Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Let's stop bad-mouthing the .30 Carbine

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by natedog, Jun 6, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. natedog

    natedog Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,634
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    Many people believe that the .30 Carbine is weaker than the .357 Magnum. This is simply not true. The .30 Carbine has 967 FPE at the muzzle, while the .357 Magnum has 640 FPE at the muzzle. The .30 Carbine is superior.
     
  2. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    muzzle energy is not the end all and be all, else we'd all be shooting .017 caliber guns that shoot a 2 grain bullet at 8000fps.
     
  3. critter

    critter Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,172
    Location:
    southeast AR
    I agree-BUT it depends upon how it is used and what it is used for. When I was in college, an aquaintance had just taken up deer hunting. Having shot a friend's M1 carbine, he was enamoured with it and its great firepower-all 15 rounds you know. He wanted one in the worst way. Kept on forever about the gun.

    Finally, he was told that one of the older guys he worked with was in 'The Big War' and might have an idea on the carbine. When he asked the guy, he was told, " Well, alls I know about it is that hit ain't worth a DAMN for killin' Germans". (He was in Normandy in WWII.) Kinda busted the kids bubble.
     
  4. Marko Kloos

    Marko Kloos Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,587
    Location:
    Enfield, NH
    Yes and no. You're quoting muzzle energy for .30 Carbine out of a rifle barrel, and .357 Magnum out of a handgun barrel. If you shoot warm .357 out of a Marlin lever gun instead, the numbers are much closer. The Magnum also offers much higher bullet weights if needed.

    There's nothing wrong with .30 Carbine, especially when used in a War Baby. You just have to be aware of the ballistic limitations of the cartridge. Out to 200 yards, it's a capable social rifle.
     
  5. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    nate, you're comparing a wrench to a screwdriver. Different tools for different jobs.

    Nothing inherently wrong with the little carbine, just have to accept its power limitations and load with softs. For me it's just a wasted club eating space in the bag. Half dozen of one . . . .
     
  6. BigG

    BigG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    7,081
    Location:
    Dixieland
    Paper bullistics although useful are generally best for people who like to do their shooting with a book or magazine. Army changed the M1 Carbine to full auto once they realized it was pretty lame otherwise. Great little package, good for vehicle carry but not too respectable where the rubber meets the road. M16/AR15 is a much better weapon with all the small-light-compact and cute (to me) attributes but much deadlier when applied as a weapon.
     
  7. Devonai

    Devonai Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    3,855
    Location:
    Connecticut
    I use my M1 Carbine as a home defense weapon. I live in an aparment building in suburbia, so where the lead goes after it passes through the BG (or wall if I miss) is very important. Combine that with short handling and a fifteen round magazine and you have a capable weapon for the short distances of in and around my building.

    But since the energy is around 280 fpe at 300 yards, i.e. less than a .38 Special out of a 2" barrel, I own other WWII favorites, namely an Enfield #1 MkIV and a M1 Garand.
     
  8. Onslaught

    Onslaught Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,006
    Location:
    Georgia
    The M1 Carbine rifle is, in and of itself, one AWESOME rifle. It shoulders well, points well, maintains well, is a DREAM to shoot, etc ad infinitum... The only real drawback I see is the available ammo.

    Sure, there are 1 or 2 hollowpoint offerings, but they aren't available in bulk, and cost as much as most premium rifle cartridges.

    If the .30 carbine round got the kind of attention that the "big 3" got, it would be completely superior to the .357 magnum. But as it is, I would rather defend my home with 25 rounds of Georgia Arms 124gr +p "sheer power plus" than the same company's ".30 Carbine softpoint". Of course, if I WERE defending my home from hoards of zombies, I'd go for the 1050 rounds of Lake City XM193 first :D

    Don't get me wrong, I've owned an M1 Carbine and loved it, but for only $8.99 per 100 rounds of fmj in 9mm, it loses as "cheap plinker" too. It's long gone and I'm saving for a 9mm AR.

    But don't tell my Dad I said any of this... He and his '43 Postal Meter would never speak to me again :what:
     
  9. Sven

    Sven Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,808
    Location:
    Los Gatos, CA
    If you can withstand listening to folks talking about putting $100 saddles on $50 horses, check out my 'modernizing the carbine' threads:


    M1 Carbine - New Prototype Photos, forward scout mount

    Red Dot on an M1 Carbine?

    M1 Carbine - The Original Fun Gun!

    If you really want to have fun, consider getting one of those 5.7mm Spitfire barrels on there - you can use your original mags, as it just .30 carbine necked down to .22...

    5.7mm Johnson or 22 Spitfire Info

    ...might be flatter shooting (?), but Gun Tests had a hard time wrangling much accuracy out of this chambering.
     
  10. Onslaught

    Onslaught Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,006
    Location:
    Georgia
    Sven, I can't wait to see your final product... I just hope you go PG, so I can see what I "coulda had" :)
     
  11. Badger Arms

    Badger Arms Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    3,738
    Location:
    Harnett County, NC
    Who badmouths the Carbine and why? That's like picking on a mule because it can't do what a Draft Horse can do and isn't as smart as a dog. A mule is a mule. If it's designed to do it, it will do it.

    The Carbine was NOT intended to replace the Garand, it was designed to suplement the 1911. It was cheaper to produce, easier to use, more accurate, and offered overall better performance than a 1911 for large numbers of support troops. It is not intended to be used as a primary weapon for front-line troops but rather a self-defense weapon for support troops.

    In these roles, the lightweight, reliable, handy carbine beats both the Garand and the 1911 and gives many modern weapons a run for their money. It's much lighter than the M-4 especially when the Crunchies add all that laser, nitght vision, bottle-opener, holographic crap to it. It has twice the capacity of the Garand and it has greater knockdown (paper) potential than the 1911 -- but that's an apples and oranges comparrison.

    Let's jump back in time and understand what they were dealing with and what they produced. Gas-operated rifles were decade-long development monsters (unless John Moses Browning designed them). The Carbine was developed to be JUST HEAVY ENOUGH for the cartridge it fired and handle better than any other gun of the period. Any soldier could fire it effectively and the bullet had enough punch to get the job done most of the time. I'd call it downright perfect.

    In retrospect, it COULD have had a better gas system; it could have used a faster bullet; it could have had more energy; it could have included a laser sight. Unfortunately for all the critics, the time machine has yet to be invented.
     
  12. Mike Irwin

    Mike Irwin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    7,956
    Location:
    Below the Manson-Nixon line in Virginia...
    Most of the carbine's reputation, or lack there of, comes from using full metal jacket bullets.

    .30 cal. FMJ bullets of any kind generally aren't the best stoppers.
     
  13. Wildalaska

    Wildalaska member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,296
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska
    I keep my folding stock M1 carbine in the corner of my bedroom with a loaded 30 round mag, FMJs and the bayonet attached, so I can charge the bad guys while spraying madly from the hip...

    Bet thats effective enough!

    WildanythingiseffectiveifyashooteminthefaceorenuftimesAlaska:what:
     
  14. David4516

    David4516 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,304
    Location:
    WA State
    Sould we be bad-mouthing the carbine on the aniversery of D-Day?

    Anyway, I think it is a great gun. I learned how to shoot on a M1 carbine and it will always be one of my favorite guns. As far as shooting at the bad guys, I'd take a M1 Carbine over an MP5 any day...

    Sure it's not the best rifle out there, but it is FAR form the worst. You have to keep in mind what it was designed for... all things considered I think it's a great gun.
     
  15. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    I sold my universal and I miss it

    now I want a "good" m1 iver johnson,remington
    maybe a new IAI,do they take bayonettes?(the IAI?)
    I read some where that the reason the .30 m1 didn't kill alot of the enemy during the war was it was used on auto
    & folks just missed...I could be wrong it has happend before,but I
    really like the little rifle & think it could be a good
    urban warfare carbine still available in the commie block
    states like PRK,PRNJ & PRNY.
    plus you can get good 30 round clips and the 15 round seem to feed real good
     
  16. WonderNine

    WonderNine member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,331
    Location:
    always offline!
    Full power .357 out of a levergun barrel is twice the energy of a .30 carbine.
     
  17. 243_shooter

    243_shooter Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2003
    Messages:
    231
    Location:
    NY
    I don't know about it's ballistics....

    But I think it's probably the most fun gun to shoot that I've ever had the pleasure of shooting.

    I may be slightly biased as it was my introduction to centerfire shooting at about 8 years of age.. :D To this day it's still my favorite gun to plink with.

    Leo
     
  18. Glamdring

    Glamdring Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Messages:
    916
    Location:
    MN
    30 Carbine 110 grain bullet @ 1990 fps from 18" brrl

    357 magnum 110 grain bullet @ 2400 fps from 18" brrl

    30 Carbine 110 grain bullet @ 1400 fps from 7.5" brrl (Blackhawk revolver)

    357 magnum 110 grain bullet @ 1600 fps from 6" brrl

    ****

    Or in other words the 30 carbine is to the 357 magnum sort of like the 30-30 is to the 308 Win (almost that big a difference)
    ***

    The 30 Carbine IS weaker than the 357. It is also SMALLER:p (.308" vs .357")
     
  19. winwun

    winwun Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Messages:
    225
    Location:
    Blount County in East Tennessee
    The truth about the Carbine is that it was issued to replace the 1911 which was quickly recognized by the military to be the most inaccurate handgun in the world, and in its original form is still recognized as such by the rest of the world.

    The consensus being that it would be better to hit with the "weak" carbine than to make an almost certain miss with the 1911.

    When it (the carbine) reached priority one zones, it was decided that it should supplement, not replace the 1911, as there was a certain constituency, namely Field Grade Officers, who viewed the 1911 as a fashion accessory, and rarely being in the position to call upon it, never saw the wisdom of carrying an accurate weapon.

    It is indisputable that the carbine will dramatically out-perform the as-issued 1911's both in firepower and accuracy in the same arena.

    That the 1911 begged to be tweaked and toyed with to the extent that it has, in no way speaks contrary to the original performance of the piece.

    The carbine was, and is, a close-range weapon that was, for years, unsurpassed in the job that it was intended to do.
     
  20. Braz

    Braz Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    434
    Location:
    Mukilteo, Wa.
    Great collectors piece,

    But a mini-14 is only a pound and a half heavier in the same small package. It has better range, power and has a large after-market supply of parts and accessories.
     
  21. curt

    curt Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    378
    Location:
    NOVA
    I think that the point natedog was making was that the .30 carbine has more going for it than the .357 from its typical platform does. The point being that noone sneezes at a .357 revolver so why do they consider a .30 carbine a punk?

    There's always someone with a story of a "__________ gun that wouldn't stop a _______" fill in the blanks. Not to denigrate a veteran but while that story is undoubtably significant to him it ain't to the big picture. No doubt there's more than one guy whose M1 dropped somebody like a load of bricks.

    The M1 carbine wasn't changed to full auto to deal with its "lame" performance but to enable it to replace the thompson and grease guns.

    I would seriously doubt that anyone kept score on how many the M1 carbine killed vs anything else, it was a war not a soccer game.

    I'll resist the temptation to defend the 1911 as it really doesn't need my help.

    I guess that does it.
     
  22. BigG

    BigG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    7,081
    Location:
    Dixieland
    Not true. Hard to shoot for a mama's boy who closes his eyes to pull the trigger but capable of minute of bad guy up to fifty yards. Remember the 1911 was too much for many of the city boy draftees who had never fired a weapon in their lives before Uncle Sam introduced them to his weapons in WWII basic training. The farm boys had no such trouble with old Slabsides. The M1 Carbine was a replacement for the PISTOL. What the front line troops did was try to replace the RIFLE with it and found it wanting.

    Yes, it is a LAME cartridge, nowhere near as good as a 30/06, 45 ACP, or even a 357 Magnum.
     
  23. Blain

    Blain member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Messages:
    993
    That's what I keep telling people about the AR!
     
  24. Detachment Charlie

    Detachment Charlie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    543
    Location:
    Venice, FL
    Gotta Comment

    Carbines are cute. And, cute will get you killed.
    The weapon was designed for use in combat, although not originally intended to be a weapon for front line combat troops. True, it did find its way to those guys.
    I was one of those, not in "The Big One," but in the S.E. Asia War Games (Hey, we took the Silver Medal!). Issued one of those cute little M2s, initially I found it pretty handy (It was light and as a combat photographer, I had enough crap to hump anyway.) The first time I NEEDED a weapon, convinced me that cute wasn't gonna cut it. Sorta like shootin a cape buffalo with a .38 Spl. -- it seemed to just p*ss him-off...as if the guy wasn't p*ssed enough and bangin away with an AK. Swapped it out for an old (the Navy didn't have any other kind) Model '97 and lived happily ever after.
    The Carbine is a great little field plinker for soda cans or rats. Good fun. Bad ju-ju as a self defense weapon. Get a decent caliber hand gun and practice, practice practice. Or get a 12 ga., load appropriately and practice, practice, practice.
    Now, where the h*ll did I leave my meds.
    :cuss: :fire: :banghead:
     
  25. Don Gwinn

    Don Gwinn Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Virden, IL
    See, that's what I don't understand. Abandon the M1 carbine, because it's not powerful enough, but go out and get a "decent handgun?" How can that make sense? What do you consider a decent handgun? Certainly not a 9mm, .357, .40, .45 . . . . no way that ammo out of a handgun beats the carbine round out of the carbine. You can argue all day about "but if they were coming out of the same barrel. . . ."
    They're not, and that's the bottom line.

    I can understand that you had experience with the carbine that convinced you not to use it. . . . but then why go to a handgun?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page