Inland M1 Carbine

Long gun discussions.
Post Reply
User avatar
Nathan
Site Admin
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:09 pm
Location: Roundup, Montana
Contact:

Inland M1 Carbine

Post by Nathan » Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:05 pm

Image
Having falling in love with Mister B's 1942 M1 Carbine, I did my research and ultimately decided that I wanted to buy a modern production version. I respect the heritage of an original WW2 rifle and I suspect that I'll eventually get one just for historical reasons, but I wanted a rifle that I wouldn't feel bad about shooting regularly. Since it was also an original OEM from WW2, I felt that the Infield would give me the best of both. So I placed my order with Bud's gun shop and about two weeks later my gun arrived.


Image
I was highly impressed with the fit and finish. The wood is gorgeous, and everything feels quality. My initial concerns were magazine related; I dang near had to use a vise to get rounds #14 and #15 into the OEM magazine.


Image
Shooting a combination of Remington 110 grain FMJ, Federal 110 grain JSP and American Eagle 110 grain FMJ, to my dismay I found the rifle to be highly unreliable. After 100 rounds through the OEM fifteen round magazine, I suffered an almost 50% failure rate. I suffered about an equal number of failures to extract and failures to feed. I also suffered one failure to fire where I don't think the bolt was closed all the way because there was no indentation on the primer at all despite that the hammer fell. I also tried a thirty round magazine and only suffered one failure to extract using that one.

I'm sincerely hoping this is some kind of break-in issue or something that can be easily resolved. I love this little rifle, and I want to love this rifle as much as I love this rifle. cb/
Nathan in Image

User avatar
Ohio9
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:13 am

Re: Inland M1 Carbine

Post by Ohio9 » Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:10 pm

I've always wondered why the M1 Garand was the standard issue rifle for American GIs in WW2 instead of the M1 Carbine. The carbine is superior in every way. It's magazine fed and it holds almost twice as much ammo.

But damn, if the actual thing was this unreliable, then it certainly does make sense.

User avatar
Nathan
Site Admin
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:09 pm
Location: Roundup, Montana
Contact:

Re: Inland M1 Carbine

Post by Nathan » Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:52 pm

M1 Carbines were reliable; mine is just defective. I'm currently awaiting its return from the OEM. The reason it was never standard issue is because it's an intermediate caliber, somewhere between handgun and rifle. It was originally designed to replace the handgun for support troops. @100 yards the M1 Carbine has energy comparable to .357 Magnum at the muzzle. This is certainly respectable, but once you get beyond 100 yards it starts to drop considerably. The M1 Garand, .30-06, is still impressively lethal past 1000 yards.
That said, have you ever picked up a Garand? I would hate lugging that thing around the wilderness all day.
Nathan in Image

User avatar
Ohio9
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:13 am

Re: Inland M1 Carbine

Post by Ohio9 » Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:39 pm

Nathan wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:52 pm
M1 Carbines were reliable; mine is just defective. I'm currently awaiting its return from the OEM. The reason it was never standard issue is because it's an intermediate caliber, somewhere between handgun and rifle. It was originally designed to replace the handgun for support troops. @100 yards the M1 Carbine has energy comparable to .357 Magnum at the muzzle. This is certainly respectable, but once you get beyond 100 yards it starts to drop considerably. The M1 Garand, .30-06, is still impressively lethal past 1000 yards.
That said, have you ever picked up a Garand? I would hate lugging that thing around the wilderness all day.
No I've never touched a Garand, nor a M1 Carbine for that matter. It just seems like on paper the Carbine is superior in virtually every way. And a .30 caliber round is certainly not underpowered, regardless of how it compares to the Garand. Heck, it's a hell of a lot more powerful then the standard rifle caliber the military uses now. The M1 Carbine was Audie Murphy's weapon of choice in the war. Doesn't that tell us everything we need to know about it?

http://www.lsbauctions.com/1036/audie-m ... le-at-lsb/

My experience has been that a carbine really isn't that much less accurate then a full sized rifle. I'd prefer an M4 over an M16 any day for literally any condition. But at least with the M16 and M4, there is no difference in ammo feeding system or capacity. With the Garand and Carbine, the difference is 8-round clips vs 15 or 30 round magazines, It's just no contest.

For literally every soldier other than snipers, rate of fire and ammo capacity has been more important than long-range accuracy or lethality for as long as firearms have been used in war. Especially for major wars like WW2, in which a large percentage of the combatants were conscripts or recent volunteers, and thus not the best marksmen.

Post Reply