Help understanding M1 Carbine

Status
Not open for further replies.

DFW1911

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,231
Location
Hill Country, TX
I'm not sure where to post this, so we'll start in General Gun.

Okay, so I went to buy some M1 Carbine ammo and when I came-to after passing out due to sticker shock of ammo in general, I could only find 110 grain of various flavors, mainly FMJ, RNSP or Corbons.

Except for the Corbons most of the ammunition, especially Winchester, had a picture of some kind of varmint on it like a ground hog or similar.

So here's my question: have I overestimated the size of Axis troops in WWII and they were actually much, much smaller than an average-sized human :eek: OR has the M1 Carbine suffered from some poor PR?

If the Axis troops were human size, which I believe they were :), did our guys use a different round than the 110 grainers? I think we've all heard the tale of the 110's bouncing off of heavy clothing during winter campaigns. Having recently read a table I'm not sure I buy that (At close range, anyway. Long range, who knows?).

Finally, my grandfather was a Field Surgeon serving w/ Patton in WWII and spoke quite highly of the M1 Carbine.

So what's happened to give the M1 Carbine such a bad reputation as a defensive round?

I look forward to your input.

Thanks,
DFW1911
 
Last edited:
I agree, it seems like it's gotten a bad rep as not being a "man stopper." I wouldn't feel undergunned with an M1 Carbine at my bedside.
 
the standard .mil load was/is the 110gr. FMJ. It is underpowered, and is spoken highly of because is was handy, not particularly deadly.

Take a look at the side of a box of .223Rem and you'll see the same varmint.
 
I'm not an expert by any means, but from what I understand, the 30 Carbine round has the "hitting power" roughly equivalent to a full power .357 magnum round, all the way out to 200 yards or so. Hardly something to sneeze at... 30-06 it ain't, but it's still adequate for most uses up out to 150-200 yds.
 
The M1 carbine was designed as a mid-point between pistols and rifles, more as something for service and support troops to have for their defense.
 
There are so many myths about the M1 Carbine it's ridiculous. The bottom line is that it has been sixty years since WWII and debating the "man-killing" value of the gun may be interesting, but it's academic.

The fact is the M1 Carbine is a fun gun to shoot for fun, is a piece of history and would work fine for close in self defense. What else would you want with a gun?
 
The 30 carbine is a modernization of the old 32/20 and was never intended to be a battle rifle of any description. The feeling was that it was more likely to hit an enemy than a 45acp 1911 because of poor training of the troops who carried the 45acp as a primary weapon, mostly REMFs who were non combatants anyway. Some officer types took to carrying the little carbines as they were light and handy. As far as power goes, nothing larger than a coyote should be considered as proper game for the cartridge. 110 gr fmj was and mostly is the only available ammo and the velocity was around 1900fps from the carbine. The round does shine brightly when used in a seven and a half inch Ruger blackhawk however. It's a fun little cartridge but was never intended to be a man stopper. Some would have you believe that it was a preferred tanker weapon but that just isn't so. Tankers had a strange affinity for the M3 and 1911a1.
 
Contrary to what people who only shoot .45 and 12gauge slugs while drinking motor oil, getting shot by any bullet is not a fun thing.

You pop over a berm and take a 110grain .30 anywhere in your body and that is going to hurt and you're going to get back on your side of the berm immediately.

If you can put well aimed shots down range rapidly, you've got a nice gun that people are going to love. So even if it's not bruising your shoulder, breaking glass with its report and altering the gravitational pull of the earth, you don't want to get shot by it.
 
I read recently that a police department - I forget where - selected the M1 over the AR for their patrol rifle, their point being they have sharpshooters to hit targets over 200 yards. They like the reliability, dependability, (and cost vs AR) of the M1.

Given the ballistics - 110 grains move at nearly 2,000 fps - I can't discount this as a decent defensive round, especially if using RNSP or the Corbon HPs. I've heard, and highorder mentioned, that the round is underpowered. How? What needs to be done to make it adequately powered?

As BobbyQuickdraw said, I sure wouldn't want to be hit with one.

Thanks for the help with this.

Take care,
DFW1911
 
Last edited:
It's only underpowered if you compare it to other military offerings of its day, like 7.92x57, .30-06, 7.62x54R -- all large rifle calibers.
 
when I said underpowered, I was refering to the citation in Cartridges of the World, that states that the .30 carbine is loaded to a very modest pressure level. Had Winchester established a higher pressure specification for the carbine's receiver,(which it would have easily handled) the round could be loaded to produce another 400fps, which is a significant.
 
You can soup it up slightly, but the best way to increase the terminal effectiveness of the M1 Carbine is to simply use better bullets. There are several available in both factory loads and as components, handloaders have it best.
Denis
 
I was issued an M2 Carbine my first tour in Viet Nam as an Adviser. I didn't try to understand the son-of-a-b*tch!

When it failed to stop someone who needed stopping, it wound up wrapped around a tree, and I borrowed an M1 rifle from the ARVN.
 
Had Winchester established a higher pressure specification for the carbine's receiver,(which it would have easily handled) the round could be loaded to produce another 400fps, which is a significant.

Ah, but Winchester had a weight limit it had to meet with the carbine, hence the lack of a "beefy" receiver able to handle higher pressure. As for the "bullets bouncing off winter coats" legend, I would be happy to sell you a padded coat (telogreika) for you to wear for testing the theory.:D

Don
 
The late great Jim Cirillo, of NYPD Stakeout Squad fame, said the best rifle he found for stopping bad guys was a .30 M1 Carbine loaded with 110 grain soft point ammunition.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
Last edited:
M1 Carbine according to Wikipedia

Troops in the rear, paratroopers, or front line troops required to carry other equipment (such as medics, engineers and mortar crews) had found the full-size rifles too cumbersome, and pistols and revolvers to be insufficiently accurate or powerful. Submachine guns like the Thompson were more than sufficiently powerful for close-range encounters, but lacked effective range and were not significantly easier to carry and maintain than the existing service rifles (such as the M1903 and Garand).

Much the same constraints applied to airborne infantry, a concept that was also under consideration at the time. Prior to the development and issue of submachine guns such as the M3 "Grease Gun", a submachine gun like the Thompson was also much more expensive than pistols and most rifles of the period. The .30-06 Garand, then entering service, was as heavy and cumbersome as the existing service rifles. It was decided that a new weapon was needed for these other roles. While the range of a pistol is about 50 yards and the range of existing rifles was several hundred yards, the requirement for the new firearm called for a maximum range of 300 yards.

A carbine version of the standard-issue semi-automatic rifle was considered, but the .30-06 round for which the M1 Garand was chambered was found to be too powerful. The requirement was for a weapon lighter and handier than the Garand, with less recoil, but at the same time, greater range, accuracy, and effective stopping power than the M1911A1 pistols currently in use. The M1 Carbine was intended for use by soldiers who required a more compact, lightweight defensive weapon, and for soldiers who did not utilize an infantry rifle as their primary arm.

In 1938, the Chief of Infantry requested the Ordnance Department develop a lightweight rifle or carbine, though the formal requirement for the weapon type was not approved until 1940. This led to a competition in 1941 by major U.S. firearm companies and designers. Winchester at first did not submit a design, being too busy perfecting the Winchester Military Rifle in .30-06. The rifle originated as a design by Jonathan "Ed" Browning, half-brother of the famous weapons designer John Browning. A couple of months after Ed Browning's death in May 1939, Winchester hired ex-convict David M. "Carbine" Williams, a some-time bootlegger who had devised a short-stroke gas piston design while serving a prison sentence for murder. (This unlikely true story, a natural for the movie industry, was the basis of the 1952 movie Carbine Williams starring James Stewart.) Winchester hoped Williams would be able to complete various designs left unfinished by Ed Browning. Williams' first design change for the rifle was the incorporation of his short-stroke piston design. After the Marine Corps semi-automatic rifle trials in 1940, Browning's rear-locking tilting bolt design was considered to be unreliable in sandy conditions. As a result, the rifle was redesigned yet again to incorporate a Garand-style rotating bolt and operating rod.

The prototypes for the US M1 carbine were chambered for a new cartridge, the .30 M1. It chambers the .30 Carbine, a smaller and lighter .30 caliber (7.62 mm) cartridge, very different, in both design and performance, from the larger .30-'06 used in the Garand.

The .30 Carbine cartridge was intermediate in both muzzle energy (ME) and muzzle velocity (MV). It is essentially a rimless version of the obsolete .32 Winchester Self-Loading cartridge. The .30 Carbine had a round-nose 110 gr (7.1 g) bullet, in contrast to the spitzer bullet designs found in most full-power rifle cartridges of the day. From the M1 Carbine's 18 in (457 mm) barrel, the .30 Carbine cartridge produced a muzzle velocity of approximately 1,970 ft/s (600 m/s), a velocity between that of contemporary submachine guns (approximately 900 ft/s (274 m/s) to 1,600 ft/s (488 m/s)) and full-power rifles and light machine guns (approximately 2,400 ft/s (732 m/s) to 2,800 ft/s (853 m/s)). For example, the U.S. M3 submachinegun, chambered in .45 ACP, had a MV of 920 ft/s (280 m/s); the British Bren light machine gun in .303 British reached 2,440 ft/s (744 m/s); the M1 Garand firing .30-'06 had a MV of 2,800 ft/s (853 m/s). At the M1 Carbine's maximum listed range of 300 yards, its bullet has about the same energy as pistol rounds like the 7mm Nambu do at the muzzle. Bullet drop is significant past 200 yards.


81 mm mortar crew in action at Camp Carson, Colorado, April 24, 1943. The soldier on the left has a slung M1 Carbine.By May 1941, the rifle prototype had been shaved to a mere 7.5 lb (3.4 kg). Winchester contacted the Ordnance Department to examine their design, who believed the design could be scaled down to a carbine which weighed 4.5 lb (2 kg) to 4.75 lb (2.2 kg). In response, Major René Studler demanded a carbine prototype as soon as possible. The first model was developed in 13 days by William C. Roemer and Fred Humeston. It was cobbled together using the trigger housing and lockwork of a Winchester M1905 rifle. The prototype was an immediate hit with Army observers.

After the initial Army testing in August 1941, Winchester set out to develop a more refined version. This competed successfully against other carbine candidates in September 1941, and Winchester was notified of their victory the very next month. Standardization as the M1 Carbine was approved in October 22, 1941. Contrary to popular myth, Williams had little to do with the carbine's development, with the exception of his short-stroke gas piston design. As a matter of fact, Williams went about creating his own design apart from the other Winchester staff. Williams' final carbine design was not ready for testing until December 1941, two months after the Winchester M1 Carbine had been adopted and type-classified. None of William's additional design features were incorporated into later M1 production.

The M1 carbine was designed primarily to offer non-combat and line-of-communications troops a better defensive weapon than a pistol or submachine gun, with greater accuracy and range, but without the recoil, cost, or weight of a full-power infantry rifle. The carbine was also easier for less experienced soldiers and smaller-framed people to fire than the .30 caliber infantry rifles of the day. The carbine was more convenient to carry for officers, NCOs, or specialists encumbered with weapons, field glasses, radios, or other gear. Tankers, drivers, artillery crews, mortar crews, and other personnel were also issued the M1 carbine in lieu of the larger, heavier Garand. Belatedly, a folding-stock version of the M1 carbine was developed, after a request was made for a compact and light infantry arm for airborne troops. The first M1 carbines were delivered in mid-1942, with initial priority given to troops in the European Theater.

The M1 and its reduced-power .30 cartridge were never intended to serve as a primary infantry weapon, nor was it comparable to more powerful assault rifles developed late in the war. Nevertheless, the carbine was soon issued to infantry officers, machine-gun crews, paratroopers, and other frontline soldiers. Its reputation in combat was mixed. Some infantrymen and Marines, especially those who did not use a rifle as their primary weapon, preferred the carbine over the Garand because of the weapon's small size and light weight. The carbine also gained generally high praise from airborne troops who were issued the folding-stock M1A1. The carbine's exclusive use of non-corrosive primered ammunition was found to be a godsend by troops and ordnance personnel serving in the Pacific, where barrel corrosion was a significant issue, though not to the same extent in Europe, where some soldiers reported misfires attributed to bad primers.

In the Pacific theatre, soldiers and guerrilla forces operating in heavy jungle with only occasional enemy contact generally praised the carbine for its light weight and accuracy. Other soldiers and Marines engaged in frequent daily combat (particularly those serving in the Philippines) found the weapon to have insufficient stopping power and penetration. Reports of Japanese soldiers being shot multiple times in chest and body without immediate effect began to surface. Like the .45 Thompson, some troops found the .30 Carbine cartridge incapable of penetrating small trees and other light jungle cover. Aware of these shortcomings, the U.S. Army, its Pacific Command Ordnance staff, and the Aberdeen small arms facility continued to work on shortened versions of the Garand throughout the war, though none were ever officially adopted.

Initially, the M1 Carbine was intended to have a selective-fire capability, but the decision was made to put the M1 into production without this feature. Fully-automatic capability was incorporated into the design of the M2 (an improved, selective-fire version of the M1), introduced in 1944.

The M2 Carbine continued in use during the Korean War. As noted, the M2 featured a selective-fire switch allowing optional fully-automatic fire at a rather high rate (850-900 rpm) and a 30-round magazine. In Korea, all versions of the M1/M2 carbine soon acquired a poor reputation for jamming in extreme cold weather conditions, eventually traced to inadequate recoil impulse and weak return springs. A 1951 official U.S. Army evaluation noted the weapon's cold-weather shortcomings, and recorded complaints by troops for failure to stop heavily-clothed North Korean and Chinese troops at close range after multiple hits.

The M2 carbine was again issued to some U.S. troops in Vietnam, particularly reconnaissance units (LRRP) and advisors as a substitute standard weapon. These weapons began to be replaced by the M16 in the late 1960s, and many M1, M2, and M3 Carbines were given to the South Vietnamese.

The M1/M2 carbine was finally replaced by the M16 in the mid-1960s. The M1/M2/M3 carbines were the most heavily produced family of U.S. military weapons for several decades, most of these being the M1 version.


[edit]
 
I have a recently deceased friend who was a marine in Iwo Jima during the big one. He said the carbine was quite a gun and the guy's who whined about it by and large couldn't shoot. I've never owned one (although I'd like to) nor have I ever fired a shot in anger but he was a man I would certainly sit and listen to respectfully. He had indeed been there and done that.
 
I have a pine stump in the backyard that I use as a back stop for shooting new guns. It is 14 inches in diameter. I have shot a few 9mm, 22lr and .223 rounds into it. Last year when I bought my first M1 Carbine I fired a 110 FMJ round into the stump. Well........The M1 Carbine round was the first round that has totally gone through the stump. I think all this talk about M1 Carbines rounds being stopped by a frozen coat is B.S. I keep a M1 Carbine by my bed and am not at all worried about its stopping power.........:D
WinArl1.gif
 
My M1 Carbine is the most ergonomic and fun gun to shoot I own though the AR I just built may challenge that title. If I have to carry a rifle for a long time nothing comes close. I've dropped one turkey and one deer in short order with it over a short time in the field. It shoots what is considered a powerful handgun round. I feel completely confident with it at the ranges at which I work. I don't shoot at anything that's not shooting at me beyond a couple of hundred yards.

It will never equal the hit/kill ratio of a 30.06 or any other high power round. It will aways exceed the hit/kill ratio and hit/fire ratio of the 1911 handgun it was designed to replace.

I wish I'd bought a roomfull of them back in the 50's and 60's.
 
If you look at the ballistics and energy, think of it as shooting a .357 magnum load. It's a giant, easy-to-use pistol, if you will. If you think of it as a rifle, sure it'll be sub-par. However, I would doubt most people you'd be likely to use it on are going to be bulked up for a military-style winter encampment, etc etc etc. Plenty of people think .357 is fine for man-stopping from a pistol, but claim that an equal type of bullet won't work in .30 Carbine? If shooting FMJ, it's a hoot for range use; load it up with those HP rounds, and I for one would feel adequately armed with a 15/30 round semi-auto .357 magnum-ish rifle.

Keep in mind what the thing was built to do--serve as a weapon easier to use than a pistol for people who weren't on the front lines. Don't try to make it into something it's not, practice with it so as you can shoot the darned thing, and you should be happy with it. Try to take it to war to replace a rifle, while using those FMJ loads....maybe not.

Just my opinion. No offense meant to those who served with the weapons in question.
 
Last edited:
The rumors I'd heard about Korean jackets was at long range. It's what happens when you try to use a 150 yard rifle at 200+. It's small, light, easy to use, only real drawback is ammo. The sheet that came with Lee's dies said that with cast bullets, it's as cheap as .22LR. Not sure I"d believe that, but it does help. You can find recipes from 85 to 135 grains for it too, if you like.

I'm curious about this extra 400 FPS mentioned though. With that, it could almost replace the M16.
 
Re Vern Humphrey's reply: I used to have a salty old co-worker who had the same experience with the carbine in WWII and his met the same fate! His statement was: "Waaalll, alls I know about the carbine is this. Hit ain't worth a dam* fer killin Germans!"
 
It shoots what is considered a powerful handgun round.

That makes a lot of sense: I looked at some ballistics tables last night and they would support this claim.

If you look at the ballistics and energy, think of it as shooting a .357 magnum load.

Thanks - good frame of reference.

The rumors I'd heard about Korean jackets was at long range.

Yes, that's the one I heard - I just didn't know the details.

Thanks, all, for your input and knowledge.

Take Care,
DFW1911
 
Most of your questions have been answered but here's my take anyway...

after passing out due to sticker shock of ammo in general

You must not have bought ammo in a while if you're just finding this out now :) Say thank you to our thirst for cheap products from China...their absorption of the world's supplies of base metals are driving the prices up.

the M1 Carbine suffered from some poor PR?

Yes it has. Remember, the M1 Carbine was designed as a replacement for a pistol for 2nd line troops...sort of the 1940's version of the PDW. Was never meant as a first line weapon. Therefore if fires a pistol class power cartridge...and people complain that it doesn't have the "stopping power" of a rifle...well, no $#!&, Sherlock!

I think we've all heard the tale of the 110's bouncing off of heavy clothing during winter campaigns.

I think some of that (a lot of that?) is 1) poor marksmanship (I swear, I hit him but he didn't go down...it must have bounced off those thick coats!!) or 2) foggy memories

spoke quite highly of the M1 Carbine.

6 million-ish (?) of them made and being the chosen weapon by many troops says a lot. People liked the size, weight, handiness and reliability. Enough that they were willing to overlook the "relatively" weak cartridge (compared to a .30-06)

2wquy4j.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top