M1 Carbine Export & Import Historical Info.

[campperrykid]

Title says it all .

Howa M1 Carbines and USGI Carbines in Japan and Thailand.

https://www.m1carbinesinc.com/carbine_howa2.html

More focus on Euro exports/imports going way back.

https://www.bavarianm1carbines.com/imports.html

Some details about the impact of GCA 68 and various dirty tricks used to discourage importers during the 1990's.

[SVT-40]

I have quite a few carbines including a "Howa" made one. I would sure like to find the correct bayonet lug someday!

[campperrykid]

Very nice.

[campperrykid]

Some info on US M1 Carbines used by various agencies in West Germany after WW2:

https://www.bavarianm1carbines.com/Germany.html

[Mike A]

I've seen M1 and M2 carbines in use by police all over the world, even fairly recently in Mexico and Italy. But I have never got much information on how well they work as combat weapons.

The "wisdom" from WWII was that troops scorned them as underpowered and ALWAYS preferred a Garand. Only the REMFs liked them because they were light to carry.

The "take" from Korea was that they were underpowered and didn't work reliably in the extreme cold. And the M2 was a chronic jammer.

In Vietnam "everybody" rushed to get rid of them and get an M-16.

But with all this negativity in print and on the street, I have talked to many veterans who really liked and relied on them. My older brother did three tours in Vietnam as an advisor to ARVN troops and always carried an M-2 carbine, even when M-16s became available. He was very confident that it would kill people when he needed it to, and he almost always fired it on full automatic when he fired it. Said it never jammed that he could remember (he also carried a Browning Hi-power as well).

If the M-1 and M-2 were such inadequate weapons, why were/are they so popular world wide? (I was on a hike in Sicily a few years ago and the Forestry Police were still carrying "Winchesters:" M-1 Carbines. And those guys DO get in gunfights fairly often!).

Any comments? Does anybody know of a source that evaluates the combat effectiveness of the M-1 and M-2?

[campperrykid]

Try the Terminal Ballistics section at m4carbine.net for an evaluation of the M1 Carbine as a personal defense weapon with modern ammo & accessories.

A very good combo at 100yds and less.

[Milsurp Collector]

The "wisdom" from WWII was that troops scorned them as underpowered and ALWAYS preferred a Garand. Only the REMFs liked them because they were light to carry.

The M1 Carbine was Audie Murphy's favorite weapon.



Audie Murphy's "lucky carbine", uniform jacket, and decorations.



This is an interesting article The M1 Carbine For SELF-DEFENSE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

I think any deficiency of the M1 Carbine was due to the FMJ bullet used by the military. I think if the ammo used JSP bullets there would have been fewer complaints about lack of stopping power.

[Mike A]

Thanks, guys. Good reads both!

I suspect that some of the criticism of the M1-M2 in the Korean War may have come from the tactical situation that developed, with ranges longer than in the Pacific WWII theater at least and an enemy wearing cold weather clothing that was padded and in some cases, crude body armor. It may also have been that the VERY extreme cold was affecting the ballistic quality of the ammunition somewhat, as well. And many of the troops were poorly trained in the beginning of the war, and under or over lubricated their weapons, which helped make them unreliable, especially in the cold and dusty climate.

None of these things really applied in Vietnam, where the jungle ranges were close, the enemy unpadded, and the temperature HOT, not cold. Most of the US troops using M2s were advisors, meaning pros; either SF or some other kinda lifers. So they took care of their weapons. My brother started out using an M2 because that was what the troops he was leading had to use. But he grew to trust it.

[Milsurp Collector]

I suspect that some of the criticism of the M1-M2 in the Korean War may have come from the tactical situation that developed, with ranges longer than in the Pacific WWII theater at least and an enemy wearing cold weather clothing that was padded and in some cases, crude body armor. It may also have been that the VERY extreme cold was affecting the ballistic quality of the ammunition somewhat, as well. And many of the troops were poorly trained in the beginning of the war, and under or over lubricated their weapons, which helped make them unreliable, especially in the cold and dusty climate.

A good Korean War book I've read is The Last Stand of Fox Company, the story how one Marine company held a critical hill in subzero temperatures in November 1950 while surrounded and outnumbered 10-1 by Chinese. Three Medals of Honor were awarded for the action.

It was so cold that even the sainted Garand and BAR froze up, grenades were duds, bowel movements were frozen solid on the ground before the Marine could get his pants pulled back up, and frozen corpses were used for cover. Fox Company suffered 75% killed and wounded but they held the hill overlooking the only escape route for other surrounded Marine units until they were relieved and evacuated. When the starving, filthy, frostbitten survivors finally got back to a relatively safe base they formed up and marched into camp singing the Marines' Hymn.

One of the theories about the M2 Carbine sometimes not stopping Chinese soldiers who were "hit" several times with carbine rounds was that the M2 was not very accurate or controllable when fired full-auto, and the enemy just wasn't being hit in critical areas or at all. The M1 Carbine was more reliable and accurate than the M2 Carbine in Korea.

[Mike A]

I agree that inexperienced troops tend to love the "spray and pray" method, and that it isn't very effective in actually killing anyone. (The Chinese using the PPSh probably did a little better with that technique, but who wants to lug one of those locomotives?). Seasoned troops have a tendency to actually aim, and use the semi-auto mode, or at least "baby" the trigger to get short bursts. (I have never fired an M2, so don't know if that works; works fine with an M3A1, tho).

[campperrykid]

Take a look at the M1 Carbine sticky over at m4carbine.net.
There are some line drawings of typical .30 carbine wound channels . I had never realized that yaw ( bullet kicks sideways ) was a significant factor in USGI FMJ .30 Carbine ammo's effectiveness. By modern standards the carbine has a fairly late/deep yaw cycle. That might be another clue to the conflicting folklore about it's combat effects.
A larger deeper target -- like a big , well-fed SS guy might experience a more severe wound than a small , skinny , undernourished NKPA or CPLA soldier.

[Mike A]

"Conflicting folklore" is a very good description of the kind of "information" that we mostly get about historical arms in combat!

[Mike A]

I just found out that "Bugsy" Siegal was hit with an M2 Carbine on full automatic. Not the first or the last bad guy to fall to Carbine Williams' brainchild! Wonder if the hitter was a WWII vet?

[smle-man]

I know two VN combat vets who carried M2 carbines and swore by them; one of these also carried a .38 revolver instead of a .45 too (and he was a SF E7 when I knew him) so don't believe all the bad rap on the carbine. I'm reading a book about the Alamo Scouts from WW2 in the Pacific; they had their choice of weapons and rarely did someone carry an M1 rifle. The preferred weapon was the M1 carbine and the Thompson submachine gun. The book details many kills using the carbine. None of those shot ever got away.