Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Why wasn't there a real M1 Carbine?

Discussion in 'Small Arms and Edged Weapons' started by Zefer, Oct 7, 2009.

  1. Zefer

    Zefer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    1
    I mean the M1 Carbine we know and love just isn't the same as the Garand. In fact, why wasn't to there a real M1 like the 1-26 M1 Garand Tanker?
     
  2. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,625
    Likes Received:
    999
    The Argentinians made something pretty close to what your talking about it looks like a cross between an M1 Garand and an M14 still chambered in the 30-06. A 30-o6 is a big round and it like to have a long barrel and a heavy stock to be accurate in semi-auto fire. It reamained in service, as well as a local version of the MP/StG-44 through the early 80's.

    The US M-14 is a Garand based weapons system chambered in 7.62. It's a lighter variant and also shoots a lighter cartridge. The M-14 is the absolute pinacle of service rifle development and is the last service rifle to shoot a "full sized cartridge" and is an example of: "Quality of firepower of Quantinty".
     
  3. Triple C

    Triple C Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    230
    FormerJughead,

    The M14 was actually heavier than the M1 at 11.5 lbs, 2 lbs heavier than M1 Garand's 9.5 lbs. The reason for this is that the M14 was designed to be capable of full-automatic fire and the only way the rifle could withstand the brute force of 7.62mm's recoil was to add weight to strengthen it.

    Full-automatic fire turn out to be a worthiness feature as only all but the strongest of man could fire a short burst with the M14 and hit anything with assurance at even point blank range. In consequence, the mechanism that enabled automatic fire was removed and kept by platoon leaders to be given out as necessary, and in practice was almost never used in combat.
     
  4. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,625
    Likes Received:
    999
    The numbers you are comparing is the unloaded weight of the Garand and the loaded weight of the M-14.
    With an empty magazine the M-14 tips the scales at 8.7lbs. With a fully loaded 20 round magazine the M-14 tips at 11lbs.

    ( M-14 RIFLE )


    Compared to an unloaded Garand at 9.5 lbs - 10.5 lbs (depending on the stock species) loaded 10.5 - 11.5 lbs with an 8 round "en-bloc"

    FM 23-5

    The flash supressor of the M-14 also added about a half inch to the overall length bringing it to just over 44 inches whereas the Garand was just over 43 1/2 inches.
     
    Triple C likes this.
  5. Triple C

    Triple C Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    230
    Gotcha. That's interesting--I did not know they successfully cut weight with the M-14. Judging from your post, you're a big fan of that rifle? =)
     
  6. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,625
    Likes Received:
    999
    I like them both
     
  7. ltcboy

    ltcboy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Tanker you refer to was never amilitary issued M1 Garand variant. It was a civilian modified weapon.

    MIke
     

Share This Page