M1 .30 Carbine

I have had one since 1974. Was my go to gun in my youth. It was light and cheap (at the time) to use. It would knock a Jack Rabbit down with one shot, no matter where you hit it. Sometimes my buddies 22s would take more than one shot. Its a short rifle so it is easy to get in and out of a vehicle with. I have 5, 10 and 30 round magazines. Mine is a WW II era rifle. Don't use it too much any more. More of a collector piece now.
 
I wish I had never traded the one I had off for a stupid Dodge D-50 pickup that has never been any thing but a money pit. Good firearm even if not a military gun. A little light for game like deer but will still do the job if you hit the deer just right. Yes I used it at times on deer and also used it as a training firearm for my nephews as they where growing up. Little to no kick made it a good training gun for a kid who was say 8-15 years old
 
Good light easy to handle with a good fire rate but a small almost pistol like round
 
Our American Legion Post is raffling off an M-1 Garand. New in the box from the Springfield Armory. Has the special rear site. I'm not much of a gun guy so thats all I know. tickets are 10$, hoping to sell 1000 by Labor Day, thats when the drawing is. gobble
 
That would be a 3006 round and much larger round the the M-1 carbine but both guns are good firearms
 
Yes, very good rifle when in good operating condition. Used to be as common as todays AR's, CMP use to sell them cheap to the public. WWII vintage ones with non matching numbers, are often worn, ones mileage may vary. Fulton Armory offers a very nice better than mil spec version, will cost you more, but seeing WWII vintage ones are ridiculous in price, I'd take one over the old ones for a reliable shooter. Hollow points are very effective and although the round is similar to a .357 magnum, it's still a very potent round, regardless of the things you'll hear about them from the past. This is my go to carry around rifle when patrolling my place and or hiking same and or surrounding lands I have permission to walk. Light, effective at decent ranges, you can't beat these. Older ones may have feeding issues, like to run wet, need to use care with mag selection and the larger capacity mags, you may not want to top off, leave a few rounds out. There is all kinds of videos on you tube. Ammo not exactly cheap, but there are some better deals off the web, I found the surplus Korean ammo to be very good.
 
I had one issued to me when i was in the National Guard at our local unit, fired it once year, i think the unit only had two,wished i would of taken a picture of it! Even had the serial number memorized for a long time!
 
I bought one of the knockoffs about twenty five years ago at a gun show. I think I paid about 90 bucks for it. I seldom shoot it. It rests propped against the wall next to my head board. The last time I had it outside it would go bang every time I pulled the trigger.
 
I had a chance to get one years ago, wish I had. But I wanted a Garand and didn't want to spend the money on another gun at the time.
 
We had one on the farm that my Uncle secured while in the Corps, Dad loved it for woodchucks. I had issues with it not firing if you didn't let the slide slam shut when chambering the first round. Of course, that is much louder to do, so if I snuck out after a chuck and crawled around without a round in the chamber, then wanted to lock and load before aiming, the target was made aware of my presence, and often vanished. At least that was my excuse for lack of productivity when chuck hunting.

Uncle eventually came back to claim "his" Carbine; if I'd have known it was just headed for the pawn shop I would have bought it myself.
 
I thought about buying one years ago but Pop talked me out of it. He had bad experiences with them in the Philippines. He claimed he went through three or four and threw them all away before they got him killed. Ended up grabbing a BAR he was happy with until he got put out of commission. Could have been more of an ammunition problem than anything.
 
The National Guard Unit I was in was an Artillery Unit that carried the M1 .30 Caliber Carbine for a side arm.
Sometime after I got out of the Guard I bought a new .22 that looked like the M1 Carbine's little brother. Still have that .22 and like it, and still use it some.
 
My late FIL gave me a Korean War era one last year but I haven't had a chance to shoot it. My first deer hunt was with one when I was about 10. Didn't see a deer but based on my target practice I wouldn't have hit it anyway. Not blaming the gun. My son gave me a bayonet for it for my birthday.
 
The one I was issued had the full auto selector. Every time we qualified somebody would get the lever pushed by mistake. Neat little feature. They got hot quick on full auto!

Bill
 
They are nice little handy guns. Originally designed to be used by support personnel and officers-not front line battle operations in WWII. The main front line rifle was the M1 Grand which fired the very powerful .30-06 round. The M1-Carbine utilizes the M1 Carbine .30 cal round. This round is essentially a pistol round. The pros of the M1-Carbine are: 1) Light weigh, 2) compact 3) you can get a 30 round magazine for this rifle, 4) Original ones are very collectable (there were about 10 manufactures from WWII with some of the most desired by collectors being the ones made at the Rockola Juke Box company. Other manufactures were: General Motors, IBM, Winchester and others..
Cons of the rifle are 1) The pistol round lacks range 2)The pistol round lacks stopping power on very large game an humans with heavy coats as reported from those who used the rifle in Korea going against heavy coated Chinese during the battle of Chosen Reservoir.

Overall if you have any appreciation of American history. I would get one-if nothing more than just to look at and hold a piece of American history (much like tractor collecting)
 
Here's my two M1 Carbines. They're great little guns. If the crap hits the fan and anyone comes around here bothering me they are my go to guns. I have some larger rifles that will really reach out and touch someone if needed.

S6sXD7i.jpg
 
They are great little rifles. Accurate and light weight. The only issue with them are the magazines. They are pretty wimpy. I have read and seen video on youtube that talk about the magazines. If you ever start having feeding issues look at your mag first.

OTH
 
I haven't heard anything bad about the post-war commercial carbines. But apparently some of the ones produced during the war were known for having the bolt lugs fail, sometimes dramatically. My dad, who served in the occupation of Japan, said he quit carrying a carbine after the third one failed. He preferred the Thompson, due to its reliability.
 
I wish now I had never traded off the one I had. I picked it up for $160 and 15 minutes latter a guy offered me twice what I had paid for it and I told him no. Told him if he thought it was worth that then it is wroth holding on to but then years latter I trade it off for a truck
 
great website on these rifles, use care if you come across any made by Universal. I have one with a stamped bolt operating handle, not sure I trust it 100%. I've had 3 altogether, still have 2. 2 are/were stainless steel Iver-Johnson models, both were good shooters contrary to what you might read. Also get used to how the safety operates on these, 2 variations. Another current manufacturer is Inland, and they are not the original General Motors Inland Division, just the same name like Springfield Armory is now vs the previous by the same name but owned by the US Gov't.

Original Inland Div. rifles are sought after as are other WWII vintage rifles, very costly today, many with significant wear etc.
M1 Carbines Inc
 
Check the website but I believe that is WWII, maybe later, forget when the gov't contractors ceased production, but should be mil spec. Need to check wear on bore, see what is what.
I've never seen a sporterized one, I did have one of my IJ's scoped with a dovetail mount, was very accurate for an M1 Carbine.
 
In my experience shooting a few thousand of rounds of .30 carbine military ball ammo, it will punch right through an 8" tree at 75'-0". At just over 100 yards, the same ammo will embed into a common 70's steel GM pick up truck rim. I don't discredit what has been said for years, maybe question it a little about those winter coats stopping these rounds like a bullet proof vest. There is no way I would trust a thick coat to protect from bullet penetration of M1 carbine ball ammo LOL. That would have been a great one for "Mythbusters" to test !
 
You have to remember military rifles are design to wound not kill as such. If you wound one man that remove 2 or 3 from the fight because it takes 2 or 3 out of action taking care of the wounded man.

As for a heavy coat stopping that round it would take a very very heavy coat to even come close.

Also well placed shot at a deer that round will take it down with one shot I know because I have done so in the past
 
That's what we used to qualify with on the rifle range when I was in the Air Force. The one I was issued was not sighted in correctly, and because it was the Air Force and not the Army, we didn't get to adjust the sights. Because of that, I didn't qualify for the marksman medal. That was very disappointing for me because I can out shoot everyone I have ever competed against. I didn't know the rifle was shooting off until I had already fired at least 10 rounds and the training instructor looked thru a telescope and said I had a perfect group high and to the right. So I started shooting low and to the left, but it was too late, because too many had not hit the bullseye. In the Air Force not much use for marksman because they didn't even issue us rifles even in Vietnam!
 
(quoted from post at 13:44:41 07/29/20) You have to remember military rifles are design to wound not kill as such. If you wound one man that remove 2 or 3 from the fight because it takes 2 or 3 out of action taking care of the wounded man.

As for a heavy coat stopping that round it would take a very very heavy coat to even come close.

Also well placed shot at a deer that round will take it down with one shot I know because I have done so in the past

Are you actually saying that the M1 Garand 30.06 was designed to wound enemies? I don't think so. I agree that a wounded enemy takes another to take care of him but that Garand was definitely not designed to wound people.
 
The idea that the .30 Carbine cartridge isn't intended to kill is preposterous. It has a muzzle energy of nearly 1000 ft-lbs, which is roughly double the energy of a .357 Magnum.
 
.30 Carbine (Upper cartridge) Is the same bullet diameter as the 30-06 Garand MI, different. One is pretty good forground hogs, the other for deer.
Jim
cvphoto51861.jpg


cvphoto51862.jpg
 
hey hold on here , these are just peacefully talks, don't start shooting , the guns off yet, at least see what the other side has to say, remember the white flag matters. I think the ammo has a lot to do with the operation of any gun. being a reloader, it is easy to see issues with just about any kind of firearm. just my side of the war. mark55
 
I have an original WWII era built by Underwood typewriter. Its fun to shoot. I've never killed anything with it. I think its pretty worn. All I have to say is, You better buy it before Nov 3.
 
Military round are full metal jacket so as to go in and out an wound more often then kill simple truth here and done to remove more then one person from the battle field study things
 
(quoted from post at 02:39:49 07/30/20) The idea that the .30 Carbine cartridge isn't intended to kill is preposterous. It has a muzzle energy of nearly 1000 ft-lbs, which is roughly double the energy of a .357 Magnum.

It's very simple. If you're in combat and the enemy is trying to kill you, you don't try to wound him, you just shoot to kill.
 
> Military round are full metal jacket so as to go in and out an wound more often then kill simple truth here and done to remove more then one person from the battle field study things

The reason almost all military ammo uses full metal jacket bullets is to comply with the Hague Convention of 1899, which prohibited the use of expanding bullets. FMJ bullets are generally considered to comply with this requirement. The idea that FMJ bullets are more likely to wound than kill is silly; for starters if you have two holes in you you're going to bleed twice as fast as if you have one hole. Pointed FMJ bullets tend to tumble inside the body, which can be as destructive as an expanding bullet. And most modern military bullets are designed to be armor piercing so they can penetrate vehicles and body armor where an expanding bullet might not. And I'll add that FMJ "solid" bullets are often preferred for the most dangerous big game, precisely because they can penetrate deeply into large, tough-skinned, big-boned animals.
 
Have you been in the Military?? If not your not likely to understand the truth of thing simple as that. Full metal jacket is design to wound more often then kill but yes it will kill if hit in the right place.
As for how fast the bullet goes that again has to do with kinetic energy.
A M-1 carbine bullet is a small light bullet where as the 357 if a heavy bullet an slow and heavy and slow means more kinetic energy. That is why the colt 45 was produced due it high kinetic energy and being a hard hitting round and was said to knock a man down even if hit in the hand. That statement is as told to us in boot camp by the way
 
> Have you been in the Military?? If not your not likely to understand the truth of thing simple as that. Full metal jacket is design to wound more often then kill but yes it will kill if hit in the right place. As for how fast the bullet goes that again has to do with kinetic energy. A M-1 carbine bullet is a small light bullet where as the 357 if a heavy bullet an slow and heavy and slow means more kinetic energy. That is why the colt 45 was produced due it high kinetic energy and being a hard hitting round and was said to knock a man down even if hit in the hand. That statement is as told to us in boot camp by the way

I spent a decade of my life working on military installations alongside US servicemen. Not that military experience is a substitute for an education in classical physics, as evidenced by your post.

You are confusing energy and momentum. Energy equals 1/2 mass times velocity squared (1/2mv<sup>2</sup>). Momentum equals mass times velocity (mv). In practical terms, this means if you take two bullets, one light and one heavy, and drive them to the same muzzle energy, the heavier bullet will have greater momentum. Back when the 45 ACP (I think you meant 45 ACP rather than 45 Colt) was introduced, it was believed that high momentum translates to higher "knockdown power", but most folks agree these days that momentum is not as big of a factor in lethality as energy. On the other hand, momentum is important for metallic silhouette shooters who want their bullets to knock down targets rather than punch through them.

Let's compare three cartridges: .30 Carbine (110 grain bullet), .357 Magnum (158 grain bullet) and .45 ACP (230 grain bullet). Velocity is from Wikipedia, while energy and momentum were calculated using the <a href="https://www.n4lcd.com/calc/">Taylor KO Calculator</a>.

.30 Carbine: Muzzle velocity = 1990; Muzzle energy = 967 ft-lb; Momentum = 31 lb-ft/sec

.357 Magnum: Muzzle velocity = 1240 ft/sec; Muzzle energy = 539 ft-lb; Momentum = 27 lb-ft/sec

.45 ACP: Muzzle velocity = 835 ft/sec; Muzzle energy = 356 ft-lb; Momentum = 27 lb-ft/sec

Interesting: The lowly .30 Carbine cartridge has both the greatest muzzle energy AND the greatest momentum. And the slow, heavy .45 ACP comes out dead last. In fact, the only advantage the .45 has is it makes a really big hole. Which isn't much of an advantage if it has to penetrate body armor.
 
They'll all kill ya deader than a hammer. Even a .22 Short. Some may be better, some worse. Your comparison is kind of apples to oranges, though, due to likely barrel length discrepancies of those tests. Would need to compare data on the 30 Carbine out of a handgun chambered for it. Or compare the 30 Carbine from a rifle to 357 or 45 ACP out of a pistol caliber carbine. To do a true comparison, the barrel lengths need to be equal. There is no point in comparing energy of a rifle cartridge out of a longer barrel to a pistol cartridge out of a short barrel. One is meant for range, the other for short work. The news media did a similar display of how much more powerful .223 from a rifle is, than a 9mm is from a hand gun. Well, duh.

But, in the end, it really doesn't matter to me. Wouldn't want to get shot with anything.

BTW, watched a nice M1 Carbine sell at auction last weekend for $1200+tax and transfer, and the guy was glad to get it for that price. I was there for the 1903 A3 and the beat up Garand. I bid the Garand to my self imposed limit, guy went $25 more than me and paid $800+tax and transfer. The 03 went for $640, of it had sold after the Garand, I would have come home with it, it was cherry.
 
> Your comparison is kind of apples to oranges, though, due to likely barrel length discrepancies of those tests. Would need to compare data on the 30 Carbine out of a handgun chambered for it. Or compare the 30 Carbine from a rifle to 357 or 45 ACP out of a pistol caliber carbine. To do a true comparison, the barrel lengths need to be equal.

You do have a point, although old didn't say his comparison used identical barrel lengths. I just assume he meant the different cartridges were being fired in the guns in which they're most commonly chambered: M1 carbine, revolver and M1911A1.

According my Lyman manual, the .357 Magnum has an astounding 1800 fps muzzle velocity out of a 20" Model 94. That 45 percent increase in velocity gives it a 111 percent increase in energy and a 45 percent increase in momentum, putting the 357 at the top of the heap. Much of that velocity increase is probably from eliminating the revolver's cylinder gap.

The .45 ACP is another matter. It has a modest powder capacity and a very big bore, so it requires pretty fast powders like Unique. Fast powders don't yield much additional velocity with longer barrel length. (357 and 30 carbine use slower powders like H110 which is why they benefit from longer barrel length.) Referring to the <a href="http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45auto.html">Ballistics by the Inch</a> site, we see that a 16 inch barrel only increases the .45's velocity by 14 percent over a four inch barrel. That's not nearly enough to overcome its 3 to 1 disadvantage in muzzle energy versus the .30 carbine. In fact, the .45 actually SLOWS DOWN if the barrel is longer than 16 inches!
 
The theory is that if a soldier is wounded it takes two other soldiers to take care of that person.

There was a lot of anecdotal reports that carbine bullets bounced off the ice covered quilted uniforms of the North Koreans.

A more plausible explanation is that the bullets over penetrated and went out the backdoor causing less damage than a long bullet that tumbles.
The proof is the Czechoslovakian Cz52 roller lock pistol that shot a 30 caliber round at 1700 fps. (7.62x 25 Tokarev). It had the same problem which was over penetration.

Both rounds use short round nose bullets that aren't as likely to tumble and expend energy.
 
(quoted from post at 15:58:47 07/31/20) The theory is that if a soldier is wounded it takes two other soldiers to take care of that person.

There was a lot of anecdotal reports that carbine bullets bounced off the ice covered quilted uniforms of the North Koreans.

A more plausible explanation is that the bullets over penetrated and went out the backdoor causing less damage than a long bullet that tumbles.
The proof is the Czechoslovakian Cz52 roller lock pistol that shot a 30 caliber round at 1700 fps. (7.62x 25 Tokarev). It had the same problem which was over penetration.

Both rounds use short round nose bullets that aren't as likely to tumble and expend energy.

I still would not take kindly to a bullet going in my front and coming out my back :(
 
(quoted from post at 19:22:30 07/29/20)
(quoted from post at 13:44:41 07/29/20) You have to remember military rifles are design to wound not kill as such. If you wound one man that remove 2 or 3 from the fight because it takes 2 or 3 out of action taking care of the wounded man.

As for a heavy coat stopping that round it would take a very very heavy coat to even come close.

Also well placed shot at a deer that round will take it down with one shot I know because I have done so in the past

Are you actually saying that the M1 Garand 30.06 was designed to wound enemies? I don't think so. I agree that a wounded enemy takes another to take care of him but that Garand was definitely not designed to wound people.

I would think it is the ammo design, not the gun design that is affects the wounding or killing.
 
It is the design of the bullet that determines it's lethality.

The Hague Convention outlawed the use of dum dum bullets (any expanding bullet) in war. This did not stop them from using elongate bullets that tumble when they encounter a change of media (going from air to solid substance).

The British 303 Mark 7 bullet was made to be lighter in the nose. This made it bottom heavy and shifted the center of gravity. When it hit an object it tended to tumble, unloading its kinetic energy and tearing up whatever it hit. Actually any long bullet tends to do this, but the engineering makes it more prone to do this, overcoming the gyroscopic effect of spin.

Something similar occurs when you hit the brakes on a car. Most of the braking power is in the front brakes. It tends to make the rear pass the front of the car.
 


There are a lot of posts here that show a remarkable ability for people to expound at length on things they don't understand at all. I suppose it's the fault of the internet making experts out of anyone with online access and a willingness to repeat what they read, regardless of it's accuracy.
 
The analogy of the car braking is a very limited analogy and all analogies are limited. It's the effect not the physics involved.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top