Earlier today I had a discussion with Charter Arms.

[Sam1911]

I don't think that would interest me at all. I have an Underwood made USGI model and love to shoot it. And I'd trust it just fine for home defense or short range hunting.

But Charter has a niche of the market. They have the Charter Arms corner that suits them and their customers. To put a fine point on it, anything with their marque on it is going to have to be really quite cheap or today's gun buyer isn't going to buy it.

And I just don't want a cheap M1 Carbine. I had one once, a commercial copy that was considerably less expensive than a GI carbine, and I didn't like it. I didn't like it and didn't keep it, and it was actually more nicely made than I'd expect (or expect to have to pay for) Charter to do.

I DON'T knock Charter Arms. They provide a specific product to meet specific needs and expectations and that seems to work well for them. But in my eyes an M1 Carbine wouldn't fit into that niche.





If they did try it, I'd expect the forums, the gun ranges and shops, and maybe even the gun press to respond pretty much with, "Well, great, another crappy M1 Carbine copy... won't these makers ever learn?"

 

[Capybara]

I agree with Sam1911. If there was a market besides what all of the non-GI models have been, somebody would have filled it. Most of us who want an M1 Carbine will pony up the $800.00 to $1,500.00 it takes and buy a GI model. OTOH, I think there is a strong market for a wooden stocked, nice looking reasonably priced 9mm, .357 mag or .45 ACP magazine-fed camp rifle carbine in pistol calibers. Look at how popular 9mm ARs are. But not for more than $500.00 or $600.00.

 

[Captain O]

I agree with Sam1911. If there was a market besides what all of the non-GI models have been, somebody would have filled it. Most of us who want an M1 Carbine will pony up the $800.00 to $1,500.00 it takes and buy a GI model. OTOH, I think there is a strong market for a wooden stocked, nice looking reasonably priced 9mm, .357 mag or .45 ACP magazine-fed camp rifle carbine in pistol calibers. Look at how popular 9mm ARs are. But not for more than $500.00 or $600.00.

Both Auto Ordnance and Inland have entered the market. Auto Ordnance with four variations of the WW2 rifle and Inland with three separate variations of their own (including their Advisor pistol.)

This, in and of itself, should tell you that there's a substantial market for the venerable WW2/Korea/Vietnam war veteran. It's cartridge fills a niche that can't be covered by the .22 WMRF and is overpowered by both the 5.56 x 45, 300 Blackout and 7.62 x 39 Soviet round. (Why ruin beat when it can be avoided)? These all have more power than is needed for a self-loading "garden gun" and close range varmint/ Whitetail deer rifle. Incidentally, neither the 9mm and .45 ACP come anywhere close to the power developed by the .30 Carbine in and 18 inch barrel. This is an irrefutable fact. Small cases (9mm Luger and .45 ACP) don't have the pressure limits for their respective bullet weights.

Another manufacturer could provide healthy competition for both Auto Ordnance and Inland. These manufacturers have a somewhat "spotty" reputation. They are as unto the little girl with the curl right in the middle of her forehead. When they are good they are pretty darned good, but when they are bad, they are horrid!

Charter Arms can procure the same barrels from Green Mountain Barrels, (as does Auto Ordnance). Manufacturing good cast receivers isn't "rocket science" but is isn't a walk in the park either! If Charter uses exacting precision as does other makers, they can provide as good or better quality product than either Auto Ordnance or Inland.

As the old axiom says, competition improves the breed. Another company producing a better product can "hold their feet to the fire".

 

[USAF_Vet]

Aside from a limited run revolver, what other guns are chambered in .30 carbine?

That right there should tell you something about the round. It's simply not popular. Chamber an AR-15 in .30 Carbine and then maybe, we'll see some interest in a niche cartridge increase.

 

[Robert]

Two company's making a rifle does not prove a substantial depand. Heck there are more companies make copies of Sharps rifles but I would not say there is a substantial depand for them. The M1 Carbine is a fun, handy little gun but it is not going to come roaring back just because you talked to Chiappa about making them.

 

[Davek1977]

Come on, folks, think!

Its not a lack of thought that is going on here, its a lack of huge demand for what many consider a rather obsolete product. Because YOU think its a great idea that warrants extreme interest, doesn't necessarily make it so. Despite your claims to the contrary, theres lilttle the .30 carbine does that something else doesn't do better at this point in time. While there will always be marginal interest due to it being a govt issue weapon at one point, the .30 carbinne wouldn't be be my FIRST choice for any task. While it may fill a roile it was pushed into, its not the "best" solution for any problem I can imagine

If you go to Gunblast.com you can watch the owner of Inland and Mr. Quinn fire a folding stock, M2 (select fire) version of the carbine (New Inland manufacture). It looks quite controllable. It seems as if it shoots quite well in both semi and fully automatic modes. Controlled two and three round bursts were extremely accurate for their purpose.

So...you're actually going to offer a video as to evidence as to their control-ability, as opposed to the word of someone who has actually shot the carbine and a host of similar guns? I'm glad you "liked" the video, but that really doesn't prove a darn thing! You like the carbine...we get that. That doesn't, in and of itself, make it the greatest thing since sliced bread, as witnessed by the overall "meh" response

 

[HOOfan_1]

Maybe there is a lack of quality control and manufacturers, because making the M1 carbine well is not cheap.

If it was truly a profitable proposition to build high quality M1 Carbines, then more companies would be doing it, just like there are myriad companies building, or assembling AR-15s.

 

[Zendude]

Charter is a fairly small outfit. Not sure the have the equipment or space for manufacturing a rifle or even a semiauto pistol.

 

[Captain O]

Robert: Who said anything about speaking with Chiappa? I spoke with Charter Arms and Auto Ordnance (not Chiappa). Do you need more coffee?

I watched the Gunblast Inland video. (Including their collaboration with Ithaca reproducing their Model 37 WW2 reproduction of their "trench broom" fighting shotgun). Their "in house" M2 seemed quite controllable. Of course, they are more experienced than the average shooter, and the .30 Carbine isn't a heavy-recoiling cartridge.

Everyone is making a "clone" of the AR 15. Frankly, it is getting boring. Every "mall ninja" on earth has one. While good, the market reached a saturation point decades ago. You can ask any particular "gunny" individual, and most have either the AR, or some kind of replica. *yawn* It is akin to buying a cell phone. Everyone has "the latest and greatest". I don't have anything against the AR platform, but they have been "done to death". I simply find them monotonous.

 

[ROAshooter]

M1 carbine

In spite of some who are "bored" with the current favorite sporting rifle of ALL times....as proved by the myriad manufactures .....CA will not spend the time and money to break into the small market of the M1 carbine....it just AINT GONNA HAPPEN

 

[Sam1911]

If they were to build the M1 Carbine to better quality levels than those of Auto Ordnance and Inland, would you buy one?

I guess there are a lot of different questions really at the heart of such a query.

1) COULD Charter Arms build an M1 Carbine copy to be of higher quality than AO, or the new Inland company? Or Plainfield, Universal, Iver Johnson and about 20 other companies before them? I'd have to say, based on the Charter Arms firearms I've handled, that I pretty strongly doubt it. Or at the very least, that I doubt they WOULD do so, understanding that anyone with enough money to hire talent and buy high-quality machinery COULD do whatever they set out to do.

2) If they did produce a high quality version, would the public accept and believe that? Or, how long would it take for Charter's new found excellence with this product take to overcome the decades of gun culture experience inertia regarding the products they do make? And, importantly, could they keep up production long enough and stick with it long enough to see the public eventually accept and value their new gun as worth the price they have to charge for it?

3) What would the price point have to be? It's a Charter. The price point can't be anything close to an original GI, and probably shouldn't approach that of the other reproduction models being made now. Charter just cannot come into the market asking a high-quality-gun price, even if they're in actuality making a high quality gun. Hyundai may decide to make a car that is superior to a new BMW, or even a new high-end Toyota, but they won't find buyers willing to pay high-end Toyota prices for a car with a Hyundai badge on it.

Manufacturers know this. They choose what spot in the market they occupy. They don't make lower-grade, budget products because they couldn't figure out how to make a better one. They make lower-grade, budget products because their business model is to make more profits by cutting costs and selling more units of product at the lowest possible price point.

That's Charter Arms. So how cheap would this have to be in order for American consumers to buy a Charter Arms rifle? And could CA make money (the ONLY reason for any company to exist in the first place) selling this for that price point?

4) Is this going to be an M1 Carbine? Really? USGI spec? Or sort of? Like the AO? Or kinda, like the old commercial versions with different parts? Or look-alike but really different, such as in a non-standard cartridge?

Cartridge changes are one of those things "everyone" really really would JUST LOVE to have ...except ... well...you know I really actually don't need that after all because if I'm getting an M1 Carbine, why wouldn't it be in .30 Carbine? And the various pistol cartridge carbines in 9mm, .45, .40 etc, have tended to be waaay more popular on gun forums and in gun club BS sessions than in real life. Manufacturers seem to either need to sell them at REALLY low price points because, it's "just" a PCC, or they seem to drop them from the catalog after a while -- and all us gun nuts whine that they don't still make that cool old PCC we didn't go out and buy enough of to keep viable.

5) Is the world really going to buy them? I mean, sure, you would. And some other folks would. But how many people who want an M1 Carbine aren't just going to save their nickles and buy a real one? Or buy one of the ones already being reproduced? Are there really that many people out there who just want A carbine, of some kind, and an M1 Carbine copy really happens to fit the niche just right for them -- but they aren't going to prefer and pay for the other options already out there? Probably very few.

Tooling up for a new product line is monstrously expensive. Charter will have to believe they can sell however many tens of thousands of these it would take to pay back all that investment ... and then still make enough of a profit to make the whole exercise more than just an interesting way for them to kill time.

6) Would I buy one? No. I already have a USGI one, and I like it for occasional plinking and teaching the kids to shoot. But I could do that with any of MANY other guns. There is almost nothing about the M1 Carbine that would make me go buy one over lots of other choices -- aside from the military history cachet. And while I do not have a huge gun budget, I am not in desperate enough need of a carbine to purchase a Charter Arms product. If I was going to purchase a carbine, I'd save my money a little longer and buy something from a maker with a different position in the market, understanding that I'd have to spend a little more to get that. So, no. I would not.

 

[Jackal]

I think most people looking into a handy carbine fall into 2 categories:

People who are practical and just buy an AR15 or equivalent.

People who want a real, authentic carbine and buy a USGI.

There seems to be little modern market for imitations or clones. Besides, when you get them down into the "impulse buy" region of $450 or less, the quality seems to suffer to the point to where you might as well just buy a Hi Point and save some money.

 

[bluejeans]

My 2c.
I would want one. Modern built look-alike. It should come I camberings of 30 carb. .357 mag, and 10mm.

NO... I would not trust charter arms to build anything of decent quality. In this pipe dream, the carbine would be produced by SIG or kimber to match their 1911 lineups. buy your retro military boxed set of 1911 and carbine in 10mm ftw

 

[Captain O]

I forgot to mention...

Fulton Armory is building .30 M1 Carbines to the tune of about $1500.00 each. If you want a "Kimber" level build, there it is.

This is number three of those building .30 Carbines. This one is building them to "premier" production levels.

 

[toivo]

That said, if they could offer it in one of the popular handgun cartridges such as 9x19mm, .45ACP, or .357 Magnum, I would think they'd have a profitable rifle that would market toward the PCC class of firearms.

As has been mentioned, Citadel (Chiappa) is making one in 9mm:

http://www.legacysports.com/m-1-9mm-carbine

It takes Beretta 92 mags, which is convenient but kind of ruins the look, IMO. Might be nice if they made a dedicated mag that retained the original appearance. Maybe some kind of sleeve for the Beretta mags.

 

[BSA1]

The local Cabelas had a bunch of G.I. M-1 carbines in the store last Fall. Close a dozen. They had them marked $1,100 each and sold all of them.

Personally they didn't interest me due to the price and the poor stopping power of the 30 Carbine. I am old enough that I grew up with WWII and Korean War vets and they shared their opinions on a lot of topics including poor performance of the 30 Carbine.

 

[Captain O]

If you are smart, you'll believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. I have seen recent penetration tests on soaked and frozen news print covers with a heavy wool blanket and a jacket. In the video test I saw, FMJ 110 passed right through.

<.......>

No, the .30 Carbine penetrates well and expands well when soft points are used and have proven themselves repeatedly.

 

[Art Eatman]

"If you are smart, you'll believe half of what you see and none of what you hear."

As good a closing statement as ever I've seen.