What makes the M1 Carbine special?


PDA






Snowdog
November 2, 2003, 03:06 PM
Here's the question:

What can an M1 Carbine do that a much cheaper AK variant in 7.62x39 cannot?
I might see how the svelte "War Baby" could be a bit more accurate and lighter, but the AK's fodder is around 50% more powerful and both rifles are roughly the same length.

So, besides the neato light-recoiling .30carbine cartridge and the interesting lines of this petite rifle, what exactly is the M1 Carbine's forte? What factors would drive someone in the market for a short, high capacity semi-auto plinker to buy an M1 Carbine over an AK clone?

If you enjoyed reading about "What makes the M1 Carbine special?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
telewinz
November 2, 2003, 03:20 PM
IMHO its the "feel", light recoil, and rapid fire without all that muzzel blast. To me its a very "handy" firearm that uses rapid follow-up shots to make up for its lack of power. I'd still choose the carbine over the several AKs I have.

Sven
November 2, 2003, 03:22 PM
Gotta say: history is a big factor for me. The way that 10 manufacturers (or more) could come together to crank out some 8 million of these is an amazing story.

Jiles111
November 2, 2003, 03:36 PM
Personally I like it more for several reasons.

1. Weight. A fully loaded (30rnd) AK is 4.79kg (10.56lbs)

Carbines weight in a 6.5lbs loaded with 30 rounds

2. the Ak is broader (?? whats the word? Taller maybe). Which in turn makes it a bit worse than the M1 to carry strapped on your back.

3. Not that it matters now, but the m2, and the m3 (M1 sisters) have a faster rpm count than a AK by 100 rounds per minute (Full Auto versions).

4. M1's Longer Barrel. (carbine = 905 mm, AK-47 = 415 mm)

5. And last, it Feels like a rifle, not a "Die Cast" (stamped steel) Toy.

I grab a AK and I want to shoot at computers and TV's and stuff. I grab a M1 and I want to shoot at varmints and game!

These of course are just my opinion. =)

http://17hmr.net/guns/carbine.jpg

Snowdog
November 2, 2003, 04:36 PM
Interesting comments.

Jiles111, I noticed that Carbine picture you supplied features an M2 round bolt and rear adjustable sights. Is that a commercial Universal (such as mine) or GI issue?

I've been thinking about selling my Universal M1 to a friend (who's been inquiring about it for years now) and buying an AK variant. I own two SKS rifles, but feel an AK clone will add to the collection nicely.
Later on, I plan on either buying an IAI or surplus military M1, but lately I've been wondering what makes the M1 Carbine special to begin with.

Sven,
the historical value of the M1 Carbine is a good point to make. That's the primary reason I bought mine. If I do buy another to replace this one, that would again be the primary reason.

Jiles111
November 2, 2003, 05:14 PM
Its the Commercial Universal. I would not really enjoy huffin a vintage GI M1 through the mud and gunk just because of its historical factor. The commerical versions I dont have any problems putting them through anything. =)

Jiles111
November 2, 2003, 05:20 PM
Has anyone done the .22 Spitfire conversion to thier M1's?
Or perhaps the .17 ?? (Cannot remember the Name of that one) conversion?

I heard that you have to make your own on the .17 (necked down .30 carbine cartridge), and possible the .22 spitfire cartridge. I have never seen any at the stores around here. I did hear that they get around 3000fps out of those necked down cartridges. Interesting none the less.

Detritus
November 2, 2003, 05:26 PM
is the .22 spitfire teh same as the ".22 (or is it 5.56?) Johnson" (i think that's what the guys at the shop called it) round that IMI is putting out a few examples in??


either way last ti9me i was over at Fountain Firearms in Houston there were at least two 30carbine-.22 IMIs.

Atlas Shrug
November 2, 2003, 05:27 PM
A few semantic points on the M1 Carbine. I would normally not even mention these, but since we started dealing with definitions and specs on the other M1 carbine thread, it's worth keeping things in perspective.

1. I think it's closer to 6 million produced, not 8 million.
2. They are magazine fed, not clip* fed.

* (Clips are actually devices to charge a gun or magazine, while a magazine holds cartridges as they are fed into a gun. I wish that we called "clips" "chargers" as some of the Commonwealth countries do/did. It would make things more clear.)

Sorry, these are somewhat peeves of mine. No slights intended to anyone.

And now some more specific comments:

3. The sights are FAR superior to the AK series.
4. The trigger, while not up to Garand standards, is superior to the AK.
5. The controls (safety, mag release) are superior to the AK.
6. As mentioned, weight is a huge difference. AKs are HEAVY for a "carbine."
7. It is (perhaps) better suited to indoor use than an AK (this is somewhat of a special case, though).


I'm not anti-AK, although I don't own one. I do have an SKS, though.

Overall, I'd say that the M1 carbine is much more "user friendly" than an AK. It is much less powerful, though.

cdbeaver
November 2, 2003, 05:28 PM
During the Korean Conflict, I was issued an M-1 when I first arrived in-country. When I was assigned to riding in a Jeep all day, I discarded the heavier weapon for a lighter M1 carbine. When the opportunity arose, I traded that rifle in for an M2 full-automatic version.

The carbines were much more comfortable to carry while riding in a Jeep all day long. But I must admit I felt better armed when I had the good old M-1 rifle in my hands.

But the carbine was a pretty decent pheasant gun, unless your turned it to full-auto before firing.

Jiles111
November 2, 2003, 05:41 PM
.22 Spitfire AKA 5.7 mm Johnson
http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/wmmj57mm.html

The .17/.30 Carbine AKA .17 Pee Wee

Both are considered "Wilcats"

http://www.thegunzone.com/carbine-wildcat.html

4v50 Gary
November 2, 2003, 06:06 PM
Recall in the '60s how Daisy came out with a BB gun that looked like the old M-1 Carbine. I suspect it was directed towards WW II or Korean War Vets to buy for their sons. Ever wonder where the style for the Ruger 10/22 came from (and the rotary magazine 44 magnum that is discontinued)? In the late '60s and '70s, the was quite a bit of sentimental value attached to it. Still exists today.

BTW, gotta love that Johnson Spitfire version.

JShirley
November 2, 2003, 08:56 PM
"It just feels right."

Too bad it doesn't fire a real cartridge, but for all around use, I'd still prefer a 110 grain .30 to a 55 or 62 grain .22. Penetration through body armor is where the War Baby is lacking.

John

Ant Mod
November 2, 2003, 10:30 PM
what exactly is the M1 Carbine's forte?

Its Ca legal and AK varients are not. Hence its better. :)

El Rojo
November 2, 2003, 10:43 PM
Get both. The M1 Carbine because it is handy and fun. The AK because it is handy and fun and less expensive to shoot.

I have an M1 Carbine that might have a slight marred extractor that I want to sell (it has problems extracting, but probably just needs a new extractor). It is sort of a parts gun with a new barrel. Winchester receiver. I have a C&R FFL so if anyone else with a FFL wants it, I am interested in selling it. I have pictures.

C.R.Sam
November 2, 2003, 10:59 PM
What makes the M1 Carbine special? The movie..To Hell And Back, Audie Murphy.
I don't think very many folks gave a hoot for the carbine till the movie came out.

Sam

Nightcrawler
November 2, 2003, 11:51 PM
10.56lbs

The AK does NOT weigh 10 pounds loaded. My FAL weighs about 11 pounds, with 20 rounds of .308 in it. Loaded AK is about eight and a half, unless you're dealing with a 20" VEPR; those are 9lbs to begin with.

Devonai
November 3, 2003, 12:34 AM
As others have pointed out:

1. Historical significance

2. Ease of handling

And my additional point:

Magazines are very inexpensive. GI 15-rounders are about $8/each and utterly reliable.

Jiles111
November 3, 2003, 08:41 AM
The AK does NOT weigh 10 pounds loaded. My FAL weighs about 11 pounds, with 20 rounds of .308 in it. Loaded AK is about eight and a half, unless you're dealing with a 20" VEPR; those are 9lbs to begin with.

http://www.nd.edu/~bhenness/BadguyWeapons.html

Of course some are going to wiegh less than others. On this page they range from 8.7 to 9.3. Its all in who makes them really.
The M1 Carbine are all made alike. (unless its the commercial version which varry slightly)

Here is another web site that has these specs

Cartridge: 7.62x39mm
Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt with two lugs
Length (overall): 34.25in / 870mm
Barrel Length: 16.34in / 415mm
Rifled Bore: 14.89 in / 378mm
Rifling Grooves: 4
Magazine capacity: rds 30
Sighting range: 800m
Weight w/empty magazine: 9.48lbs / 4300g
Weight w/loaded magazine: 10.75lbs / 4876g
Cyclic rate of fire: 600 rounds per minute
Muzzle velocity: 766 yards/s or 700m/s
Killing range: 1640 yards or 1500m

http://www.ghostrecon.net/html/arms_ak47.htm

ChairborneRanger
November 3, 2003, 01:14 PM
The Carbine is the original fun gun----not much recoil----almost like a .22 on steroids!

Sunray
November 3, 2003, 02:32 PM
"...Penetration through body armor..." When was the last time any of us had to worry about armoured deer, ground hogs, coyotes, etc? And you're speaking of ball ammo. There has been so much BS written about it that 'urban legend' is a misnomer. BALL ammo is under powered. Load up some 110 grain HP's with IMR 4227 and see what it'll do.
"...very many folks gave a hoot for the carbine till the movie came out..." Nope, the carbine has always been in demand. The reason it seems they weren't looked at until this movie came out is because they were still standard issue and had not been surplused in 1955.
Everybody likes the carbine because it's light, fast handling, accurate enough and you can be Sgt Rock with one. Or Audie Murphy as the case may be. There's no comparison between it and an AK. The AK was designed for illiterate conscripts named Ivan/ Wang/ Mobuto/Abdul/Pedro to use. It's main battle rifle and intended for use by everybody.

Sven
November 3, 2003, 02:47 PM
Correction noted re: 6 million

Sunray
November 3, 2003, 02:49 PM
"...Penetration through body armor..." When was the last time any of us had to worry about armoured deer, ground hogs, coyotes, etc? And you're speaking of ball ammo. There has been so much BS written about it that 'urban legend' is a misnomer. BALL ammo is under powered. Load up some 110 grain HP's with IMR 4227 and see what it'll do.
"...very many folks gave a hoot for the carbine till the movie came out..." Nope, the carbine has always been in demand. The reason it seems they weren't looked at until this movie came out is because they were still standard issue and had not been surplused in 1955.
Everybody likes the carbine because it's light, fast handling, accurate enough and you can be Sgt Rock with one. Or Audie Murphy as the case may be. There's no comparison between it and an AK. The AK was designed for illiterate conscripts named Ivan/ Wang/ Mobuto/Abdul/Pedro to use. It's main battle rifle and intended for use by everybody.

hillbilly
November 3, 2003, 02:50 PM
Also, the standard mag on the Carbine holds 15 rounds and just barely protrudes farther than the trigger guard.

The standard mag on the AK is usually the 30 rounder and is much bigger and more bulky.

Light, handy, and even with 15 round mag, still very light and handy.

I've owned two carbines and a MAK-90 variant of the AK.

When I go for a walk out on my 30 wooded rural isolated acres, it's the carbine that goes with me, not the AK.

The carbine is lighter feeling that some "handguns" I've handled and fired.

hillbilly

Newton
November 3, 2003, 02:50 PM
Jiles 111

The barrel length on the M1 Carbine is 457 mm, 905mm is the weapons entire length.

An M1 with a 3 foot barrel, now that would be something :D

I have a M1 Carbine and an SKS just to be on the safe side. With a good expanding round the M1 would be a most excellent close in weapon, especially with a 30 round mag. But in the field, I would take the extra punch of the SKS, it is also a more reliable design IMO.

RustyHammer
November 3, 2003, 03:59 PM
The user ...

bogie
November 3, 2003, 06:51 PM
1) A .22LR will keep folks' heads down at 100 yards just as good as .50 BMG.

2) Have you ever carried a Garand all day?

3) They're fun!

VG
November 3, 2003, 07:45 PM
And now some more specific comments:

3. The sights are FAR superior to the AK series.
4. The trigger, while not up to Garand standards, is superior to the AK.
5. The controls (safety, mag release) are superior to the AK.
6. As mentioned, weight is a huge difference. AKs are HEAVY for a "carbine."

What he (Atlas Shrug) said....

ksnecktieman
November 4, 2003, 02:28 PM
The M1 carbine is an AWE gun for teaching non shooters. for instance;
Aw, this is a military rifle?
Aw, this is light
Aw, this is easy to shoot.
Aw, this is fun.
Aw, look at how good I can shoot, see the can dance?

Light, easy to carry, easy to shoot, easy to hit with, easy to load. If you know someone that is ready to try shooting for the first time, this is a great tool for them to learn on, without the handicaps of weight, recoil, noise or muzzle blast.

BigG
November 4, 2003, 02:56 PM
Inspire nostalgia in a WWII veteran. The M1 Carbine is a teddy bear that many people fall in love with at first sight. AK will not give many people warm fuzzies due to the cute looks, as an M1 Carbine will. AK has much better performing cartridge than a M1 Carbine.

If you enjoyed reading about "What makes the M1 Carbine special?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!