The Carbine as SBR

[Captain O]

I saw an SBR M2 in the hands of Ron Norton on Gunblast. It was interesting, but I fail to see the value in it for anything but tactical (not tacticool) applications. The "Advisor" M2 Carbines were a welcome addition to the arsenal of the "tunnel rats" back in 'Nam. Inside of the house, it would be deafening, and would needlessly mitigate the power of the .30 Carbine. I can't see any "pluses" in civilian applications for the .30 Carbine SBR. While it may be fun, it doesn't make it any more effective.

Give me a "full-length" .30 Carbine with a folding stock any time.

Thank you!

[imarangemaster]

OK gents, been away for a while and actually found my own post with a renewed interest. lol.

I have my SBR carbine now and have enjoyed it immensely! YES, IT IS LOUD! I get people stepping back from their lanes any time I shoot it indoors. It thumps like a .44 Mag! And the muzzle flash lights up about 20 feet of my shooting lane! I wish I would have had the foresight to have left enough barrel in front of the front sight to thread for some form of flash suppressor. That will happen on the next build.

But it makes it sound just that more powerful!! I guess this is akin to those guys like to SBR a .308 rifle!? I never understood that process from a ballistics standpoint, but I get it now from a Show and Go aspect. Still not my thing. I think a .300 Black out or 7.62 x 39 would be the most potent cartridge I would ever SBR. Just talking .30 cal for now.

I built mine from a commercial copy ( Iver Johnson) that I have owned for a while and checked to be sure was functioning properly before applying for cutting it down. It functioned fine as an 18" rifle, but after the cut down, with NO adjustment to gas port, it was experiencing some failure to eject. I traced this to this simplest denominator. New extractor and spring. That fixed it! So a carbine cut to 10" is fine with existing gas port opening. Like the XM177E1 and other short barrel AR-15s, it needs a fresh, strong extractor and spring due to possibly faster bolt velocities?? Fortunately, the M1 carbine does not seem too finicky. It continues to give me reliable service. I would NEVER consider doing this to a G.I. carbine, almost no matter how beat up that rifle would be. There are enough working commercial copies and that seems like the appropriate donor to use. IF you get a commercial and it is giving some functioning issues, buy a fresh new operating spring from Wolff and you will more than likely be good to go. Same for the ejector spring and extractor spring. Even these commercial copies are now 40-50 years old and the original springs were possibly later commercial versions without the benefit of meeting USGI Mil Spec requirements?

With the rifle in an M1A1 folding stock, I love how compact it is for transportation and toten around. I wrap my sling around the steel folding arm to make it more comfortable against my cheek, but the sling is always with me in case I need it for utilitarian reasons.

The accuracy is really not bad and I get 6" groups at 100 yards with 110 fmj surplus style fodder. I need to try some of the Hornandy Critical defense ammo.

In the meantime, I do see that the NEW Inland company is revamping the old Enforcer concept which I now believe was inspired by guys coming out of Viet Nam who had used or at least seen these cut down carbines that SF and helicopter pilots used in small quantities. I have a few pics gleaned from the Internet that I will include with this post.

I think my next project will be to buy a new Fulton Armoury M1 carbine receiver and build my pistol version of the cut down Viet Nam carbine. I am pretty sure I can build one for much less than the $1100 retail I hear Inland is going to charge. Interestingly, I found what looks like a promo picture from Inland with their Advisor mounted in an M1A1 stock just like I was inspired to do. I have included a picture (also sourced from the Internet) that shows a nicer cut down in a folder. It has a front sight too. I will certainly build my pistol with the front sight, even though most pics show a cut down from Viet Nam with no front sight.

I am undecided whether to do this tribute with a threaded muzzle or without? A FH is a nice addition, but for authenticity, going without one would be closer to the pictures I have seen.

Input and stories are welcome. Thanks!

Anyone recognize the guy in the middle photo? That would be the Lt. "Stormin" Norman Schwartzkopf

[Captain O]

It seems that those short-barreled rifles burn propellants inefficiently. People call this a "pistol cartridge" when it is obviously generates higher pressures than the .357 S&W Magnum (38,500 psi as opposed to 35,000 psi). The only handgun cartridge that exceeds the .30 Carbine is the 9 X 25 Winchester, and there's not much call for that cartridge in a "light rifle" is there?

So let's quit fooling ourselves by calling the .30 Carbine a pistol cartridge when it's genesis was from the .32 Winchester Self Loading Rifle Cartridge. The .30 Carbine always has been a rifle cartridge and will never be sufficiently efficient in shorter barrels. It is hard enough to gain performance from the Ruger's revolver barrel. (I shot a friend's Ruger in .30 Carbine and it was extremely loud and not efficient at all).

While it worked inside the tunnels for "short range shock effect" it wasn't much above ground.

Its time to face reality.

[DaveHH]

Had one along on my usual convoy down to Cam Rahn. It belonged to one of our chopper pilots and was a full auto capable weapon. I stopped on Hwy 1 about a mile or so before the rubber plantation and we all shot it. It might be a good weapon if you were locked in a car with someone. On full auto it was ridiculous. No cigar.

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

So let's quit fooling ourselves by calling the .30 Carbine a pistol cartridge when it's genesis was from the .32 Winchester Self Loading Rifle Cartridge. The .30 Carbine always has been a rifle cartridge and will never be sufficiently efficient in shorter barrels. It is hard enough to gain performance from the Ruger's revolver barrel. (I shot a friend's Ruger in .30 Carbine and it was extremely loud and not efficient at all).

Its time to face reality.

I have to disagree with part of this. I have a Ruger and the AMT automg in .30 carbine. My Ruger, though it is louder then a rifle and does have a huge flash, has been accurate. and reliable. The AMT is a bugger to get back on target, not as easy to shoot.

Loud is relative, the reason we wear hearing protection, the Ruger is nothing compared to others, try a S&W .460 or .500 if you want loud. These are loud.

[browningautorifle]

It might be a good weapon if you were locked in a car with someone.

That's a good one...! Never heard that one before!

[emmagee1917]

I was going to build one , but just never got around to it . I went instead with an AR with a 9-inch bbl in 300 Blackout as well as an ACC 762-SDN-6 QD suppressor . Add QD mounts for a choice of a Fastfire III red dot , a Leupold VX-R Patrol 1.25-4 X 20 firedot scope and an Armasight CO-MR Gen III night vision device ( works with red dot or scope ) , and you have one compact and versatile package . Now , if ATF would just hurry up on the stamps !
Oh , BTW , the new challenge is to put 5 shots on a 3X5 card at 200 yds shooting subsonics out of your 300 BO .
Chris

[Captain O]

Fun is fun, but I can't see the advantage in them. These "variations" are expensive play-pretty things that seem of little use in any practical sense. Not worth the $200.00 NFA (No Fun at All) tax for an SBR in .30 Carbine.

[shadycon]

Fun is fun, but I can't see the advantage in them. These "variations" are expensive play-pretty things that seem of little use in any practical sense. Not worth the $200.00 NFA (No Fun at All) tax for an SBR in .30 Carbine

FUN IS FUN in many ways to many different people! TSMG's [FA/SA] and other MG's are fun to shoot. Are they worth the $200 tax stamp? Yes, if that is what you want and can afford it.

[browningautorifle]

I must admit, I did love to shoot the 1928 T Gun...and did so whenever I had the chance.