As you know, the M1 Carbine was never supposed to be a replacement for the M1 rifle. Rather, the purpose of the M1 Carbine was to give people who normally don’t carry a full-size rifle (radiomen, mortar crews, messengers, truck drivers, etc.) something more efficient than a pistol. Basically, the idea wasn’t to replace the M1 Rifle, the goal was to replace the 1911 pistol for people who would, normally, only be carrying a pistol.
The 1911, like any pistol really, is challenging to shoot well under stress. A carbine is way easier to handle and get hits with under stress. Gun Jesus ran an impromptu course using both a 1911 and an M1 Carbine and the results are interesting.
As Chuck Connors pointed out in virtually every episode of his show, a short carbine with a pistol cartridge at pistol ranges will outperform a pistol pretty often. This seems to answer the age-old question of ‘what good is a pistol caliber carbine’. Or..does it?
An M1 Garand is about ten pounds. The M1 carbine was about half that. Obviously, theres a tremendous weight advantage. But….a 9mm carbine like a 9mm AR is virtually the same weight as…a .223 AR. So you get virtually no advantage.
You could say, though, that a 9mm AR pistol would be more compact and lighter than a .223 AR carbine and you’d be right. But then you could also just carry a .223 AR pistol and be right back to zero.
So, comparing apples to apples…..AR platform to AR platform..is a zero-sum game it seems. But as mentioned, the M1 Carbine wasnt meant to replace the M1 Garand, it was meant to replace the pistol. So…what about when you compare the 9mm carbine against the pistol? Thats where things would change. But…since you can get your 9mm AR carbine in .223, why not just use your .223 carbine?
It’s an interesting mental exercise. Almost anything you can do with a 9mm carbine you can do with a .223 carbine, so why take the ballistic penalty of being in 9mm? I gotta say, it’s hard to imagine a scenario where a 9mm carbine is a better choice than an M4. Easy to suppress and marginally lower recoil but after that…………..?
Having said that, though…I still like my 9mm carbines. I especially like my Ruger PC Charger which is probably the only format (an arm-braced ‘pistol’) that gives an advantage over the M4..namely, compactness.
Anyway, an interesting video although I’m not sure the implications it suggests are as relevant in a world of M4 carbines that ape the M1 Carbine in terms of length and weight.
Well, given that you had plenty of ammunition and magazines for both 9mm and 5.56 rifles, you can carry approximately twice the amount of magazines in the same space as the 5.56 bandoleer. Maybe even three times as much. If said magazines fit your sidearm (looking at you Glock 19), that 9mm carbine appears to be a suitable option.
For short range. As in inside 100 yards. At twice that distance, the 9mm becomes a noisemaker only, while 5.56 is still well within reason.
Suppressed may be a time when a 9mm is better than a 223/556.
I once bought a 9mm AR off a friend just to help him out financially- i really didnt want it as i was not a fan of pistol caliber rifles. It turned out to be my fav AR. Cheap practice and less noise for the nearby neighbors.
If one would like a real life example, it was reported Audie Murphy killed a crap ton of Nazi’s with his M1 carbine.
For home defense, I would suspect a 9mm carbine suppresses a whole lot better?
Especially with subsonic pistol ammo…
Thought exercises like this really help with making informed choices, no matter which way you go. Mags, sights, food, parts, etc…
It’s one of the reasons why I went with a 30 cal silencer. I can use it on 75% of my rifles. I just can’t use it on PCC’s.
Griffin just came out with probably my next silencer. The Bushwacker 46. I can use it on most of my handguns and PCC’s.
Common old school training was that you use a pistol to fight your way to a rifle. 1911 vs revolver, – the revolver, though limited in no. of rounds, exception for the 10 rd .22, leaves no traceable brass laying around you can’t find to pick up. Both have the advantage, if it’s my preferred steel vs plastic, when you run out of ammo you can always club em cause it’s, ya know, heavy. Weight has value, clubbing ability as well as reduction in recoil, and you can use it as a hammer if need be. (See clubbing above). so now ya know my 2 cents…. Handgiun, rifle, carbine, howitzer, claymore’s, grenades….. it’s all good!
Remember, that at the time the M1 carbine came out that there weren’t light weight rifle cartridges like the .223 (or 7.62×39); up to WWII, carbines were rifle length weapons that fired pistol cartridges.
The advent of ‘assault cartridges’, which is what they are in military terms, made possible light weight rifles and carrying more ammo. This technology change mostly mooted the distinction of carbine from rifle. Having said that, there are still times that a PCC is more useful than a rifle caliber carbine – as mentioned above, for short range or suppressed use, or when weight is critical. I would also add that newcomers to shooting, or those with small recoil sensitive frames, a PCC is a doable step up from a 22
“carbines were rifle length weapons that fired pistol cartridges.”
It was my understanding that up till WW2 carbines were merely shortened versions of full sized rifles and continued to fire the full size cartridge.
The rise of the AR did a number on the submachine gun market in general.
Better suppression sure, but that’s a niche market.
You could make the argument in suburbia that a 9mm is less likely to over-penetrate.
If you carry a Glock pistol magazine commonality is an advantage.
I’m a Beretta guy, so I’ve lusted after the CX4 carbine for a long time for that reason.
9mm penetrates better than 5.56 and .308 in houses here in the US. Your neighbors 2 or 3 houses down need to be concerned if you miss your Bad Guy. NOT an exaggeration. Those rifle rounds break up going through typical walls.
This is true. .308 does not go through the exterior of a timber frame house. Don’t ask how I know.
overpenetration in civilian, family, neighbor environment. less cost of ammo for 9mm. recoil reduction for certain shooters. I love my 43′ 30 carbine. but the cost to shoot is same AR. ugh.
The M3 submachine gun (the Greasegun) was also used in lieu of the 1911 also, it was .45 cal and had pretty good performance. I remember it was still being issued to armored vehicle crewmen in the late 70’s and 80’s in Germany. Fired it quite a bit over there when they would go out to qual and I’d go along to get some range time (on the Ma Deuce too).
The SFOD shooters carried them in the mid 80’s as well when I was assigned to 2nd Ranger (our “God Squad did too). They had suppressors on them and were used in our MOUT ops. They were replaced by suppressed MP5s which had a higher rate of fire. Us? we carried the mighty GAU 5. The M3 are good little guns with a lot of knockdown power. I like my Highpoint .45 carbine for all the reasons you discussed above.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M3_submachine_gun
Regards
Recall that one of the requirements was to be effectively accurate to 200-300 yards. That’s pretty well beyond the M3.
I agree, I was just adding information. The M3 was great at 50 ft, spotty at 100 ft, 300 yards? Mehhhhh…. It has a distinct “Chugga Chugga” sound. My carbine is also for use in less then 150 ft (primarily for Hog – either Homo Sapien or Porcine), my AR is what I’d grab for beyond that.
I’m really not a pistol fan – I subscribe to the old addage of “a pistol is what I fight with till I can get to my rifle (carbine in this case). Just built another AR pistol because I had an extra 10.5 upper, as well as bits and pieces without a pistol SN lower. Prices are going up! 250 bucks for a lower with a very basic “brace” (I’ve got a better one from PA). It’s nice and small and may end up as my truck gun but it too isn’t going to do diddly at 300 yards…
Regards
I used to have a very negative view of the M1 Carbine. A buddy of mine is a Korea/ Vietnam Army NCO. Harder than woodpecker lips. Think Gran Torino but without booze.
They came up in a conversation. He spoke very highly of the M1 Carbine. Said it is a good man stopper and accurate out to 200-300 yards. Given that he has directly personally observed (and presumably used but it’s impolite to ask that) the use of the gun in a war where a shitload of people got shot (and also saw the AR/ AK in Nam) I weigh his views pretty heavily when compared to most anecdotes.
Logistics (where yuh it is distantly after the AR and AKM) aside I would be comfortable with one as my carbine.
The M3 was made to replace the heavy and labor intensive Thompson, with a little practice makes 300yds doable. Not only that but it makes you really popular at the range and with a few spare parts will last almost forever. Yes but when your life is on the line quality counts. The reason not to have 223 in short barrels is the ballistics are really poor. Try 7.62×39?
Sorry to interrupt. But ….what’s up with ol’remus. Gone fishing? Just worried.
Not sure why I would know….
Dunno, Remus is missed. I am hoping its just a temporary holiday, his site (like this one) has good content and learning opportunities.
And also, for today, in some more repressed states, having a “normal” AR is problematic. At the moment, however, a PCC configured the right way, (as Ruger has done, thank you!), is not. So in that case it becomes a “poor mans” AR, or at least a reduced range AR of sorts. Still have the mag limit issue to deal with. . . grrrrr.
But the M1 carbine didn’t replace the 1911, did it? Lots of 1911s remained in common service until the ’80s. Why? Close range combat. Imagine clearing a tunnel in Viet Nam. Take a 1911 or an M1?
The M1 Carbine wasnt meant to replace the 1911 pistol for everyone, it was meant to replace the pistol for people whose duties would normally only leave them with a pistol. Big difference.
Keep in mind too, that Ian is an experienced pistol shot and 2 gun competitor. He did better with the carbine despite that, and using modern two handed shooting with plenty of practice. Now try the same drills using someone brand new to shooting. Then try on a course of fire with a target at 100 yards……
I thought someone commenting might know. Ya know kinda like minded people looking out for each other. Like if you dissappeared. I’d ask around.
Reasonable. But, there’s only a very small handful of bloggers I keep in contact with other than through comments here, and by nature of our interests I tend to b rather regimented about their privacy…so if they don’t say anything about their disappearance then I certainly am not going to.
Fair enough. Happy Canada Day brother.
Okay. But I will take the M1 carbine as a primary weapon with the 1911 as my backup.
The thing I like about the carbine is with a 30 round mag in the gun and with the butt stock pouch carrying another 30 rounds in 2 15 round mags. I have 61 rounds with one up the spout. If I grab anything it will be the carbine. The 1911 holds 8 rounds max.
But in certain situations the 1911 will stop a gun fight with one shot.
In another life I carried the 1911 Combat Commander as my undercover firearm of choice. So there ain’t no flies on the pistol or the 45 acp round. Either or will get the job done as long as one doesn’t push beyond their limits.
For night work my choice is still the 12 gauge tactical shotgun with 8 rounds of magnum OO buckshot.
The .30 M1 Carbine really needs an upgrade to an M2 magazine housing to get reliability with the 30-round M2 mags, just watch the longer, heavier mag flop around with every shot when using them in a standard M1. This presents each round at a different feed angle for every shot, no wonder they become jam-prone. The M2 mag-housing with it’s extra lug on the side to catch the extra pressing on the side of the M2 mags gives much extra rigidity during fire, it was needed for the high cyclic rate of full-auto in the M2. Also, stick with GI M2 mags for reliabity, or just keep using the GI 15-shot mags, they generally work just fine. I had IBM, Winchester, Rockola and Inland M1s before the bans (for most) in Australia. The War Baby worked fine with big mobs of feral pigs, so long as you remembered it’s limitations: fine on sows and medium sized boars, but you needed precise shooting on tough old boars, and 100% reliability!
The main difference between a 9mm AR and a .223 AR is the suppressor.. My 9mm with a homemade suppressor is very comfortable to shoot.. My .223 AR also has a homemade suppressor but the 9mm is very pleasant to shoot…
I’ve gotta say – one of the most fun guns I’ve ever shot was the M1 carbine! Partially I suppose because it was my first exposure to a true carbine. Back then we didn’t have a CZ Scorpion Evo or a Ruger Camp Carbine.
A lot of truth to the saying the most effective gun being the one you have access to – weather it’s a 1911 in the waistband, a carbine in the backpack or a rifle in the truck.