Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by JCooperfan1911, Jun 6, 2021.
Gun Review: Ruger New Model Blackhawk in .30 Carbine - The Truth About Guns
A friend bought one of the Blackhawks in 30 carbine.
That sucker is ear splitting loud
Pistol caliber carbines are one of the hottest markets today, and the Carbine, and it’s round, are exactly that.
Its ammo price would drop if more guns were chambered in it.
It's chasing .375mag muzzle performance at 100yd, too.
And, that 5# weight and near center balance is a big deal in your hands. Shooting one side by side with a 6.5# .300bo can be an eye opener.
15 and 30 round excellent Korean made mags, $12 and $14, also in stock.
Exactly. Prices for ALL rounds are severely bungled right now due to the craziness. Before the nuttines, .30 Carbine was trending right at .45 ACP prices. Now it is right in line with 9mm. To say it is markedly expensive over other rounds is patently false.
The thing is that 30 carb ammo was markedly more expensive than 7.62x39 and 223/5.56 ammo which are real rifle calibers. I know I wasn't willing to pay more for less just to plink with.
I guess any gun who’s cartridge is more expensive than those rounds aren’t worth owning? Give me a break.
I know I didnt really bother with the Carbines back in the 80's and 90's when they were still cheap (wish now that I had, but thats water under the bridge), mainly because the ammo was a lot more expensive than most of the others that I was into at the time.
I also was more into 7.62x51 and 30-06, and wasnt real impressed with the Carbine round in general.
As was mentioned, the 7.62x39 and 5.56 are a bit of a different league than the Carbine.
Its not that they arent worth owning, just that if its going to be your only gun, it wouldnt be my first choice. As much as I like my Carbines, for me, they really are basically plinkers (not that I would be too uncomfortable if it were all I had), and if I didnt load for them, and barring what we have going on now, the ammo would still be on the salty side compared to some of the others.
I think too, some of us look at things a bit differently, and see that some guns, while still very much viable, are still not the best choice of whats available. If youre looking for something to cover most things, and its going to be youre only gun, the Carbine really isnt a realistic choice.
If youre looking for something to supplement your fun, and enjoy a piece of history, its a great choice.
I know I’d rather hear a 30 carbine indoors without ears on (quite likely in a home defense scenario) than I would a 223, 7.62x39 or even 357 magnum
I have recently found PPU made .30 Carbine at $32 a box of 50. I bought some Remington made .30 Carbine at $44 a box of 50. I did not buy much because I expect this panic to pass as other panics have passed.
Per military standards both the 5.56x45 and 7.62x39 are NOT rifle cartridges, they are classified as intermediate cartridges. 7.62x51 (308), 30-06, 8mm Mauser, 303 Brit, 7.62x54 are rifle calibers.
And yes if you go by ballistics, the 30 carbine is still a viable caliber. I would be happy if my father in law ever decides to give me his M1 Carbine and Ruger 30 cal Blackhawk.
Keep in mind there are very few firearms other than the M1 that are chambered for the 30 carbine. That versus the number of firearms chambered for 223 or 7.62x39.
That makes the price of 30 carbine higher.
Anyone that has EVER held a carbine would have to agree that it feels wonderful in the hands. Also, if carried 5 miles, it still feels great. Any soldier can tell you that you carry your weapon around WAYYYYYY more than you shoot it. Shooting aside, would you rather carry a M1 Carbine or a Garand? I know what my answer is.
The goal of a military small arm is to WOUND people more than kill them. Wounding hopefully takes several people out of the fight because they are carrying the wounded guy. Based on that, the M1 Carbine is a very viable weapon. It will wound effectively out to 300 yards, which is what the military had one leg of the original flip peep set to.
If we were talking about a repeating handgun (not an AR15 playing handgun) that shot at 1900 plus fps with a muzzle energy of nearly 1000 ft lbs AND could hit 150 yard targets easily and repeatedly, we wouldn't be discussing viability. We would be discussing how GREAT it was.
I am not a partisan hack in this. I don't own a M1 Carbine. I have handled them and like them lots, but never bought one. I also have a M1 Carbine level load for my Marlin 32-20 carbine because I like that kind of easy carrying gun and that ballistic level. Easy to carry, cheap to shoot if you hand load, lot's of shots per pound of powder and lead, rapid accurate fire, and pretty good results at a pretty good range.
Thankfully, we’re not at war here.
Aside from a designated hunting gun, isn’t tossing lead around at the range what we mostly do?
If they weren't adequate for certain self-defense scenarios, then one or more Israeli firms probably wouldn't issue them for personal security.
In remark #50, I included that photo of a street in Israel, plus the Carbine (?) with the Ruger 44. Did the M-1 Carbine's size, weight etc inspire the 44's concept?
I'd rather have the 30 carbine unless it's danger close. The 30 will easily outrange the 44.
In the 80s when they were cheap surplus I could easily see using one and my family did but now the nostalgia and success stories on the battlefields of WW2 and Korea has driven the price of originals crazy as shown by the fact that Midway sold out in a couple hours and the cheapest one was $1150 so I'm leaving my 5 digit Inland in the safe for the grandkids to inherit. I've considered reproductions but are nearly as bad now.
Separate names with a comma.