Ineffective .30 Carbines in Korea?

[Nom de Forum]

Inspired most recently by another thread recently closed; I have a question I would like to pose.

If the M1/2 .30 Carbines were ineffective during the Korean War winters why did the Russians so like the performance of the 7.62 Tok SMGs they used in Winter and why did German troops use ones they captured. Could it be that both of these rounds are effective in penetrating heavy winter clothing? Sure there are other factors that made these Russian SMGs widely used by both sides, but if their ammunition was not effective at destroying the enemy I don't think they would have been chambered in 7.62 Tok for very long. As we all know the .30 carbine is more powerful than 7.62 Tok so it should be at least as effective.

Anyone have something more that hearsay about the ineffectiveness of the .30 carbine during Korean Winters?

 

[henschman]

The claim about frozen layers of clothes being able to stop, or render ineffective, the .30 carbine would be easy enough to test with some ballistic gel. I wouldn't be surprised if someone has done it. I personally think it's BS. I think any time soldiers can blame poor performance on the cartridge rather than their shot placement, you will see claims like this just like you do with the 5.56.

 

[wlewisiii]

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-8-the-rags-o-truth/

 

[Mosin Bubba]

The claim about frozen layers of clothes being able to stop, or render ineffective, the .30 carbine would be easy enough to test with some ballistic gel. I wouldn't be surprised if someone has done it. I personally think it's BS. I think any time soldiers can blame poor performance on the cartridge rather than their shot placement, you will see claims like this just like you do with the 5.56.

I read this article on it a while back.

www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-36-frozen-clothing-and-the-box-o-truth/

Now that test isn't exactly scientific, but I think it proves that a 30 carbine wouldn't have any problems penetrating a frozen winter coat.

EDIT: Darn it, Lewis beat me to it.

 

[Casefull]

More effective than a pistol round but also not much of a rifle round...not enough velocity.

 

[WestKentucky]

Pretty s uprising that 2 layers of denim did that. I wish they had compared poly tipped ammo as well. That is designed to punch through clothing and eliminate the issue shown by the tests in the link while still expanding properly.

 

[scaatylobo]

AND

Remember that ANYTHING that needs shooting [ attackers ] is worth shooting as many times as it take to STOP the attack.

And in our world,we can [ and should ] use soft point or an expanding round ,IF we needed such.

I have shot woodchucks with 5.56 and .30 carbine ball ammo = the .30 C did a much better job of anchoring the critters.

 

[200Apples]

.
Jeff Cooper was never very fond of .30 carbine... but there was a cop in NYC that regarded in highly due to the fact that it might rarely "overpenetrate" causing collateral damage. Something to think about in a crowded metropolis.

 

[mac66]

The Korean War failure thing is a myth. Always was, always will be. Time to let it die.

 

[yamahawarrior89]

Does range have anything to do with it?

The sub guns during WWII were used in the cities mostly clearing houses/buildings and such. To me, Korea seamed much more open.

 

[Sunray]

"...If the M1/2 .30 Carbines were ineffective..." Internet myth. If a Chicom's quilted jacket was frozen, so was he.
"...why did the Russians..." It ain't about the cartridge or its effectiveness. It's about how much weight a PBI troopie has to carry. In any case, a PBI troopie doesn't care if an enemy troopie dies or not. If he is no longer a threat, that'll do.
Ditto for the Carbine. It wasn't a battle rifle. It was a replacement for the 1911 issued to support troopies. PBI liked it because it weighs 6 pounds.

 

[Delmar]

The M-1 carbine is a fairly effective weapon for what it is....pretty much a light bullet 357 Magnum in a very handy rifle. As I understand it, the carbine was a favorite of Audie Murphy, who didn't seem to have much of an issue with it.

I have personally heard some WWII veterans who said that the carbine was the preferred carry weapon-until they got into a firefight, and then wished for a Garand. I would imagine the carbine would be a much more effective weapon in a jungle setting where ranges are short and snap shooting was more likely needed.

Korea would be a lot of long range shooting, excepting the cities and villages. Lots of hills-I spent 2 tours with the 2nd ID in Korea in the 1970s, and it seemed if you weren't going up a hill, you were going down one!

 

[Edarnold]

I think there may be a confusion between penetrating those quilted jackets, and the target falling down and ceasing to be a threat. Just because you have succeeded in hitting an enemy soldier doesn't mean he is going to starfish and fly backward ten feet, like they do in the movies. That goes goes for any caliber, including the mighty .45 ACP. I'd guess that the legend of carbine bullets bouncing off Chinese jackets stems from the wearers of the jackets not falling down.

 

[mljdeckard]

Mine is under the bed right now, it is the first gun I grab for a personal defense weapon.

 

[jmr40]

It was far more effective during WW-2 in the Pacific than in Europe. I don't know much about Korea. Part of the problem in Europe was heavier clothing, larger men and shots at longer ranges. Not totally ineffective, but it didn't inspire confidence either. In the Pacific jungles against sub 100 lb soldiers wearing just a shirt it was more effective.

 

[USSR]

I will happily sell anyone a genuine telogreika (quilted jacket) as worn by the Chinese and North Koreans if they want to test on the real thing. My bet is on the .30 Carbine.

Don

 

[JShirley]

Small-framed enemy wearing baggy clothes being shot at with automatic weapons. Think it through.

In my own informal testing, .30 Carbine JSP tends to be incredibly penetrative- FMJ should be even more so.

John

 

[rondog]

I have no plans to use my M1's in winter combat anytime soon, only for range fun, truck gun and home defense. I think they'll do just fine.

 

[peacebutready]

If the M1/2 .30 Carbines were ineffective during the Korean War winters why did the Russians so like the performance of the 7.62 Tok SMGs they used in Winter and why did German troops use ones they captured. Could it be that both of these rounds are effective in penetrating heavy winter clothing? Sure there are other factors that made these Russian SMGs widely used by both sides, but if their ammunition was not effective at destroying the enemy I don't think they would have been chambered in 7.62 Tok for very long. As we all know the .30 carbine is more powerful than 7.62 Tok so it should be at least as effective.

Anyone have something more that hearsay about the ineffectiveness of the .30 carbine during Korean Winters?

More rounds sprayed in s SMG...Was the Tok SMG used at close range with the Mosin used at longer range? I don't know.

Puffy clothing can make a soldier think he hit closer to C.O.M. than he really did.

 

[garyhan]

There is nothing mythical about failures to stop with the M1 Carbine. The documentation is solid. My father experienced it more than once in the Pacific in WWII, and as a result became insparable from an "03 Springfield. Failures with the 9mm are also well documented. This does not suggest that they are not useful for civilian uses with expanding bullets, nor that they have not frequently been effective in military use.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I have seen men in Viet Nam continue fighting after being hit with the .30 carbine -- that's why I wrapped mine around a tree.

 

[JR47]

I've seen men in Vietnam, barely over 100 pounds in weight, and wearing just a thin shirt, absorb two and three 5.56 rounds, and just flinch at each hit. Should we, then , have wrapped our M16 rifles around trees? Of course, that was when the danged things would fire that many rounds without a jam.

Korea generally had longer distances involved in the "failures" to stop. Add into that the fact that many times the Koreans used human wave attacks, as well. As the wall of screaming humanity surged towards our soldiers, most of them simply aimed at anything moving towards them. Part of the failure to stop may well have been from shooting at unknown distances with the M1 Carbine. They may well have missed the target, or hit peripherally, neither of which will be effective.

I'm guessing that blaming the cartridge was easier than blaming the marksmanship of the shooter.

The NY detective was Jim Cirillo.

 

[Penoe Hunter]

My dad was a platoon leader at Okinawa and his unit was positioned around a quad 50 mount that they were using to repel banzai charges, when during a charge as he was walking up and down the line checking on his guys, a Jap officer took a bead on my dad and came at him with his sword up in the air. My dad shot him in the torso 4 to 5 times with a carbine but he kept coming. My Dad 's buddy a Cajun guy name Luc took the officer down with a blast from a Mod 12 trench gun . Those M1 shots were probably fatal but not a man stopper. My Uncle in the European theater had similar results. By the way I have the sword!

 

[sixgunner455]

Pacific theater Marine I knew used the carbine, loved it. Saved his life more than once.

 

[earplug]

WW11 and Korea war infantry NCO told me about taking shots with his M! Carbine at a North Korean in a fox hole, he thought he was missing, come day light there were 8 dead Koreans.
I served from 1973 to 1996 in the US Army and Colorado National Guard. Served with and talked to WW11 vets, Korean and Vietnam etc. Lots of conflicting stories on various weapons. I'd be more concerned if there were lots of living recipients of various bullets talking trash about each round.