Grokking the M-1 Carbine

Ad Astra

Ad Astra

Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
3,833
Never understood this one, until today. Wondered what people saw in this rifle. WWII vets reported it sometimes took 2-3 hits to knock an enemy down. Why carry this when the 1911 and Garand are around?

Got to shoot an Underwood/Irwin Pedersen today- 100 rounds- and clean it. Finally, I understand why people defend the little carbine. :cool:

1. It's fun to shoot. Rotating bolt reminds you of other, bigger kin.

2. The round is powerful enough. At 1900 FPS and 110 grain, isn't this like a hot .357 round? Nobody doesn't call that a stopper. I think if our guys in combat used softpoints (against the Geneva Convetion, I know), the M-1 carbine would have had a better rep.

3. Easy to clean.

4. Light, light weight. Easy to tote.

5. .22-like recoil.

6. Fast shooting.

7. Ammo is cheap, really- $15, but it's for a 50-round box.

8. This picture: http://www.iwojima.com/raising/lflagi.gif

There's more, but I've changed my previous opinion about it. Like the 9mm, with the right slug, the carbine probably is a stopper, or SHTF rifle.

Dangit, but they are overpriced. Were $150 when I was a kid. American collectors like them lots- historical, but people are shooting them too- and now I know why.

Anyone love or hate the M-1 Carbine? Got one? Shot one?


Ad Astra
 
carried one in Nam for a short time.had a selector so it was an M2 carbine.Loved it, in fact I kept it.
 
Bought one on a whim 20 years ago , took a little spike buck with it then a friend bought a week later for $ 200.
 
From what I have read the M1 Carbine was issued initially as a replacement for the .45 pistol. The idea was to have a small light weapon for non-rifleman that was more accurate than a pistol with comparative stopping power. It was issued to officers, radiomen etc. to provide an adequate weapon for close action that would still be a lesser burden to keep up with than a M1 Garand or Thompson SMG.
 
Nuke_Spook said:
From what I have read the M1 Carbine was issued initially as a replacement for the .45 pistol. The idea was to have a small light weapon for non-rifleman that was more accurate than a pistol with comparative stopping power. It was issued to officers, radiomen etc. to provide an adequate weapon for close action that would still be a lesser burden to keep up with than a M1 Garand or Thompson SMG.
Click to expand...

Squares exactly with what I've been told. Shot one several times over a few months (years ago) and came to respect it, even though my uncle had a very bad experience on Corregador. Seems a Japanese non-com charged him with a sword. My uncle swears he could see the dust puffing off the guy's chest from an entire magazine of 30 cal, when a friend opened up with a .45 and dropped the guy in his tracks. My uncle prudently traded his for a .45 and had little to say in favor of the little carbine. But for a fun gun.....?
 
Would it be more precise over reasonable distances than a 45 . Would it be easier to handle in close quarters than a full sized rifle ? What is the magazine capacity ? Is there an advantage there ?

Yeah I know . Newbie questions . I,m pretty good with target acquistion . A lightweight weapon with a good sized magazine sounds very interesting . Especially with inexpensive ammo .
 
Kevin the grey said:
Would it be more precise over reasonable distances than a 45 . Would it be easier to handle in close quarters than a full sized rifle ? What is the magazine capacity ? Is there an advantage there ?

Yeah I know . Newbie questions . I,m pretty good with target aquistion . A lightweight weapon with a good sized magazine sounds very interesting . Especially with inexpensive ammo .
Click to expand...
I'm quite certain that at 25 and 50 yards most anyone including your wife can fire a tighter group than with a .45 pistol, once you show them the sights. It will work in close quarters better than a Garand, but not perhaps any better than a short AR 15 or AK 47. A .45 pistol really comes into its own at close ranges. 80 % of all gun fights are at 4 yards or less and 90% are under 7 yards!!!

Magazine size was 5, 15, and 20, with two twenties often taped together upside down. Just drop, flip over, insert again and keep firing.
 
Neat story and thanks, Mr. Jurassic.

Wouldn't want to take on a samurai or a grizzly with it; and the M-2 must be a lot of fun. Think the large-cap mags for it are 30's.

Had one FTE but the thing was pretty dirty at that point. I wonder if they are going to continue to appreciate; many guns are doing better than the stock market.

Anyone shot the Auto Ordnance- Kahr carbine? Heard they had bugs and worked them out. Wish it was cheaper. $79-100 milsurps have spoiled me.

and this pic says a lot: http://www.iwojima.com/raising/lflagi.gif
 
There have been articles on appropriate home owner and or LE use. With proper ammo selection, you can penetrate a car door, or stop in the wall of an apartment.

I had one. I liked it. But being not afluent, I had to decide whether I could resist the inflated prices for a non import model, or sell to help buy a MT bike. Only time I ever broke the no gun sales rule.


munk
 
I've had an M1 Carbine for a few years now. I can't seem to properly adjust the rear sight on mine; it keeps shooting to the left. I'll have to get around to checking out the carbine section on the surplusrifle forums. I've read about the round being compared to a .357 magnum as well. The carbine is pretty fun to shoot IMO.

Bob
 
Read a bunch of after action reports from WWII and the general opinion of the M1/M2 Carbine in the hands of WWII soldiers was that with full auto capablity is was an excellent submachinegun and assault weapon, especially in urban fighting in Europe. Though the brass originally intended for it be a leader's weapon to give more range and power than the M1911A1 pistol, in the field it rapidly came to be considered America's answer to the 9mm MP40/41 German submachinegun and it had a noticeable range advantage over the German weapon.

The first thing that many of the troops did with the M1 when it got overseas was to modify it to full auto. Some of the troops were highly skilled machinists and some of the select-fire conversions were very high quality. The better of these examples were shipped back to the states and evaluated, the result being the select-fire M2 carbine.

One common theme talked about a lot from experienced combat soldiers in WWII is the need for raw firepower. Due to the ranges they normally ran into the enemy at, they tended to have a much higher level of respect for the Germans' MP40/41 series submachineguns and the MG42 squad auto machinegun than they did the venerable Kar98k Mauser. Accounts of large scale infanty actions that were settled by accurate, long range rifle fire were rare.
 
Got a 1944 Inland in pristene condition. It's a great little rifle.

The problem, of course, is that ever since I found out what it's worth I've been reluctant to shoot it. I'm hoping to trade it off for something less collectible eventually.

I have a difficult time getting a good cheekweld on it -- the sights sit a bit low for me. Other than that, it's quite fun to shoot.
 
$500 is cheap for a WWII-era M-1 carbine in good condition. Don't know about the M-2...

and agree with Dave, was having a weld problem. And brass bounced off my head occasionally. Still, was a lot of fun.


Mike
 
Runs With Scissors said:
I need to find out if I'd be legal by pulling the selector parts and throwing it away though. (Right now it has a real bad tendency to slam fire when on full auto anyways...or so I've been told)
Click to expand...

BATF sez "no." A full-auto cannot lawfully be converted to semi-auto -- it would be considered a contraband weapon. As for "slam firing" -- I'm no gunsmith, but it sounds like some moving parts are badly worn down from overuse. I wouldn't pay $500 for a worn-out rifle that's unlawful for you to possess.

The M1 carbine is a great gun -- if you get a good one, and if you load it up with hollowpoints or Bee Safe rounds. They take 30 round mags, have minimal recoil, and are extremely lightweight. I, too, have heard of cases where someone took multiple rounds of FMJ to the torso and kept on coming -- you really need proper defensive ammo for it to be effective.

I hear tell that the fellow who designed this weapon did so from a prison cell. I also heard that this weapon was not originally intended for combat troops, but rather for non-combatants (mechanics, cooks, clerks, etc.) in the event they were overrun by the enemy.
 
I was afraid of that.

Guess it'll have to stay in the village, just in case the Japs invade.:D

All hope is not lost...there's still the Kahrs...no history whatsoever, but a VERY well made lil' M-1 Carbine.
 
I think it's a nifty little rifle. Light and handy, more or less readily available ammo ... I just wish collector demand hadn't driven the prices so high.

Pat
 
MY problem with the M1 Carbine was that I could get a more powerful, even more reliable weapon for less or about the same money. Ruger 30 or Mini 14

You could get a heavy barrel RPK

You can buy a used or new AR.

You could get Mossberg's military version 590 shotgun. Coon Killer

I should have kept the rifle longer, but I bought it for 250 and sold it several years ago for 450.

>>>>>>>>>

My two AR's are gone. 4 Garands gone. And the little M1 Carbine.
Some non essential urban defense stuff had to go.

>>>>>>>>

Audi Murphy swore by the M1 Carbine.

As a little woods or desert knock around, they are cool.



munk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top