February American Rifleman

[imntxs554]

Arms of the Chosin Few...This is a Article in American Rifleman in 2010. Nothing has changed in 6 years about the Perception on the M1 Carbine problems and then has to be rewritten again in this last article in AR. This Topic has been talked about so many times here and other Sites and Magazines. To me no matter how it performed in the Korean Conflict it's the Best Carbine by far in that era. The number of casualties will never let us know how many were due to the M1 Carbines, but I bet it's a lot more than the problems some soldiers didn't like about it. I have read and heard stories about some Marines saying it was a great Carbine to use. To me I only see bad Reviews about this Wonderful Carbine in Korea. I never seen or maybe I missed reading anything bad about the M1 Carbine in the European Theatre. Is the Author of this Story in AR the same man that wrote a book about it ?

American Rifleman | Arms of the Chosin Few

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[lemaymiami]

I'm a retired cop (served from the last day of 1973 to 1995 down here in paradise ,south Florida, during the height of the party....) and I have killed on the street when I had to (one shot fired in 22 years.....). I only mention it for some background on my remarks.

I recently decided that I needed a carbine (the original PDW) for the exact purpose it was originally designed for -as a personal defense weapon for my vehicle (I have a different weapon for home defense purposes). I know that the original military "hardball" ammo means great penetration - but could probably be improved upon in the civilian world. I remembered reading that a NYPD stakeout team had great results using softpoint ammo working robbery details in the late sixties.... That was specifically why I chose a carbine (the other two "possibles" were a mini 30 tactical from Ruger or an S&W sport 15 in .223 -but the carbine was just much more interesting..). I'm also a Vietnam vet (although only a pencil pusher back in 1971) and I did remember that many of the ARVNs were equipped with carbines as well...

So with all that in mind I recently purchased an old carbine in nearly new condition (not a USGI -in today's world they're out of my range). It was a Plainfield and appears to have come from the early seventies -towards the end of their production time. Haven't been to the range with it yet so that we can get acquainted. When I do it will be with hardball to verify aim, function, reliability then finally with softpoints to make sure it feeds them properly and that I can go through a box without an jams, failures to fire, etc.

Once it passes it will go into service - and I'll be pretty confident that it will be exactly what I want - something quick and maneuverable with a bit more power than .357 for the possibility that it might one day really be needed. I've read a lot of accounts about the performance issues in the Korean conflict and I can understand that concern. I also know that many cartridges don't perform up to spec in extreme cold weather (not a concern in my world).... Unfortunately, down here... if I ever need a weapon away from home I'll probably be facing more than one opponent - just what that little carbine was intended for....

[DaveHH]

Using the Chosin as an example of carbine performance isn't fair. I don't buy the argument about the extra burden of an M1 rifle endangering the Marine Corps. The guys who are humping base plates and pig guns are always the big lads and the difference between 6lbs and 9lbs isn't going to bother most people, it's all heavy.

I'll bow out of this talk by saying that in the 60s and 70s I worked with maybe a dozen Chosin and China Marines. Getting drafted in 1965 and returning from Vietnam in 1967 made me even more inquisitive. I am a history nut and talked to these guys a lot. To a man, 100% disliked the Carbine as a tool of war.

[firstflabn]

The guys who are humping base plates and pig guns are always the big lads and the difference between 6lbs and 9lbs isn't going to bother most people, it's all heavy.

Except that ditching 7-1/2 lb. M1919A4 spare barrels at the Chosin happened frequently enough to warrant mention in the "lessons learned" section of the 1MARDIV AAR. Silly me, when I read the phrase "due to the extra weight" I leaped to the conclusion that weight was somehow a factor. Maybe the big boys were all toting the 81mm mortars and HMGs.

I don't have a detailed T/O for a USMC KW rifle company to see whether weapons crews had pistols or carbines. In the 1944 version, I was surprised to see that everybody in the USMC 60mm mortar and LMG crews were authorized carbines, while in the army equivalent the gunners and their assistants had pistols. Would be interesting to know their thought processes. Different outcomes perhaps, but both services were looking for an edge - to win and to save lives.

[DaveHH]

There is a big difference between dumping a spare barrel and choosing a marginal weapon that may save your life to avoid humping a couple of pounds. SLA Marshall's somewhat believable books chronicle the Army personnel dumping everything, spare ammunition, grenades, over the matter of weight. I would not expect the same behavior from Marines. HMGs were rarely carried. I'll give you another theoretical instance that you can pick apart: Suppose your assistant gunner and ammo bearers are humping cans of belted ammunition in addition to a spare barrel in a piece of web gear that may be a genuine hassle to keep on board comfortably. You ask the SGT if it's ok to ditch the barrel and pick it up later or just forget about it. If there has been no use of it for several days, it might be a great idea to dump it in favor of bullets. Gas masks are dumped by the hundreds, was there a "lesson learned" on that?

[ChipS]

There is a big difference between dumping a spare barrel and choosing a marginal weapon that may save your life to avoid humping a couple of pounds. SLA Marshall's somewhat believable books chronicle the Army personnel dumping everything, spare ammunition, grenades, over the matter of weight. I would not expect the same behavior from Marines. HMGs were rarely carried. I'll give you another theoretical instance that you can pick apart: Suppose your assistant gunner and ammo bearers are humping cans of belted ammunition in addition to a spare barrel in a piece of web gear that may be a genuine hassle to keep on board comfortably. You ask the SGT if it's ok to ditch the barrel and pick it up later or just forget about it. If there has been no use of it for several days, it might be a great idea to dump it in favor of bullets. Gas masks are dumped by the hundreds, was there a "lesson learned" on that?

Without getting too nostalgic, back in the 'Old Corps' (LOL) in Vietnam (almost) everybody in a USMC rifle company carried something besides their personal ammo & gear - gun ammo, LAAWS, claymores and/or 60mm mortar rounds, take your pick, they all get heavy. Nobody was allowed to ditch nothin', and that was true for gas masks. Lose your gas mask and you would probably be standing before the man explaining and paying. That may not be true today now that the Marines will be deploying 110 pound little girls in their front line infantry units. God help us. Semper Fi.

[firstflabn]

There is a big difference between dumping a spare barrel and choosing a marginal weapon that may save your life to avoid humping a couple of pounds. SLA Marshall's somewhat believable books chronicle the Army personnel dumping everything, spare ammunition, grenades, over the matter of weight. I would not expect the same behavior from Marines. HMGs were rarely carried. I'll give you another theoretical instance that you can pick apart: Suppose your assistant gunner and ammo bearers are humping cans of belted ammunition in addition to a spare barrel in a piece of web gear that may be a genuine hassle to keep on board comfortably. You ask the SGT if it's ok to ditch the barrel and pick it up later or just forget about it. If there has been no use of it for several days, it might be a great idea to dump it in favor of bullets. Gas masks are dumped by the hundreds, was there a "lesson learned" on that?

To my knowledge, they didn't prepare "lessons learned" reports on hypothetical situations. If your research has turned up any, I'd be pleased to learn of them. However, the 1st Marine Division's post-Chosin reports do employ careful speculation, versions of "maybe this or that would help" after explaining the event.

The wisdom of retaining the carbine in the USMC T/O had already been answered before the NORK's started south in June, so your wishful thinking is pointless. It had already been answered several times during WWII during rather sweeping T/O changes. The idea that the carbine had mechanical issues during Chosin is firmly rooted in fact. The point I was striving to make (and you either ignored or dismissed) was that if you rely on anecdote in place of research, you'll miss the point that other weapons had numerous reliability problems too. If you strip the context from even factual accounts, you distort the conclusion. Is that not obvious?

Since I've endorsed context as a good thing, and since we both seem to have an interest in the weight carried by weapons crews, how about a quick peek at how the Marine infantry battalion mortar and MG elements (both heavy and light) were organized in Oct 40. I'm fairly certain this is the last version before the carbine was adopted. Piecing together some secondary sources, looks like 65 rifles and 170 pistols. I can't help but wonder if the considered wisdom of the Marine Corps thought weight might be one issue leading to this distribution.

What did the first USMC T/O with the carbine look like? Again, for the weapons crews in an infantry battalion: 1 pistol, 132 carbines, 41 '03s. That's virtually a complete swap, carbines for pistols (at least proportionately as the quantities varied a bit).

I can't prove that the reason the Corps assigned a much higher proportion of carbines to their infantry battalions than did the army was because they also assigned a much greater number of MGs and mortars (correlation is not the same as cause and effect), but, when combined with remarks about the weight of other weapons, it's impossible to ignore.

If you can tolerate one more comment: I had always been a bit skeptical about the claims that the original carbine safety was changed because of WWII GIs getting it confused with the mag release, but I'll be damned, there it was in one of those WWII lessons learned reports. Still learning (now if I could just remember where I put stuff).

[JOHN42768]

For what it is worth. There are may thousands of dead buried enemy solders who could attest to the effectiveness of both the M1 Carbine and the Garand. I don't believe any of them would pick one over the other.

[USGI]

My February copy of AR arrived yesterday and I haven't had time to read the article as yet. I can recommend the book, "US Infantry Weapons in Combat - Personal Experiences from World War II and Korea" to anyone who would like to read further on the subject. It has the personal stories of 65 soldiers who were interviewed during the book's writing. Here's a link that has some notes from the publisher, Scott Duff. The notes pretty much sum up the contents. - Bob
http://www.amazon.com/Infantry-Weapo.../dp/1888722150

[Seaspriter]

US Infantry Weapons in Combat - Personal Experiences from World War II and Korea"

Looks like a fascinating book. Here's a quote from the Foreword by Scott Duff:
"The differing opinions of these men is fascinating. One man loved the M1 rifle and hated the M1 carbine while the next loved the M1 carbine and hated the M1 rifle." I think those opinions have not diminished in 70 years. Each was designed for a purpose, and, more than likely, was hated when used outside its scope of design.