M1 Carbine shooter wins National Match with it.

[Rattler]

Seems the new M1 Carbine from Inland is pretty accurate.

http://www.thetacticalwire.com/story/d420d8c7-e684-4958-8f4a-d152b67ab2d3

 

"Inland Carbines are so faithful to the original WWII carbines that the barrel and other parts are marked to prevent them being used to upgrade original carbines for unscrupulous sale to collectors.

The Inland carbine is inherently more accurate than its WWII counterparts thanks to advanced barrel manufacturing and materials. The Inland Carbine is not your granddaddy's carbine--though it looks identical."

Edited September 25, 2018 by Rattler

[GreeneHunter]

Interesting !

[Pygmy]

It would be very challenging to shoot good scores at any distance over 50 yards with an M1 carbine...

Long range accuracy is not that weapon's forte...Portability and firepower IS , at the expense of accuracy and stopping power...

An old ( now departed) friend of mine served in Korea during the Korean conflict...He was a lineman and carried a carbine, but he said if he had ever got into a hot combat area he would be trying hard to swap it off for a Garand....

[Rattler]

It appears Inland has made great strides in the accuracy department with their new M1 replica using modern metals and machining.  The M1 has much more power, accuracy and distance than the military pistols it was designed to replace.  Nobody would argue with a .45 auto within it's range.  It's a matter of selecting the right tool for the job.  The M1 carbine served the South Vietnamese military well in hot combat when the distance was inside of 50 yards.  Many LEO agencies also used them to great effect in firefights for years.  Sure there are better carbines today, but the Thompson is still considered effective, even in semi auto.  The M1 Carbine is still a winner if you respect it's limitations.

[Pygmy]

I didn't mean to   bad mouth the carbine....It did a great job at what it was designed for...Many hundreds of thousands  of very dead  enemy combatants would attest to that, if they could....

[Gencountyzeek]

My grandfather was in korea and wouldnt carry a carbine. He only wanted a Garand. They are fun to plink with though.

[Pygmy]

4 hours ago, Gencountyzeek said:

My grandfather was in korea and wouldnt carry a carbine. He only wanted a Garand. They are fun to plink with though.

The .30 carbine round is relatively underpowered...In Korea, at often subzero temps and shooting at people wearing heavy clothing, the fault was compounded, and there were many accounts of  enemy soldiers taking multiple hits with a carbine and staying on their feet... With the Garand, chambered for 30-06,  it only took one solid torso hit and down goes the gook...

Hehehe..Reminds me of a song lyric, to the tune of " I'm Movin' On"....

" There's a thousand gooks coming through the pass, playin' burp gun boogie all over my ass

I'm movin' on....I'll soon be gone...

Well it ain't no joke when your M1's broke, I'm movin' on..."

 

[Hunter007]

1 hour ago, Pygmy said:

The .30 carbine round is relatively underpowered...In Korea, at often subzero temps and shooting at people wearing heavy clothing, the fault was compounded, and there were many accounts of  enemy soldiers taking multiple hits with a carbine and staying on their feet... With the Garand, chambered for 30-06,  it only took one solid torso hit and down goes the gook...

Hehehe..Reminds me of a song lyric, to the tune of " I'm Movin' On"....

" There's a thousand gooks coming through the pass, playin' burp gun boogie all over my ass

I'm movin' on....I'll soon be gone...

Well it ain't no joke when your M1's broke, I'm movin' on..."

 

Dont care always like that gun even with its faults  it was designed to be light and portable and something with better performance then just carrying a handgun . 

I dont believe storys  of the enemy just walking off being shot by one,  yea sure maybe 20 feet  before they dropped dead probably all the same just not as fast as a 3006 .

 

 

Edited September 26, 2018 by Storm914

[wildcat junkie]

It just about had to be a dead calm day as the 110 gr projectile for the M1 Carbine has a horrible BC (.170) and is affected a lot more by wind than either the 7.62 (.462) or 5.56 (.272) match bullets.

[Rattler]

I believe the match being discussed is only for .30 caliber carbines.

  

".30 caliber carbine national match"

 

Is there any other .30 caliber carbine that could be used?

 

[airedale]

Just some food for thought on this rainy day.

I find it interesting how two relatively short range cartridge's ballistic perspectives as man stoppers are judged.  The 30 M1 carbine is held in such low esteem and yet on the other hand another cartridge, the 9MM is thought to be adequate as a manstopper.

Below are approximate ballistics comparing the two

The 30 M1 fires a 110 gr bullet at about 2000 ft per second at the muzzle.

Muzzle energy is 977 ft lbs, 50 yds is 733 ft lbs and at 100 yds 541 ft lbs

The 9 MM fires a 115 gr bullet at the muzzle at almost 1200 ft per second

Muzzle energy is around 400 ft lbs, 50 yds is around 280 ft lbs and 100 yds is around 240 ft lbs

So while neither set the house on fire the puny 30 M1 delivers more power at 100 yds than the adequate 9 mm Luger at the muzzle.

Al

[Rattler]

People compare rifles to other rifles and handguns to other handguns.  However, carbines were conceived as defensive weapons, not offensive weapons.  They were meant to be better than handguns for defensive purposes.

A Garand is better for offense, but compared to an M-60, it's on the light side.

 

[Hunter007]

4 hours ago, Rattler said:

People compare rifles to other rifles and handguns to other handguns.  However, carbines were conceived as defensive weapons, not offensive weapons.  They were meant to be better than handguns for defensive purposes.

A Garand is better for offense, but compared to an M-60, it's on the light side.

 

I think if your fighting in a city or thick jungle brush or going in and out of buildings clearing rooms a light carbine like the m1 would be just as good or better then the 30-06 Garand.  All depends on where and when the enemy happens to show up really .

Being shot is being shot . 

[wildcat junkie]

7 hours ago, Rattler said:

People compare rifles to other rifles and handguns to other handguns.  However, carbines were conceived as defensive weapons, not offensive weapons.  They were meant to be better than handguns for defensive purposes.

A Garand is better for offense, but compared to an M-60, it's on the light side.

 

A Garand fores a 30-06 cartridge, the M-60 7.62 NATO which is a lower pressure version of the 308 Win.

 

Aside from rate of fire, the Garrand has more energy and more range than the M60

[wildcat junkie]

18 hours ago, Storm914 said:

 

I dont believe storys  of the enemy just walking off being shot by one,  yea sure maybe 20 feet  before they dropped dead probably all the same just not as fast as a 3006 .

 

 

The M1 Carbine fires a 110 gr FMJ bullet. Not a lot of tissue damage from that. Unless the central nervous system, heart or major arteries near the heart were punctured, it could take several seconds, perhaps a minute for the combatant to go down. He could do a lot of damage in that time. Imagine how far a deer would run when hit with that FMJ bullet through the  back of the lungs or liver.

[Hunter007]

1 hour ago, wildcat junkie said:

The M1 Carbine fires a 110 gr FMJ bullet. Not a lot of tissue damage from that. Unless the central nervous system, heart or major arteries near the heart were punctured, it could take several seconds, perhaps a minute for the combatant to go down. He could do a lot of damage in that time. Imagine how far a deer would run when hit with that FMJ bullet through the  back of the lungs or liver.

Same kinda of stuff is said about  223  depending on the situation how  fast something dies may or may not matter .

If someone is really close m1 with . (967 ft⋅lbf) will drop them like a rock  that is more then  double what a 9mm  or 45  put out in energy .

Come now It's the military they no there stuff  there not going to issue a weapon that is not pretty darn lethal . 

Btw any bad shot no matter what you use will result in a slower death even with 30-06 I no guys that have taken bad shots with 30-06 and the deer ran a mile  before recovery .

Markmanship is always  more important then power  in the end you could argue the light recoil and faster follow-up shots  because of it would make m1 better for most situations especially at close range  

 

[Rattler]

The Garand also fires a FMJ bullet, just heavier and faster.  The big disadvantage of the Garand is the clip.  They only hold 8 rounds, cannot be topped of when half full and make noise when they eject from the rifle when empty.  The rifle can also really tear up your thumb when reloading in battle.

The M14 was a big improvement over the Garand with it's detachable magazine.  The M1 Carbine also used a detachable 15 round mag, which was an advantage over the Garand in close quarters combat.

For home defense, I'd have to say the M1 Carbine would be a better tool than a Garand.

[airedale]

If I were to use the 30 M1 for hunting I would be buying ammo if available or handloading soft point expanding bullets which would improve it's terminal performance quite a bit.

Al

Edited September 27, 2018 by airedale

[Rattler]

I've taken a few deer with mine.  I used soft points and kept the shots under 50 yards and every deer dropped to a single shot.  Heck, years ago people took a lot of deer with rifles shooting the .32-20.

[Hunter007]

6 minutes ago, Rattler said:

I've taken a few deer with mine.  I used soft points and kept the shots under 50 yards and every deer dropped to a single shot.  Heck, years ago people took a lot of deer with rifles shooting the .32-20.

Good markmanship trumps  the bullet or gun used every time . 

[wildcat junkie]

22 hours ago, Rattler said:

I've taken a few deer with mine.  I used soft points and kept the shots under 50 yards and every deer dropped to a single shot.  Heck, years ago people took a lot of deer with rifles shooting the .32-20.

I was referring to the FMJ military ball that would have been used in the Korean war. After penetrating thick layers of 1950s era cold weather clothing that the Chinese were wearing, there wouldn't  be a lot of energy left for immediate man stopping trauma with a non expanding FPJ  30 cal 110gr bullet.

Edited September 28, 2018 by wildcat junkie

[wildcat junkie]

On 9/26/2018 at 11:02 PM, Storm914 said:

Same kinda of stuff is said about  223  depending on the situation how  fast something dies may or may not matter .

 

 

223 is a whole different ball game. with FMJ bullets it can be more deadly than the 30-06 loaded with the same type projectile.. The light bullet traveling at 300+ fps is more likely to tumble or otherwise make an erratic, larger wound cavity than a heavy 30 caliber bullet. Again the original posts were about man stopping capabilities military ammo.

[wildcat junkie]

On 9/27/2018 at 12:00 PM, Rattler said:

The Garand also fires a FMJ bullet, just heavier and faster.  The big disadvantage of the Garand is the clip.  They only hold 8 rounds, cannot be topped of when half full 

 

What was the first "battle rifle" that could have the magazine topped off in a "ready to fire" conduction?

Ready to fire is defined as a closed bolt with a cartridge in the chamber.

[Hunter007]

2 hours ago, wildcat junkie said:

223 is a whole different ball game. with FMJ bullets it can be more deadly than the 30-06 loaded with the same type projectile.. The light bullet traveling at 300+ fps is more likely to tumble or otherwise make an erratic, larger wound cavity than a heavy 30 caliber bullet. Again the original posts were about man stopping capabilities military ammo.

223 being more deadly then 30-06 in FMJ never heard that one before like to here what buckmaster has to say about that or others that have played around with both   have to say I find that statement hard to believe. 

Not saying you are wrong just dont know have not seen anything about that .

 

Edited September 29, 2018 by Storm914

[Rattler]

5 hours ago, wildcat junkie said:

What was the first "battle rifle" that could have the magazine topped off in a "ready to fire" conduction?

Ready to fire is defined as a closed bolt with a cartridge in the chamber.

Not sure why you ask.  Although not in the "ready to fire" mode, the 03 could be topped off without a problem.  So could the Thompson, 1911 an M2 .50 cal.  None but the 1911 were ready to fire when doing so.  The Garand certainly wasn't ready to fire when loaded at any time.  The M1 carbine could be ready to fire when topped off with a new mag.  Advantage, M1 Carbine.

Edited September 29, 2018 by Rattler