M-1 Carbine vs. Ruger's PC

V

VictorLouis

New member
Considering these for the Mrs.' long gun. The Mini-14 is a bit daunting for her. What do you feel would be the superior round: 110HP .30cal, or 115+P 9mm? BG's have more resistance to being "stopped" in winter cold, not a concern here in the desert FWIW.

I like the inherent safety/robustness of the Ruger. OTOH, the M-1 has plentiful, cheap, hi-caps around. I have not had the opportunity to shoot either gun. Those of you who have, I would appreciate your input.
 
My pick was the M1 carbine. Less recoil, better handling for my taste, 15rd magazines are $7 used. Ammo is $10/50 for ball and $18/50 soft points. While 9mm is probably a better round (can use 147gr JHPs), I am not all that impressed with Ruger carbine: it is heavy and has surprisingly hefty kick.

------------------
Oleg "cornered rat" Volk (JPFO,NRA)

http://dd-b.net/RKBA
 
I have no use for the M1 carbine as a weapon. It was a poor substitute for what it was designed for. I feel I have pretty good reason for my feelings as I ran a range with 500 M1a2s for several years and I can't begin to count all the tons of paperwork I had to fill out due to catastrophic failures with injuries.. I had one blow the bolt out through the side of the receiver and it struck the shooter in the temple as it spun by. It dam near killed him. As a man stopper it wasn't and if a man was wearing a field jacket he was in good shape . the bullet design caused neat little round holes with very little tissue damage. It was very similar to the Chinese burp gun used in Korea. It wouldn't knock a man down in less than a full drum.
 
I used the M2 carbine in extensive close combat. I did not experience any malfunctions, perhaps because I seldom fired it on full automati. Everyone I shot with it promptly fell down and died.

British army experience convinced them that the .30 carbine was more effective than their 9mm subnachine guns for general combat use.
 
Gale, your input is disconcerting! I think Hardball answered what my question would be. Was it not designed as a semi, and therefore "afterthought" full-auto causes failures? Any chance these were battle-worn guns in need of armorer level refurbishing?

I've got to respect your experience; however, what could account for the discrepancy in field results between you and HB?. Tropics vs. winter theaters of operation? I know that ball is a poor stopper in all save maybe .308/'06, and my ammo will be HP exclusively.
 
Both are tough weapons, either will serve you a life time. The plus with the Ruger is the synthetic stock and easy to use ghost ring sights. The M-1's round has more punch and can penetrate certain bullet resistant vests. If you have a Ruger 9mm pistol, the P9C will accept its mags. Same goes with the .40S&W Carbine.

Now, if Ruger only came out with a .45ACP Carbine...
 
I agree with you Pete80. I've asked them why not a PC in 45 ACP. Ruger dislikes to let the cat out of the bag though I do know they're working on a new semi-auto .44 Mag rifle which is similar to the Mini14.

Opps. You heard it here first at TFL!

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
 
More thoughts on the DC9 vs. M1 carbine.

Parts availability is squarely on the side of the M1.

Ammo availability is with DC9.

Accuracy is a non-issue for home defense and I don't know which would win.

Magazine price is better for M1.

Ammo...that's a hard question. With light ammo, I'd say it is a slight advantage to the carbine. 110 grain soft point at 1900fps beats any 115gr JHP at 1250fps. .30 JSPs expand fairly reliably. OTOH, 147gr JHP might be a better pick for close range.

FWIW, the Korean vets I have talked to all liked the M1 carbine but also realized it was a substitute for a handgun, not for the Garand. At 100 yards it was very decisive and they would not support the opinion that a padded overcoat would stop the bullets.

------------------
Oleg "cornered rat" Volk (JPFO,NRA)

http://dd-b.net/RKBA
 
30 carbine without a doubt very reliable would work fine for home defense as far as not being a man stopper ask any one in the pacific they worked very well
 
On reliability: I got a recently made IAI carbine and for the first hundred rounds it had about ten malfunctions, always not going into battery without it being obvious. I think that easing the bolt in was responsible for half of those. After the first two boxes of ball, it then fed 220 rounds of ball and soft points with zero malfunctions and decent accuracy. The main advantage is that it is fast to point and even a whimp like me can shoot it off-hand and hit heads at 25m rapid fire.
 
I got the pc9 with ghost rings for christmas and love it. My dad and I have decided that Ruger took the idea from the m1 carbine. The advantage the Ruger has is in the ability to interchange the mags with the 9mm pistols. Also you have to remember that the 9mm will go alittle faster than most published numbers because of the longer barrel. For a first rifle with more knockdown than a .22 go with the Ruger. If your wife enjoys it then its the next to cheapest ammo to shoot.
 
My preference would be for the M-1. Most objections to the piece come from garritroopers who never had to shoot a ChiCom in his padded belly. (Sorry, Gale.) Civilian soft point ammuntion is even more effective than FMJ GI.
HOWEVER: There is only ONE Ruger PC9...it's a known quantity: heavy and brutish, but bought new, you know where it came from and what its history is. M-1's may range from civvie copies to tattered range wreaks that have been passed from hand to hand.
If you can trust yourself to select only a good one, then VERIFY it, then the M-1 will be a fine choice. (Does the name 'Fulton Armory' ring a bell?) Otherwise, go with the Ruger.
I'm biased. My boys' first center-fire rifle experience was with a Rockola M-l, at about 10 years of age. It was good for them, I think it'll do fine for your Mrs. slabsides

------------------
If they take our guns, I intend to let my hair grow long and acquire the jawbone of an ass.
 
In the last days of the M1A2 in the airforce they had a red label TO which required them to be inspected and magnafluxed every 400 rounds. We would loose 25 percent each time they went to magnaflux. Cracks around the recoil lugs. Of coarse these were training rifles and the coarse of fire was 20 rounds full auto and 50 rounds for familiarization this meant our rifles were consumed at a hell of a rate. To be fair there was a couple of makes that gave all the trouble and I don't remember which ones they were.
 
If you select the M1 carbine here is a useful technique which I picked up from Hard Ball. Get an original old style carbine magazine pouch which holds two 15 round magazines, Di assemble your carbine and slip the magazine pouch over the stock.
You can now carry two 15 round magazines ready for reloading on the off side of the stock. You can now load a 15 or 30 round magazine imtp the action of the carbine. Ypu npw have either 45 pr 60 rounds immediately available installed on the carbine ready for immediate action.
 
Gale, thanks for the clarification. Slab, are the FA's the only ones I can trust, or are there others? Any guidebooks that you know of that provide the info on what to watch out for? FWIW, a back issue of SOF mag has an article where veteran Chuck Karwan praises the M-1 for defense use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top