with another one all the way back to Evrette, at the Boeing plant to get it fixed. I often wonder what would have happened if the guard was using a carbine, or better still still an M1 Garand? The carbine is a good weapon to learn to shoot with and to learn to hit with. As i said before, If that is all one has at hand when trouble arises it is better than rocks. A whole lot better. If one knew that trouble was coming for certain then there are better choices I think.
 
Anybody got crime statistics on perps wearing Type III or IV body-armor? That's a pretty dedicated miscreant, with considerable investment in his "tools." Probably more inclined to bank robbery than home robbery/invasion?

Type III was asked about. That appears to stop everything but "high-powered" rifle cartridges, .308, .30-06, and meaner. But how much trauma would a perp wearing Type III suffer from a close-range hit from a .223 hollow-point or an M-1 Carbine soft-point? And what happens to Type III on multiple hits?
 
I am a fan of IAI carbine mostly for its reliability and quick-pointing characteristics. Recoil is about non-existent, too. Folks at a shotgun course made fun of it but they were getting 10% hits with slugs (using peep sights) while I was getting 60-70% hits with the carbine, all at 40-80m range.
Picture of 30 carbine soft points (Remington)
 
Think about this...
It hits harder than a .357 Magnum - yet its easy to shoot - and easy to shoot fast with it. Its easy to make your hits with it.

Anything wrong with that?
Not a thing.
Get some hot .30C loads topped with a JSP bullet and you are set.
A person with an M1 Carbine that knows how to use it is a well armed person.
I have come VERY close to buying one on several occasions.
Read the latest issue of SWAT for a good article on the M1. And if your like me and you want one... I suggest buying a couple of them before they become the new "In Thing" and the prices get jacked up.
I bet you there are some good shops out there that can give the M1 Carbine a nice action and trigger job that would really set the gun apart.
 
While I was stationed at Inchon, I'd occasionally "liberate" a 600-rund canister of ammo from the arms shack and go down to the beach at low tide and shoot seagulls. Full auto is fun, fun, fun! Rough on seagulls, too.

Again, though, it's the purpose that determines the utility. The carbine ain't a battle rifle and never will be, but it's fine at close range for home defense and for plinking. 100- and 110-grain soft-nosed bullets are better than GI for anything serious...Still, it's heart and head, and don't stop at one shot.

As far as comparing it with the .357, I've loaded some 110-grainers from the Hogdon (?) book which supposedly run 1,800+ ft/sec from a 6". They shoot real good. Loud, though.

As usual,

Art
 
I’ll give in my two cents concerning the M-1 Carbine. I’ve had one for years and it is a fun rifle to shoot. Except for slam fire I had that blew the operating handle apart and also blew the magazine apart.

But lets face facts the carbine was issued to replace the 1911 for rear troops, Platoon Leaders, RTO’s etc. a little more fire power than the 45 auto could give but less weight the infantry rifle. It was never meant to replace the infantry rifle whiter being the M-1, M-14 or M-16. Even within a 300-meter range fighting it still lacks the power over past or current infantry rifles.

Concerning using the M-1 Carbine for self-defense. I keep at ready 9mm BHP for my home handgun. But if you compare the Carbine and the 9mm Parabellum I believe the Carbine cartridge (110 gr. SP) wins in addition with the Carbine you have a shoulder aiming platform that is small and easy handling. I’ve always said if you know you’re going to gunfight take a rifle.

I do not keep my M-1 Carbine as my ready rifle but have a Colt AR-15 SP1 loaded with 55 gr. Nosler Ballistic tips which is vastly superior to the Carbine round. Another rifle that is good for self-defense is the SKS Paratrooper model.

From my experience I’d take an M-16, M-14 or an M-1 over the M-1 Carbine any day going into actual ground combat regardless of the type of terrain. I worked with a ARVN unit (Ruff Puffs) in 69 that carried mostly M-1/M-2 Carbine. These troops liked the Carbine due to its size and weight. I'm quite sure if given a choice they'd took a 16 in its place. I still believe they were outgunned against AK's and SKS's

Home Defense "YES"
Ground Combat "NO"

Turk
 
Turk, well stated. As indicated in prior post, I indicated our usage. Considering the closeness of an ambush and the more controllability, the carbine for point was adequate. Again, it was a point application. Byron
 
According to most accounts, both the Army and the Marines were actually unhappy with the M1 Carbine during World War II and Korea.
Click to expand...

After getting shipped to Austrailia after the Japs bombed Pearl Harbor, my dad fought in New Guinea, the Battle of Biak, various islands, etc.. He was issued a carbine and got rid of it. He wouldn't trust his life to it. He carried a Thompson for the duration.

straightShot
 
I have found the M1 carbine inadequate when used against main battle rifles. They out range, out penetrate and far more accurate at distance. If used against pistols it has the advantage..but you don't always know what you are against. I'll defend my home with a Fal..defeats level III and penetrates door to door any normal car. Plus the added elements of optics and specialty ammunition not available to the carbine..;)
 
I'll defend my home with a Fal..
Click to expand...

Man, I hope for your neighbor's sake you're out in the sticks... I sure wouldn't want to look over and see a few rounds of .308 zipping through the drywall..

I suppose it does come down to a question of application.

Out of curiosity, how do the Mini 14 and the M1 carbine stack up against each other in terms of recoil and accuracy? Since folks keep talking up the carbine as a short-range HD piece, surely the Mini's 4 MOA or so wouldn't be so bad at those ranges either?


-K
 
Mini 14/M1 carbine

I place both in the same catagory with the edge to the 5.56x45. Both underpowered, light and handy. The only value to me of the 5.56 is in full auto controllability and most people do not have full auto which includes our Army(3rd burst).. In semi auto it gives too much bullet weight away..I feel much better off with a 7.62 MBR such as a Fal. It gives me excellent firepower I can legally employ and reasonably use near or far. Why use anything less, you may need it.
 
People who deride the carbine do so because they are comparing it to a full sized battle rifle, and trying to use it for that purpose.

Remember, its role was to be similar to a service pistol, for use by rear eschelon troops and officers.

Its really unfair to compare the carbine to the garand, just like it would be unfair to compare the garand to a Sherman tank.
 
In an urban or suburban setting the .308 and '06 could be overpenetration nightmares. I just have too many qualms about putting my innocent neighbors at that much risk. The high power cartridges can shoot through many modern walls and windows (I mean in a row.) I just don't think I can control the backdrop situations well enough in a real crisis. What are the odds that a perp who is doing home invasions is wearing level III armor? Carbine rounds would disable someone in soft armor at close range with multiple hits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top