posted
I picked up one of Auto Ordnance's M1 carbines recently. I think it would be a nice gun for home defense, but wonder if the 30 Carbine FMJ rounds would overpenetrate inside the home or should I use SP or HP for that purpose? And, how powerful is the 30 Carbine round? I understand it was issued mainly to the non-frontline troops in WWII who wanted something more powerful than a handgun but not a full-power rifle cartridge? I have read the usual horror stories about how many rounds a person absorbed but still would not drop dead, but it seems every caliber has one of those stories.
posted
The M1 has a few great features, it’s amazingly small and lightweight, very easy to use accurately and is pretty reliable under normal conditions.
Get some good 30rd magazines (you will pay for them) and plenty of the little 15’s, use good HP’s if they work if not use FMJ.
Audie Murphy is probably the most famous person to carry an M1 into battle, he probably could have chosen another rifle since he was a respected officer on the front lines. Countless other soldiers used them to drop Germans, Italians, Japanese and later on Koreans and Vietnamese.
Learn to shoot like a soldier and stopping power will concern you much less, fire for the chest and head until your enemy is down.
Outside of 150 yards you NEED a better round, indoors or CQC you could do MUCH worse.
quote:Originally posted by Shadowman: ...I understand it was issued mainly to the non-frontline troops in WWII who wanted something more powerful than a handgun but not a full-power rifle cartridge?...
That's almost 100% right, but still slightly off the mark.
Here ya go:
quote:The weapon was designed primarily to offer non-frontline troops a better weapon than a pistol in terms of range and hitting power, but without the recoil, cost, or weight of a full power weapon. The weapon would give rear-echelon troops a better chance to defend themselves if directly attacked. It was also easier for less experienced soldiers and smaller framed people to fire the weapon than the full power rifles of the day. In addition, it was useful for soldiers like radiomen, engineers, and medics that had to carry a lot of other equipment. Also, officers or NCO's would sometimes choose it over a submachinegun. The automatic and dedicated paratrooper versions would further expand its use.
posted
my father in law was in germany in the winter. he often told me that it was very hard to stop the enemy when they had all the winter clothing on.he thru his down and got a garand...
posted
If you reload, try Hornady 100 gr 1/2 jacket and Herc 2400. Winchester does make a good factory load too, 110grJSP. Been waiting for a TAP rd to come out for it, not enough demand I guess.Have fun...
posted
Just 2 thoughts, first the 15 round magazines are more reliable than the 30 round ones. Second has to do with the lack of penetration of heavy winter clothing (German, Korean, whoever). I took one of the 5 gal water jugs that goes in a water dispenser, wrapped it with 2 surplus wool overcoats (swiss?) and put it at 50 yds. The container was full of water. Using military ball, I got complete penetration of the coats and water jug. I think most of the failure to penetrate were actually misses. I also feel it is a 100 yd weapon.
quote:Originally posted by ponyboy506: my father in law was in germany in the winter. he often told me that it was very hard to stop the enemy when they had all the winter clothing on.he thru his down and got a garand...
Okay, it's not what you think. No terrorists were injured in the making of this thread.
What are the effects to a bullet of passing through thick clothing before hitting a bad guy? Will that stop or slow down bullets considerably? Will it clog-up hollow points and prevent them from expanding?
We have several inches of cloth clamped to a cardboard holder in the Box O' Truth, just to keep it together.
Then, a milk jug of water to catch the rounds that exit. Then three pine backer boards, in case the jug doesn't stop the round.
The cloth includes 2 layers of blue jean material and then several layers of terry cloth towels.
I realize that there would be an almost infinite number of variables, this is just a common example of thick clothing.
Rumors had it that the .30 Carbine had problems penetrating the thick clothing of the North Koreans during the Korean War.
Let's see what happens.
The bullet, a military Ball, went through the entire box set-up, blew up the water jug, and flattened itself out against the solid concrete block, knocking out a big chunk of cement.
Lessons learned: 2. The clothing didn't seem to be much of a factor for rifle rounds.
3. If the North Koreans seemed uneffected by the .30 Carbine rounds, they were probably not being hit. Because clothing won't stop a 30 Carbine.
posted
The Marshall Evans actuall shooting statistics of M1 Carbine shootings lists it as a ninety some percent one shot stops in actuall police shootings. This is pretty good as follow up shots are far easier than with a MBR or shotgun in confined spaces. I trust mine. I use SPs.
posted
My Dad, one of the Chosen Few, also on the Marine Corp rifle competition team ( sniper during Korea )related this about the carbine. " I shot him in the chest with the whole magizine and he fell on top of me" " He was really big!". He then tried a Thompson that was to hard to load (I think it was to cold) and settled on a ww1 BAR that he liked and wouldn't put it down until they made it back to to the port city Hgram U or whatever the spelling. They really did sing the Marine Corp Hym when they entered the port city and knew they made it. Dad has passed. Marine Mom still going!! Dad said the BAR saved his life. The M1 was great , but " The BAR saved my life" for days with ammo being dropped. On a side note. They locked up all the Marines in chain link compound so they would not go after mcarther and .... No kidding!!!
[ March 12, 2006, 02:59 AM: Message edited by: G. W. Gill ]
posted
The BEST explination on why the coats on the North Koreans/Chineese stopped the 30 carbine was due to the Layered cotton quilted material becoming saturated with water and FREEZING.
This gave the coats a couple layers of hard ice to act as hard body armor.
quote:Originally posted by wwglen: The BEST explination on why the coats on the North Koreans/Chineese stopped the 30 carbine was due to the Layered cotton quilted material becoming saturated with water and FREEZING.
This gave the coats a couple layers of hard ice to act as hard body armor.
Don't know if it is true but it sure sounds good.
wwglen
Good try but the real reason is probably that the good guys missed the bad guys.
posted
I'm glad to see some of the B.S. myths being laid to rest here. I've always figured anyone who thinks clothing of any sort will stop a carbine round must also believe in the tooth fairy. Get real. Neat little guns. I would trust my life to one, as have many others. My 2 centavos.
posted
I don't know how many Japanese my grandfather killed island hopping with his, but you can be certain that the round will kill if you do your part.
The 30 carbine is like a suped up handgun. I don't know about overpenetration, but it will kill BGs.
quote:Originally posted by wwglen: The BEST explination on why the coats on the North Koreans/Chineese stopped the 30 carbine was due to the Layered cotton quilted material becoming saturated with water and FREEZING.
This gave the coats a couple layers of hard ice to act as hard body armor...
BS! The .30 carbine travels at about 1900 fps with a 110 grain bullet, a thin layer of ice wouldn’t do squat. Even an inch of ice would be unbearable to carry-if a coat measures 2’ by 3’ laying flat it would take a cubic foot of water to cover it.
Water weighs 62.4 pounds per cubic foot at 32°F
A few inches of ice offers no ballistic protection unless he bullet is coming at an odd angle.
posted
there was a police officer in san diego that was shot in the back with an M1 carbine through his BPV and was sadly killed. this little rifle does pack a decent punch. do not underestimate it!
posted
The carbine is a fine choice. I was scepticle after hearing the failure to stop stories so I turned to a first hand account of someone who was there and used one in WWII. Accourding to my step grandfather it worked great. He used one in Italy, Germany, and North Africa. When asked if it was not effective he waved his hand and said,"Ahh that's a bunch of whooyie, the carbine killed Germans fine." This man is definately not a poser and has undeniable experience and never hardly talks, much less tells a tale. I have confidence in his recounts. I figure the ones who complain either missed or just happened to be unlucky. Remember bad stories travel much faster and longer than good. Studies suggest up to 20 times when related to business experiences.
M1 Carbines are great and now there is a rail system for the gun that replaced the handguard so one can mount a red-dot or long eye-relief scope.
posted
1950's era Koreans and Chinese were very slight people. Most likely Commie uniforms were one size fits all. Making the target area look larger.
I'm sure Grunts were seeing that round bullet smacking the heavy coats. The "Holy-chit" response. Then the dude getting up and running again. Nothing more.
The M1 Carbine is a very fine weapon. It's just not a MBR, even if some people expect it to be.
posted
Its a very good gun, about the only dislike I have for it is the lack of ammo (its not to common for preppers to use it and stock it) and its range compared to 7.62 nato.
posted
The "Box of truth" has been a great educational source of what ifs. Given the private funds used ,much practical information has been gained .
However,I must point out that if you put a Level IIIA vest tightly on a gallon of water, it will no longer function as a level IIIA vest. Perhaps a level IIA at best. What does that mean ? It means even 9mm 115 grain HP rounds will penetrate it.
Why ? Body armor is designed around the factor of a human body against it.
Without the human body to put stress against the armor with a little give,then it doesn't act the same.
The above test would have been much more accurate if clay stuffed into a container was used instead of the gallons of water.
Another factor to consider is the difference in the cloth used for the test and what they actually used. Ever compare Cordura to denim ? Still ,I think .30 carbine is better than it's been given credit for.
Personnally ,I've been waiting for the "Box of truth" .223 versus 7.62 x 39 mm and 7.62 x 51 mm for penetration of common obstacles.(Like cars,brick walls,cinder blocks,logs) I think that would be an all time favorite.
quote:Originally posted by Beaver: The carbine is a fine choice. I was scepticle after hearing the failure to stop stories so I turned to a first hand account of someone who was there and used one in WWII. Accourding to my step grandfather it worked great. He used one in Italy, Germany, and North Africa. When asked if it was not effective he waved his hand and said,"Ahh that's a bunch of whooyie, the carbine killed Germans fine." This man is definately not a poser and has undeniable experience and never hardly talks, much less tells a tale. I have confidence in his recounts. I figure the ones who complain either missed or just happened to be unlucky. Remember bad stories travel much faster and longer than good. Studies suggest up to 20 times when related to business experiences.
M1 Carbines are great and now there is a rail system for the gun that replaced the handguard so one can mount a red-dot or long eye-relief scope.
By the end of WW2 the carbine was extremely popular with combat troops. It was issued on a scale that greatly exceeded the TO&E allowances for combat units. This continued during the Korean war. The ease of carry, low recoil, rapid recovery on each shot, and lighter ammunition (carry more compared to the standard .30) made it highly attractive. The Brits were impressed with the gun and issued it for use in Borneo and Malaya in the 50s. The first U.S. advisors in Vietnam usually carried M2 carbines until M16s were available. They didn't carry M1 rifles and they didn't carry M14s. If the carbine lacked killing power they wouldn't have been carrying it.
posted
I apoligise for getting off topic here but shadowman and any other squirrels who own/have fired the Auto Ord M-1 carbine. What are your impressions of the rifle? Quality of workmanship, do the parts interchange with GI?, and most importantly,how reliable is it?
quote:Originally posted by Beaver: The carbine is a fine choice. I was scepticle after hearing the failure to stop stories so I turned to a first hand account of someone who was there and used one in WWII. Accourding to my step grandfather it worked great. He used one in Italy, Germany, and North Africa. When asked if it was not effective he waved his hand and said,"Ahh that's a bunch of whooyie, the carbine killed Germans fine." This man is definately not a poser and has undeniable experience and never hardly talks, much less tells a tale. I have confidence in his recounts. I figure the ones who complain either missed or just happened to be unlucky. Remember bad stories travel much faster and longer than good. Studies suggest up to 20 times when related to business experiences.
M1 Carbines are great and now there is a rail system for the gun that replaced the handguard so one can mount a red-dot or long eye-relief scope.
By the end of WW2 the carbine was extremely popular with combat troops. It was issued on a scale that greatly exceeded the TO&E allowances for combat units. This continued during the Korean war. The ease of carry, low recoil, rapid recovery on each shot, and lighter ammunition (carry more compared to the standard .30) made it highly attractive. The Brits were impressed with the gun and issued it for use in Borneo and Malaya in the 50s. The first U.S. advisors in Vietnam usually carried M2 carbines until M16s were available. They didn't carry M1 rifles and they didn't carry M14s. If the carbine lacked killing power they wouldn't have been carrying it.
I forgot to mention that in 1976 I did the ROTC course at Ft. Bragg. The "TAC" NCOs were detailed from the SF. In a moment of downtime I asked the E7 who was our mother hen what he carried as an SF soldier in Vietnam. He had the choice of any weapon in the U.S. supply systems or for that matter any weapon that they came across. His answer surprised my back then but he said he carried two weapons that were both highly reliable, effective when needed, and light enough to carry for days on end: M2 carbine and .38 revolver. For the distances that he needed to engage the enemy both were all he needed.
posted
I cme asross a deal a few years ago. I bought an M1 carbine made by Iver Johnson, an Omaha Beach Comemoritive, and a 600 round "tuna can" of ammo that had not been opened. I have not shot the rifle, so do not know how it will do, but I sure do like the handy size and wieght.
posted
JimRinTX, You should test fire your M1 and zero it. I have researched M1 Carbines and found overwelming disappointment with the Iver Johnson/Plainfield carbines. They are not GI spec. Don't mean to worry you, just thought you should be aware of this. http://www.jouster.com/cgi-bin/carbine/carbine.pl?
quote:Originally posted by SmokeEater2: I apoligise for getting off topic here but shadowman and any other squirrels who own/have fired the Auto Ord M-1 carbine. What are your impressions of the rifle? Quality of workmanship, do the parts interchange with GI?, and most importantly,how reliable is it?
I've had one for a while, mine has a serial # under 200.
The parts do interchange with USGI models (I have an Underwood M2 bolt as a spare, actually), and the fit and finish was good. The reliability aspect has been great, much better than my Springfield M1A, in fact, but there are some things you need to do when you get the rifle.
First, this is a brand new carbine and not a 60+ year old weapon. As such, it has (or at least mine had) a lot of grease from the factory on it. Strip it and clean it, then put it back together and lubricate it appropriately. Next, cycle the slide by hand a bunch. Mine was tight, but after doing this 100-150 times, it was really smooth. It has worked great ever since.
At this point, I have thousands of rounds through it - Georgia Arms, Remington UMC, Winchester, and PMC factory loads along with my own handloads. It feeds FMJ, SP, and JHSP ammo equally well.
posted
I got to shoot the rifle yesterday. I had a bit of a rough beginning with 4 or 5 dud rounds in the first magazine. But, after that, everything worked fine. Ammo used was PMC 110 gr FMJ. I had the 30-round magazine that came with the gun and bought the 2 15-round GI mags that the store had. The 15-rounders would not lock the bolt open on last shot, but otherwise fed fine. I shot 100 rounds of at 25 yards. I know that is very close for a rifle, but its primary use will be at the range or less, so that was why I chose that distance. I used a silhouette target and pretty much took out the left lung. The group was a bit high, but that was offhand. I will of course want to try some soft points and hollow points, but I am very pleased with this little weapon. I just need to get some more magazines for it and of course a case or so of ammunition. So SmokeEater2 or anyone else interested in this model, I would recommend it if you can find one.
quote:Originally posted by SSGTM14: JimRinTX, You should test fire your M1 and zero it. I have researched M1 Carbines and found overwelming disappointment with the Iver Johnson/Plainfield carbines. They are not GI spec. Don't mean to worry you, just thought you should be aware of this. http://www.jouster.com/cgi-bin/carbine/carbine.pl?
Are you sure????
I thought Universal was the carbine that didn't match GI specs.
I had PMC's back before the Mini-14 came out and I have my dad's IJ now. They seem to me to be GI.
posted
I had a Plainfield carbine way back when. It worked just fine. Plainfield was the M1A of its day, at first made with many GI parts but as the availability of original parts diminished more and more was newly made. Universal morphed into a version that had unique dimensioned parts that were not all interchangable with GI guns.
posted
BOOKWORM, I stand corrected it was the Universal models that were not GI spec, my mistake. I believe the slide and stock, sights, possibly others.IverJohnson has a problem with their cast recievers(not GI spec) that had poor quality control issues, the rest of their parts were USGI.My link is full of hardcore M1 Carbine collectors who can provide specific info.Sorry for the wrong gouge JimrinTX, my bad
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Marine Corp]](graemlins/marinecorp.gif)
