If you had a choice of weapons...

Hello everyone,
I'm just putting this up to see who would choose what so here it goes.


If you had a choice of a semi-automatic rifle in WWII and you are American, what would you choose?

1: M1 Garand

2: M1A1 Carbine

You choose!

Personally i choose the Garand. i always loved the weapon. Very accurate and very deadly.

 

M1 Garand and an MRE spoon(the old white ones)

 

Have we already had a thread with these two semmi-Automatic rifle guns???

How about putting more options up,or not up to you.And What if you are not an American,can you still answer?

 

of course, i'm just saying its american weapons.

 

I would choose the carbine if I was in close quarters or urban fighting. The M1 would be necessary everywhere else.

 

If i was about to be in a battle,and my life was being threatend,i pick any gun!
if i had time to choose, M1 Garand

 

M1 carbine for close-quarters fighting....and the Garand for everything else.

 

If it was my choice, I'd pick the Carbine, especially if I had to walk any distance. But I'd also find out what kind of whiskey the ordnance sergeant preferred and try to secure some, so if an M-2 carbine was on hand, I'd have something to trade for it.

 

"Personally i choose the Carbine. i always loved the weapon. Very accurate and very deadly. "


So that's why it takes 2-3 shots to kill someone.

 

Well the Carbine was lighter but the Garand packed a more powerful punch so I would have to go with the Garand.

 

I read an account from an 82nd Airborne NCO's memoir years ago where he talks about sneaking up behind an Italian infantryman and shooting him twice with his M1 carbine. The Italian turned around and fired his rifle at him. The NCO had to shoot him three more times to drop him.

There are similar stories of US personnel having to hit Chinese and North Korean assault infantrymen several times with their Carbines to actually stop them from attacking. (In the Korean war)

 

Right that's what I am talking about. The carbine ammo was made especially for the Carbine and designed to be lightweight. A comparison of the two ammo types...



M1 Garand

Bullet Weight 174gr.

Bullet Shape Pointed

Muzzle Velocity 2700 fps

Effective Range 600 yards



M1 Carbine

Bullet Weight 110gr.

Bullet Shape Round nose

Muzzle Velocity 1900 fps

Effective range 300 yards

 

A North Korea vet actually told me that.

 

I read that the m1 carbine's effective range was under 300 yards.

 

This may sound redundant but I'd pick the carbine for close quarters and the Garand for all other engagements

 

Really lower than 300 yards? Do you have the number handy?

 

The little "Baby Garand" (.30 Carbine) could "reach out" to 300 yards, but its effective range was more like 100 yards or less. I owned one and shot it hunting white tail deer here in MT since the fifties, and if I was looking at a deer over 80 yards away, I'd pass the shot off to someone else if possible. My Dad's old 30/30 was way better than my little .30 caliber Carbine at over 100 yards. You could knock down a coyote, or chuck at decent ranges, but they are much smaller in body mass.

They could "reach" that far, but the penetration ability and inertial energy was pretty well spend before that distance was reached.

 

That sounds only marginally better than a 9mm or 45 cal. round fired from a submachinegun!

 

Much much more accurate than any shot from a pistol, trust me. The Thompson M1A1 with its longer barrel was reasonably accurate beyond 100 yards believe it or not. Although the sights on it had been changed to remove the calibration levels out to 200 yards by the time it went into service in WW2.

 

The Garand.