The M1 Carbine is the standard by which all PDWs are measured.

[n9nwo]

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...ecial-carbine/ great story btw

The M1 carbine sort of set the standard of comparison for what a PDW should be.

Any PDW has to have the range and power of the .30 carbine round (7.65x33).

[Old18C]

I would have to disagree with that from the NRA. I am very fond of MP-5Ks for PDW work and have NO faith in .30 carbine even the M-2 just didn't have what was needed for work. I haven't used a M-1 or M-2 on two legged meat targets but on 4 legged it was VERY lacking. I belive the 9mm sets the standard the .30 carbine dosen't meet.

[GregP42]

I know my grandfather preferred the M1/M2 carbine to his M1 Garand. Said the carbine worked much better for him when he was in Burma, China and India. That said, he said the best one if you could get it was a Thompson, but all the officers would claim them and "You got to wait for the japs to shoot the bastards so you can take it." I know when I got am M1 when I was younger he showed me how to strip it, all the way down to pulling the gas piston out under the barrel. Maybe I need to get another one, I miss the one I had all those years ago,

[stanc]

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...ecial-carbine/ great story btw

It is a good story, but the statement that the M1 carbine was designed for "use by 'secondary' troops, including vehicle crews, medical personnel, rear echelon soldiers and other support personnel not normally found on the front lines" is inaccurate. Actually, the M1 carbine was also intended for issue to front line infantrymen for whom the heavy M1 Garand would have been a hindrance to their primary duties.


Above: 1st Lt. Bryan Bell at Normandy in 1944;
rifle platoon leader, G company, 313th infantry.

Below: Airborne infantryman with M1A1 carbine.

[stanc]

I would have to disagree with that from the NRA. I am very fond of MP-5Ks for PDW work and have NO faith in .30 carbine even the M-2 just didn't have what was needed for work. I haven't used a M-1 or M-2 on two legged meat targets but on 4 legged it was VERY lacking. I belive the 9mm sets the standard the .30 carbine dosen't meet.

I agree that 9mm is a better "standard" for PDW calibers -- the .30 Carbine is more of an assault rifle cartridge, than a PDW round -- but 9mm FMJ terminal effectiveness is not likely as good as .30 Carbine FMJ.

[lazyengineer]

The M1 Carbine definitely has fans and detractors! That .30 carbine round isn't nearly as weak as people act. I know people who laughed at it as a silly pistol round, and then managed to punch through steel pistol swingers like butter with it, from 100 yards away. They stopped laughing

I have one of these, but rarely shoot it. It's really light and handy, has very cool nostalgia, and hey - it's a .30 cal piston operated assault rifle (if you will); which for about a 10 year window, everyone was trying to transform an AR15 into! But in all honesty, today - they... kind of aren't so hot. I tried 3-gun style shooting with one once. Went through over 200 rounds in about 30 minutes.

It was fun but in reality:

-Relatively poor accuracy (not a big deal in the 50 yard range usage)
-Had about a 1% failure rate; due to the ejected casings that bounce off the back of the port, sometimes bouncing back into the action.
-The sight picture tends to be partially obscured by the front handguard.
-Doesn't really snap into a comfortable position and point that great.

On the last note, overall it just doesn't compete with an M4 IMHO. Engaging multiple targets and follow-up shots was just slower than it felt like it should be. I suspect the FN P90 beats it in purpose as a concept for non-primary function armament.

That said, it really is an impressive little nostalgic rifle. In my opinion, an M1 Carbine is worth every bit of $350 and 25 cent ammo as a fun gun.

[TexHill]

It is a good story, but the statement that the M1 carbine was designed for "use by 'secondary' troops, including vehicle crews, medical personnel, rear echelon soldiers and other support personnel not normally found on the front lines" is inaccurate. Actually, the M1 carbine was also intended for issue to front line infantrymen for whom the heavy M1 Garand would have been a hindrance to their primary duties.

The Ordinance Department's original 1938 request to manufacturers was for a light carbine to replace both the pistol and revolver. Both are PDW weapons that are normally issued to support personnel , artillery personnel, mortarmen, and officers. The Ordinance Department had done a study of the performance of the 1911A1 during WWI, and found that the ".45 pistol's ineffectiveness was well proved by the amazingly small number of casualties inflicted upon enemy troops during WWI."

It wasn't until the spring of 1942 that the Ordinance Department requested the submission of designs for a folding stock to be used principally by paratroopers because of their need for compact weapons. The first folding stock M1A1 carbines were issued to airborne units in June of 1942.

So, the story's statement about the M1 carbine's original intended use is true, but it was also quickly adopted by troops who's needs were better suited by the light carbine rather than the Garand.

As far as comparing the 30 carbine round against the 9mm, 30 carbine is at least 500 fps faster at the muzzle than the 9mm. Sorry, but I'll take the 30 carbine over the 9mm.

I collect WWII small arms, and I currently own two early war Inland carbines. One of which is a legit M1A1 paratrooper.

[kmon]

Stanc is exactly right on how it was used by many of our service men. My Dad is one that carried an M2 Carbine in Korea, he was a lineman keeping up communications along the front lines in some areas I am sure some of you have heard of Punch Bowl and Heartbreak ridge. He was there after the more famous battle for Heartbreak Ridge occured and the pictures he had of that there were almost no trees standing in them. He was issued a M1 but traded it for the M2 shortly after getting there and swapped it for another M1 before leaving. That little M2 served him well during his time of using it

I have a Rockolla and please do not tll all the deer it has killed since I got it that they were killed by an inferior firearm, they might return to give me indigestion. One of my Aunts killed truck loads of deer with hers and rarely ever shot more than once at a deer. Like mine has never shot more than once at a deer. I do keep all my shots when hunting under 100 yards but in thick woods of Mississippi where I use it that is not an issue.

[stanc]

The Ordinance Department's original 1938 request to manufacturers was for a light carbine to replace both the pistol and revolver. Both are PDW weapons that are normally issued to support personnel , artillery personnel, mortarmen, and officers.

So, the story's statement about the M1 carbine's original intended use is true...

Infantry platoon leaders are officers. They are also front line soldiers, not rear echelon, "secondary" troops.

[TexHill]

Infantry platoon leaders are officers. They are also front line soldiers, not rear echelon, "secondary" troops.

Our military has a habit of thinking that the next war is going to be fought like the one before it. I agree with you that infantry platoon leaders are front line troops, but a platoon leader's primary role is to lead and direct his men. His secondary role is to fire upon the enemy. In the trench warfare of WWI infantry platoon leaders were issued the Colt 1911A1 or in some cases the S&W M1917. They were not issued rifles like the Springfield 1903. This is exactly why in WWII officers were issued the carbine rather than the Garand.

[A5BLASTER]

Stanc is exactly right on how it was used by many of our service men. My Dad is one that carried an M2 Carbine in Korea, he was a lineman keeping up communications along the front lines in some areas I am sure some of you have heard of Punch Bowl and Heartbreak ridge. He was there after the more famous battle for Heartbreak Ridge occured and the pictures he had of that there were almost no trees standing in them. He was issued a M1 but traded it for the M2 shortly after getting there and swapped it for another M1 before leaving. That little M2 served him well during his time of using it

I have a Rockolla and please do not tll all the deer it has killed since I got it that they were killed by an inferior firearm, they might return to give me indigestion. One of my Aunts killed truck loads of deer with hers and rarely ever shot more than once at a deer. Like mine has never shot more than once at a deer. I do keep all my shots when hunting under 100 yards but in thick woods of Mississippi where I use it that is not an issue.

I don't even want too try and count up all the deer/hogs/coon's/nutria/gators that have meet their end with the M1 that my grandfather brought home after WWII.

Not sure where he got it but the story goes he had it with him in his luggage when my grandmother picked him up at the bus stop the day he got back.

Still rocking the same 12 mags and never a mis feed.

Now that I think about it, I might have too break the old girl out of the safe and go get her nice and dirt at the range.

[stanc]

I agree with you that infantry platoon leaders are front line troops, but a platoon leader's primary role is to lead and direct his men. His secondary role is to fire upon the enemy.

That's essentially the same thing I said in post #4:

Actually, the M1 carbine was also intended for issue to front line infantrymen for whom the heavy M1 Garand would have been a hindrance to their primary duties.

The point is that -- contrary to the statement in the article -- the M1 carbine was designed to be a PDW not just for use by rear echelon support troops, but front line soldiers as well.

[n9nwo]

What the .30 carbine has going for it over the 9mm is being able to do aimed fire out to 100m. Not sure that the 9mm would have the accuracy let alone the energy down range that the .30 carbine would.

Any PDW has to have the ability to engage targets out to 100 m.

[JASmith]

What the .30 carbine has going for it over the 9mm is being able to do aimed fire out to 100m. Not sure that the 9mm would have the accuracy let alone the energy down range that the .30 carbine would.

Any PDW has to have the ability to engage targets out to 100 m.

Concur with need for a PDW to be able to to engage targets out to 100 meters.

The perception of gross inaccuracy of the 9mm comes from the 4 to 5 inch barrel and a firearm designed for one-handed use.

A 20-inch 9 mm barrel would add about 200 fps and yield a 100 meter velocity very close to that of the pistol at the muzzle. Further, a 100 yd zero would keep the bullet within about 5” of the line of sight out to past 140 yards.

Assuming both are FMJ military rounds, the larger diameter of the 9mm bullet would result in more rapid incapacitation in hits away from the CNS or major bones.

Both being carbine platforms, the hit probability would be about the same for each.

[pacificpt]

I have had the M1 Carbine and a Ruger 9MM PC Carbine at the range at the same time. My experience is the M1 Carbine can be used to engage torso sized targets at 200 yards with confidence. The Ruger 9MM, not nearly so much. I love the Ruger, but for a PDW the M1 Carbine has significantly more ability, and is lighter to boot. The real weakness with the M1, in my experience, is the magazines.