Gun Magazine Reviews

S

Shann

Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
5,250
Has any gun magazine (except Gun Times) every shot a gun they didn't love? I know this has been done to death, but really. Last month's Shooting Times did a review of an M1 Carbine in .30 caliber. I don't remember the manufacturer. It shot 5" 100 yard groups.:eek: They liked it and they said it had acceptable accuracy. Even thought it would be a good hunting rifle for javelina or similar sized game. I'm not a really good shot, but that ain't acceptable to me, not from a bench rest. And don't recommend it for hunting. It might be okay for a plinker.

I know that .30 carbine is not the greatest round, but I'd expect better than that. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I am, why would anybody want a "new" M1 in .30 caliber?
 
Yeah... there's a "Consumer Reports" type mag for the industry. It's not afraid to tell the truth, but they don't have the $$$ to really dig in.

For example, when I was looking at lever .22's the article never even mentioned the Henry, which is what I wound up with.

Worse, if you are an NRA member and get Shooting Times (which SEEMS like a natural thing) you will get more or less the exact same items reviewed at the same time... that same M-1 and the new .30-30 soft tip ammo come to mind.

*opinion break*
American milsurps are way over-valued, is why Garands and M-1 carbines are so expensive. Yes, I saw "Band of Brothers" and have the DVD's... no, I don't have a Garand. That rifle is evolutionary, not the end of the world. Yes, I know what Patton called it.

and even the new M-1 carbine is pricey and is having teething problems.

I wish I had both rifles, but not at $600 and $800. That's a shooting budget for a year with a Mauser, Mosin, SKS et al- and that's counting the rifle.

BTTT


Mike
 
5" at 100yds????????? damn man I can see 3" as being ok but 5"??? best get that thing looked at! :D

And yea I can't see the 30.M1 round as being anything to get hot over;anything it can do at under 100yds the .223 can do better! :thumbup: so $600 to $800? no-thank-you!
 
5" at 100 yards isn't that bad for an M1 carbine. There are a lot of folks who claim MoA performance (and to them I say: show me) but 5" really isn't bad for this. Many are getting worse, regardless of what they're claiming on the internet.

(And yes, the fliers count. Especially if the fliers outnumber the good ones.)

Remember to watch the verbiage. Someone can talk a lot of crap without actually lying if they're careful. Every carbine will print a one hole group at 300 yards IF the group consists of one round.

EDIT: Correcting my poor grammar to make things a little clearer.
 
That's what I was going to say. There is some basic similarity between the MI carbine sight and the Garand but it is not as precise. It has no reason to be. I don't know anything about M1 Carbine's being shot through universal recievers or even a good single action, that might help, but my impression is the round itself is not that accurate and the Carbine a mediocre delivery machine. My WWll MI Carbine wasn't any more accurate than that in my hands at least. I sold it. It was fun, it was light, and I sold it at a nice profit.

I have a BF falling block in 32/20 that is very accurate. I used to load it up to Carbine power and the two rounds are not that disimilar in capacity or size.

If anyone has any experience with an accurate M1 Carbine I'd like to hear about it.

I like the Carbine. But...

munk
 
"Minute of angle" rifles are neat (and are actually showing up ocassionally), but how many "minute of angle" shooters do you know? I actually own a couple such rifles, but both weigh a little more than I want to carry all day long in the woods. So when deer season rolls around, you will find me carrying a short Ruger 77 RSI in .270 that stays under 2" for 10 shots on any day in any weather. I know, I know, a .270 with an 18" barrel should be "inefficient", but it puts a couple deer in the freezer every fall.

After 50 years experience, I am comfortable telling you that I am NOT a minute of angle shooter, standing on my hind legs offhand....but, what the hell....I get the job done. Don't select your favorite rifle based only on what it does on the bench, rather on how it fits you, and how it performs in the weeds.
 
jurassicnarc44 said:
"Minute of angle" rifles are neat (and are actually showing up ocassionally), but how many "minute of angle" shooters do you know?
Click to expand...

Personally? None. Never even seen one. At the top of my game, I was not one. Perhaps that's influencing my opinion of MoA rifles. I almost never see groups like that from others and the only time that I even bother shooting at paper myself is when I'm sighting something in. Most of my shooting is at the plates; either I hit what I aim at or I don't. I don't believe in awarding myself partial credit.

I did see a phenominal group one time but it was on an abandoned target and I did not see the shooter nor the weapon. Once, while posting my own targets at the 200, I noticed an existing target with a nice, centered ten round group that was just inside of an inch. The holes were smaller than what a 22 caliber weapon would make. It was an outstanding target. It goes without saying that the person behind the trigger was no slouch either. It is not easy to hold for a group like that, even rested.
 
Ahhhh MOA is what 1.042" @ 100???


I am with ya Dave on the "showme" thing...

Truthfully I have seen a couple rifles and a couple guys that could do this pretty much on command...Both are VERY avid hunter's and shooters as well as handloader's...Neither are comp shooter's but they do shoot for money using those little green army men...Put army man at whatever yardage they wanna shoot at and go until one misses...

I however cannot shoot anywhere NEAR the level that they can...I use the "pieplate" method of testing...If I fire 5 times or 10 times and all of them are in the pie plate then I am happy


I have shot several rifles that were considered "MOA" guns and I can honestly say that I did shoot better with them...But MOA?? Nope, not me!


BACK on topic...The m1 carbine was never meant as a target gun, it was meant for VERY close work...I am pretty sure that if I shot one at 100yards and kept all of the bullets on the man size target I would be very happy
 
Bud, the guy who introduced me to firearms, called the .30M1 a "long pistol."

Funny, he also had a favorite rifle...a Winchester Model 70 in .270. (I almost put "pre-64," but back then...everything was "pre-64.")

Looks like the .270 is getting new attention from the military. ?What is it, 6.8Rem?


Dave Rishar? Tell us about the new lever gun, please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top