BHM's Homesteading & Self-Reliance Forum

Posting requires Registration and the use of Cookies-enabled browser

  #81  
Old 03-17-2014, 03:37 AM
raytwnmt's Avatar
raytwnmt raytwnmt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 84
Default M1 carbine

Quote:
Originally Posted by raytwnmt View Post
The question was; "Anyone else using an M1 carbine as a security rifle?"

The answer is yes. I have an Underwood M1 carbine. The best rifle to use on

offense for me is the M14, but I can't afford one.
But I also have a 6.5x55, .243, and an 870 pump. (and others)

No gun will do it all. Anything will be a compromise
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-18-2014, 04:06 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. Male ArmySGT. is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado!!!!!!!!!!
Posts: 1,621
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearfootfarm View Post
I realize you have nothing factual to add
There's no need to keep repeating worthless rhetoric


You may see it only as "entertainment" because you have little real knowledge to add
Others find it informative when folks stick to the topic

You should give it a try

You still don't get it. I don't take orders from you.

That is the topic of the moment.
__________________
This is a how-to, homesteading and self-reliance website and Forum. We want to attract people who are primarily interested in those areas and for whom politics is secondary.
Oliver
Here's an internet truth; just because it bothers you, doesn't mean anyone else cares! - Me.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 09-24-2014, 12:01 PM
r80rt r80rt is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 2
Default

Please delete.

Last edited by r80rt; 09-24-2014 at 12:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-01-2015, 11:41 PM
Jjr's Avatar
Jjr Male Jjr is offline
Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NWLA
Posts: 836
Default

I had one back in the mid-80's, thinking it would be the perfect house gun. Being light, portable, mild recoil and easy to use was much of my basis. It was all of those things, and more too. It was really enjoyable to use and play around with. I'm not sure a firearm should literally be played around with, but I'll use it anyway as a descriptive phrase. The ammo was expensive and mine did not like reloads in the slightest. It stripped ammo from any magazine, except the 30 rd ones. I never found a 30 rd magazine that functioned flawlessly in the one I had.

Everyone to their own opinion and several have stated the .30 carbine is in the .38 Special/.357 Magnum power class. I tend to lean on the lower side of that power class and say the .30 Carbine more closely parallels the .38 Special in power based upon my use and performance evaluation.

If a .30 carbine was all I had, I would certainly use it, but I would not purchase one today for that express purpose. Cost & availability of ammo would cull the .30 carbine more than anything else in my book.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-03-2015, 08:31 PM
Lurch Male Lurch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North Idaho
Posts: 219
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjr View Post
I had one back in the mid-80's, thinking it would be the perfect house gun. Being light, portable, mild recoil and easy to use was much of my basis. It was all of those things, and more too. It was really enjoyable to use and play around with. I'm not sure a firearm should literally be played around with, but I'll use it anyway as a descriptive phrase. The ammo was expensive and mine did not like reloads in the slightest. It stripped ammo from any magazine, except the 30 rd ones. I never found a 30 rd magazine that functioned flawlessly in the one I had.

Everyone to their own opinion and several have stated the .30 carbine is in the .38 Special/.357 Magnum power class. I tend to lean on the lower side of that power class and say the .30 Carbine more closely parallels the .38 Special in power based upon my use and performance evaluation.

If a .30 carbine was all I had, I would certainly use it, but I would not purchase one today for that express purpose. Cost & availability of ammo would cull the .30 carbine more than anything else in my book.
I agree. I'm an advocate of sticking to NATO rounds, for the most part. I'm all about practicality.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-04-2015, 03:26 PM
hunter63's Avatar
hunter63 hunter63 is offline
Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: SE/SW WI
Posts: 635
Default

In the intrest of stirring the pot .....
M1 Carbine in 9 mm......
http://www.legacysports.com/m-1-9mm-carbine

Now that makes comparisons and use much easier to figure out.......
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-05-2015, 12:18 PM
recoilless_57mm's Avatar
recoilless_57mm Male recoilless_57mm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 407
Default

I did not have this experience it was an older late friend of mine. He was a ww2 vet. He was issued an m1 carbine in the pacific during that conflict. To put it in his words, it was a piece of s**t if you were defending yourself. He related that a 45 and or Thompson was worth its weight to carry.

I agree with a prior poster that the m1 carbine cartridge is more on the level of 9mm. If it were me I would stick to the 9mm pistol for that level of fire power. It is more compact and if practiced up will work better than an m1. JMO

A good riot gun with extended capacity mag on it makes a good close in tool.
__________________
Be polite, be professional and have a plan to deal with everyone you meet.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-05-2015, 03:43 PM
Lurch Male Lurch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North Idaho
Posts: 219
Default

I recently read a review of that 9mm M1 carbine in the Shotgun News. They liked it overall. However, as long guns go it was comparatively inaccurate on the rifle range. The original 30 caliber cartridge that was designed to be used in the M1 carbine had a muzzle velocity of over 1900 ft/sec. It is substantially more accurate at midrange and provides more penetration than either the 9mm pistol cartridge, or the .45acp.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-13-2015, 01:34 AM
Jjr's Avatar
Jjr Male Jjr is offline
Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NWLA
Posts: 836
Default

Stopping power is a funny thing in some regards.

Penetration does not always equate to stopping power, but it definitely is a factor. The .45 is a well established fight stopper, but the .30 Carbine never proved equal at the task. For support troops (mechanics, cooks, transportation specialist and the like) a rifle (carbine barrel length) was probably easier to use and certainly carried greater firepower than the .45 sidearm afforded, but like many other things in the real world, it was a compromise weapon. The military did not think that highly of it either, or it would have stayed in their inventories longer than it did.

Had the .30 Carbine proved to be more of a Mini .30 (AKA M1 Garand [Mini .30-06 cartridge more than the rifle itself]) something along the lines of the 7.62 X 39, I believe it would have had a much longer service life, and probably served us better in Vietnam at the shorter ranges routinely encountered there than the M-16 did. The 7.62 X 39 in the SKS's & AK-47's sure served the NVA well.

Just saying.......
.......food for thought!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -2. The time now is 08:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 1996 to Present. Backwoods Home Magazine, Inc.