M1 Carbine w/Softpoints vs. AR with your Favorite Ammo

[JShirley]

"Knockdown" and "stopping" power are both meaningless terms.

Either will make a hole.

.30 Carbine SP does tend to be a very deep penetrator, so it's likely to punch through a home invader with enough remaining pen to injure or kill an innocent bystander. Ammo selection can resolve this, but it's really easy to find .223 that doesn't overpenetrate.

 

[d2wing]

I can't hardly believe that 4 pages of posts that don't seem to know the truth about terminal ballistics. The 5.56 NATO even with FMJ is going to be more effective than a M1 carbine. This was proved in Army tests 50 years ago.
With soft points the 5.56 NATO or more likely .223 will be vastly more effective. It is a basic true that soft tissue is mostly fluid. The faster a projectile hits it, the greater the resistence. The greater the resistence, the greater energy is transferred to the tissue causing it to be destroyed in an expanding pattern like a wave. Ever see what a wound from an either round at close range. Wound pictures from Vietnam were so gruesome that they were classified for many years after the war. Modern loads are slower heavier and more stable so the wounds are less gruesome but still way beyond what the .30 cal. M1 is capable of.
Besides being in combat I have used a .223 for deer hunting. It turns the lung and heart cavity to mush. I don't use the carbine round but I do use the more powerful 7.62x 39 in soft points. It does a nice job at close range but there is no comparison in tissue damage either in the size of the wound or amount of damage.
There is whole lot of misinformation and ignorance on the Internet but I would expect some of you guys to be more informed than you are. I think a lot of guys are tired of arguing with some people that post bs on here.

 

[peacebutready]

For example, maybe a version of the Remington 7400 that takes AR magazines? Maybe it wouldn't be profitable, but I can dream.

The Rem 7400 isn't known for being robust, IIRC.

 

[peacebutready]

It makes no sense to use nonsensical terms and then tell people not to debate your phrasing.

Perhaps I should have wrote 'end the threat' rather than stopping/knockdown power?

 

[peacebutready]

But I understood the OP was talking about which one is more effective against the human body.

Correct.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Inside a 100 yards I think we are talking more about bullets than cartridges. There are some pretty good self defense bullets for the 30 carbine if that were your choice.

This one might change your mind. Go down the ad to the 30 carbine ammo.

http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2008/11/15/hornady-critical-defense-ammunition/

 

[TIMC]

I own a .30 carbine and 7 AR's; for home defense it would definitely be one of the AR's. If I stayed at the 100 yard max range and thinking home defense I would say either the .300 Blackout with my had loads and 110 grain bullets. or the .50 Beowulf with my hand loads and 334 grain HP bullets would be much better.

 

[Gordon]

The AR rifle was proven to me in over 10 years of top tier training from 1999 to 2010 and in those classes rarely did an AK other than mine twice in 2002 show up. In Modesto in 2006 an ex old spook cleaned my clock him using an M1 carbine with an Aimpoint in a combined Scott Reitz / Louis Awerbuck class. But overall, the development that has taken place with the AR makes it the instrument of choice for the limitations you placed in the OP. If times were taken in a competition I'd BET the " well set up" AR operator would win a simulation . Even if the same operator were to use an AR and an M-1 carbine or an AK

 

[d2wing]

Perhaps it would help to know that in Minnesota the M1 .30 Cal. Is not legal for deer or any big game but the .223 is.
Part of the reason for the AR in the first place is the ineffectiveness of the Mi Carbine in Korea. The 30 carbine is a step up from some pistol rounds but not in the realm of a modern rifle.
If you think otherwise and want to ignore science and studies maybe a contest is in order. Anybody got some hogs to shoot with both?

 

[Nuclear]

Speaking of knowing better, you know, or should know that the M1 Carbine performance in Korea wasn't responsible in any way for the development of the AR rifle. But nice try.

And Minnesota has some strange hunting laws, apparently.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Perhaps it would help to know that in Minnesota the M1 .30 Cal. Is not legal for deer or any big game but the .223 is.

30 carbine is legal for deer in MN. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/regulations/hunting/legalcartridges.html If it isn't I can't find it in the regs. If you know where that is maybe you could post it up.

There are some states where it isn't legal however. .223/5.56 isn't legal for deer in some states either. It isn't legal in my state. That isn't a good measure of a defensive cartridge so why are we even discussing that? Muzzleloaders and bows are legal for deer. I'm pretty sure nobody here wants to use one of those for home defense.

There is whole lot of misinformation and ignorance on the Internet but I would expect some of you guys to be more informed than you are.

Most people post here for information which they will research with leads or links. It isn't the last or best authority on anything.

 

[Goosey]

30 carbine is legal for deer in MN. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/regulations/hunting/legalcartridges.html If it isn't I can't find it in the regs. If you know where that is maybe you could post it up.

There are some states where it isn't legal however. .223/5.56 isn't legal for deer in some states either. It isn't legal in my state. That isn't a good measure of a defensive cartridge so why are we even discussing that? Muzzleloaders and bows are legal for deer. I'm pretty sure nobody here wants to use one of those for home defense.

Agreed, hunting regulations are not relevant to defensive use. When the "deer legal" thing comes up I like to point out that 12-gauge buckshot isn't legal for deer in about half the states...

 

[rondog]

I keep these in my M1, they're just downright anti-social looking.....

 

[d2wing]

I stand corrected. The hunting regs have changed this year and the .30 carbine is now legal. Since everyone disagrees I will leave it at that. I have seen what I have seen.

 

[d2wing]

It would be nice if some would post evidence that the M1 carbine is more effective than the 5.56 or .223 since so many are convinced that it is a fact there must be credible studies and demonstrations.

 

[amd6547]

It's not a question of 30 carbine being "more effective" than 5.56.
As much as I like the 30 carbine, I will readily state that 5.56 is a better round.
However, my opinion is that the 30 carbine, loaded with the proper expanding bullet will do just as well as the 5.56 out to 100yds.
Then, there are the intangibles...
I like the AR just fine. It is handy and ergonomic. But the M1 carbine is lighter and handier. It just has a lively feel in the hands, like a well designed sporting gun. Really, the 30 carbine cartridge and the M1 carbine have to be considered as a whole.
Is the M1 carbine a prime battle rifle when compared to the AR? No. Will it serve as a home defense weapon from zero to 100 yds? Yes, and it will do so very well.

 

[gotigers]

My AR-15 5.56 10.5" SBR with 77gr OTMs any day over a M1. MY SBR is lightweight, short, very accurate, 30 round mags, light, etc.

 

[CoalTrain49]

It would be nice if some would post evidence that the M1 carbine is more effective than the 5.56 or .223 since so many are convinced that it is a fact there must be credible studies and demonstrations.

I'm not convinced. Rifle cartridges (necked >40,000 psi) always win the energy debate. ,223 is a more versatile cartridge based on that and it's accuracy. Lots of bullet choices for the job at hand too.

30 Carb is a glorified pistol cartridge actually designed for a weapon to be used for self defense. It works well at 100 yards especially with good SD ammo. That's about all I can say about it. A very good tool for SD out to 100 yards. Not more effective, but good enough. Field tested.

 

[CoalTrain49]

MY SBR is lightweight, short, very accurate, 30 round mags, light, etc.

You forgot to tell us about NFA class III.

 

[Snowdog]

Yes, Cor-bon's DPX, Hornady's FTX and Speer's Gold Dot are modern rounds that make use of the M1 Carbine's 1,000 ft/lbs of muzzle energy (or 770ft/lbs @50 yards and 614 ft/lbs @100 yards) and turns the .30 Carbine into quite the lethal beast, far more than the typical soft points of yesteryear and leaps and bounds beyond FMJ.

I have not a single issue with folks saying they prefer the 5.56/.223 over the .30carbine; I have rifles chambered in both and greatly respect both. The 5.56 indeed has the edge in both velocity and energy and there's a plethora of wonderfully nasty rounds for the 5.56/.223 .

However, anyone believing the .30 carbine from a 18" barrel is "marginal" for defense within 100 yards using modern defensive rounds is truly delusional (i.e., not grounded in reality), especially considering we're pairing these destructive modern loads with 15 and 30 round magazines. Of course no one on this tread has said such a foolish thing, but I sincerely hope no one thinks as such.

Both the Warbaby using modern loads and the AR15 would work wonderfully for defense within those ranges. It seems it would boil down to the preference of platform.

 

[peacebutready]

I'm not convinced. Rifle cartridges (necked >40,000 psi) always win the energy debate.

Energy isn't the only measurement of power. There is also momentum. IIRC, the .45 only has about 10% more energy than a 9mm, but the .45's momentum is much higher.

I read a good comparison test of 5.56/.223 loads fired into water. I remember being disappointed by the lack of penetration, including the soft-point loads. Most loads break up quickly, making them unpredictable.

What someone needs to do is shoot ballistic gel or water at 100 and 200 yards with the 5.56/.223. I think many less loads would break up/not penetrate at that range due to less velocity.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Energy isn't the only measurement of power. There is also momentum. IIRC, the .45 only has about 10% more energy than a 9mm, but the .45's momentum is much higher.

Good point. .223 wins the energy calc. But it doesn't win the momentum calc. Maybe that's the reason for it being an effective SD cartridge. Who knows what we have at 100 yards.

http://morelesscompare.com/handgun-rifle-charges/223-remington-vs-30-carbine/

Here's your cartridges.

http://morelesscompare.com/handgun-rifle-charges/45-acp-vs-9-19mm-parabellum/

 

[d2wing]

Peace, you are misunderstanding how bullets work, when a bullet strikes water and also flesh, the faster it strikes, regardless of caliber, the greater the resistence. What happens is water like soft flesh cannot be displaced fast enough so the forces are much greater causing the fluid to act more solid and the energy spreads out over a wider area. This effect is much greater in bullets that expand. Anyway this resistence cause the bullet to deform and in some cases break apart. Ideally the bullet should retain it's mass but that is not always possible. That is why high speed bullet do much greater damage than slow bullets and soft points do much greater damage than FMJ rounds. That is also why slow bullets will often penetrate further but do much less damage. I hope this helps.
It is something like hitting water hard with the flat side of a paddle or slipping it in slowly on edge. Or a fast boat will ride on top of water while a slow one rides low in the water.
The faster you try to move flesh or water the harder it resists.this is why fast bullets do more damage but slow ones sometimes will out penetrate a fast one. Remember it is damage that kills not penetration necessarily. But neither takes the place of bullet placement.

 

[d2wing]

Momentum is not a measurement of killing power, energy is along with how that energy is converted to destruction on the target. And speed, mass and type of bullet determine that.
Momentum is a measurement that has limited value concerning small arms.

 

[mavracer]

Momentum is not a measurement of killing power, energy is along with how that energy is converted to destruction on the target. And speed, mass and type of bullet determine that.
Momentum is a measurement that has limited value concerning small arms.

Simple laws of Physics would largely disagree with this without momentum Kinetic Energy wouldn't exist. Without momentum the bullet won't penetrate, Raw energy numbers are a very poor depicter of terminal ballistics.
Otherwise a 5.56 would be a better bear round than a 45/70 and we know that's wrong.