modern use for an m1 carbine

I realize that back in the day, the .30 had its purposes in combat. However, I am not in a situation where I need a gun to be "weildy". I have an ak, and a hi point carbine that both serve these purposes. While I am not opposed to buying guns for adding to the collection, I'm too early in my money making days to buy everything I want. (have some other items on the "to buy list") Basically I look for varmint/hunting possibilities in the guns i buy, and there isn't a single reason I should buy a m1 carbine to hunt deer when my m1a is better in every way (for that purpose). That being said, I like the idea of the rifle, but with the all of the reason given above, 600 doll hairs is a bit too much for something I don't really need. (as of right now :D) It's on my list though...........
 
Leafybug, good reasoning for you and it sounds like you've answered your own question to your satisfaction then,...though as an additional point, the .30 carbine would functionally be far less redundant a choice for you--between the two--vs the Mini 30, as the latter fires the AK round and you already have that (AK).
 
Gak, this has been taken into consideration. Also, I don't know if there is a rifle cartridge that is more economical for what you pay for (quantity, firepower, availability) than the 7.62x39. Seems like a great SHTF/zombie round. (but that's a whole different topic). But the main point being, (other than weight/ 1 lb isn't severe when talking guns-at least for me) there doens't seem like the carbine can do anything the mini 30 cannot. Now if the m1 carbine only cost 250, I can grantee I would already own one.
 
Leafybug, I think you're right on all accounts. I acknowledged the "zombie" superiority. In Post D-Day Cologne doing steet battle, shooting across *to* buildings and trying to penetrate walls, doors, defenses, the x39 would be my choice. OTOH, if "just" defending your courtyard or clearing buildings, rooms, hallways, alleyways, the even more rapid-fire (back on target double or triple tap) nature of the carbine might be my choice. Fine points, yes, and not saying these are (hopefully!) concerns germane to your needs :) Feeling the way you do, I would not get a carbine. They're for those who--for the reasons stated here and elsewhere--feel it *does* fill a niche they don't have covered....or "just because"--a fun-to-shoot cool piece of history. And a pound isn't much to some, but it is to others, especially if they're just wanting a handy plinker and pester and perhaps second-go-to HD piece, not wanting to carry around any more wood and steel than absolutely necessary (the "big deal" factor")...in effect a comfortable extension of their .357 revolver or 1911 pistol as was suggested earlier.
 
I recall reading somewhere (maybe one of the gun rags years ago) that back in the day the NYPD "stake out squad" used the M1 Carbine with good effect . The late Jim Cirillo wrote of his experiences I believe .
 
Used to keep my Iver Johnson stainless with folding stock carbine behind the seat of my SUV, with just a towel covering it, when I lived in AZ. Had an attemped carjacking on me by 3 of our southern neighbors finest (the old bump from behind stopped at a light which was a well known tactic back then, and then they tried to run me off the road), they did not like it AT ALL when I exited my vehicle with it in hand, and I was determined to shoot them in case of any further hostilities. That little rifle saved my bacon that day.

The M1 carbine might not be the utmost in tacticool today, but it will get the job done in spades against a handgun wielding assailant.
 
I recall reading somewhere (maybe one of the gun rags years ago) that back in the day the NYPD "stake out squad" used the M1 Carbine with good effect . The late Jim Cirillo wrote of his experiences I believe .
Click to expand...

You are correct... I happen to have just finished his first book (and started the second) and Cirillo certainly seems to have been a fan of the 30 carbine. (And if anyone qualifies as an expert on gunfighting, Cirillo does.)
 
And for extra utility U can get a Ruger BH chambered in 30 carb. Very handy, rifle & pistol using same round. Try that with a 39.
 
If the purpose of the original M-1 Carbine actually was to replace or augment both the .45 handgun and the Thompson machine gun, then would support troops (or Paratroopers) who were issued the Carbine require high accuracy at 100 yards?
 
What do you define as, "High accuracy" ? The Army called for the M1 Carbine to hold 5 out of 7 shots in a 12" 'Quasi circle' at 100 yards. I do not think it was originally intended for paratroopers, unless they were originally issued the .45acp pistol. I do not think it was originally intended to be a Thompson replacement. Where are you getting your information ?
 
Both my Inlands--one in family since new/'45--shoot nice tight groups at 100. Re penetration, way back when, many an old car body in the dry river bottom fell victim to regular 110 ball ammo-T'n'T. Actually quite impressive.
Re LEOs, many have had a very good relationship with the carbine over the years.
 
Hook686:

An old friend in the 80s showed me the GI Carbine which his Dad had brought back from the Pacific campaign. He also had a Japanese handgun.
It might be a misunderstanding on my part that his Dad had been issued it as a paratrooper. But maybe not.

I can't remember the exact places where I read that the Carbine was designed to replace the 1911 handgun for support troops, and possibly also the Thompson. This last part does not make sense to me.
One source was probably a military history magazine at Borders Books, or the NRA magazine.

Although not specific, this is from "The Great Book Of Guns" (Thunder Bay Press) by Chris McNab: page 278. "Just before WW2, the US Army decided that it needed a new light weapon, an intermediate between the pistol and rifle...". This might have led some authors to include the 1911 and the Thompson as being in need of a single substitute, if it was not actually the objective.
 
Last edited:
Ive read it was originally intended for support troops. How accurate that is I dont know.

That said the JSP rounds work fine on smaller deer (Under 100 lb). It would be fine for South Alabama Deer with native genetics but the Northern Alabama Deer that carry mostly Michigan and Wisconsin Genetics can run a bit large.
 
M1 30 cal. carbine works fine on pigs. I knew a farmer that kept one as a truck/harvester gun & accounted for many, many pigs over the years. I saw him in action a number of times against a large mob of pigs & he was deadly on them with the carbine, but probably limited his shots to around 120 yards or so.
 
I'll weigh in as well . I believe the original intention was to replace the sidearm with it as well as possibly issue to non-combat personel . They found out quickly that they needed every long gun they could build in the field . M1 Garands couldn't be made fast enough . Carbines were being mass produced and were a logical solution .

The M3 Grease Gun was made to replace the Thompson and did eventually .

A veteran of the 5th Marines and a long time customer of our's had related to me more than once that as a sergeant on Peleliu and later as a company commander in Korea the only small arms he had confidence in were the 30-06 weapons . Garand , BAR and 1919 LMG . Also in Korea he related that his 60mm mortars saved there butts(my word) more than a few times .
 
The 50th AAA Battalion in Korea was a mobile outfit, with M-16 halftracks (Quad .50s) and M-19 light tanks with twin-40mm buckets on top. We were issued M-2 carbines. This was in 1954, for me.

The M-2 was a fun little chatter-gun...
 
Anyone got anything on accuracy? What kind of groupings from 100?
Click to expand...

The last time I shot my '43 Inland, I was at a bench. 100 yard range. My carbine is in the condition that Uncle Sam put it in for Korea- bayo lug barrel band, adjustable, stamped year sight. Original 1943 barrel and a pot-belly M2 stock. No bedding, etc, all just USGI. I was using Remington UMC carbine ammo

I set up two 50 foot NRA pistol targets at 100 yards, and fired one shot at each target. I am 40 years old, and my eyes are still 20/20. At this range, I was centering the sights on the whole target, not the bull. I bulls-eyed both targets. My report on accuracy is "good". :)

carbinestock.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top