M1 Carbine v. AR-15

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would prefer the AR for these reasons: power, the ability to easily mount things to increase the usefulness of the weapon like flashlights, and the easier ability to obtain ammunition for practice. Also, 30 cal carbine mags tend to be of lower quality. They are either very old mil magazines (don't think any have been made for the mil for a LONG time) or newer productions from questionable overseas locations.
 
The only thing an M1 carbine does better than an AR is be nostalgic.
I respectfully disagree. The carbine swings and points like a fine upland shotgun. Unfortunately the fact it shoots an inferior round and is often unreliable completely trumps that, but in terms of pure handling and ergonomics the M1 carbine puts the AR platform to shame.
 
I respectfully disagree. The carbine swings and points like a fine upland shotgun. Unfortunately the fact it shoots an inferior round and is often unreliable completely trumps that, but in terms of pure handling and ergonomics the M1 carbine puts the AR platform to shame.
The 30 Carbine at 100 yards produces similar ballistics to 357 Magnum at the muzzle, not exactly "inferior" IMO
The only surplus Carbines I've found to not be reliable are ones that haven't been taken care
Ensure that they are in-spec and they run like a top IME
 
I have in our bedroom a 40s&w semi, 12ga pump and AR15 all have lights and there is other handheld lights nearby. I like the idea of a 9mm AR for home defense brought up earlier and will probably look into one closer, also I like the idea of a laser for the SD AR so it would be easier to point and shoot, I feel the versatility of the AR platform makes it the winner. I have a CMP carbine and a couple of mags but think I'll keep it for range use instead of SD.
 
A 9mm AR would be great for home defense but I've had two of them and wouldn't trust my life to either one because of feeding reliability problems. That is only 2 among literally dozens of options, but my advice is if you are going to use a 9mm AR for defense you better shoot it a whole lot with your defensive ammo until your confident it will run reliably.
 
Skinny Pete
The AR-10 was designed in 1953/54
2022 - 1954 = 68

"Nearly 70 years old"

AR-10? I thought we were talking about the AR15?

The ArmaLite AR-15 (the "AR" is an acronym for "ArmaLite Rifle")[5][6] is a select-fire, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed rifle manufactured in the United States between 1959 and 1964.[7]

In 1959, ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-15 to Colt due to financial difficulties and limitations in terms of manpower and production capacity.[8] After modifications (most notably, the charging handle was re-located from under the carrying handle like AR-10 to the rear of the receiver),[9] Colt rebranded it the Colt 601, however it still carried the Armalite markings due to contractual obligations to Armalite/Fairchild Aircraft Co.. Colt marketed the redesigned rifle to various military services around the world and was eventually adopted by the U.S. military in January 1962 and subsequently designated as M16 rifle in December 1963, which went into production and service in 1964.[7][page needed][10][page needed]
Colt continued to use the AR-15 trademark for its line of semi-automatic-only rifles marketed to civilian and law-enforcement customers, known as Colt AR-15. The Armalite AR-15 is the parent of a variety of Colt AR-15 and M16 rifle variants.

Information source: Wikipedia-Armalite AR-15

2022-1959=63
 
The 30 Carbine at 100 yards produces similar ballistics to 357 Magnum at the muzzle, not exactly "inferior" IMO
The only surplus Carbines I've found to not be reliable are ones that haven't been taken care
Ensure that they are in-spec and they run like a top IME
I think the problem here is, most guns you run across haven't really been properly maintained since they were last through the arsenal for a rebuild, and many of the bring backs never were.

And just from some of what a lot of people have said in the threads on gun cleaning around here, a lot of people seem to think you dont need to clean your guns, and 60 years of crap and crud doesnt help either. You should have seen all the dried up and gooey crap and crud that flushed out of the bolts Ive stripped and rebuilt.

Add to that, a lot of them are still running old, original GI and aftermarket mags, which are often a big part of the reliability problems.

Of the five Carbines Ive owned, all of them needed their bolts stripped and rebuilt, and recoil springs replaced. That in itself made a pretty big difference in reliable function right off. They all needed their rear sights reset and restaked too, and a couple needed their front sights properly zeroed.

That, and replacing the well worn GI mags that came with the guns with current, new Korean mags, brought things up into the high 90 percentile as far as function goes. Still, they do have stoppage on a pretty regular basis. Might only be one or two rounds every 2-300 rounds, but its enough to be annoying.

Keep in mind, on average, I normally shoot 5 or 6 cases of 5.56 each year, and I cant remember the last time I had a stoppage that wasnt set up. So one or two stoppages here and there every couple of hundred rounds is kind of a big deal, and not all that awe inspiring.

If you shoot them enough and are used to cleaning the stoppages, which usually arent much more than pulling the charging handle back and giving the gun a shake, it's probably not all that big a deal, or maybe it is. All depends on when it happens. :)
 
Skinny Pete
AR-10? I thought we were talking about the AR15?
Your original assertion...
jski
Yes and that would be the more modular and adaptable AR platform versus the 80+ year old design of the M1 Carbine.
The AR platform is nearly 70 years old
The AR-15 was simply a scaled down AR-10, which took place in 1956
2022 - 1956 = 66
The AR-15 is nearly 70 years old ;)
 
I think the problem here is, most guns you run across haven't really been properly maintained since they were last through the arsenal for a rebuild, and many of the bring backs never were.

And just from some of what a lot of people have said in the threads on gun cleaning around here, a lot of people seem to think you dont need to clean your guns, and 60 years of crap and crud doesnt help either. You should have seen all the dried up and gooey crap and crud that flushed out of the bolts Ive stripped and rebuilt.

Add to that, a lot of them are still running old, original GI and aftermarket mags, which are often a big part of the reliability problems.

Of the five Carbines Ive owned, all of them needed their bolts stripped and rebuilt, and recoil springs replaced. That in itself made a pretty big difference in reliable function right off. They all needed their rear sights reset and restaked too, and a couple needed their front sights properly zeroed.

That, and replacing the well worn GI mags that came with the guns with current, new Korean mags, brought things up into the high 90 percentile as far as function goes. Still, they do have stoppage on a pretty regular basis. Might only be one or two rounds every 2-300 rounds, but its enough to be annoying.

Keep in mind, on average, I normally shoot 5 or 6 cases of 5.56 each year, and I cant remember the last time I had a stoppage that wasnt set up. So one or two stoppages here and there every couple of hundred rounds is kind of a big deal, and not all that awe inspiring.

If you shoot them enough and are used to cleaning the stoppages, which usually arent much more than pulling the charging handle back and giving the gun a shake, it's probably not all that big a deal, or maybe it is. All depends on when it happens. :)

Again...
The only surplus Carbines I've found to not be reliable are ones that haven't been taken care
Ensure that they are in-spec and they run like a top IME

I can't even recall the last time I had an in-spec, properly maintained M1 Carbine malfunction
On the other hand, I can recall having several AR malfunctions just in the last year
 
With modern .30 Carbine ammo (e.g., Hornady Critical Defense) in a home defense scenario, that’s a highly questionable statement.
Even mil-surp ball is far from "inferior"
To assert it is inferior reeks of internet regurgitation by folks with zero experience
Maybe we will be regaled with "My gran-paw said the 30 Carbine rounds bounced off helmets and heavy winter coats" :rofl:
 
Again...
The only surplus Carbines I've found to not be reliable are ones that haven't been taken care
Ensure that they are in-spec
and they run like a top IME

I can't even recall the last time I had an in-spec, properly maintained M1 Carbine malfunction
On the other hand, I can recall having several AR malfunctions just in the last year
The Carbines do run better when properly maintained, but they are not as reliable as an AR. Not even close. As I said, I dont usually get more than 2-300 rounds without a stoppage with the three I currently have, and the other two werent any better.

Again, the problem with many of the Carbines, or at least the ones Ive run across is, many havent been properly maintained and even when they are, they usually arent 100%. And even less so if youre using old GI mags.

Just curious, what problems were you having with your AR? I have a bunch of them and shoot a couple of them on a rotating basis pretty much weekly, and I normally have to set up the stoppages if I want to get some practice clearing them.
 
With modern .30 Carbine ammo (e.g., Hornady Critical Defense) in a home defense scenario, that’s a highly questionable statement.


I dunno, but IAW Hornady even with their 20" M1 carbine test barrel VS their 24" .223 test barrel:

2000 FPS for 977 Ft/Pds at the muzzle for the .30 Carbine

VS

3240 FPS and 1283 Ft/Pds for the .223

https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/30-carbine-110-gr-ftx-critical-defense#!/
https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/223-remington-55-gr-critical-defense#!/


Inferior might not be the correct word, but they're not exactly equal. Which probably explains why there's not a plethora of modern defensive weapons available in .30 Cal carbine. I mean people who shoot other people for a living, aren't choosing the .30 Cal carbine, maybe it's for a reason?

Not even going to get into the whole fragmentation, hydrostatic shock thing that happens at high velocity that's so controversial on gunboards.
 
Last edited:
Is there any reason to prefer one over the other in a home defense scenario?

I have some experience with the M1 carbine. It's lighter and handier than an AR and is more than enough for HD. I'd prefer it, but it's on the S list here in New Jerky, so I have a 16" Frankengun AR instead.
 
The argument for the M1 over the M4 is an emotional one. I honestly can’t think of an objective criterion in which it wins for defensive applications with modern shooting techniques.

Ultimately though, like all those above me have said, shoot/carry what you like. Freedom is a wonderful thing :)
 
My next purchase when I find a good one at a reasonable price will be a second Ruger Mini-30. After that I'll be looking for an M1 Carbine to replace the one I never should have sold 40 years ago. My M1 Carbine was 100% reliable. It was light, fast and accurate. I've shot friends M1 Carbines since those days. There's nothing not to like.

People who choose an AR over any other gun in answer to a question like this are more likely to be the nostalgic ones, the unimaginative ones, and the inexperienced ones... a little wet behind the ears.
 
This post in particular really nails it LOL

Exactly. Don't see to many door kickers using a M1 Carbine these days, they would be experiencing similar scenarios as a home defense situation.

That said there is something very nice about the M1 Carbine, they are so light and handy.
 
My next purchase when I find a good one at a reasonable price will be a second Ruger Mini-30. After that I'll be looking for an M1 Carbine to replace the one I never should have sold 40 years ago. My M1 Carbine was 100% reliable. It was light, fast and accurate. I've shot friends M1 Carbines since those days. There's nothing not to like.

People who choose an AR over any other gun in answer to a question like this are more likely to be the nostalgic ones, the unimaginative ones, and the inexperienced ones... a little wet behind the ears.
LOL. Are you sure you didn't mix up your guns there at the end? :)

The choice here was the Carbine or the AR. Although even with most other things more current and readily available these days, Id probably still choose one of the 10" AR's over most other things, and that is in fact what Ive had handy and ready to go around the house for a number of years now.

As much as I like my Carbines, they've been regulated to range toy status. Around the house, the AR's are and have been, just more useful for things across the board. I wouldn't have a problem using the Carbine if it were all I had, but luckily, its not all I have. :)
 
The 30 carbine is basically a pistol cartridge and may be a good choice in some scenarios where over penetration is a concern! ,

The idea that handgun cartridges are less penetrative is a common one, but the opposite of true. Almost all effective 5.56 mm ammunition has less penetration than most 9 mm defensive ammunition, and double-ought buckshot. The common 110 grain 30 carbine soft point is extremely penetrative, seeing that it is a relatively low velocity SP.

30-Federal-gel-test.jpg

Randy Garrett used to say that the reason his .45-70 loads penetrated so deeply was the heavy, hardcast bullet and the low velocity. The opposite is also true: a good way to reduce over penetration concerns is to use a fast load with a light-for-caliber bullet (though 75 and 77grain 5.56mm and .223 also have good reputations).

I like the M1 Carbine a lot, but don't fall victim to mindlessly repeating something, just because you've heard lots of other people say or write it.

John
 
The idea that handgun cartridges are less penetrative is a common one, but the opposite of true. Almost all effective 5.56 mm ammunition has less penetration than most 9 mm defensive ammunition, and double-ought buckshot.
One of the greatest, most enduring myths of the firearms hobby and defensive use considerations. So many people just think "rifle penetrates more than pistol" and don't bother to consider the nuances behind that rule of thumb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top