User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 2:11:05 AM EDT
[#1]
I wonder what .30 Carbine could do with a heavy hard cast |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 2:16:06 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can get 125gr hardcast lead loads from Buffalo Bore @ 2100fps out of a rifle, almost 1700fps out of a revolver....very similar to a .357 Mag, except the .357 gives you the option of much heavier bullets. Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? You can load .30 to higher pressures than .357 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 2:24:52 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? You can load .30 to higher pressures than .357 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 2:27:40 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? You can load .30 to higher pressures than .357 Not sure you would have enough barrel twist to stabilize a longer heavier slower pill in a standard 30-carbine barrel. Probably require a custom barrel with faster twist. You would have to develop your own load data (pressure trace would help) and then you might need to re-tune the gas system since it was setup for different load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 2:33:59 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not sure you would have enough barrel twist to stabilize a longer heavier slower pill in a standard 30-carbine barrel. Probably require a custom barrel with faster twist. You would have to develop your own load data (pressure trace would help) and then you might need to re-tune the gas system since it was setup for different load. Since this thread is about why the cartridge didn't become more popular, I didn't mean to imply that it'd have to be in an M1 carbine. Then again, I guess the fact it didn't catch on that well outside of that rifle is probably why people haven't done a lot of load development on it |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 3:00:13 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How does a .22 caliber cartridge loaded with light for caliber bullets pack "better punch" than the .30 Carbine??? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I've fired a M-2 a couple times (knew a guy who had one years ago) and your right, on full auto their a pain to control. As much as I love the Carbine the round has been replaced by more modern designs. The round itself was based on the 32. Winchester rimmed round used in the Model 1905. The P90's 5.7x28 is a excellent example, more modern round packing better punch for its size. The problem with the 5.7 is until Ruger brought out their pistols using that caliber the only games in town were the P90 or pistols offered by FN chambering that round. Civilians can't use the range of ammo most effective for the caliber since their considered armor piercing IIRR How does a .22 caliber cartridge loaded with light for caliber bullets pack "better punch" than the .30 Carbine??? I would argue it might be but it is circumstantial. The only ammo for a 5.7 I would call good is $2/rd normally with a 4 month backlog, but is all sold out from the manufacturer right now and will run you $5/rd off gunbroker. The "cheap" plinking ammo for it will run you $1/rd currently as well if you can find a good deal on it but probably more like $1.50 shipped. Why is the good stuff so expensive? Because the 5.7 has almost no case capacity so the people loading up those rounds are basically filling the case as full as they can with powder and custom making fancy bullets to get good performance coupled with low demand for a niche round. A .30 carbine with basic surplus ammo will go through a some IIIA from a rifle or pistol length barrel but it isn't a guarantee like 5.7 is and a .30 carbine soft point is devestating and definitely not a bad option for self defense. Surplus is running around $.65/rd right now and good soft points are around $1. It's a lot easier to afford to shoot the .30 carbine and that holds true in non panicky times as well. Nobody ever really did anything like has been done with a 5.7 for the .30 carbine, but I guarantee if someone wanted to they could put the same effort into designing a custom .30 carbine load/bullet and get better or equal results from a pistol or rifle as the 5.7. That goes for most things though, most ammunition is designed to be in an optimal curve of cheap and effective and if you wanted to throw that to the wind you can make, for example, 9mm rounds that penetrate IIIA that don't legally count as AP, it's just mostly there isn't enough demand like there has been with 5.7 for anyone to actually go put the effort into it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 3:11:34 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For being as bad as you say it was pretty damn popular w/ the troops. I bet it was. You could carry around a 9.5lb Garand or a 5.5lb Carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 3:40:33 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For being as bad as you say it was pretty damn popular w/ the troops. Light weight/high accuracy/ease of use made it popular, But the question in the OP was why did it die on the vine even though it was popular? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 3:50:33 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Light weight/high accuracy/ease of use made it popular, But the question in the OP was why did it die on the vine even though it was popular? Because it was never really converted over for a hunting round. Guns brought back from the wars were mainly for hunting. Target shooting or just general plinking was a rich man's game until recently. I don't think I saw my first carbine ammo loaded with hunting bullets until the mid 70's. Cheap milsurp ball was pretty much it until then. Handloaders had half jacketed 110gr roundnose plinkers but they acted just like ball. Speer if I remember right, came out with a 110gr spirepoint later. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 4:11:12 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because it was never really converted over for a hunting round. Guns brought back from the wars were mainly for hunting. Target shooting or just general plinking was a rich man's game until recently. I don't think I saw my first carbine ammo loaded with hunting bullets until the mid 70's. Cheap milsurp ball was pretty much it until then. Handloaders had half jacketed 110gr roundnose plinkers but they acted just like ball. Speer if I remember right, came out with a 110gr spirepoint later. It doesn't really work for hunting. Lots of people shot for fun. After the war guns and and ammo were plentiful and cheap. The carbine is a fine fun guns to shoot, but there wasn't much profit in ammo for then as surplus was available. Until just recently, your choices the same as they were forty years ago. Three or four flavors of ball a couple of soft points and a hollow point any of which could be out of stock for to a year. Given a load with a modern expanding bullet, a realible Carbine with good mags is a handy do defensive weapon. Unfortunately a good Carbine is priced like a decent AR and you have to try to dig up working mags. An 8.5 or 9" Blackout with supers offers similar ballistic potential in a smaller package that is just as light with a variety of effective ammo that was on the shelf until recently. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 4:16:46 AM EDT
[#11]
is probably why people haven't done a lot of load development on it |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 8:53:34 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? You can load .30 to higher pressures than .357 Load a 180 grn bullet in a Carbine case to magazine OAL, you're giving up measurable case capacity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 10:49:20 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hague convention? We aren't a party to it Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Question, for some of you claiming that one of the problems with the M1 carbine was semi-auto only - later corrected with M2 so you had a happy switch: You ever actually shoot an M2 carbine in full auto? I have, they are NOT easy to keep on target in full auto !!! Even shooting "smart" short controlled bursts the recoil impulse is too jarring and they really like to climb and bounce around too much to hold a decent effective "beat zone" in full auto. M16A1 is far more controllable in full auto. And even with the "happy switch" equipped M2 carbine the primary weakness of the magazine being flimsy and finicky and limited capacity (all judging by modern standards) still exists. I do totally agree though that going with more modern bullet technology could prove the cartridge. I'm thinking about one of those solid copper projectiles with the crazy tips that look like philips screw drivers 90 grains weight or so. More velocity plus that nasty bullet nose shape should make some real nasty wound channels and since they are a non expanding bullet design would even be on the right side of the Geneva Convention. I still say just upsizing the P90S platform by just about 10% and adding roller delayed bolt mechanism would be awesome in 30-carbine chambering. 50-round modern reliable magazines that top load flat and low and the 30-carbine puts out over double the impact energy of the 5.7x28 possibly even better with modernization of the load components stuffed into the 30-carbine shell !!! Hague convention? We aren't a party to it But, as you are no doubt aware, we still abided by it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 11:02:56 AM EDT
[#14]
30 carbine has the energy of 44 Magnum (excluding hot +P+ loads)
imagine, 30 rounds that are equivalent to 44 Mag energy-wise with more accuracy and less recoil than 44 Magnum |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 11:52:05 AM EDT
[#15]
30 carbine is really easy to hand load, I use the same powder (296), primers, and bullets as 300 blk. 110gr Sierra Varminter HPs are cheap, accurate, and feed perfectly in my NPM carbine. 14gr Win 296- 1860 FPS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 12:00:10 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? You can load .30 to higher pressures than .357 Quoted: Not sure you would have enough barrel twist to stabilize a longer heavier slower pill in a standard 30-carbine barrel. Probably require a custom barrel with faster twist. You would have to develop your own load data (pressure trace would help) and then you might need to re-tune the gas system since it was setup for different load. One of the commercial manufacturers back in the '60's, either Plainfield or Universal, adapted barrels from 1903's and/or 1903A3's for use in their Carbine's. These barrels would have a 1 in 10" twist. So, at least in theory, they could stabilize heavier bullets. I suppose one could maybe load 150 or 165 gr. RN bullets in the Carbine, but I'm not sure what advantage they'd hold. I don't imagine a bad guy being hit by a heavier bullet would know or appreciate the difference. Lyman makes a mold (#311410) that casts a 130 gr. bullet that was designed for the .30 Carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 12:12:42 PM EDT
[#17]
The Universal design should be AVOIDED like the plague. That being said I’ve seen an EARLY Universal that was exactly like a G.I.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 12:23:00 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Universal design should be AVOIDED like the plague. That being said I’ve seen an EARLY Universal that was exactly like a G.I. I have a Universal. What's wrong with it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 12:40:13 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One of the commercial manufacturers back in the '60's, either Plainfield or Universal, adapted barrels from 1903's and/or 1903A3's for use in their Carbine's. These barrels would have a 1 in 10" twist. So, at least in theory, they could stabilize heavier bullets. I suppose one could maybe load 150 or 165 gr. RN bullets in the Carbine, but I'm not sure what advantage they'd hold. I don't imagine a bad guy being hit by a heavier bullet would know or appreciate the difference. Lyman makes a mold (#311410) that casts a 130 gr. bullet that was designed for the .30 Carbine. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Yeah why can't we get 160-180 gr bullets? You can load .30 to higher pressures than .357 Quoted: Not sure you would have enough barrel twist to stabilize a longer heavier slower pill in a standard 30-carbine barrel. Probably require a custom barrel with faster twist. You would have to develop your own load data (pressure trace would help) and then you might need to re-tune the gas system since it was setup for different load. One of the commercial manufacturers back in the '60's, either Plainfield or Universal, adapted barrels from 1903's and/or 1903A3's for use in their Carbine's. These barrels would have a 1 in 10" twist. So, at least in theory, they could stabilize heavier bullets. I suppose one could maybe load 150 or 165 gr. RN bullets in the Carbine, but I'm not sure what advantage they'd hold. I don't imagine a bad guy being hit by a heavier bullet would know or appreciate the difference. Lyman makes a mold (#311410) that casts a 130 gr. bullet that was designed for the .30 Carbine. Off the top of my head I think it was National Ordnance that used 1903 barrels. Both Plainfield and Universal had barrels made for their Carbines |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 12:47:21 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But, as you are no doubt aware, we still abided by it. Yep |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 1:21:47 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Off the top of my head I think it was National Ordnance that used 1903 barrels. Both Plainfield and Universal had barrels made for their Carbines Yup. I stand corrected, it was indeed National Ordnance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 1:27:42 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yup. I stand corrected, it was indeed National Ordnance. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Off the top of my head I think it was National Ordnance that used 1903 barrels. Both Plainfield and Universal had barrels made for their Carbines Yup. I stand corrected, it was indeed National Ordnance. There was someone asking about Unimak tactical rails for Carbine's awhile back, he had one and I remembered it |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 1:43:32 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have a Universal. What's wrong with it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The Universal design should be AVOIDED like the plague. That being said I’ve seen an EARLY Universal that was exactly like a G.I. I have a Universal. What's wrong with it? Depends on early or late. Early one's used as many GI parts as they could get, IIRC, and the later ones used newer manufactured parts. Can you see the right locking lug through the slide handle? Then you have a later one, and they are prone to breakage there, and good luck getting another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 1:56:46 PM EDT
[#24]
Also On later Universal carbines, MANY of the parts do not interchange with G.I.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 1:59:46 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have a Universal. What's wrong with it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The Universal design should be AVOIDED like the plague. That being said I’ve seen an EARLY Universal that was exactly like a G.I. I have a Universal. What's wrong with it? As mentioned, "Gen 3" Universals used a different design than the USGI Carbine design, and parts are very hard to find. Here's a link that'll help if you want more info http://www.m1carbinesinc.com/carbine_universal.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 2:46:29 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: As mentioned, "Gen 3" Universals used a different design than the USGI Carbine design, and parts are very hard to find. Here's a link that'll help if you want more info http://www.m1carbinesinc.com/carbine_universal.html Interesting reading Mr. Flynn. He does a good job addressing the purported problems with the Universal Carbines. Many owners of the carbines manufactured by Universal Firearms have enjoyed them for many years without encountering any problems. As with any other firearm, every part thereon and therein has a lifespan. All semi-automatic centerfire rifles share a number of common safety features that should be inspected periodically and when buying a used one. With a used gun, it's not the name on the firearm that matters as much as having a competent mechanic check under the hood before we drive it. All of this should be kept in mind if and when you may encounter negative comments regarding the carbines manufactured by Universal Firearms. Investigations conducted by this author have found the majority of complaints were either not from first hand experience, did not include examination by a knowledgeable person to determine exactly why something went wrong (think semi-auto rifle gas systems, headspace, poor quality or worn out magazines), or one complaint was posted on an internet discussion forum and quoted on a dozen others making it sound like more than one. The issues discovered with a Universal Carbine or Universal M1 Carbine have been consistent with all commercially manufactured carbines, regardless of who made them. Refer to the Safety issues page on this website. Remember, a used semi-auto rifle requires more maintenance and safety inspections than most other firearms. Also keep in mind that if the carbines manufactured by Universal Firearms were as bad as the rumors, how did they manage to stay in business so long and make so many carbines? Mine is an 87,000 serial number which was supposedly prior to the big changes. Mine appears mostly military except that the trigger housing is aluminum, and although the parts therein appear to be military, the housing is shaped differently than its military counterpart. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 4:33:09 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Universal design should be AVOIDED like the plague. That being said I’ve seen an EARLY Universal that was exactly like a G.I. That's b/c before surplus parts ran out, Universals had GI dimensions and GI parts would interchange. When surplus parts ran out, they changed the deisign to be easier to manufacture, so most parts don't interchange. Later models should be avoided now on the grounds there are no new parts, but even if a Universal slide breaks it can be welded back together. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 4:37:07 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's b/c before surplus parts ran out, Universals had GI dimensions and GI parts would interchange. When surplus parts ran out, they changed the deisign to be easier to manufacture, so most parts don't interchange. Later models should be avoided now on the grounds there are no new parts, but even if a Universal slide breaks it can be welded back together. I know they use two recoil springs instead of one |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 5:13:53 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Interesting reading Mr. Flynn. He does a good job addressing the purported problems with the Universal Carbines. Mine is an 87,000 serial number which was supposedly prior to the big changes. Mine appears mostly military except that the trigger housing is aluminum, and although the parts therein appear to be military, the housing is shaped differently than its military counterpart. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: As mentioned, "Gen 3" Universals used a different design than the USGI Carbine design, and parts are very hard to find. Here's a link that'll help if you want more info http://www.m1carbinesinc.com/carbine_universal.html Interesting reading Mr. Flynn. He does a good job addressing the purported problems with the Universal Carbines. Mine is an 87,000 serial number which was supposedly prior to the big changes. Mine appears mostly military except that the trigger housing is aluminum, and although the parts therein appear to be military, the housing is shaped differently than its military counterpart. Yours's would be a "late'' Gen 1 or 1.5 then. Both Plainfield and Iver Johnson did the same thing on their trigger groups, used wider designs as the supply of USGI trigger groups dried up. My 1966 Plainfield is one of the last to use a GI group (IBM). If yours runs the old saying is if it works don't mess with it. If you did have a issue with the Universal trigger group you could always replace it with a USGI trigger group. You'd need a new stock but those are out there. I've been using these on my USGI Inlands to replace post war birch stocks Boyd's M-1 Carbine Stock  The one on the far left is 1 I did a few weeks ago. I'm doing another when it gets here for USGI Inland in the middle, then moving that to the Plainfield on the right. It'll give me a extra stock but I might end up with another USGI Carbine if the feds give us more money, either that or use it on the Carbine with the red dot on it if I get tired of that setup |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 5:35:47 PM EDT
[#30]
I'd be interested to hear others experiences with this, but another reason for the lack of popularity was the cost of ammo. I remember in the 90s and early 2000s a brick was some of the most expensive ammo on the shelf. Maybe you could get some surplus somewhere cheap, but it wasn't readily available like today. Maybe pre 90s it was cheaper, can't remember, but the sticker shock I remember from those days is still there. Pretty much if you relied on store bought back then it was an expensive gun to shoot.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 6:08:16 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Actually, the FN-P90S platform would be an exceptional candidate to build a roller delayed 110% upsized varient of in 30-carbine chambering. P90S being semi-auto only with a 16" barrel for civilian sales just isn't really worth all that much in it's original 5.7x28 chambering especially with civilian non-AP ammo. As a PDW you really need full-auto with 5.7x28 to have sufficient stopping power when "up close and personal" and at extended range beyond 100-yards without AP hard solid core ammo barrier penetration is so week that a clump of brush is potentially cover not just concealment for your attacker(s). On the other hand the same platform in 30-carbine makes a huge amount of sense. The magazine has always been the weak point of the 30-carbine the P90 style magazine solves all that and provides greater standard capacity and locates the magazine more efficiently on the firearm. Most people will claim that the 30-carbine lacks sufficient stopping power but up close and personal especially with modern projectile technology it is miles ahead of the 5.7x28 and a substantial improvement in stopping power when you are limited to semi-auto only where you don't need as low of recoil cartridge to effectively control full auto fire. Then at range the 30-carbine with civilian FMJ ball loads has superior barrier penetration compare to civilian FMJ 5.7x28 loads. Last of all 30-carbine actually does something useful with a 16" barrel and has a very low flash signature. Yah, you can tax stamped SBR either one and get back to an original PDW barrel length, but even then I bet the 30-carbine looses less velocity and ballistic effect on target then 5.7x28 and does it still with a lower flash signature. Go check out the cartridge dimensions and specs. of the two cartridges. It could be done with only a very small scale up factor. You would need to use a roller delayed action rather then simple blowback due to the significant increase in the bolt thrust. I think it would make an excellent old-meets-new hybrid. .30 carbine with modern projectiles is ballistically just about identical to quite a few mild .300 blackout loads. I'd rather have an AKM, but an M1 carbine is a decent weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 7:05:49 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd be interested to hear others experiences with this, but another reason for the lack of popularity was the cost of ammo. I remember in the 90s and early 2000s a brick was some of the most expensive ammo on the shelf. Maybe you could get some surplus somewhere cheap, but it wasn't readily available like today. Maybe pre 90s it was cheaper, can't remember, but the sticker shock I remember from those days is still there. Pretty much if you relied on store bought back then it was an expensive gun to shoot. Until the current shortage .30 Carbine was on par a 1000 round case with good brass cased 5.56. I was paying around $300 for a case of 1000 for brands like S&B and Armscor. I was even avoiding the recent Korean surplus because new manufacture ammo was cheaper. When the panic hit I started buying the Korean because it stayed the same price until the week of the election, that's when it jumped $250 a case in price |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 7:51:14 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Until the current shortage .30 Carbine was on par a 1000 round case with good brass cased 5.56. I was paying around $300 for a case of 1000 for brands like S&B and Armscor. I was even avoiding the recent Korean surplus because new manufacture ammo was cheaper. When the panic hit I started buying the Korean because it stayed the same price until the week of the election, that's when it jumped $250 a case in price Even when 30 Carbine was on par price wise with 223/5.56, Why would anyone choose the 30 Carbine over 223/5.56? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 7:59:41 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol so no then? They just tested whether it would go through a coat and not if it actually affected the performance?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 8:05:08 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even when 30 Carbine was on par price wise with 223/5.56, Why would anyone choose the 30 Carbine over 223/5.56? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Until the current shortage .30 Carbine was on par a 1000 round case with good brass cased 5.56. I was paying around $300 for a case of 1000 for brands like S&B and Armscor. I was even avoiding the recent Korean surplus because new manufacture ammo was cheaper. When the panic hit I started buying the Korean because it stayed the same price until the week of the election, that's when it jumped $250 a case in price Even when 30 Carbine was on par price wise with 223/5.56, Why would anyone choose the 30 Carbine over 223/5.56? Because the M-1 Carbine is a fun gun to shoot and everyone should own at least 1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 9:16:52 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even when 30 Carbine was on par price wise with 223/5.56, Why would anyone choose the 30 Carbine over 223/5.56? As a relatively short range, personal defense weapon, and especially one apt to be fired in the house, I'll take the .30 Carbine all day, any day. Too, .308 caliber bullet starts out with almost 40% greater frontal area than a .224 caliber bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 9:47:21 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 30 carbine has the energy of 44 Magnum (excluding hot +P+ loads) Only if you cherry pick your loads....most of the 200-240gr .44 Mag loads have anywhere from 20-40% more muzzle energy than the carbine. GI ball .30 Carbine averages around 950 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle, even pedestrian .44 Mag 240s are over 1100 ft-lbs. Regardless, a 240gr bullet with 1100+ ft-lbs is a whole different animal than a 110gr bullet with 950. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/2/2021 10:09:37 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Also On later Universal carbines, MANY of the parts do not interchange with G.I. They are pretty easy to spot by the stamped op-rod. You can see the bolt lug on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:01:24 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just remembered I have a case of wolf 30 carbine. Me too. Will those steel cases hurt my almost 80 year old USGI carbine? Will I need to keep spare extractors on hand? In a similar vein, I recall shooting some AMERC ammo and the cases were so soft, I found fired cases with cracks in them. I wondered if that would hurt the chamber, but then I thought the chamber was made of the same steel that the throat of the barrel was, and it takes the heat of the ignited powder charge just fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:02:30 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol so no then? They just tested whether it would go through a coat and not if it actually affected the performance? Went through the frozen clothing, and then 7 (of 8) gallons jugs of water after that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:06:48 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Went through the frozen clothing, and then 7 (of 8) gallons jugs of water after that. Well, there's your problem. Clearly our myopic heroes were shooting dehydrated Chinamen who were wearing bulletproof frozen coats. Those bullets dindu nuffin after going through that ice! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:09:05 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Who needs vests or plates when you can just buy a Chinese coat; after all bullets just bounce off of them. Don't let the people at the Blackhawk Catalog find that out, or they will start advertising them in their catalog. The first year, they will be made in China, and the catalog will extol "the authenticity of these recreations of the Korean War ballistic overcoats." The second year, they will be made in Vietnam, to save labor costs, but without lowering the product price. The third year, they will be made by kids working in a cave in India, who are being kept there against their will by a shaman who pulls the beating hearts out of employees who do not make the production quota. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:11:29 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Me too. Will those steel cases hurt my almost 80 year old USGI carbine? Will I need to keep spare extractors on hand? In a similar vein, I recall shooting some AMERC ammo and the cases were so soft, I found fired cases with cracks in them. I wondered if that would hurt the chamber, but then I thought the chamber was made of the same steel that the throat of the barrel was, and it takes the heat of the ignited powder charge just fine. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Just remembered I have a case of wolf 30 carbine. Me too. Will those steel cases hurt my almost 80 year old USGI carbine? Will I need to keep spare extractors on hand? In a similar vein, I recall shooting some AMERC ammo and the cases were so soft, I found fired cases with cracks in them. I wondered if that would hurt the chamber, but then I thought the chamber was made of the same steel that the throat of the barrel was, and it takes the heat of the ignited powder charge just fine. Much (most? all?) .30 carbine ammunition produced during WWII for the troops was steel cased. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:13:54 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s why I’ve never fired mine. It's not that bad at all but shoot in an indoor range and everyone stops and looks lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:19:16 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Our family knew an old miner/trapper/mink farmer who had a bear problem at one point. He had told Fish and Game about the monster grizzly harassing his place and they ignored him. Well one day it tried to climb into the cab of his 6x Dodge swamp buggy he used to get back to the mine and he emptied the magazine of his M1 carbine into it. Then he hauled the 1800lb bear to Glenallen and dumped it on Fish and Games porch. I met Simon twice, in 68 and 71 as my dad and uncle would always stop as his place for a cup of coffee. That one guy had more testosterone than an entire platoon of AntiFa. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:29:11 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Universal design should be AVOIDED like the plague. That being said I’ve seen an EARLY Universal that was exactly like a G.I. Yep. When Universal started making them, there were plenty of USGI surplus spare parts to be bought cheap and put into the their rifles. The early productions runs did not deviate from the USGI design. That is why those Universal rifles are a good source for USGI parts. Towards the end, the surplus parts were drying up, and the inflation of the 1973-1975 recession made things very expensive. To keep the price from going up, they looked for ways to make something that looked like an M-1 carbine for people who did know better or didn't care. The big clue that you are looking at one of those later guns is that there is a hole in the charging handle that holds the bolt lug, as well as a toggle that must be manipulated to hold the bolt open. Some people have had good luck with their late production Universals. It was an affordable shooter/plinker in the years when gas went from 25 cents a gallon to 98 cents a gallon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:34:50 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. When Universal started making them, there were plenty of USGI surplus spare parts to be bought cheap and put into the their rifles. The early productions runs did not deviate from the USGI design. That is why those Universal rifles are a good source for USGI parts. Towards the end, the surplus parts were drying up, and the inflation of the 1973-1975 recession made things very expensive. To keep the price from going up, they looked for ways to make something that looked like an M-1 carbine for people who did know better or didn't care. The big clue that you are looking at one of those later guns is that there is a hole in the charging handle that holds the bolt lug, as well as a toggle that must be manipulated to hold the bolt open. Some people have had good luck with their late production Universals. It was an affordable shooter/plinker in the years when gas went from 25 cents a gallon to 98 cents a gallon. Yep. The main issue with those late Universals is that non-standard op slide. They will break eventually - it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. The good news is that there's a company making replacement ones now, and they're almost certainly better quality than the originals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 2:36:33 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Much (most? all?) .30 carbine ammunition produced during WWII for the troops was steel cased. Hmmmm. I did not know that. I'd like to know more. Can you point me in the right direction. I did find a box of steel cased USGI dummy rounds on Aberdeen Proving Grounds once. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 5:34:17 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Chinese frozen coat myth was debunked. The Box O' Truth guy fired rounds into layers of cloth immersed in water and frozen. The rounds still got through multiple layers. https://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-36-frozen-clothing-and-the-box-o-truth/ The Box O' Truth #36 - Frozen Clothing And The Box O ... https://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-36... Jun 13, 2014 · The Korean War with the m1 carbine is a load of hooey. My granddad carried a m1 carbine for 3 years during WW2 and for 1 year in Korea. In WW2 he was a radioman with the ” Big Red One” and told be before his death, he put quite a few Nazis in the ground with no problem, and during Korea the same thing as long as the range was 300 yards or less and you had to hit the target before it hit you. “The box o truth guy”. LOL fucking 2013 was the worst year on arfcom I swear. His name is Ol Painless and he started his experiments here, for our benefit. Good ol OP and T-man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2021 10:08:17 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Me too. Will those steel cases hurt my almost 80 year old USGI carbine? Will I need to keep spare extractors on hand? In a similar vein, I recall shooting some AMERC ammo and the cases were so soft, I found fired cases with cracks in them. I wondered if that would hurt the chamber, but then I thought the chamber was made of the same steel that the throat of the barrel was, and it takes the heat of the ignited powder charge just fine. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Just remembered I have a case of wolf 30 carbine. Me too. Will those steel cases hurt my almost 80 year old USGI carbine? Will I need to keep spare extractors on hand? In a similar vein, I recall shooting some AMERC ammo and the cases were so soft, I found fired cases with cracks in them. I wondered if that would hurt the chamber, but then I thought the chamber was made of the same steel that the throat of the barrel was, and it takes the heat of the ignited powder charge just fine. I was going to buy some Wolf and test it in one of my Carbines I had worked over by Fulton that I had a new bolt installed. I found Armscor at $11.99 a box right before the current panic and bought 5000 rounds of it instead. You should be ok. I would inspect the extractor after each range session. Extractors you can still find, you just need 3 hands or a bolt tool to change them out.  I replaced the one on my Plainfield over the summer just to play it safe and went from 1 FTE every 100 rounds or so to none the last 300-400 rounds I used this parts kit Fulton Armory has https://www.fulton-armory.com/spare-parts-kit-m1-carbine.aspx I keep and 2nd on hand given the number of Carbines I own and the amount I shoot 2-3 of them....just in case. As I've mentioned in this thread, new springs help 75 year old Carbines ALOT with reliability IMO |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
