M1 Carbine accuracy

[jimb16]

Actually, at the nationals, that is about all they do:UNLESS you are in the top ten. Then they do a complete strip down of the rifle and make sure it is not accurized in any way, It has to be totally "stock". If not, then you are disqualified.

[USGI]

I always wondered if you leave it cocked, the hammer spring might get softer over time and make the trigger a bit lighter?

I think it might. One of mine with a lighter pull has an M2 sear (eBay: "hammer release") and I think that helps. They seem to have polished surfaces. I think it's an RIA part. I would think they should be legal to use?? - Bob

[Bruce McAskill]

Type 2 trigger, type 3 sear, type 3 recoil plate and the type 3 barrel band. All add to the accuracy of an M1 carbine. The type 2 trigger was designed for easing the trigger pull. But you can only go so far before you get into dangerous territory. Do not stone the trigger or the sear. If you do you should be ready for a surprise when you fire it. As to cutting the hammer spring. The original had 22 coils but was increased to 26 coils to improve the force of the hammer when it hits the firing pin. Of course your not in a combat situation. Don't mess with the sear spring as it can and often will present unwanted surprises.

[DaveHH]

Funny that you never hear of the warning about oiling the hammer or sear on the carbine, but the M1 Garand is adamant about that warning. Probably because the Garand is a two stage trigger. You look at some of these carbine hammers and you'd think that they've got to be unsafe with the shape of the notch but they are all safe as can be. Winchesters are the only ones that look OK.

[Daan Kemp]

If I remember correctly, the M1 carbine was originally intended to replace the pistol as a sidearm for personnel who couldn't really carry/use a full size rifle? In that case intended use was close up and acceptable accuracy. Later use morphed totally.

[mrclark303]

If I remember correctly, the M1 carbine was originally intended to replace the pistol as a sidearm for personnel who couldn't really carry/use a full size rifle? In that case intended use was close up and acceptable accuracy. Later use morphed totally

Absolutely, whats 'acceptable' accuracy from a carbine, designed in wartime and initially as armament for rear echelon troops?

I would say being able to to hit a man sized target at 100yds is acceptable and being able to keep heads down at 200 + is good enough.

It was only later when wartime demands thrust the Carbine into first line issue that accuracy became a thing to considered and soldiers facing very angry men, quite naturally expected to be able to reach out and give opponents the good news (from a good distance) with a rifle, even if its a carbine....

[Bruce McAskill]

The carbine was designed to have an effective range of 300 yards and hit a man sized target at that distance with the force of a .38 SPL has at the muzzle. That would equal about 250 lbs. of energy. Not a lot by todays standards but back in the day it was adequate. So accuracy was the ability of the carbine to hit a minute of bad guy at 300 yards and to take them out of the picture. Might only wound them but they are no longer in the fight. Today with a good soft point round the carbine is even much more deadly.

[DaveHH]

Read "Blackhawk Down" and hear what a failure the M16 was. The D Boys said that you could have multiple hits and the target would simply flinch and keep right on doing, to die later from the wounds. The M14 equipped D Boys would drop the bad guy with one shot every time..
The M16 was a killer in VN with the 55 grain bullet and 12/1 twist barrel. Add the green tip round and it just drilled holes in people. Undoubtedly hundreds of people shot with the M16 went down, but the overall impression was not good with the D Boys.

Step back with the carbine and thousands of enemy soldiers died after being shot with it. Audie Murphy used the carbine as his preferred weapon. He was a hunter of men and shot killing shots with that rifle. He liked 15 shots and the handy way the carbine could be used. On Iwo and Okinawa, the Marines used it to great effect and they were not rear area troops. It wasn't made as a replacement for the pistol, it was just another weapon, and a very popular weapon.

[firstflabn]

It was only later when wartime demands thrust the Carbine into first line issue that accuracy became a thing to considered

1st Infantry Division received carbines on 10 Jul 42, shortly before embarking for UK. Their 'thrusting' began in earnest on 8 Nov 42.

What 'wartime demands' are you referring to? 1st ID looks pretty 'front line' to me.

[mrclark303]

1st Infantry Division received carbines on 10 Jul 42, shortly before embarking for UK. Their 'thrusting' began in earnest on 8 Nov 42.

What 'wartime demands' are you referring to? 1st ID looks pretty 'front line' to me.

I simply mean that as designed, it was meant mainly for rear echelon troops.

I always thought that was the primary design driver?

When the US entered the war, the extremely rapid mobilisation saw it propelled straight into the front line.