The .30 Carbine Cartridge - Why?
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- This is a discussion video in which we address the following questions from Patreon supporter Alex V:
"I was wondering if you could address the choice by the US Army of the M1 Carbine in .30 Carbine, over a full-auto weapon like the Thompson or the grease gun, and in a new and otherwise un-used cartridge, instead of something already in production and in the supply chain.
What practical real world benefit would the .30 Carbine round offer that would offset the nightmare of getting yet another item to troops in all theaters of the war?
Why go to a semi-auto carbine, when the Russians and Germans were proving the effectiveness of full auto SMGs that could also be fired single shot from the shoulder?
While the M1 Carbine is a handy little rifle, it seems like there would have been better options available to the Americans when it was adopted."
/ inrangetv
.45ACP out to 300 yd? Hey that's perfect for artillerymen - it's indirect fire!
Even better for mortar operators, start at 45 degree incline and walk it back.
Lmao it really is. I hit a 2 liter at 100 yards with a 9x18 polish makarov. Took all six rounds and the holdover was rediculous lmao. I wasnt actually aiming more like using the dirt splash to adjust lmao. It really was field artillery with a pistol.
Inhuman Filth that’s weird, thinking that 9x19 almost has no drop at 100
@@basti080891 since you mention it i would like to take my berretta out sometime and try that shot again with both pistols as i did not posses a standard 9mm at the time. The 9x18 cartridge is fairly enemic when compared to 9x19 even though they are simmilar in stature, it would be interesting to see how they stack up side by side.
@@inhumanfilth681 sounds interesting, have no experience with 9x18, but I shot 9x19 out of a cz shadow 2 at up to 200m and at 200 it dropped little more than the height of the front sight, was much less than expected
that rug really ties the room together
I love that movie.
This is the first CZcams comment that made me laugh out loud.
Lars Schröter lol
I wanna pee on it...
El Duderino
You guys handle having two people in front of the camera speaking based on a loose script far better than many other youtubers, e.g. TFB-TV. Neither of you seems to talk over the other, or talk the other down, and you keep disagreements more civil. I definitely prefer your presentation style (no offense to anyone else intended).
For sure, TFB is a close second though.
I think a lot of it comes from genuinely being close friends and knowing each other very well. When you spend that amount of time with someone you can tell when a small movement is an intention to speak or just a small movement. But as mentioned it definitely helps a lot. I'm glad the channel is getting a lot more popular these days. I came from Ian's channel a while back and I'm glad I did. Personally TFB-TV and the like seem to have too many pre-concieved beliefs. We all do, but at least here they feel comfortable disagreeing and giving the counter argument (like AR-15 vs AK strengths/weaknesses) to show that its not a firm truth.
Was going to say they played off each other very well without either seeming annoyed or step on
I view the M1 Carbine as more of a precursor to the modern PDW (P90, MP7) than as a "proto assault rifle." The assault rifle is meant to decrease the weight and increase close range firepower for combat troops, the PDW is meant to increase the firepower of support personnel. The M1 Carbine was definitely designed with the second goal in mind.
True in a sense. It was designed to be a better PDW than the 1911. But it uses an intermediary cartridge unlike the current PDWs making it more of an assault rifle. so i wouldn't really regard it as a precursor to modern PDWs since those tend to be more related to submachine guns in general.
Its interesting how much they have in common considering one has the word "assault" in it and the other has the word "defence" in it
In the military we don't call it an "assault rifle" it just a rifle
The only people I know that call a rifle “assault” are anti 2nd Amendment. Assault is a verb not a noun... please!
@@stephenwatts2879 Like it or not, assault rifle has become the term that military historians use to distinguish rifles like the AK47 and M16 from things like the FAL or G3 (what they call "battle rifles"). If you are using "assault rifle" to refer to a magazine fed, select fire rifle shooting intermediate ammo, you are semantically correct. The big problem is when people use "assault rifle" to refer to "guns that look scary".
If the ordnance board decided to cut the .30-06 cartridge in half, like the Germans did with the 8mm Mauser round, we might have ended up with a round something like the 300 Blackout 70 years ago, and the M1 carbine might have go one to become the first assault rifle......
Or they could have adopted the .276 Pedersen, then gone on to develop a carbine version of the M1, or another design like the Winchester "M2" that was downsized to become the M1 Carbine. (Forgotten Weapons has a recent video on the "M2").
The 7.62x39 came out almost 70 years ago now. I believe the first weapon chambered for it came into production late in World War II. So we wouldn't have beat them to it by much.
It's ordnance...not ordinance, dumbass.
Blaine Edwards - thanks for the correction
You would need a much heavier rifle to handle the extra 20k psi.
The M1 .30 Carbine is one of the most underrated guns and rounds mainly because people approach it from the wrong direction and compare it to their AR rifle and use lousy cheap magazines and don’t keep their gun clean.
Actually it isn't too far behind the AR-15 especially when the 223 is fired from a 14.5 or less length barrel.
I've watched my Dad consistently smack whistle pigs passed 300 with his. Seen a few dogs chasing elk get it at range too. It's not a bad round, especially for the time. My old shooting instructor was a Korea vet. He always told a story that there only guy he ever killed was trying to put a bomb on their elevated water tank. He fired 3 quick rounds and hit him with all three and the guy screamed all the way to the ground and the fall killed him.
My uncle served in Korea at Chosin Reservoir and he went looking to buy an M1 carbine as soon as he got back!
Though considered anemic, the .30 Carbine has twice the muzzle energy of a .357
@Simo688 probably comparing to a lever gun at the same barrel length.
They are very comparable in terms of muzzle energy out of similar length barrels. Your comparing data collected from a .357 handgun more than likely less than 6” compared to a 16”+ m1 carbine. That’s the difference. Literally look at a ruger Blackhawk, they are made in 357 and 30 carbine in similar barrel lengths, as the cartridges are comparable
The muzzle energy and velocities are right in the middle of .357 Mag out of rifles. Depending on the manufacturer .357 is either slightly more powerful or slightly less, so it’s really just a slightly smaller diameter, auto loading version of the cartridge due to high chamber pressure
@@DickBumguscomparing 357 out of a pistol to 30 carbine out of a rifle isn’t meant to be fair or not. It’s simply trying equate about the power of the round. Some 357 out of a rifle have pretty crazy energies.
If you ask a question that makes these guys have to research something, you deserve a medal
The M1 Carbine is one of the most underrated weapons in military history, most definitely in US military history. Arguably the first purpose built assault rifle design (as it was originally intended for and eventually developed into select fire).
My favorite WW2 weapon i've shot for sure.
So ahead of it's time and gets almost no recognition.
Hash-Slinging Slasher sure it does!
I think it was more like a proto-PDW like a Krinkov or a P90
I think the guns great as well, however saying first assault rifle is just wrong. Firstly you have like the stuff Fedarov Avtomat coming decades beforehand secondly it's not an intermediate cartridge so isn't an automatic rifle.
M1 is a great short range rifle. M1 carbine is better than a useless pistol .To compare it to the M1 Garand is comparing apple to oranges. M1 is heavy long distance firearm.
M1 Carbine: an exquisite example of less is more, on a strategic level.
My father was a Corsair pilot in the Pacific during the second world war, on the day peace was declared he took the top round off all his firearms as souvenirs so due to the vagaries of family life I have ended up with 3 of the 6 browning 0.5inch cartridges and the 30carbine round from that day. He saw plenty of combat including allot of troop support on landings through the pacific flying from land bases. The carbine would have hung on the wall of his hut just in case. He also carried a 38 revolver he was RNZAF on an American base so had to be very careful as the Americans all wanted to swap their 1911's for the revolver. I am not a handgun sort of guy so have no idea what that gun was? Any trouble though he was more likely to be running to his plane and its 6 Browning machine guns that mucking around with the carbine.
I have always thought it is fascinating that Audie Murphy used the M1 carbine so much towards the latter part of the war. He used others also of course but switched to the M1 when he could. He was even taking out snipers with his!
On the subject of full auto fire with an M1 Carbine, I too agree that it would be ridiculous. My Grandpa was issued an M2 in Korea (I know there are some slight changes such as stock weight), he said that after his first engagement he never put it back on full auto due to the complete lack of control he had over the gun when running on auto.
the widespread issue of the select fire M2 did effectively muster out the submachine gun in most US Military arsenals, the last hurrah was Vietnam where most infantry units had "that one guy" who 'procured' a WWII era weapon. PM me if you want any pics
Yes please!?
Thomas Maierhoffer I've shot a m1 carbine in full auto. it was very controllable. not mp5sd controllable but the same as any 223 full auto.
+Thomas Maierhoffer - you gotta try it once, though, don't you? :)
ravissary79 do keep in mind, the only other automatic weapon that a soldier might’ve handled that had any similarities to the M2 carbine would’ve either been the Thompson M1928 or the M3 “Grease gun”. Both of which are VERY controllable compared to ANY assault rifle in full auto.
The full auto version of the M1 was called the M2. Both were very effective in the jungle warfare of Korea and Viet Nam at 100 yards or less.
The M1 carbine was very popular with the troops that carried it in combat. I recommend "With the Old Breed " by E.B. Sledge. It was the memoir of a Marine mortarman in the Pacific.
Sledge carried a Thompson though…
I use an M1 with soft points for home defense. It doesn't overpenetrate and it's easy to shoot.
Depends on the ammo. Ball rounds will but soft points or the extreme cavitator wont
Cliff Yablonski you missed where he said he used soft point. If you use a rifle for defense or hunting you should use soft points
Cliff You might like Paul Harrell, he goes into the different types of ammo really in depth
Devin Alden That or some other type of expanding ammo, such as hollowpoints.
Hornady makes some with their polymer tipped hollow points. A good balance for the 30 carbine.
That was extremely informative (and very interesting!
Yeah, I think both the M1 Carbine and STG-44 were well-designed, effective weapons at the roles/jobs they were intended for. The M1 Carbine was a highly welcome weapon for troops in need of a light, smaller, handier weapon than a full-sized rifle--paratroopers in particular. The STG-44 was meant to be the ultimate front-line infantryman rifle, effective up close and from afar, even if it was heavier, more expensive to produce, and too big to be truly practical for other forces.
In short, the M1 Carbine was intended to fulfill a less glamorous, more indirect, and more widespread need than the STG, and did so in a more logistically-friendly way.
Wait, too big? Do you mean for paratroops and tankers and the like, or...?
May your swords stay sharp! (mysss29)
Yes, that was referring to tankers, paratroopers, artillery personnel, and other miscellaneous roles.
This is the best way to describe it.
Well said.
"I hit at 800 meters with my 240 and its open bolt REEEEEEEEEEEE"
How many shots?
@@lukedontknow9283 Yes
@@lukedontknow9283 Bipod tho.
The carbine is fascinating in so much as it was introduced as a light rifle for auxiliary troops in a world of bolt actions. It met the range, ease of use, and weight/handling burden of US military requirements but also provided very high rate of fire with enlarged magazine capacity. Seems like a staggering win when any serviceman can send that volume of fire down range so easily.
Love your videos.
Everyone should read 'To Hell and Back' Autobiography by Audie Murphy, the Most decorated Veteran of WWII.
His favourite weapon was the M1 Carbine. He had lots of kills at 200 yards
Magazine are usually the source of poor reliability. Check to make sure the magazine springs are not upside down, or front of spring is flipped. Also magazines were frequently replaced in field as they were easily damaged. Check followers and feed lips.
M1 Carbines were also frequently used in Vietnam. The lighter weight and smaller size made them popular with S Vietnamese.
Also US advisors (Green Berets).
There is a picture of Stormin Norman Schwarzkopf using a short barreled M1 Paratrooper model in VN.
Later famous for the 1st Iraq war.
As to the effectiveness of 1911 in combat:
Everyone should
Read 'A Rifleman Went to War' by Herbert McBride.
He put down a lot of Germans in the trenches of WWl with his 1911.
There was a great demand for 1911s in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and later conflicts.
Don't forget Alvin York, He killed 7 Germans taking out a Machinegun nest with his 1911 in WWI. (Awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor).
1911s have been preferred backup weapons with frontline soldiers ever since WWI.
I know a Vietnam Lurp Vet who killed 3 Vietcong with his 1911A1 when they ambushed on patrol. His XM177 was taken out of action when a VC bullet went through its receiver. 3 shots 3 kills faster than you can say it. He was also wounded. Unfortunately the other 5 members of his patrol were killed at the same instant during the ambush.
Some Tunnel Rats preferred the 1911A1 While some others preferred the S&W Model 10 .38 Specials.
Soldiers who were not issued 1911A1s figured out ways to get them bribes & trades.
ex trades of an SKS for a 1911A1 were common.
Also trade of an SKS for a XM177.
As you could take an SKS back to the world as a war trophy because they are semi-auto
Love the M1 Carbine!!! Love the concept, execution, and final result. I feel it was way ahead of its time, what with the popularity of PCC's like the Ruger, any AR-variant in 9mm, etc. I also love the nostalgia of it-Band of Brothers, etc.
The .30 carbine had extreme penetration of soft tissue and bone. This is because the bullet was not a spitzer like a .30-06. The bullet would not tumble but go straight through a person. When the GIs thought the chinese clothing was stopping .30 carbine bullets the exact opposite was taking place. The bullets were punching straight through without mushrooming, fragmentation or tumbling. Yes a person would eventually bleed out without medical attention but it might be minutes or hours, not seconds.
The .30 carbine can penetrate both a steel GI helmet as well as a kevlar helmet. The Kevlar at close range.
If you shoot jacketed hollow points I would say it would be effective enough to kill a whitetail deer. Bullet placement is important just like it would be with a larger cartridge.
Vasili Panin He means the tumbling/yawing upon impact with the meaty target, as most bullets do.
there's no better endorsment of the m1 carbine than that our enemies seemed to think they were worth using when captured.
+Burt Hulbert They picked up and used everything they could get. That's not an endorsement of anything. ~Karl
InRangeTV actually the Germans gave them rather good reviews. Probably liked ppsh-41's more.
The development of this cartridge/carbine combination is celebrated by hunters of javelina across the Southwest every year.
Brilliant. Loved this. I mean this topic specifically, but also generally, you guys' down-to-earth conversational presentation style is unsurpassed on all of CZcams.
The 1911 is useless? Wow! Admittedly he fought in WW1, but it's a good thing Alvin York didn't know that. And it's interesting that the m1911a1 continued as the standard sidearm for the U.S. military decades after the M 1 carbine.
It is possible to see in the development and issue of the M-1/M-2 carbine an implied criticism of the M1911 45 ACP sidearm, but that's a mistake - as you point out quite well. The real issue wasn't the effectiveness of the M1911 as a weapon, or its cartridge, but the fact that - for most individuals - it is easier and quicker to master a carbine-length rifle than to become proficient with a combat pistol.
As for the M1911 45 ACP, its greatness is assured and has long-since been proven. If top-tier special ops forces like the Navy SEALS and Mar-Soc still use them with all of the other alternatives which are available today, that's all the endorsement anyone could want.
Reminds me of the scene in the film "We Were Soldiers" where Lt. Colonel Moore (played by Mel Gibson) asks Sgt. Major Plumley (played by Sam Elliott) if he wants an AR-15, and Plumley says "I'll just stick with my pistol" - which is of course his M1911A1. And he does. He fights the whole battle from start to finish using just his side-arm. Heck of an endorsement coming from a legendary soldier like that!
@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Excellently stared sir.
I been in love with the 30 CARBINE since day one I shot it. it's really fun to shoot and a good HD/SD rifle. The 21st century rounds for the carbine like any type of Soft Point or Hornady FTX CRITICAL DEFENSE rds Will do the job, but CORBON DPX RDS Will be good but they tend to not feed right. Also about almost 2yrs now UNDERWOODS AMMUNITION used to make the 30 CARBINE rds but now they do not, alone with that DOUBLETAP AMMUNITION still carry one. All and All best rifle. BLACK RIFLE of military type is too much of over penetration.
Owning a M1 Carbine I will say they are very underestimated. Paper ballistics do not show the cartridges potential. They in proper use and at reasonable distance out to 150 will cleanly take deer size game, I know I have taken more than a few with mine.
It's under rated in more ways than 1.
The .327 Federal Magnum needs some recognition here, too. It's a bit hotter than a .30 Carbine, I think, rimmed, so it works well in revolvers and lever actions. Federal factory 100gr SP clock 1541fps in a 7.5" revolver, and 2221fps out of a 20" lever gun barrel, over my Oehler chronograph. I've reached similar velocities with 115gr hard cast LSWC handloads, no pressure signs. This is near .357 magnum punch, even flatter shooting, less recoil, and reloadable cheaper than .buying 22. My poor .22s have been neglected for a couple of years now. Near .357 energy on a .22 frame, this is just WAY too much fun to shoot. I like it a lot. Working on 122grain and 135grain loads, too. Someone (Rossi are you paying attention?) needs to chamber a Model 92 in this caliber. It would sell like hotcakes and really give the .327 a boost as the ideal wandering around out in the woods and deserts round.
MontanaMountainMen Just look at Busy Siegel's rubout pics. Very effective round.
MontanaMountainMen from experience with my carbine, I completely agree. The muzzle energy is in the same range as a .357 mag and no one complains about those being under powered.
Yea Jessy if you compare a 357 Magnum 110 grain bullet to an M1 carbine, the same weight bullet, 357 magnum is 1,500 muzzle energy and 30 carbine is 967 just so you know, however I would still take the M1 Carbine because what people forget is with 30 round Magazines you can put down range about 750 rounds per minute with that M1 Carbine. Also at distance I still think the 30 carbine is better due to more muzzle velocity from the longer barrel. I own one, I can hit a guy with a 357 Magnum and hit him accurately before he can shoot me. I used to hold it out with one hand and make a can dance in the air, you won't get that type of accurate follow up shot with a 357 magnum handgun. Either of these weapons will kill you pretty dead.
If I needed to travel fast and light and raid something, I would definitely take the M1 Carbine on that mission. For the weight you really can't beat it.
You can carry 300 rounds loaded and move fast, you can't do that with most rifles.
I've had my Auto-Ordnance M1 .30 for about three years. I've fired close to 2.000 of mostly steel case ammo through it. And with all that I've had one mishap. A failure to eject. People can debate the issue of the power of the .30 round all day long but I can tell you who won't be here debating with us. The many thousands of German, Japanese, North Korean, North Vietnamese and Viet Cong who were killed with it.
funny that you mention the north vietnamese apart from the vietcong, as to basically recalling your countrys massakers of women and children. I'd like to pose one question to you though, what is the city of Saigon called right now?
The official requirement for accuracy from the M1 carbine in service from the manual which is most commonly available is to keep all of the projectiles within a target which is drawn as a 36" x 36" box, with an 18" radius arc on top of it, at 100 yards.
So, while a well set up example of the carbine can achieve much closer to rifle-like accuracy, the Army was willing to accept much less accuracy in a general issue situation.
Hence, a functional requirement for a PDW as envisioned by the folks who wrote the requirements, even if the manufacturers were capable of much better performance from the basic design.
"We need a light weight, 300 yard round. What do you have for us Winchester?"
-276 Pedersen "... da fauq man.?.."
From what I know, the Soviets did pretty much the same thing with calibers while designing the 7.62*25 for the tokarev and ppsh. Same with the sks/ak round. Using the same bore size meant easier production using existing tooling, which was more important than designing the perfect bullet
Soviets would cut a Mosin-Nagant barrel in half and use them to make 2 PPSH-41s
Just for public knowledge ...the Reising submachine gun fires from a closed bolt and is very accurate for what it is , but it did weigh 7 lbs. It is not a 300 yard gun though. I have shot mine out to 300 and basically you have to just "lob" the bullet out there. Super accurate, way more than the Thompson.
When my dad served in Europe during WW II at the division HQ level he had an M1 Carbine. When I asked how it handled, it was clueless, as he never fired it for familiarization. So, he had no idea if it would fire if that need arose.
He also recalled that the 1911 pistol was the status symbol of weapon carry among the officers at the division HQ level.
This makes me wonder, if instead of considering this an assault rifle, we consider this the first real PDW?
It seems to fit the requirements of that very close. In weight, calibre and effective stopping power.
I consider the M2 Carbine the US Military’s first assault rifle.
So in a way, the US looked at the intermediate cartridge concept from the pistol calibre upwards instead of the rifle calibre downwards like the Germans did with the M1? That is how it seems to me.
Edit: literally what they just began discussing after I commented.
godspeed joe
Thaiguy27 PR Oh hello there.
+joezzzify yo
And that's why you watch the video before commenting...
My dad was in radio communications in the US AAC in WWII, in the middle east and north africa, and had to learn to use a M1 carbine, even though he was left handed. It worked well enough although he never saw ground combat, had a sharpshooters badge.
Loading .30 carbine for my AMT III as I'm watching this. Bliss!
The .32 Win self loading cartridge was the starting point, not made from scratch. I used to own a WW-II M-2 Carbine with a Para stock! I only sold it along with my registered NFA M-14 NM rifle when Slick-Willy got in and the price of NFA guns went through the roof and used the money for a new Ram-Jet 502 for my trans am. It was the single best sub-gun I ever shot! It was lively as you say, but it was also very controllable with a tight grip and by leaning into it. It was easy to get hits at 100-150 Meters at best. Which at the time I used to win more than a few Sub-gun matches in the 80's and early 90's. Most sub guns are hard to get multiple hits with at 100 Meters! The Carbine was easy to get two hits as much as I missed at 100 Meters.
Many people decry it's caliber and energy, but The Israelis used them for police forces with soft point ammo and were delighted with the results!
My dad had and used a M-1 Carbine in WW-II until he acquired a Garand.
Good comments and thought. I had forgotten that the cartridge came first and the gun was built to it. Karl made a good point about the US absolute fascination with aimed rifle fire. It's become such a part of out tradition that it is insepperable from the Army and the Marines. That's why what was basically a PDW needed to reach out to 300yds. (If I was on a mortar team I would soone drop a few 60mm mortar bombs on him/them rather than trying to pick them off with a carbine). The carbine is for those minutes that you are unassing your mortar and moving to the rear.
If they made an AR chambered in M1 carbine I'd buy one right away. Would be cool having .30 carbine in a gas impingement operated rifle instead of the short stroke piston like the M1 carbine is. Although I have no problem with the original style M1 carbine, I love them.
Alvin York used his 1911 to great effect.
It's the statistics, the average soldier (and average has at least three different meanings that would give the same sort of answer here). Alvin York was maybe a one-in-thousand soldier, and the M1 was for the other 999.
Somehow I missed this video a year ago. Thanks a ton for answering questions about it. The round was so unique, and seemingly developed out of nowhere - there being no obvious other platforms for it leading up to its use - that I've always wondered 'Why?'
Somewhat after WW2, the US "rules" on barrel length changed tor rifles, from minimum 18 inches (like shotguns) to 16", SPECIFICALLY to cater for the barrels on millions of "surplus" M-1 carbines. That was when the "floodgates" opened.
Wildcatters formed .17, .22 and 6mm bottle-necks and the cartridges were fed through "hot-rodded" Carbines and an assortment of small-actioned bolt- guns, like the lovely Sako Vixen.
One early .30 Carbine wildcat was the .22 Spitfire which was re designated as the 5.7mm MMJ by the designer, Melvin M Johnson of Johnson rifle and LMG fame.
It became one of the more popular wildcats. Port pressure was a concern because of the small bore, but there are probably a few still popping away in the woods.
Fast-forward to the "modern" FN toys in 5.7 x 28. Given the head diameter and overall size, I suspect at least one person at FN knew about Johnson's dinky little cartridge.
Final carbine ammo trivia:
The .30 Carbine cartridge was specified from day one to use "non-corrosive' primers. This was essential in a firearm whose gas system is essentially "not user serviceable". There IS "VERY" corrosive carbine ammo out there, pretty much all of it seems to have originated in "the mysterious East". even the headstamps are knock-offs, and, just for giggles, most that I encountered was BERDAN primed. Unsure of some of the Post WW2 Austrian ammo,: Caveat Emptor, and all that.
Enlisted USAF 1958, Basic training, M1 carbine, 1/2 day how it works and disassembly / cleaning, 1/2 day on range where every shot ramped the rear sight up a click, rising string group through target with
enough hits to qualify.....Last time in four years I ever used one....Would rather have had my dads 12 gauge pump....
Good analysis.
On the 'storm rifle' definition, one important aspect I see people forget a lot is that the stock needs to be in-line with the bore to better control the recoil from the full auto, particularly on the move, while you are 'storming' a position.
1. Intermediate cartridge
2. Select fire
3. In-line stock
Great info! The .30 carbine, both cartridge and rifle did fill-in a serious void. We cannot bag on it too much. It is a hot rodded Winchester .351SLR! ( Winchester was too far ahead with the '05, '07, and '10 SLR's. Needed AR style rotating bolt heads, but I digress!!)
As a late 20th and early 21st century cartridge, the .30 carbine is an excellent mid range hunting calibers, in single shot, or Ruger Blackhawk pistol. It can be safely loaded up (to spec) with multiple powders and bullets for handgun hunting all types of game.
My Dad and Uncles, all spoke well of the M1 and M2 carbines, after the War. "Light and lots of bullets", was the take away. YET, when they all were in combat , including Korea, they all carried Garands and M1911's. Go figure!
My M1 has it's rear aperture sight cut off to where it looks like a v shape. I FUCKING LOVE IT!!!
It's a perfect short range rifle with good takedown power. It has more velocity than a .45. I want a SBR using 30 cal carbine.
miduv82
Find an old Enforcer and when the gubmint loosens up on SBRs just ttim the front of a carbine stock to work with the Enforcer’s forend cap.
Great video and question and response. My two cents worth, the M1 Carbine did the
job it was assigned in WWII, very well. An average skill shooter can take an M1
Carbine to an indoor pistol caliber only shooting range and a rifle range with
100+ yard capability and do OK. The same
shooter with a 1911A1 will only perform well at the indoor range at close
ranges. I very much appreciate the discussion framed
with knowledge and experience.
Thanks for drawing attention to something people seem to overlook when they can't figure out the M1 -- the '07 Winchester. That has a lot more to do with "why the M1" than most people realize. This video (like your others) is first rate information.
I personally think the select fire feature is important for identity of an assault rifle since that is the defining feature that separates a military weapon from a modern sporting rifle. Which is important if for no other reason than giving gun grabbers a less provocative term to try and use to use as leverage
But it isn't a matter if tactical implementation, it's semantics
In today's context, yes; in yesteryear's context, no, since nobody at the time fielded a selective-fire self-loading rifle as general issue to all infantrymen.
Paul Lytle Last time I checked, the M16A2 and A4 still have their semiautomatic capabilities, and with not alot of practice you can easily squeeze 2-5 round bursts out of an AK.
Good show. I have heard that this weapon got a bad rep in the Korea war. Not enough knockdown power, ect. I have one and use Hornady higher power rounds in it and I love it.
Google also ". Jim Carillo and the NYPD Stakeout Squad"...with soft points, one shot, near instant Incapacitation .
I used to own one, and your right. With modern defense ammo, it is a fine gun.
Thanks men! I have asked that very question 1000 times or more!
To Hell and Back by Audie Murphy. A real hero using an M1 Carbine.
EFFECTIVENESS...My father carried that in the South Pacific,got rid of his garand because it was too heavy.It kills very easy and helped win WW11..good enough for me.And by the way,it has more penetrating power in tests than a .223/556 round. 110 grain vs 55 grain.
Our Govt took, our M1 carbines off us😣 I owned 3 at one time, very under rated little rifle.
I loved mine for CQB pig hunting 😁 great to about 100 m. 115gr soft nose hollow point, great little weapon. I now use a Win 92 in 357mag, similar role but not as good stopping power as the carbine.
It was the first weapon I qualified with in basic 1961.
Good question, good response. Thank you.
excellent video
I know a guy that's only hunted with the m1 carbine since he was old enough to hunt . I just got my first m1 and can't wait to get some rounds down range .
After world war II they did a study that said the average infantryman usually didn't engage targets beyond 300 yards and what they really wanted was something about the size and weight of the 30 carbine but with better lethality.
And the weapon that gave us the weight of the 30 caliber carbine but with improve stopping power was the AR-15.
It would have been interesting if United States army had come to the conclusion of a spitzer bullet for the 30 caliber carbine
I loved the video. You guys are REALLY knowledgeable.................... right up until the last comment where you insinuated that the M1 wasn't reliable. Really? That has never been my experience. Thanks anyhow.
+JUSTA GUY That has been my experience running the 2Gacm match for over a decade. ~Karl
The Americans didn't know of the developement of the 8mm kurtz, but in the early '30 the Frankford Arsenal TESTED the Terni 1921 select fire rifle, that used an intermediate 7.65x32 cartridge (so a .32 caliber in a shortened Carcano case) that fired a spitzer 134.5 grains bullet at 600m/s.
Power-wise, at 1155 foot-pounds, that cartridge was middle way between the .30 Carbine and the 8mm Kurz, but with a better ballsitic coefficient than both.
Digging the Selous Scouts shirt. The osprey has been my phone wallpaper for 2 years!
.30 Carbine cartridge makes a dandy handgun cartridge: I have a Ruger Blackhawk revolver chambered in .30 Carbine. Muzzle energy not too far below standard .357 Magnum 158 gr. loads fired out of a revolver, mild recoil, and good accuracy. Always thought the .30 M1 Carbine made sense too for tank crews, paratroopers, etc. bridged the gap between a handgun and standard front-line rifles for infantry.
I wonder how the .30 carbine cartridge/M1 carbine would do in a 2 gun match or the Independence day Rifle match?
Oh my gosh! I am so glad this was made. I was just thinking about why they used .30 carbine
Karl, I know you don’t think the M1 Carbine is reliable but I have 2 of them a 1944 Saginaw and a new Fulton Armory M1 Carbine. I shoot the Fulton Armory rifle all the time and have over 2000 rounds through it without a single failure. I have fired the Saginaw 500 or so rounds and there is no telling how many the previous owners have fired it but again, not a single stoppage. With that said, keep the videos coming.
It's all in the quality of the magazine.
this actually answered a lot of my own questions, great video guys!
Owned a M1 in the 80s ,wonderful gun for what it was designed for, if you understand that you'll have no gripes about it , its not a main battle rifle , M1 excellent out to 200yrds and extremely accurate for a gun of that type , I personally had no problems with any of my magazines and never encountered any mechanical problems with it .
This question was something that was wondering in the back of my mind. Really appreciated this exposition.
Some good points made, but I think the most important reason was similarity in production as well as in Training.
Every support troop would have known the M1 Garand from Basic, the M1 carbine is literally just a shrunken Garand, both in Handling and Production. It was always going to be a 30cal gun.
That handy little rifle was shockingly good execution (for the military) of an excellent idea. I still want an Inland: 'shoddy' repro or no, I'd love to have a rifle I could (inaccurately) say was built by Chevy!
And an AutoMagIII chambered in the same .30US, purely for the titanic fireballs at the muzzle.
the first full auto firearm i ever fired was a 30 carbine. that was an interesting day for me. because i also had a bolt action pistol placed into my hands to fire lol an old XP in 223.
A CLOSE-UP of the cartridges would have been nice!
One story I heard was the the carbine was supposed to be issued to mounted troops (i.e. cavalry), which were originally considered for the North Africa campaign, but they found (Hollywood aside) no one could shoot from horseback.
Also, if I am not mistaken, Che Guvera's last firearm (that received a bullet scar to the receiver from the Bolivian Army, making it unserviceable) was an M2, selective fire carbine.
Stories / Myths / Legends abound everywhere.
If you're bringing a new shooter out whitetail hunting there is no better gun or round than the M1 in 30 carbine. Many will say it's insufficient for whitetail but with soft nose ammo it performs great for the task at hand. I have 3 M1s (Thanks Dad, we miss you every day) that get use every deer season here in Michigan and have had freezers filled reliably by these weapons and Federal soft points. The only real problem is modern optics are not really an option but the ghost rings are great to learn iron sights on. I can't recommend it enough, plus it really light and not a burden to hump around the forest all weekend long.
Great discussion. Thank you for bringing up the point of our "definition" of assault rifle being debatable. I would, and do, argue that full-auto is not only not required on an assault rifle but that it is far less effective than double-taps and single, aimed shots for any distance. Cheers and lets talk more about this. :)
@ Randall Randallman - Re: "I would, and do, argue that full-auto is not only not required on an assault rifle but that it is far less effective than double-taps and single, aimed shots for any distance."
Ken Royce, the author of "Boston's Gun Bible" and also a longtime firearms trainer, makes virtually the same points in his book. He argues that "real" firepower is hits per minute, not rounds fired per minute, and he goes on to argue that riflemanship -mastery of aimed, precision rifle fire - has been in decline since WWI. He cites statistics showing that the number of rounds expended per confirmed enemy KIA has been soaring since then, and by Vietnam it reached over 50,000 rounds per confirmed enemy KIA.
The assault rifle was invented - at least in the case of the Soviets and Germans fighting on the eastern front - as the next logical step in the firepower battle going on between the two sides in infantry combat. The MP43/StG44 was the German reply to the massed forces of Red Army tank riders armed with fast-firing SMGs. Once the concept took off post-war, militaries around the world adopted mass firepower as doctrine rather than precision fire as had been emphasized in the past. Royce argues, convincingly IMO, that the pendulum swung too far in that direction, and some correction back the other way is needed.
With reference to intermediate cartridges; to me, 30 carbine is a big pistol round, while 7.92 kurz is a short rifle round. That being said, at the end of the day it's all semantics really, silencer/suppressor tomayto/tomahto.
the M2 Carbine which was really just a slightly modified M1 Carbine with an extended mag and was select fire I would say that the M2 Carbine is an assault rifle as it ticks all the boxes but it doesn't predate the sturmgewehr
M2 Carbine
-Intermediate Cartridge
-Select fire
-Magazine fed
-Useful out to around 300 yards (which is a common thing among most assault rifles)
I recall my father telling me about the time he re enlisted in the army after being discharged from his service in WW2. Just prior to the Korean conflict. He was assigned to converting semi auto M1 carbines to select fire. In fact when push came to shove he traded his M1 Garand for a carbine when the fighting got close. As his unit got overrun by the Chicoms there.
I've always wanted to play with a 30 carbine. Thanks for the info!
A few points: 1 terminal ballistics are terrible with M1 for the same reason the army went from the 38 caliber pistol in the Philippines. It does not STOP an aggressor with Military full ball ammo without multiple hits, 5 to 9 required (per after action intel in Vet Nam). 2 Full auto is way over blown in a hand held combat arm unless used by the guy putting down suppression fire (Squad light machine gunner) or area denial fire (medium or heavy machine gunner). Hit what you shoot at and it is not needed per 2 tours in SE Asia. Which brings up a topic Ian mentioned. The venerable M16 was considered uncontrollable on full auto in 1968 and 2-3 round bursts trigger control was taught. The army even went from full auto to 2 or 3 round burst fire only M16s. Why I can only speculate. If you can't hit someone when you aim at them, maybe you can hold close enough that one of the other bullets will get lucky?
"It does not STOP an aggressor with Military full ball ammo without multiple hits, 5 to 9 required" I saw a program on the History Channel in which a guy was in Iwo Jima and said the same thing. He said that he traded his carbine in for a .45 after hitting a Japanese soldier 5 or 6 times in the torso and said that he would have run right over him if he had been running at him.
D. Lindsey not too experienced on ballistics but what a lot of people seem to be saying is because the bullet isn’t a Spitzer like the 30.06 or more modern 5.56 it tends to easily penetrate and not tumble within the body, idk how that applies to the .45 tho
Terminal ballistics for the .30 carbine are almost identical to .45
Velocity causes larger wound channels than the bullet itself, so the increased velocity of the .30 makes up for it's smaller size
The 1911 was a perfectly fine side arm. But it was intended as a weapon to be used when all else fails. The Thompson submachine gun, in standard trim, weighs 12 pounds. But the M1 carbine was a fairly confident cartridge. As a matter of fact when the Germans capture groups of American gi's, their preferred weapon to borrow that we used was the M1 carbine.
During the development of the M1 carbine they actually experimented with the same cartridge necked down to 25 caliber. It was an interesting concept.
The 30 carbine was never a pistol cartridge. In actual description is it's an abbreviated rifle cartridge because they maintained 30 caliber. That also means that the 30 carbine may very well have been the world's first assault rifle when they designed it to be select fire capable. Although it was not issued that way till later in the war. At least that's my understanding.
I always wondered what would have happened if they made the 30 carbine round into a spitzer projectile rather than a round nose projectile. Could it have extended its effective range? Increased lethality? Or maybe the opposite?
They did drop with (a few) full auto carbines in June 1944 (or that is what the vets claimed in the autobios I read, Hell, I was not there). They were proto-types of the M2 from what I gather and they performed well. The one account I remember was that it handled just like the M1a1, just with select fire. I can only imagine it was spray and pray, and I would most likely hurt myself with a 30rnd clip. ;-)
I have an M1 Carbine chambered in .22 Spitfire (Johnson)
ISREALIS KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING!
That Automag III though....
The best weapon to come out of WWII you can't beat it for its ease of use and it's easy to carry, there's even photos of German soldiers carrying them in the field, it's a soldiers weapon lightweight and easy length....a 15 round magazine was nice at the time also and even true today
I've always looked at the M1 carbine as the original ASSAULT RIFLE...
M1 Carbines were issued to officers and some non-coms in WWII. My dad (staff sergeant) was issued a carbine when he was sent to Germany. He said he immediately 'upgraded' to a Springfield. His favorite was a B.A.R. though.
More carbines were produced than the Garand.
Fingers crossed 🤞 you all can one day be able to do a video on the guiberson periscope rifle
Grate history info. This info can be found in the US Cal. .30 Carbine publication by the NRA. Thank you Spaceman Moe
Ummmm I have a .30 with a scout mount and scope and hit a man size target (18" plate) at 300 yrds while on a rest all day long! Standing I can do it more or less 70% of the time or better. .30 is no joke in the hands of someone capable.
TiredOfApathy
Great Comment. Ditto. Mine are in the Choate solid PG stock with the Ultimak upper handguard and red dots. I put sling & bipod studs on the bottom centerline and got rid of the bayo mounts as well. I lapped the tight spot (at the shrink-fit gas block) out and both of them are amazing shooters. On the 300 yd line of the KD range at Cp Swift, from prone with a Harris bipod I stayed on a steel E silhouette for a 30 rd mag full as fast as I could break the next shot. All hits. SQUAD AUTOMATIC CARBINE, Y’ALL! Before my first agency finally got ARs, I carried one of these hot rodded Carbines with a handload of Hornady 110 gr JHP over H110 and never felt undergunned. One of my sons took his first deer with that Carbine and load. Full penetration, destroyed both lungs & the heart. Same load is in those two Carbines as our home defense rigs.
I think the m2 was select fire. Would that qualify as an assault rifle.
I understand some infantry chose the carbine over the Garand, and that makes sense in hedgerows and jungle warfare
By the way, have you looked up ballistic range tables for the 45? A rifle barrel produces about 1000 fps for a 230 g fmj bullet with a .195 coefficient. Speer # 11 says with 100 yd zero at 50 yd 4.1" high, at 100 yd 0, at 150 yd 8.1" low, at 200 yd 40.7" low but we have 'flip sight technology' and a 150 yd zero yields 50-5.9 high, 100-9.7 high, 150-0, 200-21.2 low still going over 825 fps. Pretty good for a man stopper cartridge over 100 years old. I think I had rather have one of those.