In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

The .30 Carbine

E.WilliamsE.Williams Member Posts: 1,101 ✭✭✭✭
edited August 2002 in General Discussion
Where does this round shine?Im wanting a smaller lighter caliber rifle to give m M1A a rest I have been shooting it too much I wt to keep it in good shape.I am looking at a IAI M-888 in .30 Carbine but dont know much at all about this round.How does it compare to say a .223 Remington.Is it good for vested threats?I have narrowed it down to the IAI M-888 or a Ruger Mini-14.Somebody tell me where this round is good besides very high mag capacity.In paticular if it will penetrate like a .223 will.Another one where does the 7.62X39 compre to the 2 rounds above on effectiveness and penetration because I could et a Mini-30 just as easy as either of the others.

Eric S. Williams

Edited by - E.Williams on 08/19/2002 00:08:33

Comments

  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The .30 Carbine sends a 110-115 grain roundnose, cased or softpoint, out at 1700 fps from a typical M1 Carbine. It is the lightest of the 3 calibers you mentioned. It was designed as a light assault carbine but often issued by the Army as an alternative to carrying the 1911 handgun, believe it or not. Both the .223 and the Russian caliber hit harder and penetrate deeper, especially against a vested threat. The M1 Carbine is preferable to most carbines firing all but the heaviest handgun rounds, but is squarely in between handgun and "assault weapon" effectiveness. The nice thing about it is its tough reliable semi-auto design, relative ease to shoot well, and its light weight (around 5 lbs.). It also used to cost less than anything in the other two calibers, though now you can have something in 7.62x39 at about the same cost. If I were you and doing comparison shopping for stopping power, I'd pick Ruger Mini-14 or Mini-30 over the carbine, as much as I love mine. Operation is quite similar, and both calibers beat the .30 carbine in all ways that count.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • n4thethrilln4thethrill Member Posts: 366 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    just another thought if you would like a nice 30 carbine that is easy to carry you might take a look at AMT handguns .30 carbine mine is wonderfull to shoot superbly balanced veryaccurate btw it is an auto ruger also makes a blackhawk chambered in the same caliber just a few more options>>>> of which you may have been aware

    you can be king or street sweeper but everyone is going to dance with the reaper
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    Actually, the .30 carbine is very close to the 7.62X39 and both are a long way from the .223 - at least as paper ballistics go. None of the 3 are known for penetration but I suspect the .223 is head and shoulders above the others and the 7.62X39 is superior to the .30 carbine.

    quote:It was designed as a light assault carbine but often issued by the Army as an alternative to carrying the 1911 handgun, believe it or not It was the other way around. The carbine was designed to be a higher powered alternative (and more accurate) to the 1911 but ended up as the first assault rifle.

    quote:Where does this round shine?
    Quite a few here have wanted something lighter than the M1A or M1 Garand for 'urban' combat - the M1 carbine fills the bill perfectly.


    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis

    Edited by - shootist3006 on 08/19/2002 01:47:09
  • Matt45Matt45 Member Posts: 3,185
    edited November -1
    Eric-

    To give you a real world sense of where the .30 carbine fits in let my just say that my Uncle has three and swears by them. He has one in the "Mud room" of his house, one in his John Deere Tractor, and one in a Koplin boot on his ATV which he uses to check the fencing on 1200 acres of farm. Between him, my father and I we have shot 100's of coyotes apiece, usually at a range of 80-150 yds, usually on the run and about 80% of the time there is no need for a second shot. I've also "nuetralized" crows, *, gophers, prarie dogs, and any other "maruading animal" you can think of, usually within a one shot-one kill margin. All three of these carbines are WWII originals and function like the day they were made, prices are a bit steep for those make and models, making ownership slightly prohibitive. I don't know much about the M-888 from IAI other than I think they are all USGI surplus parts with new made recievers, (I think),although I do know a fella who has an M-1 from them and is in love with it.

    PS- US Army surplus ammo is the way to go, especially the stuff headstamped around the 50's & 60's, short of that we really like handloaded FMJ.

    Reserving my Right to Arm Bears!!!!
  • RosieRosie Member Posts: 14,525 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Try to find surplus M1 ammo! I carried a M1 in the army for quite some time and loved it. It was made for house to house and fills that role very well. However, I would choose the 223 in a colt anyday over it. The little carbine gave me comfort many a night but when the M16 came along I gave it up very quick.
  • NighthawkNighthawk Member Posts: 12,022 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Offeror Im interested in buying the little carbine as well what Brand is yours


    Best!!

    Rugster


    Toujours Pret
  • The firearms consultantThe firearms consultant Member Posts: 716 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have to go with Offeror. Get a mini-14 or mini-30. The round are both more effective. If nothing else, all the controls are in the same place as the M1A. It has been my experience that the carbine round is rather difficult to reload, mostly due to the inconsistancy of the brass. Just a thought.
    John

    I might not always tell you the truth, but I will never lie to you!
  • v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    To answer your question, the carbine is highly reliable,durable under rough conditions and not given to mechanical problems or jams. Because of the light weight, low recoil and light muzzle blast, it's as fast & easy to shoot accurately as a 22. Ballistics are equal to the old high speed 32-20 loadings that have popped (now mostly illegal) many a deer since the 1870's. The M-2 version with strap-on muzzle brake is formidable against any close threat and gave me comfort in hostile military situations .
    Rubber magazine caps to keep pocket debris out and prevent damaging the magazine lips are available. Bent mag lips are about the only weakness of the gun that will cause a malfunction. Oil or grease in carbine actions are not a good idea in dusty of freezing conditions.
    The metal Chapstik cap was a perfect muzzle cover to keep the barrels clear of snow,rain and dust and everyone used them. They could be shot through.
    I'd like to hear how the carbine performs with todays' hollow or soft points.
    Max velocity is 1950-1975fps with the 110gr bullet.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    It doesn't matter to me whether the chicken or egg came first. I've heard that the gun was specifically designed as an alternative to the 1911, but since it came after the first German assault designs I find it hard to believe the Army didn't have some inspiration for the light carbine from German light rifles. Anyway, "Carbine" Williams made a fine light rifle that got unfairly knocked in Korea because the round didn't penetrate Chinese parkas very well. And it certainly makes a fine alternative to a handgun if it suits you better. I agree it is as easy to shoot as a .22, though it is a lot louder. In fact, it has a crack, and a pitch, that can be particularly hurtful to me, for some reason, so I am careful to stay away from enclosed spaces around me when shooting mine. Even shooting it outdoors under a rain roof is a bit more than I like.

    Mine is an above average Blue Sky import from the 80s, which I have wood-sanded and cleaned, and the actual manufacturer's name is hidden under the rear sight assembly. I've been too lazy to check it lately, but once upon a time I knew which company made it. The Blue Sky imports have the stamp on the side of the barrel. This was not considered a desirable collector piece like the Winchester, but it sure is a heck of a good shooter, and very reliable.

    Frankly, any of the manufacturers made good M1s, and you can choose according to your preference. Even the Blue Sky imports are now estimated at about $350. Some of the M1s made by various companies had fatter wood stocks than others -- mine is rather slim and I like it that way.

    Domestically, Iver Johnson and Universal made M1s in the 60s for the consumer market and those comparatively newer guns are now valued about the same, or a little less, than any military-made gun. At one time the military guns were better reviewed than the consumer guns, but I'm not sure how much of that was reality-based.

    And of course the Israeli IMI company is still making new ones, a pleasant surprise -- for about the same price as the used examples. You can't go wrong with these.

    I have some of the rubber mag covers, by the way, and the only drawback is that some of them are made of a rubbery material that gets sticky and decomposes, so I've gone without storing my mags that way. I also have one of the jungle clips for putting two mags together, and these are well worth having on some of your spare mags, as long as the extra weight does not interfere with reliability of feeding on your gun. I'll be getting more next time I see them reasonable. They should only be a few buck item.

    For a while, the scoop was that military 30 round magazines were supposed to be far more reliable than anything made in the aftermarket, and some swear that's all they will own, so if you can get the military 30s (they have a distinctive matte grey or greenish finish) you are doing well, but that's why they often cost more. I hear most of the 15 round sticks are reliable -- I have bought new ones from $5 to $8. There are still a ton of these M1 mags out there so if someone is asking too much, shop around. They are not rare and I personally use good aftermarket 30s without indication of problems, though I'd pause before loading them in a life-or-death scenario.

    For those who know very little about the history, it is worth repeating that during the WWII era, many American companies, regardless of their normal product lines, tooled up and made M1 Carbines, from typewriter companies to Postal Meter to I believe the Singer Sewing Machine company, as well as Rock-ola and Winchester. The Winchester name, and the rarer brands, tend to bring a premium from collectors, though the mil-specs of all these makes were virtually the same and all are good shooters with interchangeable parts if in good condition.

    Many of these were passed around to allies, and some come back from time to time in lots, Blue Sky being one of the importers who did this. People looked askance at the Blue Sky imports at the time because of the extra stamps ruining "collector" value, but now, as I said, they are valued about the same as M1s from any other source, depending only on collector interest in a given brand and the actual condition of the weapon.

    Lots of spare parts are available at gun shows, including good springs and such. You can also still get the bolt-atached M2 compensator, and I have one of those on my gun now for quicker follow-ups, not that it's necessary, and of course it adds over an inch to length, which in a light portable gun is not necessarily a virtue.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878

    Edited by - offeror on 08/19/2002 12:55:34

    Edited by - offeror on 08/19/2002 13:09:01
  • oldgunneroldgunner Member Posts: 2,466 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Offeror, Could you expand a bit about Blue Sky? I have one that is marked "IBM Corp," and also has the "Blue Sky,Arlington,Va" mark on it. From your last post, this seems to be a contradiction of names, or did I misunderstand? What I mean is, if IBM made it, why would it be imported? Did IBM build them someplace out of the country?

    There are no bad guns, only bad people.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    IBM is one of the companies who built M1 Carbines under government contract. It then was probably shipped off to a third world ally for a while after the war, to arm some other troops of a friendly nation. For a while, Blue Sky was an importer of M1 Carbines in lots coming back into the country. How they got "over there," and who might have used it, depends upon the history of the particular gun and Blue Sky's sources of supply.

    But yours was originally made in America for Americans, I'm sure. The Blue Sky Importer guns showed signs of use, but not necessarily excessive use, were not restored, and didn't bring the premium prices of "original" military guns that stayed in this country, but I sanded my marked and initialed stock smooth and clean, and it's a great and reliable shooter, and handsome to boot.

    At one time, you could have a Blue Sky import for about half the cost of a domestic example from the same maker, under $200. Blue Sky marked the guns they imported. That's the only reason it says Blue Sky on it in addition to the manufacturer's marks, which in your case was the domestic firm of IBM.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    Old Gunner, to clarify what you have - IBM manufactured it in the US, it was subsequently exported (most likely to Korea). Blue Sky imported it back to the US and was required by law to mark it. Hope this helps.

    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis
  • oldgunneroldgunner Member Posts: 2,466 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ahhh, dat make sense! Thanks. Mine is pretty rough in looks, but as you say, it pop just fine.

    There are no bad guns, only bad people.
  • bama55bama55 Member Posts: 6,389 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I heard/read a while back that Blue Sky stamped there markings so
    hard that it bent some of the barrels. Of course when these were
    shot, they were not accurate at all. Then Blue Sky used a different
    method for putting there "Importer" name on the barrel. Also,
    the importers started out stamping their name on the underside of the
    barrel in plain view, but later some stamped it where the stock/forend
    would cover it. I have one that I think came through Century Arms back in the 80's. It is an Underwood, and the importer marking is
    under the barrel, covered by the stock, and is so lightly stamped it is not readable. You have to use a magnifying glass/opti-visor to even see the mark. Don't know where it came from, but it had a hay string for a sling, tied through the swivel and through the oiler hole in the stock. It does shoot pretty good though.
    Eric
    I would recommend the .223 for your application. It will feed HP and
    SP ammo, where the .30 Carb. is finicky with other than ball ammo.
    In my experience the only jams in a carbine have been with ammo other
    than ball. Getting good reloads is easier with the .223 also.

    Don't send flowers when I die. Send money now, I can buy more ammo.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    You don't need to buy surplus .30 carbine. You can buy ammo like Winchester USA in either jacketed ball or ball with a soft point. Check a catalog like CheaperThanDirt for more data.

    Comparing this to a Colt is apples-and-oranges economically. Your M1 Carbine will cost you $350 or less and your Colt will cost $800 to $1100. Your apples to apples comparison is going to be a Ruger Mini-14 or Mini-30, and even those cost more than $500 new. Many people buy the M1 Carbine for the value and the fact that "the best is sometimes the enemy of good enough."

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • BullzeyeBullzeye Member Posts: 3,560
    edited November -1
    quote:
    Actually, the .30 carbine is very close to the 7.62X39...


    7.62 X 39 (AK-47, SKS):
    Bullet Weight = 125 grains
    Nominal Muzzle Velocity = 2400 fps.
    Muzzle Energy = 1598 ft. lbs.
    Muzzle Energy at 500 yds. = 414 ft. lbs.

    .30 Carbine (M1 Carbine):
    Bullet Weight = 110 grains
    Nominal Muzzle Velocity = approximately 2000 fps.
    Muzzle Energy = 976 ft. lbs.
    Muzzle Energy at 500 yds. = 182 ft. lbs.

    They're very close, are they? Oh yeah, only about 600 foot pounds of difference at the muzzle. They're practically identical!

    quote:...and both are a long way from the .223 - at least as paper ballistics go.

    5.56 NATO:
    Bullet Weight = 55 grains
    Nominal Muzzle Velocity = approximately 3185 fps
    Muzzle Energy = 1239 ft. lbs.
    Muzzle Energy at 500 yds. = 252 ft. lbs.

    Only if you totally disregard the muzzle energy and bullet size (which is the biggest aspect of knockdown power, bigger bullet=more KD power) and just stare at the velocity like it's the only thing that matters.

    quote:None of the 3 are known for penetration but I suspect the .223 is head and shoulders above the others and the 7.62X39 is superior to the .30 carbine.

    The .30 Carbine is a slow-velocity flatnose bullet and has almost jack for AP ability. The .223 generally has good AP ability, but only with correct bullet type and generally close range (under 300 yards) due to that fact that it loses velocity at a vast and exponential rate past 300 yards. The 7.62x39R has both sufficient size and sufficient velocity, which means that instead of being a one-trick-pony in terms of AP power vs. knockdown power, it can do both very well.
  • E.WilliamsE.Williams Member Posts: 1,101 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Bullzeye I have to say if those numbers are on the money you pose a good argument for 7.62x39.

    Eric S. Williams
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    bullz - actual nominal velocity for the 7.62X39 is closer to 2250 FPS and bullet weight is 123 gr., brings it much closer to the .30 carbine. I don't know the source of your velocity figures but mine come from actual measurement of 4 different brands of 7.62X39 (incl. E. German and Chinese military)
    quote:The .30 Carbine is a slow-velocity flatnose bullet and has almost jack for AP ability No, the .30 carbine is round nosed and an AP round was produced for years (granted, it wasn't a very good AP round but neither is the 7.62X39). In one experiment. We set a steel plate (about 1/4 inch thick) at 20 yards and shot it with a 7.62X39 - it made a small dent. I then shot it with a hunting load (soft point - expanding bullet) in .30-06 and punched a hole as smooth as a paper punch. The point of the example is that velocity is one of the key factors in penetrating an object, armored or otherwise. The 7.62X39 was 123 gr. at 2200 FPS and the .30-06 150 at 3050 FPS.
    At close combat ranges (urban combat - under 100 yards) the differences between the carbine and AK rounds is minimal, neither worth a damn as a penetrator. All of these low powered cartridges have only one advantage - they are smaller and lighter weight than high-powered rounds. Kind of a catch 22 situation; make them smaller so you can carry more but then you have to shoot more in order to do any damage!


    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis
  • BullzeyeBullzeye Member Posts: 3,560
    edited November -1
    My figures were from official United States Marine Corps ballistics experiments conducted during the test phase of the XM16E1.

    So with all due respect, I think my data trumps the living HELL out of yours. Three guys with two different rounds and a metal plate. You didnt even bother to take the velocity!
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Things are relative, but I believe this argument is something like looking through the wrong end of the binoculars. If what you say were true, all handguns would be absolutely worthless. Since we know we have stopping figures as high as 98% among HANDGUN rounds that are even slower and in some cases smaller, you have obviously placed "absolute zero" much too high on your practical yardstick.

    I'll say one thing for this point of view -- a lot of dead soldiers probably wish you were right about the unique superiority of the .30-06 and the relative uselessness of the carbine/midrange .30s.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • TOOLS1TOOLS1 Member Posts: 6,133
    edited November -1
    A good friend of mine went through WW2 carrying a .30 carbine. He was in 101 Airborne. Even went through the Battle of the bulge. If it was good enough for him dureing that battle it is sure good enough for me. I realy like mine.
    TOOLS
  • competentonecompetentone Member Posts: 4,696 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:
    (granted, it wasn't a very good AP round but neither is the 7.62X39). In one experiment. We set a steel plate (about 1/4 inch thick) at 20 yards and shot it with a 7.62X39 - it made a small dent.


    Shootist,

    I don't know what sort of 1/4 inch thick steel plate you were shooting at with your 7.62x39, but I've put plenty of "clean-cut" little holes through 1/4 inch thick+ mild steel at 50-75 yards.

    (I don't recommend it--from a safety perspective--as the jackets can be ripped off during penetration and "ricochet" in all directions--including back at the shooter!).

    I was using FMJ and soft point (Federal and Winchester) shooting with my Mini-30. I would expect fairly impressive penetration with steel core AP 7.62x39--if you could find it.
  • E.WilliamsE.Williams Member Posts: 1,101 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    There you go Quicksilver this should cover it.

    Eric S. Williams
Sign In or Register to comment.