Earlier today I had a discussion with Charter Arms.

There's nothing .30 Carbine does that .223, .357, .327, and so many other rounds can't do for less money.

No, I wouldn't buy an M1.

M1 carbine in 10mm would make a fine weapon,
Feeding the little guy would get spendy fast

I think it would be a hard sell, but an M1 Carbine in .357 magnum would be quite neat. I think a 10 round single stack magazine would be doable. Heck, have it accept Desert Eagle .357 magazines and you wouldn't even have to design or even produce the mags yourself.

I don't think it's likely that anyone is going to be making an M1 worth owning at a low price point any time soon. There just isn't the demand, and with the WWII-Vietnam folks getting old quickly, demand is falling not rising. On the plus side in the next 10-15 years there are going to be a lot of CMP hoarders dying, so those collections will get auctioned off. There are probably still a couple million guns out there, so it's not exactly a rarity. Watch Rock Island...

In terms of new interest, I wouldn't bet on it. The platform has little to recommend it compared to the M4, and very little mind share.

That would make you about the youngest possible person with wartime interaction with the M1, though.

Captain O said:

On the whole, the public tends to be a "military prostitute" (read: whatever the military is using is good enough for me) attitude. This isn't always such a great idea. The 5.56 x 45 mm is a poor choice for home defense. Shooting through walls (several times) isn't an attribute that I want to deal with.

Click to expand...

This proves that you have ZERO idea of the ballistics of the typical military grade 5.56, let alone rounds targeted toward public use and self defense. Show me one, just one, single, solitary instance where a 55 or 62 grain 5.56 bullet shot through several walls. You can't. But, the .30 carbine round is known for over penetration.

Soft points in the .30 Carbine tends to curb this problem, but it isn't a substitute for "target awareness" (what is beyond your initial target). With soft point ammunition the .30 Carbine penetrates far less than the 5.56 x 45.

Click to expand...

Wrong again, capt. Soft points 'curb' the over penetration issue of .30 carbine, but do not eliminate it. The 5.56 does even have an over penetration problem, but you've notably shown on a couple occasions in this thread alone that you are clueless to 5.56 ballistics, both military FMJ and civilian soft and hollow tip varieties.

Remember: the military isn't usually too concerned with what is behind their target. In fact, excessive penetration generally generates "collateral damage" when it strikes other "enemy combatants" behind the primary target.

Click to expand...

Balderdash!

Now, while excessive penetration causing secondary casualties can be done with certain ammunition, nothing in the 5.56 family is utilized in this manner. .308, maybe. .50 BMG, certainly. But it's not written in the doctrine of training for those.

Captain O said:

The .223 requires a heavier (required, due to the higher pressures in the Ruger ranch rifle as well as the AR15/M16) and more cumbersome platform. This is hard to change. The others are still rimmed, not rimless, cartridges.

Come on, folks, think!

Click to expand...

Which is precisely why light weight AR builds in the 5 pound range are common. Right?

Captain O said:

I never have cared for the 5.56 x 45 anyway. If you like it, that's fine. I never could see the advantage for civilian applications. The Police liked the .30 Carbine too.

Click to expand...

The 5.56 isn't a very capable cartridge, but it does have the .30 carbine handily beat on pretty much all fronts. When the ammo options include civilian loads I'm pretty sure it has a solid terminal ballistics edge too.

Captain O said:

At close range, they're all quite capable. I presume that firing light sub-100 grain bullets at long ranges are fine. Most civilian uses don't even come close to military applications.

Click to expand...

A slingshot with a 25mm steel ball is capable at close range, too. So is a sharpened stick. I'm not concerned with capable, but would much rather have optimal. And in my situation, in close quarters, the .30 carbine simply isn't it.

As far as self defense and especially home defense situations, a lot of those military applications translate quite nicely and easily to civilian practices.

The authorities will "pitch a fit" if your HD/SD ranges are more than 25 feet. Even if you have no duty to retreat, the current "powers that be" will throw your body in prison without as much as a second thought. They do not care.

Click to expand...

So 25 feet is justifiable, but 26 feet isn't? And who exactly are these mysterious "powers that be" who will investigate a home defense or self defense shooting. In my area, it'll likely be the city police, or the country sheriff's department. And they are not likely to "throw my body is prison without as much as a second thought"... they really don't like law suits they have no chance to win. In a justifiable homicide investigation, one might not even see the inside of a holding cell, let alone a prison cell without a jury trial. So unless you have some facts to back up this malarkey, stow it.

USAFVet: In the event you want to know, we never fired the 5.56 in basic training. I fired the .30 US Army (7.62 x 63) as a civilian. The Navy had us qualify with .22 lr. (Trust me, I thought it was a joke)! I was shooting the .35 Remington and the .30-06 as a young man. Firearms qualifications in Basic Training was ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Then why are you spewing out false information? You care to retract any of it?

Captain O said:

I guess you think that you won't be taken into custody until they have it all sorted out? Think again.

The police tend to detain everyone they can until they feel they have the entire situation sorted out.

Click to expand...

Taken into custody/ detained and "being thrown in prison" are two drastically different things. I know one will be detained during an investigation. But not necessarily locked up. Huge difference.

By the way, you're not God Almighty. (That position was filled some time ago).

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? I never claimed to be your fairy tale friend. But thanks for pointing out that I'm not fictional. It's such a positive reinforcement having the realness of ME acknowledged by a total stranger who has no idea what he's talking about.

But now that this has taken such a turn from the original subject, I'll get back to doing more important things.

I wouldn't mind having an M1 Carbine, just not one made by Charter Arms.

lefteyedom said:

M1 carbine in 10mm would make a fine weapon,
Feeding the little guy would get spendy fast

Click to expand...

Unless you reload. That changes things a whole lot. Once brass is procured the cost comes down to a few gr of extra powder.

Captain O said:

I guess you think that you won't be taken into custody until they have it all sorted out? Think again.

The police tend to detain everyone they can until they feel they have the entire situation sorted out.

By the way, you're not God Almighty. (That position was filled some time ago).

Click to expand...

Even here, in the supposed hell hole of IL, I can think of several situations in the last few years of self defense shootings where the lawful shooters wasn't arrested. The ones in the home they weren't even taken "downtown."

Captain O said:

The authorities will "pitch a fit" if your HD/SD ranges are more than 25 feet. Even if you have no duty to retreat, the current "powers that be" will throw your body in prison without as much as a second thought. They do not care.

Click to expand...

That's nice. The primary reason I own anti-personnel rifles is not "self defense". It's as a hedge against tyranny. And in such a circumstance I would not care in the least what the authorities might or might not pitch a fit about.

If I'm shooting in close I'll take the superior terminal ballistics of a shotgun anyways.

My initial thought was, No. Then I read the "if made in 357 magnum" comment and I could see myself owing one of them at that point.

jmorris said:

My initial thought was, No. Then I read the "if made in 357 magnum" comment and I could see myself owing one of them at that point.

Click to expand...

Good luck feeding any reasonable number of .357s from a magazine. The M1/M2 couldn't reliably feed 30 nearly rimless rounds. Some gun/mag combos were OK, others weren't.

Some years ago, I believe it was LaRue, modified M-1 Carbines for a host of heavier cartridges.

My understanding is that there were issues with the guns not having much of a service life with the upgraded ammo.

IJ made 9x19mm Carbines and they just did not sell.

Might be interesting to ask Chiappa how well their 9x19 mm models are selling.

Marshal and Sanows street numbers on the M-1 Carbine with GI hard ball were at one point 90 percent one shot stops.

Dr. Fackler kept a M-1 Carbine loaded with commercial hollow points next to his bed during retirement.

Meanwhile vets continue to speak of its ineffectiveness. Even vet THR members and that may well have been their experience.

More controllable in full auto?

That might be interesting to see. In my brief experience with an M2 it was far less controllable in 2-3 round bursts ( as such a gun should be used) than even the somewhat "crappy" S&W 76 and much less controllable than a host of other 9x19mm SMGs in my hands.

One the other hand if I knew I was going in harm's way and had a choice between an M-1 Carbine and ANY 9x19 mm SMG I ever shot I would pick up the M-1 Carbine. That does not imply that I would pick the carbine over a semi auto rifle shooting a bottle necked center fire cartridge.

Charter makes nice little revolvers. They have in the past and .22 semi auto rifles and pistols and I believe once considered a 9x19mm pistol. They should stick to doing small revolvers correctly. It is unfortunate that some chose to compare todays Charters to those made in the past as the same thing.

-kBob

QUOTE: "...If they were to build the M1 Carbine to better quality levels than those of Auto Ordnance and Inland, would you buy one?..."

No-not as long as I can get a Mini-14. Well, having carried one in the military for four years, maybe I would for old-time's sake.