[John in AR]

What if you were in a gunshop or pawn shop and came across one of these guns, never having seen one before; so you had no pre-conceived biases about it....


- It's a physically small shoulder carbine

- It's a semi-auto, so rate of fire is very good.

- It uses "slap-in" magazines (a la M16, vs. the "tilt-in" of the AK, FAL, etc), so reloading is very fast.

- Its magazines are readily and cheaply available

- It shoots a "medium-power" round; slightly more powerful than a .44 mag revolver, and the same power as a low-end .454 Casull round.

- Even with that power level, its gas-piston system means basically zero recoil. (I've had people as young as six years old shoot one of mine repeatedly with milsurp ammo.)

- Its gas-piston system means much lower maintenance (cleaning) requirements than an AR-platform gun.

- It is literally smaller than a Ruger 10-22

- Its ammo is currently in production from Federal, Remington, Winchester, PMC, and Magtech; some fmj, some SP and some HP. Yet surplus milspec ammo is available as well, although not as cheap as many milsurp calibers.

- It has no "pre-ban" / "post-ban" issues, so you can use a flash-hider, etc; even a silencer.

- Its price tag was $295


223 fan knows the gun of which I speak, as we've discussed it before. And while it will never be my primary defensive gun as I prefer the ergonomics, caliber, and accessories of the CAR-15, it is obviously worth considering. Even if not as your own "primary" gun, how about one, two, or three to arm your family or whoever...?

Surely someone here can guess the gun I'm talking about.

 

[andy]

I'd be more inclined to either sks or 9mm

Camp gun, due to cost of ammo, potential for suppressed work with heavy,subsonic bullets, cost of gun (sks, anyway,or I'd step all the way up to a CAR-15. The carbine you speak of is sort of neither fish nor fowl, to me, anyway. If the can is not an issue, then it makes more sense. Maybe the CArbine's rifling is "fast" enough twist to handle a heavier, subsoic bullet? Then the $300, used Marlin Camp carbine, in 9mm, would only have ammo cost and it's lack of much blast (indoors) to recommend it over your carbine. That can be a pretty big issue, for a non-gun type of person, say an elderly one.

 

[John in AR]

...The carbine you speak of is sort of neither fish nor fowl, to me, anyway.

That's true enough. It's somewhat of a "jack of all trades", though probably master of none.

The main reasons I bring it up is to get people thinking about it as it measurably is, rather than the "stories" they've heard about it over the years.

I know that if I'd just listened to the stories and anecdotal evidence over the years, I'd have not given this gun any consideration at all.

But when you step back and look at it with no pre-conceived notions or biases, it shows itself worthy of a lot more respect than it generally gets.



...Maybe the CArbine's rifling is "fast" enough twist to handle a heavier, subsoic bullet?...

1 in 12 or 1 in 14, iirc. Not positive about that. Don't know how that compares to the rifling twist rate most rifles in this bullet diameter use.

[/B]

 

[andy]

308's r mostly 1 in 10" twist, I've read

, no personal experience, but I think that the spitzer's length has an effect. Blunter, shorter bullets don't need as "fast" a twist in order to be adquately spin-stabilized.

 

[andy]

Speer's 70 gr 223 sp has been around

for about 40 years, worked fine with regular 1 in 12" twists. Pretty "blunt' sort of round nose on it.

 

[John in AR]

FWIW, for those who care, the gun I'm talking about is the much-maligned M1 carbine.

Now before you reflexively scoff & turn the page, re-read the gun's description above. Then decide what exactly it is about the gun that merits its automatic dismissal when combat arms are discussed.

If we can disregard the anecdotal stories from "my brother-in-law's uncle, who carried one in korea" & such value-less commenatries, and just look at it as it "IS", imo, it merits consideration. Those stories are just as prevalent with other weapons; "shoot a man in the hand with a .45, and it will tear his arm off", "shoot a man in the arm with an M16, and the bullet will usually come out his opposite leg", etc. Obvious nonsense, but the M1 carbine is such a low-profile, unimposing weapon, that we don't dismiss the nonsense stories about it as quickly as we do about other weapons.

I've read that in WWII, it was our most-decorated soldier's (Audie Murphy's) favorite combat weapon. Anecdotal, perhaps, but considering the source, it's an endorsement worth considering. (In his biographical movie, they had him carrying a Thompson, but I believe that's an inaccuracy.)

It isn't fashionable, it isn't 'sexy', it isn't racy. It just goes "bang"; rapidly, efficiently, and reliably. I like that in a defensive weapon.

 

[41mag]

You forgot to add that Kahr is offering a brand new one later this year!
You are right though.Lots of power in a small,un-assuming package w/enough positive history(granddad/uncle joe carried one) to overcome lots of blissninny nonsense.

 

[andy]

they refurbished Audie's Carbine, it's on

display in some museum someplace. I'd like to touch that gun.

 

[John in AR]

I didn't know Kahr was coming out with one. IIRC, IMI makes one now also.

Was in a gunshop yesterday and saw one for $299, but didn't bother picking it up, as it was a Universal, and those aren't completely mil-spec.

Heck of a deal for someone, though.

 

[Paco]

No experience with them but I've read and been advised by a pretty knowledgeable military oriented gunsmith that the US surplus ones are what you want if you want a reliable defense gun. If I saw those at $295 I'd buy two. Would love to try one out.

 

[andy]

dunno why it would be, really. for the

typical lame, the sks costs half as much, practice ammo 1/3rd as much The lw of the .30c only matters if you are intent on being foot mobile. If the latter is the case, you'd better just spend the extra money, get a CAR-15, scope .22unit, and a suppressor for it. For the "extra" $1200 or so, you get a lot more gun, and you're going to NEED it, if the sks won't suffice.

 

[John in AR]

Picked up Shooting Times' semiauto buyer's guide yesterday, and it shows Auto-Ordnance also now producing an M1 carbine. I didn't realize any American mfr currently made them; looks like we'll have two, this year.

Two thoughts...

First, with the list of the new ones being over $600, I wonder if this new supply (at those prices) will actually drive UP the cost of the used ones on the market.

Secondly, with any luck, this may increase the popularity of the cartridge, driving down ammo prices some.

 

[.45 COLT]

The ARVN rangers I advised early on in the war carried the carbine. Having seen it put to real use, I'd say it's not a bad choice of weaponry.

DC

 

[andy]

it's not, but like I said, either have

some more power, penetration, less cost of gun and ammo, with sks, or if weight means anything, then the CAR and .22 unit win hands down.

 

[41mag]

John in AR,Kahr owns Auto-Ordanance now.same same.

45Colt,I have a pic somewheres of a Green Beret showing some tribesmen training w/Garands.Those men were only slightly bigger than that rifle.Its a good thing we had the Carbine!

 

[Garand]

I had an .30 Carbine back in the '70's. The barrel was shot out, I rebarrelled it but was never really happy in its performance. Mind you at that time my issue rifle was the Canadian FN FAL, that rifle I was impressed with.