Sure, sure...no problem.
First, let me explain why I wrote the response the way I did. I've been reading THR for quite a while now, but only recently actually started to reply or start a thread. There is a problem here, IMO, just IMO...but non the less. Way too much advice being given by some people that simply do not have enough experience or interest in doing the background work for a well founded position. It happens all the time, on all the sites, but THR seems to be plagued by alot of really poorly formed advice and opinion. As most questions being asked here are by people who want a disciplined, reasonably accurate response..many of the answers are a real problem having more to do with a preference for choo-choos (any gun with more rails than the Northern Pacific) than anything having to do with purposefullness or accuracy.
Having said that, lets go. Owning a suppressed rifle, a good one, is one of the greatest and most useful rifles one can own. You know that in part from your experience with your suppressed pistol. But a rifle, say in .22 is in fact as close to silenced (a good one) as one can get and that is a most pleasant and suppremely accurate thing to have. I have a .22 rifle that I can hear the trigger mechanism when fired (it is and must be a bolt action)...it is effectively silenced. Many superb suppressed rifles shoot much better than their non-suppressed counterparts. There are many factors involved as to why that happens (caliber and barrel/suppressor design being paramount) and it takes more than a spoonful of preparedness to get the most out of your money. Many supressors sold today deserve their names...cans. A great supressor is apparent when fired next to a common one. Whereas building a supressor (those that can and should be doing so legally) is easy, building one that is quiet, can take the heat and volume of fire, stand up over time, be servicable...and is accurate is not easy, especially the accuracy part. One must shoot and listen to alot of supressors from behind the gun and, with enourmous caution and safety, listen to the bullets down range to really get to know which supressors are good.
IMO, the best way to approach a suppressor is to break them all down into three classes of firearms. First are the pistols, semi automatic (you can't effectively suppress a revolver, though two designs came as close as possible) and, aside for quiet target work, these pistols were meant for sub rosa action at close range. The second class is the sub machine gun class, short to medium range, high volumes of suppressed fire, again clandestine operational use. The second class is only truly quiet (close to silenced) in single shot, locked-out closed bolt operation. In full auto they are quieter, but more meant to hopefully be quiet enough not to carry, but mostly to confuse the enemy as to direction of fire. In CQB, they can provide the ability to allow an operative to hear his surroundings, while protecting one's hearing as well. Accurate? In single lock-out yes, in full auto many are as loud as a .22 and that, is not all the quiet.
The third class is supressed longer range shooting, some would call sniper work, but not always. In the last class, suppressed rifles are all about sound and signature suppression. Accuracy is equally important, but one needs to remember that these rifles shoot extremely well un-supressed to begin with.
So if they are to be supressed, it is to completely hide the position of the shooter.
So where does your rifle fit it? It is, obviously, not a pistol. It is not a sub machine gun. It is not a long range rifle. It is, by nature somewhere in between, it is a light rifle...some would say a very light rifle. Is that bad? Yes and no. No, it is not bad when used for what it was designed for...perhaps (opinion) yes if one was going to choose it as a platform for a supressed rifle. Early designers quickly realized that suppressed light rifles (as opposed to machine guns) made little sense as the sub guns could pack more power, be smaller, as accurate and more useful. You will find the history fascinating, especially the adaption of the Destroyer a Spanish bolt-action, five shot carbine. Its design is similar to the 95 Mauser, but uses two rear locking lugs like the Lee-Enfield. Llight and handy, like your choice, but quiet as it was not a semi auto. The standard chambering was 9mm Largo, though it has been modified to fire 9mm para, .38 Super, 7.62 mm Tokarev, and .45 ACP. Mitch WerBell of the original MAC company built several for the army during the Viet-Nam war. When he realized the limitations....Sionics was born...the M3A was supressed, the M1 left behind, etc. etc. etc. its a great read.
Your choice is closest to a subgun so I spend a little time there...
Machine guns of the right mechanism work very well as supressed weapons. The best are designed to be super reliable, high volume fire weapons that make less noise. They are not silenced, they are suppressed and make enough noise that if you were outside a hotel room door and one was fired full auto inside the room, you would know immediately there was gun fire. Having said that, a suppressed machine gun in lock -out mode will be very quiet, a .45 acp with a good supressor will make about as much noise as a hammer hitting wet mud, or about the same noise as if you were to make a fist and strike your other palm hard...a thump...in lock-out. In the early, wild days at Sionics, designers would order room service in a public hotel, when the service knocked at the door, they would fire a single suppressed round into a stack of phone books behind the closed door. When they opened the door, they would read the face of the waiter, if any alarm was present on the waiter's face, they had failed in their design. The MAC in (.380 and .45, not 9mm) with mounted Sionic Supressor with a fresh (new) second gen final end cap washer worked every time...for four shots...all in lock-out. In full auto, all the receiver noise kicks in again. Sub sonic rounds are best, guns designed for close to subsonic rounds are best... the most stable and accurate rounds as well out of a subgun. People don't realize that the sonic crack of the bullet can be heard down the line of fire with a supressed weapon. Its loud...but the supressor makes it hard to tell where the round came from.
Your 30 cal. M1 Carbine round had very little knock down power. It fired a short, round-nosed bullet at about 1900 fps. It had neither the broad frontal area of the 45 pistol ctg. nor the speed and power of the 30/06 round. However, it would kill, but probably speedy kills would only happen with a heart or central nervous-system hit. Most states won't let people hunt with it except for small game and pests, so that should tell you something. By comparison, the 7.92 kurtz (German MP44, same period) shot a more streamlined bullet at about the same weight, faster (2300fps) The streamlining let it be effective to about 300-400 meters or so. Neither was exactly a powerhouse, but the German round was indeed more effective. Many G.I.s liked the carbine because of it's "cuteness", light weight and low recoil. Had they put it out in the M2 configuration (full auto capability) with a more powerful round, we would have had the first "assult rifle". We didn't and the M1 faded away.
And then there is the issue of the amount of noise inherent with the M1 receiver. Too loud for suppressed full auto, nearly impossible to lock out quickly and efficienty...
And we go on from here..it is really too much to cover...I haven't even really begun on the design constraints when one uses that cartridge in a supressor. Get the books and have a great time, I promise you that you will move quickly beyond this idea and end up knowing exactly why you did and should have.
