Historical question as to use of the M1 Carbine in WWII - Gun Hub
Gun Hub

Go Back   Gun Hub > Battle Rifles > M1 Carbine

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-10-2014, 09:03 AM   #1
Forum Admin
 
SpecialEd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Wilmington, DelaWhere?
Posts: 6,905
Historical question as to use of the M1 Carbine in WWII

As I may have mentioned before, in the last month my wife and I have watched pretty much every D-Day documentary I could get my hands on and also Band of Brothers, The War, and The Pacific. In BOB and The Pacific, the carbine was prolific as a front line weapon. It made sense when in BOB they were parachuting but they only did that twice, the rest of the time they were just infantry. Also in The Pacific the Marines were pretty much split between the carbine and the Springfield earlier in the war then between the carbine and the Garand. Sure the carbine was easier to carry but I have to wonder at its effectiveness in thick jungle. Are the portrayals accurate or did Spielberg and company just want to show all the weapons they had?

P.S. The Stg. 44 was very prevalent in the actual footage from the Battle of the Bulge.

Last edited by SpecialEd; 07-10-2014 at 09:06 AM.
SpecialEd is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 09:56 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TommyGunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Morgan County, Alabama "In Dixie Land I'll take my stand."
Posts: 8,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialEd View Post
As I may have mentioned before, in the last month my wife and I have watched pretty much every D-Day documentary I could get my hands on and also Band of Brothers, The War, and The Pacific. In BOB and The Pacific, the carbine was prolific as a front line weapon. It made sense when in BOB they were parachuting but they only did that twice, the rest of the time they were just infantry. Also in The Pacific the Marines were pretty much split between the carbine and the Springfield earlier in the war then between the carbine and the Garand. Sure the carbine was easier to carry but I have to wonder at its effectiveness in thick jungle. Are the portrayals accurate or did Spielberg and company just want to show all the weapons they had?

P.S. The Stg. 44 was very prevalent in the actual footage from the Battle of the Bulge.
Well, one marine officer who had served in the Pacific in jungle warfare stated the considered the carbine "the ace weapon of the war." So I have to believe it did OK in the jungle, atleast to the degree it was possible to see through the foliage. I should think any bullet could be deflected by hitting branches and twigs and stuff.

Last edited by TommyGunn; 07-10-2014 at 09:58 AM.
TommyGunn is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 11:44 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
I tend to think the Carbine is much like the .223. Generally it worked as advertised, but there is anecdotal evidence to some failure to stop the enemy. However, I think history has proven that the Carbine is a very effective weapon at ranges under 150 yards, and the closer you get, the more effective it gets. Before the M16 it was seriously being considered as our official infantry rifle, either in .30 Carbine or in something akin to 5.7 Johnson (small caliber high velocity). I believe at one point the Air Force did make it their official rifle.

The Carbine is perhaps the most reliable self loading rifle the US has ever fielded. It's certainly the lightest, so users can carry a lot of ammo. And while it's not "bench" accurate, it is just inherently "shootable" and tend to make newbe's look like experts inside of 5 minutes.

For civilians I can't imagine a better urban defense rifle. When loaded with JHP's the wound profile is a good deal better than an FMJ out of a .223, and it has better barrier penetration. When using FMJ's it still has better barrier penetration (at short ranges), but loses the larger wound profile. In short, I sure the hell wouldn't want anyone shooting at me with one!

Last edited by SpecialEd; 07-10-2014 at 11:55 AM.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
 
Old 07-10-2014, 04:20 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
IrishCop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Decatur, Al
Posts: 2,562
Very true. USAF SP's were armed with the M-1 carbine, at least on SAC bases. Then General Curtis LeMay was privy to a demonstration of the then new Armalite and decided that was the weapon he wanted for his security troops. That was in 1962 I think.
IrishCop is online now  
Old 07-11-2014, 06:11 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
spwenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,071
Some Comments

  1. In the breakout frm the bocage country of Normandy, many Army troops preferred the M! Carbine over the M1 Rifle as they could not see their actual targets hidden in the bocage and the added capacity of the Carbine proved to be an advantage.
  2. A good friend's father served in the 93rd Infantry Division on Bougainville during WWII and was very fond of the Carbine. Most complaints that I have seen from the Pacific Theater involved the challenge of penetrating tree trunks or log bunkers.
  3. John George (Shots Fired in Anger) preferred the Carbine for carry on jungle marches in Burma but shortened the magazine that he used on the move, to lessen the likelihood of tangling in jungle vegetation.
  4. Many of the complaints form Korea involved the inappropriate use of the Caribine at distances beyond those for which it was intended. A late friend who served three tours in Korea once commented to me that he felt that the problem was compounded by temperatures low enough to affect bullet velocity.
spwenger is offline  
Old 07-11-2014, 09:04 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Skeptic49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Posts: 2,265
The most use of the M-1 Carbine, according to the Vets of my Dad's era, was a nice package guard duty weapon. There were two 15-round magazines in a pouch on the stock. You were issued the carbine and the Sergeant of the Guard gave you a magazine to put in the weapon after insuring the chamber was clear. The user was warned not to chamber a round, unless in extreme circumstances. Most personnel in a medical unit were never assigned an individual weapon.
Geoff
Who notes in New Guinea and the Philippines most causalities were from injury and disease not enemy action.
Skeptic49 is offline  
Old 07-11-2014, 10:02 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic49 View Post
The most use of the M-1 Carbine, according to the Vets of my Dad's era, was a nice package guard duty weapon. There were two 15-round magazines in a pouch on the stock. You were issued the carbine and the Sergeant of the Guard gave you a magazine to put in the weapon after insuring the chamber was clear. The user was warned not to chamber a round, unless in extreme circumstances. Most personnel in a medical unit were never assigned an individual weapon.
Geoff
Who notes in New Guinea and the Philippines most causalities were from injury and disease not enemy action.
The Carbine was an instant hit with GI's and it saw a LOT of combat use in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. Like I said, it's well proven in battle. Go pretty much anywhere in the world where there is a war going on and you're going to find an M1 Carbine.

One thing that amazes me about the Carbine is the lack of development and it has worked perfectly from day one. ALL major military small arms typically have teething problems. Most often there is nothing wrong with the design, it's almost always materials and manufacturing issues. Garand, M14, AK,G3, FAL, M16; none of these worked well when adopted and took a few years to work out the kinks. But not the Carbine, that little sucker just hummed along from day one. If you ask me, the development and fielding of the M1 Carbine is the finest, most successful small arms project the US has ever done.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 07-11-2014, 03:18 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
TommyGunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Morgan County, Alabama "In Dixie Land I'll take my stand."
Posts: 8,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic49 View Post
The most use of the M-1 Carbine, according to the Vets of my Dad's era, was a nice package guard duty weapon. There were two 15-round magazines in a pouch on the stock. You were issued the carbine and the Sergeant of the Guard gave you a magazine to put in the weapon after insuring the chamber was clear. The user was warned not to chamber a round, unless in extreme circumstances. Most personnel in a medical unit were never assigned an individual weapon.
Geoff
Who notes in New Guinea and the Philippines most causalities were from injury and disease not enemy action.
Yup, the ol' "stock pouch." There actually was no such thing.
Really.
In WW2 some wag found out that the early style pouch would fit over the stock if the action was dismounted. Once placed on the stock the action would be remounted, and two 15 rnd mags inserted. But, that pouch was originally intended to be on the belt and had a full web back with a snap that held it in place to the belt.
This became a convenient way for many people who were issued carbines to carry 2 extra mags in WW2, Korea and other battlefields and even found its way into Hollywood movies and the TV series "COMBAT!" where Lt. Gil Hanley was shown carrying a carbine with a stock pouch.
In fact, my carbine is currently carrying one.
TommyGunn is offline  
Old 07-11-2014, 03:33 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
IrishCop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Decatur, Al
Posts: 2,562
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyGunn View Post
Yup, the ol' "stock pouch." There actually was no such thing.
Really.
In WW2 some wag found out that the early style pouch would fit over the stock if the action was dismounted. Once placed on the stock the action would be remounted, and two 15 rnd mags inserted. But, that pouch was originally intended to be on the belt and had a full web back with a snap that held it in place to the belt.
This became a convenient way for many people who were issued carbines to carry 2 extra mags in WW2, Korea and other battlefields and even found its way into Hollywood movies and the TV series "COMBAT!" where Lt. Gil Hanley was shown carrying a carbine with a stock pouch.
In fact, my carbine is currently carrying one.
As is a new members, Bobcat7, who posted a photo on another thread.

As a kinda related aside, I watched Carbine Williams on TMC the other day. A nice old Hollywood movie with one of my favorites, Jimmy Stewart.

Last edited by IrishCop; 07-11-2014 at 03:35 PM. Reason: What else? Typo.
IrishCop is online now  
Old 07-11-2014, 05:12 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,207
Actually, the Carbine did have significant teething problems, or at least the manufacturers did.
There were many reports of manufactures having trouble making reliable Carbines.
The problem was bad enough that the Carbine had an early reputation as not reliable.

Also, strangely, the Airborne generals absolutely HATED the Carbine.
They considered it to be an unreliable weapon, unsuited for combat use.
When General Gavin parachuted into Sicily, he attempted to open fire on German troops soon after landing only to have his Carbine jam.
He grabbed another and it jammed too. The officers with him also had unreliable Carbines, leaving them in a tight spot.
Gavin came on some wounded paratroopers and picked up an M1 Rifle. He carried the same one for the rest of the war.

Contrary to popular belief, it wasn't Pacific theater requests for a shorter M1 Rifle that lead to the T21 or "Tanker" M1 Rifle, it was Gavin and the other paratrooper commanders who asked for a shorter M1 Rifle that could be jumped assembled easier so they could replace the Carbine.
By the time Springfield Armory got something working, the war ended and the idea was dropped with only three prototypes built.

However, other combat troops loved the Carbine.
It was short, light, high capacity, and handy. Just the thing for use in city fighting, night fighting, and jungle fighting.
No less then Audie Murphy had his "lucky Carbine" that he used so effectively.
Up until near the end of the Vietnam War, many Special Ops and advisers preferred the M2 Carbine to the M16 or M14, even after the problems with the M16 were solved.
They just liked the way the Carbine handled.

Remembering that the Carbine was intended to be a replacement for the pistol and was never intended to be used as a main combat weapon, the Carbine gave exceptional service.
As above, it was only in Korea where it was improperly deployed that it got a bad reputation for not being effective.

This bad reputation was continued in the hands of civilian police in the 50's and 60's for failing to stop.
That it was usually used with full metal jacketed ammo didn't help.
One surprise the Carbine did give was how effective it is in penetrating modern bullet proof vests.
dfariswheel is online now  
Old 07-11-2014, 07:32 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
stand watie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,325
dfariswheel,

Fwiw, my friend who was an officer with Merrill's Marauders said that the "tanker" was first built in the depots of the CBI & he further said that "it was an answer to a question that should not have been asked. I never saw even one that was reliably functional."

Otoh, Joe truly loved the full-size Garand & used nothing else to hunt until his untimely death by cancer. - He also said that the carbine would have been grand had it been in a more effective caliber. like the the.351 or .401WSL

yours, sw

Last edited by stand watie; 07-15-2014 at 09:08 AM. Reason: grammar
stand watie is online now  
Old 07-12-2014, 02:45 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,163
One of my college professors was a navy vet. One of his responsibilities was issuing arms. Per him (MHPRP), the carbine was intended to replace the handgun and for issuance to those whose primary MOS wasn't 'rifleman'. He said it worked very well in that respect.

Courtesy of him, I met several gents who lost part of their left hands using the carbine as a quarterstaff after sword wielding adversaries weren't impressed with the carbine. One had a snap shot showing the POI of the one round he got off. Shot placement wasn't an issue.

Obviously, the little beast got widely purloined and put to uses for which it originally wasn't intended.
William R. Moore is offline  
Old 07-12-2014, 03:04 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
TommyGunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Morgan County, Alabama "In Dixie Land I'll take my stand."
Posts: 8,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by William R. Moore
Courtesy of him, I met several gents who lost part of their left hands using the carbine as a quarterstaff after sword wielding adversaries weren't impressed with the carbine. One had a snap shot showing the POI of the one round he got off. Shot placement wasn't an issue.
I believe I've previously recounted what I read in a WW2 medical log about a American Soldier on a Pacific Island who was shot by a Japanese sniper (whatever large caliber centerfire rifle they used, obviously not a G.I. Carbine) and was equally "non impressed" until he'd gotten back to camp to report the incident and his CO removed his helmet and showed him two bullet holes -- an entrance wound and an exit wound.
He'd been shot straight through the skull.
And didn't even know it.
He survived because the bullet passed squarely between the brain's right hemisphere and left hemisphere.
"Placement is everything."
Maybe those soldiers who'd shot the Japanese and lost part of their hands DID miss ....maybe the Japanese were hyped on adrenaline and kept going long enough to complete their attack. Who knows?
But I've heard of people being shot with rounds more powerful than .30 Carbine and not diving into a dirt nap immediatly.

I'm not sure what the story of the GI shot through the head really means. Does it mean the Japanese rifle was ineffective? I don't think so. I think this was an "outlier" incident -- something outside the norm; a "blackswan."
I sure would NOT volunteer to be shot similarly -- WITH ANY CALIBER!

However .... I recognize that there were people who were dissatisfied with the carbine.
-- As some others disliked the Garand .... you can't please everyone.
TommyGunn is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 08:51 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfariswheel View Post
Actually, the Carbine did have significant teething problems, or at least the manufacturers did.
There were many reports of manufactures having trouble making reliable Carbines.
The problem was bad enough that the Carbine had an early reputation as not reliable.

Also, strangely, the Airborne generals absolutely HATED the Carbine.
They considered it to be an unreliable weapon, unsuited for combat use.
When General Gavin parachuted into Sicily, he attempted to open fire on German troops soon after landing only to have his Carbine jam.
He grabbed another and it jammed too. The officers with him also had unreliable Carbines, leaving them in a tight spot.
Gavin came on some wounded paratroopers and picked up an M1 Rifle. He carried the same one for the rest of the war.

Contrary to popular belief, it wasn't Pacific theater requests for a shorter M1 Rifle that lead to the T21 or "Tanker" M1 Rifle, it was Gavin and the other paratrooper commanders who asked for a shorter M1 Rifle that could be jumped assembled easier so they could replace the Carbine.
By the time Springfield Armory got something working, the war ended and the idea was dropped with only three prototypes built.

However, other combat troops loved the Carbine.
It was short, light, high capacity, and handy. Just the thing for use in city fighting, night fighting, and jungle fighting.
No less then Audie Murphy had his "lucky Carbine" that he used so effectively.
Up until near the end of the Vietnam War, many Special Ops and advisers preferred the M2 Carbine to the M16 or M14, even after the problems with the M16 were solved.
They just liked the way the Carbine handled.

Remembering that the Carbine was intended to be a replacement for the pistol and was never intended to be used as a main combat weapon, the Carbine gave exceptional service.
As above, it was only in Korea where it was improperly deployed that it got a bad reputation for not being effective.

This bad reputation was continued in the hands of civilian police in the 50's and 60's for failing to stop.
That it was usually used with full metal jacketed ammo didn't help.
One surprise the Carbine did give was how effective it is in penetrating modern bullet proof vests.
THAT is just bizarre, and sounds to me like they got a batch of un-tested and probably improperly assembled Carbines. If they went into battle without first testing their weapons, I don't know what to say about that kind of stupid (not saying it was the soldier's fault, they may have been forced into a situation where they had to by some other idiot).

As a man who has personally gone through a pile of 11,000 M1 Carbines, I know the Carbine WORKS, and works very well. Carbines that don't work, are very easily put back into operation at the depot level at worst. Maybe they had a batch of bad magazines (never seen a truly "bad" GI Carbine mag). Or maybe bad ammo. But to have 3 carbines in a row that didn't work, that's just not a common occurrence at all.

It would be interesting to know what happened.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 09:13 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
TommyGunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Morgan County, Alabama "In Dixie Land I'll take my stand."
Posts: 8,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Gibson
As a man who has personally gone through a pile of 11,000 M1 Carbines.....
Damit Kevin now you've gone and made me jealous!!!!!


TommyGunn is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 01:06 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyGunn View Post
Damit Kevin now you've gone and made me jealous!!!!!


I was like 21 years old and it was my first gunsmithing gig. The Carbine was one of my favorite rifles and I was elated that my first job would be working on several pallets of M1 Carbines. Really learned the rifle well during that time. There were 4,000 that came from Israel and those were all VERY nice; that's the stack that I got my Carbine out of and mine is just super clean. Then there were 7,000 from China and they were a bit rough, almost all of those were re-parkerized.

My favorite one was the M2 Carbine from China with a hand made replacement bolt. The extractor was slightly in the wrong place, more toward the top of the bolt rather than to the side. It would eject the brass right into your forehead. Really funny.

I've also been through something like 4,500 GI 1911's that came from China. About 12,000 Inglis Hi Power's. Long tedius hours, but it was very educational.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 05:44 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,207
THAT is just bizarre, and sounds to me like they got a batch of un-tested and probably improperly assembled Carbines. If they went into battle without first testing their weapons, I don't know what to say about that kind of stupid (not saying it was the soldier's fault, they may have been forced into a situation where they had to by some other idiot).

Remember, Sicily was 1943 and Gavin and company were armed with the M1A1 paratrooper Carbine. This was early days.
Gavin wrote about this in his book, and one of his biographies also described it.

Whatever the situation, I certainly wouldn't have wanted to tell such a ferocious soldier as General Gavin that he didn't know what he was doing with his combat weapon.
What came out of it was that Gavin picked up a wounded paratroopers M1 rifle and carried it the rest of the war.
Also, he and several of the other paratrooper commanders strongly disliked the Carbine, as did many other combat commanders.

Still, undeniably a LOT of combat troops thought highly of the Carbine, and many carried it if they had a choice.
It was always the second choice after the Thompson gun.

Audie Murphy had his famous "Lucky Carbine" that he used to incredible effect.
In a biography about him called "No Name On the Bullet" there's a description of Murphy moving away from a German soldier just as he slipped and fell backward.
Murphy shot the German through the head with his Carbine while laying flat on his back and shooting upside down like he was shooting prone, only laying on his back.

In one description about Murphy that pretty well tells the story, a group of majors and colonels came up to the front to take a look around and probably to claim they'd been in "combat".
Murphy warned them not to go farther forward, and they ignored him.

Shortly thereafter they were ambushed by a German unit and pinned down.
Murphy picked up some grenades and his Lucky Carbine and went to their rescue.
They later described how the Germans were about to finish them when there was a sudden burst of grenades and a hail of Carbine bullets.

Murphy literally wiped out a fairly large German unit single handed.
After he'd finished, the officers described their horror as Murphy came over after the bloody action and started joking with them like nothing at all had happened.
They said the Germans were literally shot to tatters with the Carbine and grenades, mostly the Carbine.

People who served with Murphy said he could shoot the Carbine better with one hand than most could using both.
dfariswheel is online now  
Old 07-14-2014, 07:27 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
TommyGunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Morgan County, Alabama "In Dixie Land I'll take my stand."
Posts: 8,142
dfariswheel,
I am not going to claim that I know what happened to Gavin's carbine(s) that caused the problems you report. I know all guns are subject to problems & malfunctions. Even the venerable AK-47 which has a world wide reputation for reliability even after getting it dirty. Sure it will tolerate dirt but they too will jam if they get dirty enough.
Kevin Gibson probably knows the history of the carbine better than I, but I must say I don't recall reading about it having any unusual reliability troubles when the carbine had been approved and produced.
I do recall while it was in development, it was heading toward army acceptance trials and it was somewhat a late-comer. The Winchester guys were fighting a problem with it that it was not cycling right. As a last second measure one of them decided to drill out the gas hole in the bottom of the barrel a little larger. SHAZAM! It worked fine.
But that happened while a trial model was being developed, not out in a battlefield.
I also recall that while various companies were given contracts for it, one company (I don't remember which offhand) lost the contract because they just could not make the parts correctly.
The majority of bad press about the M1 Carbine is accuracy or power related; some complain it was not accurate, while others claimed it was underpowered (this usually from trying to use the carbine where the Garand would have been more appropriate for distance), and there's the famous and debunked claim from the Korean War that the .30 carbine round would be stopped by the cheap, layered quilted overcoats the N. Korean soldiers wore.
A sort of amusing anecdote (to me) is when I read of actor Rick Jason's comments regarding the little gun. In the 1960s series "COMBAT!" (a WW2 series) he played Lt. Hanley, a character who used the carbine. Jason remarked of the carbine when it was given to him after he refused the Thompson was that "it couldn't kill a sick mouse."
A bit of .... hyperbole. But to put it in perspective and provide an explanation (they WERE, after all, using blanks on the TV series, after all ) Rick Jason was not the typical leftie Hollywood type, he was not only progun he was an avid hunter and reloaded his own rounds. To him a "rifle" fired a round that could take down a T-Rex. From his perspective, certainly the M-1 Carbine with its smallish round must certainly have looked like a ... er, well, "mouse gun."
I'm sure there were instances where carbines malfunctioned ...as Garands no doubt did as well as BARs and Thompsons and others.
However, over all I do believe the carbine was, and if well maintained is also today, a reliable weapon.
As long as you don't try to use it on a Brontosaurus....
TommyGunn is offline  
Old 07-15-2014, 09:36 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfariswheel View Post
THAT is just bizarre, and sounds to me like they got a batch of un-tested and probably improperly assembled Carbines. If they went into battle without first testing their weapons, I don't know what to say about that kind of stupid (not saying it was the soldier's fault, they may have been forced into a situation where they had to by some other idiot).

Remember, Sicily was 1943 and Gavin and company were armed with the M1A1 paratrooper Carbine. This was early days.
Gavin wrote about this in his book, and one of his biographies also described it.

Whatever the situation, I certainly wouldn't have wanted to tell such a ferocious soldier as General Gavin that he didn't know what he was doing with his combat weapon.
I would never deny a man his personal observations, but I won't discard mine either.

While there were subtle changes made to various parts on the M1 Carbine as the years went on, the basic first model Carbine was a very reliable weapon from day one.

There were changes to some parts that improved reliability and function from good to excellent. Things like a longer, stiffer hammer spring (something everyone should at least have on hand). Later style sear just improved trigger pull but didn't change anything from a reliability standpoint. The later "M" marked magazine catches just had a little more engagement of the lugs on the magazine (have to push the mag release a little further) so magazines wouldn't inadvertently be dropped from impact. The safety was changed from push button to twist lever so when someone went to take their safety off, they didn't accidentally drop their magazine. The cam angle on the slide was changed in the two later style slides which improved reliability in sand slightly, but old style slides work very well. Gas piston and piston nuts were changed just to decrease chance of any breakage. Recoil plate was changed to improve accuracy.

So even with all the changes made to the carbine, the actual function of the rifle was changed very little. In fact, the only truly functional change was the later style slides with the different cam angle, but the manual said all 3 slide styles were acceptable.

I don't doubt there were problems, when you're waging war on that scale, Mr. Murphy is a busy man. But the carbine when built right, with proper magazines and proper ammunition, is an exceptionally reliable weapon.

But there's no way to know if the one's his unit had were built right, had good magazines, or good ammo. 3 unreliable rifles in a row makes me think something was horribly wrong. A common issue early in the war for depot repair was was non-staked or improperly staked gas piston nuts, and that will just wreak hell on a Carbine. But armorers were re-educated very early as to how big of an oops that was, and that problem pretty much disappeared.

One factory problem was every now and then you'll find a Carbine with an under-sized gas port. Kinda weird to imagine how that could happen, but when I was rebuilding Carbines, that was encountered a good dozen or more times. Very quickly I got to where I could recognize the problem just by sight. The hole for the gas port extends all the way through the gas port lug, and I got to where I could just eyeball that hole diameter and tell if it was under-sized. I used a drill as a check gauge (can't recall the size, that was 1985).

So I don't doubt he did encounter issues, but I'm here to tell you that 3 M1 Carbines that didn't work, something was very wrong.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Old 07-15-2014, 10:09 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 5,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyGunn View Post
The majority of bad press about the M1 Carbine is accuracy or power related; some complain it was not accurate, while others claimed it was underpowered (this usually from trying to use the carbine where the Garand would have been more appropriate for distance), and there's the famous and debunked claim from the Korean War that the .30 carbine round would be stopped by the cheap, layered quilted overcoats the N. Korean soldiers wore.
Most of the "accuracy" issues are horribly exaggerated. The issue of accuracy is mostly related to the cartridge and shooting at distance. At distance the Garand "seems" far more accurate because the much flatter shooting cartridge is much easier to hit with. When in fact, the accuracy acceptance standards for the Carbine and Garand were exactly the same 6 MOA. In reality wartime Garands were typically 2.5 MOA and Carbines were typically 4 MOA. And while 4 MOA doesn't sound impressive, you have to understand the very limited range of the cartridge, and the intent of the M1 Carbine; a replacement for a handgun. A 4 MOA carbine is a very deadly weapon out to around 150 yards even in the hands of someone not really well trained. Out to 300 yards, you wouldn't want a well trained marksman shooting at you with one. I can connect on man sized target out to 300m with boring regularity. It's a quite competent little rifle. And when comparing ball ammo to ball ammo, the Carbine has better barrier penetration than the .223 inside of 150 yards. So for a defensive defense carbine, I just can't think of how it's deficient in ANY way. And if you use something like the Cor-Bon load, its FAR more terminally effective than ANY of the NATO FMJ rounds, even the .308; inside 150 yards.

I have said more times than I can count. The M1 carbine was SUCH a great replacement for a handgun that it has always been compared to main line infantry rifles; where predictably it would come up short.

The Carbine was a PDW before the concept of the PDW, so it just has never been measured against PDW's. Some "PDW's" were SMG's. H&K marketed a "PDW" version of the MP5-K. And when measured against SMG's the M1 Carbine would always come out smelling like a rose. Reliability is about a parity if you're comparing against the best of the SMG's (something like the Sterling), accuracy is typically better, terminal performance is superior as is barrier penetration).

I personally think the M1 Carbine still makes a great PDW, and would do well in service with any military. Sure there are better options out there. The Suchka (AKSU-74) commonly and incorrectly called the Krinkov is an excellent PDW, and coincidentally it has been accused of exactly the same things as the M1 Carbine. Lack of accuracy and "stopping power" at range. Some things never change.
Kevin Gibson is offline  
Reply

  Gun Hub > Battle Rifles > M1 Carbine


Search tags for this page

broke dovetail on m1 carbine

,

curtis le may and the m-1 carbine

,

famous people that used a m1 carbine

,

how many people were killed by an m1 carbine in ww2

,

how to use l shaped rear sight m1 carbine

,

m1 carbine historic non military use

,

m1 carbine police use

,

m1a1 carbine war photos

,

when did they use the m1 carbine in wwii

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTB: WWII M1 Carbine - No Safe queen - just a solid carbine travisaasen Guns 0 03-25-2005 09:12 PM
M1 Carbine WWII ads M1 Carbine 8 02-07-2005 05:15 AM
Historical WWII photos M1 Carbine 0 02-05-2005 04:11 PM
Winchester Garand & Carbine historical photo M1 Carbine 13 11-11-2004 02:17 PM
Historical WW-2 M-1 Carbine Data (Parts 1 thru 9) M1 Carbine 11 09-15-2004 05:15 PM




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2017 Gun Hub. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.