A Hi Point is better looking than anything else??????Yeah, but that Ruger is so fugly Hi-Points laugh at it. lol
A Hi Point is better looking than anything else??????Yeah, but that Ruger is so fugly Hi-Points laugh at it. lol
Most the major points have been made such as ammo cost and availability and compatibility with existing pistol magazines. Although I do like to make the case for a true SMG mag like the Scorpion utilizes. A major point that hasn't been made is that of bullets. While the .30M1 might look better on paper due to its velocity, the 9mm has had decades of R&D invested in better self defense bullets while the .30M1 has had practically none. Not to mention that cheap plinking/practice ammo is dirt cheap. The .30M1 has one speed, wide open. While the 9mm has a much broader range of loads and bullet weights from superlight JHP's to heavier subsonics.
So, the question i ask, why no resurgence in popularity of the M1 Carbine? It's a proven platform, locked breech, soft shooter that packs a heavier punch than 9mm. I've seen several threads here and on other sites wanting a PCC in more effective calibers, like 10mm....so why not 30 carbine?
I'm afraid such generalizations are too vague and usually inaccurate.The M1 Carbine is fast enough that pretty much ANY soft point or hollow point will work.
I'm afraid such generalizations are too vague and usually inaccurate.
The main problem for me is that a M1 carbine is going to run over $1,000, ammo's expensive and has to be lubed to reload. Also the WWII originals are too collectable for a knock around gun.
For a bit I did use something of an M1 "Carbine" that was a shortened M1 Rifle, in this case a BM59 in 7.62 NATO and gee whiz there are folks out there that shoot .308 in single shot pistols sooooo........"pistol caliber carbine?"
-kBob
Which ones were designed in the last 30yrs?well then, perhaps you can clarify this? which SP or HP do not perform well?
Which ones were designed in the last 30yrs?
Which ones were designed in the last 30yrs?
The M1 Carbine round is the M1 Carbine round.
It is not a pistol round. It was intentionally designed to be more than a pistol round.
It is not a rifleman's round. It was intentionally designed to be less than the rifle rounds of the time.
It was a uniquely American response to the need for what we today call an "intermediate" round.
I thought we were looking at the advantages or disadvantages between the 9mm and 30 Carbine and why we might want one over the other.
I think the subject of the effectiveness of bullet designs for the 30 Carbine is better suited for another topic.
Most will agree with me that those of us that have M1 Carbines truly love them. But will also agree that the newer 9mm and other caliber carbines have a better advantage in cost and ammo availability..
I was not saying that the effectiveness of one caliber over the other was not relative, but that this topic was not to discus what is the latest and greatest 30 carbine bullet today. That in itself would be a nice topic on it's own.Why in the world would the effectiveness of the cartridge not be a factor? I never said it wasn't effective, because it is. The .44Mag was also effective back in the 1960's with the old cup & core JHP's. However, the 9mm, just as the .44Mag, have become much more effective and much more consistently effective with the development of better bullets. The .30M1 has had virtually no development because its market is tiny.
As has been stated, it's also not a pistol cartridge. Any action designed for it will be too long for the 9mm/.45ACP group of actual pistol cartridges. So if what you want is a .30cal intermediate cartridge that requires an action longer than pistol cartridges, the .300AAC is a better choice anyway with a FAR greater range of capability. Ammo is only slightly more expensive but is still under intense development. Sorry but the .30M1's time has passed.
Not to even mention how loud the .30 is going to be fired indoors, compared to a 9mm carbine.
All factors affecting one's decision for a 9mm carbine over a .30M1.