Ode to the lowly M1 Carbine...

[Eaglelord17]

You make such a good point about inaccuracy and auto-climb. I wonder what the actual % hit-rate is of any rifle in automatic mode. Bullets that miss are as useless as nothing at all.

The accuracy depends on the firearm. Full auto is only good for two things in my opinion. 1 Suppressive fire (i.e. making the enemy get there heads down), and 2 Point blank range/room clearing.

Some firearms are very accurate in full auto though, some of the WWI MGs on the tripods come to minds, as well as some other firearms like the MP-5s which just due to the caliber of the round tend to stay on target much more effectively (though the caliber limits them to point blank range anyways).

[browningautorifle]

Marlin 995 XLE M2 in .22 caliber with target sights.

Sweet little carbine there...

[INLAND44]

I've thought for years that the .30 Carbine round makes for the best sub-gun of any 'pistol' caliber. A bull-pup in .30 Carbine would be an incredible PDW. The Israelis had one they used for certain special outfits - the Hezi SM-1. You get the benefits of the small cartridge size (magazine capacity) and the larger, slower bullet (greater energy transfer and less over-penetration). I completely get why the M2 Carbine was developed; the mistake was in thinking it could replace the rifle in WWII/Korea tactical situations.

[firstflabn]

I completely get why the M2 Carbine was developed; the mistake was in thinking it could replace the rifle in WWII/Korea tactical situations.

Upon what basis did you conclude that was the case? You have to look especially hard to find any combat use of the M2 in WWII.

[imarangemaster]

Upon what basis did you conclude that was the case? You have to look especially hard to find any combat use of the M2 in WWII.

I think he meant the M1 Carbine in WW2 and then M1 & M2 Carbine in Korea. Though I believe M2s saw some use on Okinawa, as my dad said he saw a "Full-auto" M1 Carbine when he went to Okinawa briefly after Iwo Jima. He thought some GI monkeyed with the sear, and didn't realize it was an M2. I do believe the misuse of the Carbine in Korea as a long range battle rifle is the source of most of its bad rep. Merrill's Marauders in Burma LOVED their M1 Carbines.

The Israelis also love the M1 Carbine. Their "Mash Az" volunteer police (like a neighborhood watch with guns) have used them for many years. They are easy to carry, and easy to train someone to use. Though some of these have phased out by now, I understand some irregular units still have M1 Carbines. I had an Underwood that was an Israeli return, with Hebrew stamps under the handguard. Also, some of the best M1 Carine ammo I have shot is Israeli, with Hebrew headstamps. IMI is still producing it, and it can be found sometimes in stock at Widner's.

As for subguns, I agree the MP5 is the most accurate. I have fired it, Thompson, M2 "Grease Gun" , UZIs, and MAC-9s. The MP5 was pick of the litter. I also fired a Colt AR-15 9mm sub-gun. It was alright, but if I have an AR15, why limit myself to 9mm, when I can shoot 77 grm OTM MK262 MOD1 ammo from an AR shorty.

[Bruce McAskill]

The round count for Viet Nam was between 3000 and 5000 5.56 per enemy casualty. Spray and pray were the rules of the day back then. The need to produce more 5.56 was the cause for McNamara to increase it by using the ball powder that Winchester told him was not ready. It finally was used and caused many good men to lose their lives because of jammed rifles. The switch to ball powder allowed the machines to increase from 7000 rounds an hour to 8000 rounds per machine at Winchester. If I remember right there were 8 machines running 24/7 at L.C. alone plus what ever T.W. and Remington were turning out.

[DaveHH]

Before I was drafted in 1965, I had not had much if any contact with the carbine. The folks who had purchased them through the NRA sales were hanging on to them at that point. In Vietnam I was exposed to what a handy little weapon they were. In the Army, you are married to your weapon and if the "wife" weighs 10-11 lbs and you could get one that weighs 5-6lbs, that is a lot less to carry around. I used to drive convoys on Hwy1 and the VC tax collectors would be hanging in their hammocks at the bridges always with a carbine. We'd wave, they'd wave back. The Koreans used a lot of carbines and I got to handle and shoot them a lot hanging with the ROKs. When I got home I made a point to find and buy a carbine. Used it for decades as a camp gun. It was powerful enough to take out a bear or cougar to protect the kids and a great deterrent for prowling humans. They remain my favorite weapon to shoot to this day. I guess a Ruger mini 14 might be close, but the carbine is more accurate and lighter yet. They are a timeless example of American industrial art that will never be made again. We are lucky to have a few of the 6M they made.

[Seaspriter]

The round count for Viet Nam was between 3000 and 5000 5.56 per enemy casualty. Spray and pray were the rules of the day back then.

Bruce, that is an extraordinary figure. Thank you for this information. It settles a long-standing debate about the issue of accuracy versus fire power (rps).

using the ball powder that Winchester told him was not ready

And thank you for this note. My research shows that Olin was actually working on "ball ammo" at the end of WWII. But most people throw the word "ball ammo" around without understanding it refers not just to the "bullet" (which of course is more likely a pointed projectile) but also to the shape of the propellant. Is it the case that "ball ammo" refers only to certain ammunition produced after WWII? For example, my boxes of original Winchester Carbine Caliber .30 M-1 with the stamp "repacked E.C. 5-44" does not refer to "ball ammo.

[browningautorifle]

But most people throw the word "ball ammo" around without understanding it refers not to the "bullet" (which of course is more likely a pointed projectile) but to the shape of the propellant

No, you're wrong. Ball refers to the type of bullet. Ball, tracer, incendiary and so on. The original was a round ball so the name stuck. The propellant is seldom discussed, especially when soldiers are involved because quite frankly, they have little or no knowledge or even care about the four major parts of a cartridge...just as long as it works EVERY time.

[Seaspriter]

No, you're wrong. Ball refers to the type of bullet. Ball, tracer, incendiary and so on

Jim, I deeply respect your insights, and I know scores of other Milsurps members far more experienced than I would support your position. Plus, I do not profess to know the answer to this question -- I have heard too many points of view and have my head scrambled on whether "ball ammo" refers to the bullet or the propellant. I'd really like to have this issue put straight in my head once and for all. I don't want to sound at all argumentative on this point, but I'd like to stimulate a healthy inquiry. Here's what I have in my research on "ball ammunition" on the other side of the debate: (please, no one take this as the "definitive answer!!!") I've numbered these paragraph's as different people's points of view.

1. Ball powder" describes a type of powder (which is different due to it's manufacturing method). Some other common methods/types are "flake" and "extruded".

2. The name ball powder is actually used by the military to describe any non cordite smokeless powder. So going back to the early days there was the 303 british with a 220 grain round nose projectile on black powder. Then they came out with a cordite Mk7 round with a 174 grain pointed projectile -- Cordite from a Mk. VI cartridge is .027" in diameter and 1.4" long, but it burns too hot and corrodes barrels. Then came Mk8 or 303 ball ammo. Thats because it had ball powder, the name has nothing to do with the projectile.

3. So far as "Ball" powder is concerned, this was developed toward the end of WWII by Winchester as a speedy way of re-working deteriorating lots of standard powders."Ball" or "Spherical" (trademarks used by Winchester/Olin and Hodgdon, respectively) designations did not come about until true ball powders were developed following WWII. It continued after the war as a simplified manufacturing method, and to re-process surplus militray powders for the civilian market. "Ball" is a trademark of Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp. which is the producer of Winchester brand ammunition. Burning rate of ball powders is controlled by deterrent coatings and rolling the ball shaped pellets into a somewhat flattened shape to vary the web thickness. Hodgdon uses the term "Spherical" to denote the same thing as "Ball", which they cannot use since it is a copyrighted name.

Experts, help me clear my head!! Thanks