What if: M1 Carbine were chambered for .30 Remington?

Discussion in 'WW2 General' started by gjs238, Jul 15, 2009.

  1. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    What if the M1 Carbine was originally designed for the .30 Remington?

    Maybe a nice 20 or 30 round magazine.
    Little longer barrel.
    Cutts Compensator.
    Why not throw in a pistol grip stock.
     
  2. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,777
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    Then it wouldn't be a .30 carbine.

    Carbine was designed to replace the .45 pistol for troops whose main job (artillerymen, signalers, drivers,etc) made carring a full sized rifle too difficult. There was a definite weight limit and length limit in the original specification.

    No .30 Remington rifle would meet the specifiaction.
     
  3. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, I know.
    But what if................
     
  4. timshatz

    timshatz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    MGR
    Location:
    Phila, Pa
    We talking a 30-06 round or something smaller? 30 Cal covers so much and the .30 Rem is deceiving.

    But an M1 Carb rechambered to 30-06 would be a monster to handle. Little gun and a big round.
     
  5. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    #5 gjs238, Jul 16, 2009
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2009
    No no no...
    Not rechambering an M1 Carbine with a full power battle round.
    What if the firearm was originally designed for .30 Remington
    .30 Remington - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    It would be a larger, heavier firearm.

    The operating mechanism, scaled up, could very well have formed the basis of the first "assault rifle."
     
  6. Doughboy

    Doughboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    N/A
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #6 Doughboy, Jul 16, 2009
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2009
    It would have had the power of a .30-30 and it would've been more lethal.:)
     
  7. diddyriddick

    diddyriddick Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,388
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Hamlet, NC, US
    The point is that it is redundant. We already had heavy battle rifles, so why? Chambered for .30 Carbine filled a definite niche, but the heavier round was superfluous.
     
  8. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    There are a lot of fun "what if" posts in the aircraft section, I ASSumed one would be appropriate here too.
    Guess not.

    The point is to explore the possibility if the operating mechanism design that developed into what was to be called the M1 carbine could have formed the basis of what came to be called an assault rifle.

    Perhaps there is no way, regardless of how it was scaled up, the mechanism could have fulfilled this roll.
    Or perhaps yes.
     
  9. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    The U.S. Army did not want an assault rifle during the WWII era. Otherwise they would have procured something similiar to the Mini 14 rather then the historical M1 Garand.
     
  10. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    OK, forget it, this obviously won't work here :(
     
  11. fibus

    fibus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Bigger rounds within reason are welcome. I don't mean 416 Rigby as an upper limit.
    But carbines and firepower was answered by men i have known that would discard anything they were carrying to pick up m2 carbines on the battlefield whenever they could.
     
  12. Matt308

    Matt308 Glock Perfection
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    20,140
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Washington State

    Perhaps a bit more enthusiasm in the defense of the "what if" and it might bait folks. Whatcha think?

    You are talking about a round with half again as much energy. The intent of the M1 carbine was to give a rifle to an untrained user. Size was very important. So as soon as you start increasing barrel length, adding compensators, and beefing up the breach/bolt area to handle the extra stress... you are quickly creating a different animal that likely would not have matched the original premise.

    Also of note is that the 30 Remington was yet another cartridge whose deveopment was made for lever action carbines where round nose bullets were required. Therefore, you are buying additional power, but not much range. Sure you can put a pointy thing in the case, but you can't exceed OAL. For if you did it wouldn't be a .30 Remington now would it. Thus you would have to load fairly light FMJBT and with the need to keep them short in length, ballistic coefficient would similarly suffer.
     
  13. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    The M1 carbine was issued to people who in other armies would likely be carrying a SMG or pistol. You cannot make either the weapon or the ammunition much heavier.

    Personally I'm surprised the U.S. Army didn't chamber the M1 carbine for the .45cal pistol cartridge.
     
  14. Amsel

    Amsel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,857
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Texas
    Or even the .44 Mag was a good carbine cartridge.
     
  15. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I agree. However it introduces a new ammunition type into the army supply system. The .45cal round is already the standard SMG and pistol round. Might as well use it for the new carbine also.
     
  16. diddyriddick

    diddyriddick Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,388
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Hamlet, NC, US
    The only problem there is that the .44 Magnum wasn't available till the 50s.
     
  17. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,777
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    .44 Magnum is also about 10-15 years too new. It's rimmed case wouldn't be loked upon favorably by automatic weapons designers.

    Since recoil is proportinal to momentum rather than energy the heavy bullets of the .44 Magnum aren't going to do much for full auto fire froma light rifle either.
     
  18. Doughboy

    Doughboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    N/A
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #18 Doughboy, Jul 20, 2009
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2009
    That would defeat the purpouse....The M1 Carbine was made to give an officer a little bit more firepower and range....tht their side-arm didn't have.
     
  19. Amsel

    Amsel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,857
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Texas
    Didn't think about that.
     
  20. Ivan1GFP

    Ivan1GFP Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    18
    As stated already, the .30 Carbine is basically a pistol replacement. Unfortunately it looked like a rifle so people used it like one and thus gave it a bad reputation. At one point, I believe prototypes were chambered for something resembling a .223 Remington and it functioned well enough. Now THAT would be a good "Light Rifle" / Assault Rifle. The problem here though is that because of its design (check the way it is held together), the accuracy is severly limited.

    Just my opinion regarding design and accuracy.
    - Ivan.
     
Loading...

Share This Page