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

M1 30-06 Garand vs. .30 Carbine

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by bushmaster1313, Apr 9, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bushmaster1313

    bushmaster1313 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,591
    Location:
    Peoples Republik of New Jersey
    Who got which, why and when.

    What type of punch does the carbine deliver?
     
  2. WNTFW

    WNTFW Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,906
    I have heard a lot of .30 carbine comparisons to .357 Magnum

    You can do more with the Garand in some respects. I would get it first.

    It really depends on what your trying to accomplish.
     
  3. longdayjake

    longdayjake Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,605
    Location:
    Genesee, ID
    They are two totally different rounds. The only thing similar is the diameter of the bullet. I own both and like both but for different reasons.
     
  4. nbkky71

    nbkky71 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    713
    Location:
    Davidson, NC
    I've got a few M1 rifles that I've acquired over the years. I bought my first one after I shot in a JCG match with a borrowed rifle. Most have been purchased through the CMP.

    5.9mil SA (my JCG match gun)
    5.8mil SA (my .308 NM gun)
    5-digit SA (mid Dec, 1941)
    6.09mil SA (luck of the draw from the CMP)

    I currently own one M1 carbine, which is an early Inland. Bought it from the CMP a few years ago at the Creedmoor Cup matches. It only comes out of the safe once a year to shoot at the CMP carbine matches at Camp Perry.

    The carbine launches a 110gr bullet at 1900fps. Performance is generally equated to be be on par to a .357magnum
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2010
  5. 1KPerDay

    1KPerDay Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    12,692
    Location:
    Happy Valley, UT
    Get both. Then get more.
     
  6. bhk

    bhk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Wooded acreage in rural midwest
    The .30 carbine has 967 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. .357s out of handgun run 400 to 600 ft. lbs. .44 magnums out of a handgun run 740 on up to maybe 1000 ft. lbs.

    Energy doesn't necessarily translate to killing power, but it does give us a basis for comparison. A .30 carbine with good expanding bullets is nothing to sneeze at!

    The Garand is in a totally different catagory and has much, much more power. It is also much heavier, longer, and has a smaller magazine capacity (8 vs. 15/30). It really depends what you want to use the firearm for. The carbine is a great HD weapon, plinker, and farm gun. Women and kids also find it a joy to shoot.
     
  7. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    I have never owned a Garand, though I probably will at some point later on (it is pretty low on the list). The Garand is just about the most useless rifle one can own IMO. It is heavy and bulky, so it is unsuitable for easy carry in the field. It makes a pretty good heavy plinker, was an exemplary battle rifle, and has tons of history. The M1 Carbine is pretty much the antithesis of the Garand; it is light, and extremely easy to carry. It is a great little plinker and magnificent rifle for hiking, camping, and HD/SD, et al. It also served its country well, is very reliable (though not as accurate or powerful), and also has loads of history. As you can probably tell by now I bought the carbine first and am glad that I did.

    :)
     
  8. USSR

    USSR Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    8,452
    Location:
    Finger Lakes Region of NY
    Hmmm, never let the lack of experience with something, get in the way of a d@mning opinion.;)

    Don
     
  9. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    I didn't say I didn't have experience with one...just never owned one. What do you think they are good for, other than just being a fun target rifle (besides who said that's a bad thing)?

    :)
     
  10. Marlin 45 carbine

    Marlin 45 carbine Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Messages:
    2,477
    Location:
    South-Western North Carolina
    my dad was in the first wave to hit Pelelui, a Seabee and they were issued Carbines as they weren't 'attack' troops just had to be ready in case of a charge by the enemy. the Marines had some attached to them for suppresing fire towards the snipers.
    they were tasked with putting an ammo dump together then a field aid station. after that they had a little rest/water time and many of them got Garands from wounded or killed Marines so they could shoot at the snipers themselves which the Carbine just wasn't capable of doing a decent job. evidently it was regarded as a good defense weapon though as some kept them handy in foxholes at night.
     
  11. bernie

    bernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    558
    Location:
    The great state of Arkansas
    At the risk of thread drift, I actually use an M-1 Rifle as my primary walk around rifle on the farm when I need something larger than a rimfire. While heavy, it actually does not seem as heavy as what it really is when I carry it. I grasp it around the receiver and it carries fine from it's point of balance for me. The sights also allow me to reach out and touch critters like coyotes and beavers at distance.

    Now this is just my opinion. This is not to disparage anyone, but to state what another contemporary purpose for an M-1 Rifle is.
     
  12. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,506
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    Usually, officers and "rear echelon" people (who would be support troops not primarily involved in actual fighting) got the carbine while infantry and marines and other frontline personnel got the Garand.
    The carbine was favored by many who liked small easily handled weapons. A marine who served in the Pacific refered to the M1 Carbine as "the ace weapon of the war." In the Pacific, where a number of battles were fought in close circumstances, the carbine's light 5 pound weight with its fifteen round magazine proved effective and versatile.
    In Europe, where it seems a lot more longer ranged battles were fought, the garand seemed to win preference for its ability to reach out and hit distant enemies where the .30 Carbine round just couldn't hack it. A number of soldiers disparaged the carbine because of the lower power of the round, but when used as intended for closer encounters it worked pretty well.
     
  13. USSR

    USSR Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    8,452
    Location:
    Finger Lakes Region of NY
    I've got 9 highpower rifles, of which only 1 is used for hunting for 3 weeks each year during deer season. So, I will argue that a gun that is a fun target rifle, is simply fulfilling it's primary role.

    Don
     
  14. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    43,267
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    My pet Weatherby, all dressed up to hunt, weighs the same as a Garand. I toted Ol' Pet on many and many a multi-mile walking hunt over some thirty years of happiness. Short hunts were three to six miles; many were twelve to fifteen.

    My old Garand works real good. So does my bring-back Carbine of my father's...
     
  15. Birddog1911

    Birddog1911 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Peyton, CO
    This is an excellent point, Art. I think Maverik either forgot that, or if he hunts, must use an ultralight. 9.8 lbs isn't heavy. My Sharps buffalo rifle was heavy. My M1A dressed with scope, mount, and what not was heavy. The Garand isn't that heavy.
     
  16. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    It is more than just the weight (though I do find it a bit excessive for most hunting); the rifle is a bit bulky, difficult to scope, and finicky to load for. Same goes for SD, and hiking/camping. I'm not going to attempt to argue that it is impossible to use for any of the above, but it would be near the bottom of my list. Don't get me wrong I like the M1 Garand, just don't have much use for one.

    :)
     
  17. Birddog1911

    Birddog1911 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Peyton, CO
    I'll give you that it isn't suitable for HD; it's a dang 30-06 battle rifle for Pete's sake! But given anything out of doors, and I would argue with you on self defense.

    Of course, my go to rifle for anything, other than home defense, is my M1A. The carbine gets top billing for a HD rifle. Did you see the pics of mine, Maverik? ;)
     
  18. gbw

    gbw Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    621
    Location:
    Deep South
    I've owned both for many years, a mint Standard Products carbine that I think is original, and a pre-war Winchester (receivered) mix master Garand also in excellent condition. The Garand is great and I've fired thousands of rounds through it. The carbine is far lighter, handier, more fun, much lower recoil and noise, is very accurate to 150yds or more, easier on brass and less expensive to shoot i.e. you can shoot more.
     
  19. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    Yep, it sure has a good looking stock. Are you sure it's original; I don't see how that could have made it through WW-II, Korea, and Vietnam in as good of shape as it is; perhaps just refinished? Either way, great lookin' carbine...don't paint it. ;)
     
  20. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    47,955
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    I own a couple of each.

    You can't compare the 30.06 against the .30 carbine fairly since the M1 carbine was intended as an "improvement" over a pistol to give support troops more engagement range as opposed to a lighter alternative to the Garand.

    Quality .30 carbine ammo out of a good M1 Carbine will perform much like a .357, which is not even in the same class for range or energy as the much more powerful 30.06.
     
  21. nathan

    nathan Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,067
    THe quintessential rifle is the Garand . But it s nice to have a carbine for the family . THe wife and kids can easily handle the recoil . If worse come to worse, if the wife or kids has to protect themselves without you in the home, the carbine is perfect .
     
  22. Onmilo

    Onmilo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    Illinois`
    Asking for a comparison of the 30 Carbine to the .30/06 is somewhat similar to asking to compare the .243 to the .375 H&H

    Both had their place, their are advocates and detractors of both.

    My opinion on the matter is the M1 Garand is a superior battlefield cartridge and the .30 Carbine is an excellent urban combat cartridge.

    Like I said, they both have their place.
     
  23. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    43,267
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    My first centerfire, back when I was a kid, was a 1917 Enfield '06. I was grumping about the sights and having some difficulty in hitting jackrabbits out beyond a hundred yards. My uncle gave me "that look" and commented, "When I was your age, anything inside of 300 yards belonged to me." He was talking about the '03 Springfield--which had a shorter sight radius.

    I crawled back under my flat rock and took a big dose of Shut Up.

    Anybody who hunts with an iron-sight rifle oughta do as well with a Garand as with any other semi-auto. Heck, most any other rifle, period.

    Around the house? Civilian usage? Gimme the Carbine...
     
  24. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    My dad entered the war effort in late 1942, and was shipped to the South Pacific as a heavy mortarman in Oct-Nov42. He trained on a 1917 Enfield at a small fort in Texas, and was later issued an M1 Carbine because he was rear of the infantry, and had to carry 40 some pounds of mortar, ammo, or baseplate, etc. They issued the carbine to lessen their loads, and because they were not front line combatants. He had no faith in the carbine, probably due to it not feeling as potent as an M1, and because of infantry troops preferring the M1 Garand to the Carbine. He quickly dumped the Carbine, and retrieved an M1 Garand from a deceased GI, and carried it all though Borneo, the Phillipine campaigns, and Occupational Japan for several months. I used to wonder when he said he could not hit the side of a barn witht the Carbine. I now have two carbines, and they will not only hit the barn, but can put the round through the window of the barn at 100 yards, and maybe even 200 yards. I think he just adopted an "I don't like it" attitude towards the carbine, and didn't want to take chances with his life with it. He did fire his Garand from the hip one time, and killed a Jap at about 15-20 yards that had been lying with a small number of dead enemy along a roadway (probably laid out by the advancing infantry). Dad thought something did not look roght when he passed the lying dead, and turned to see one getting up with a rifle. Apparently, the "live" one was a little dryer looking than the others; he had been laying under a poncho or tarp, and that is what triggered my dad's attention (almost subconsciously). I am here today because dad shot first. He said that was the only guy he can remember killing with the rifle, but he had seen, many times, the hundreds, or maybe thousands, they had killed with the mortar after the battle (81mm mortar).
     
  25. amd6547

    amd6547 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,773
    Location:
    North Coast of OHIO
    They are both great weapons for different purposes...The Garand would be a useful addition to our troops even today in Afghanistan, where ranges are long, and an eight shot capacity wouldn't be a problem.
    The carbine makes one of the best HD weapons ever...that is what I use my CMP Inland for, even though I also own an AR and an AK...I prefer the lighter fast handling carbine.
    While the carbine had plenty of detractors, it also had its wartime fans...like Audie Murphy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page