|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,661
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,661 |
I would ask my wife's uncle but he is still there somewhere, still listed as MIA. All gave some. Some gave all. God bless them all! Amen, Reverend...AMEN!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 19,495
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 19,495 |
I’ve always struggled with the M1 Carbine’s reputation in the Korean war. It’s because it’s at odds with its performance in every other war in which it was used. All theatres of WWII, use by ARVN and US troops in Vietnam, Israeli use in their assorted wars (and they still use it to some degree); everywhere it was used, it was reliable, and sufficiently put enemies down…except Korea, and most specifically the battle of Chosin Reservoir. Here we find mechanical failure as high as 30% and a vast amount of soldiers talking about short range hits on the enemy with little to no effect. In no other conflict has this ever been reported with the M1 carbine…makes you wonder why?
Well I have a hypothesis.
Now we all know that most of the Carbines used in Korea were converted to M2 configuration. Both the full auto conversion and especially the 30 round magazine were to the degradation of the weapon. Most will tell you, even Korean War veterans, that if you use 15 round magazines in semi-auto, it was completely reliable. And this, again gets things more consistent with typical M1 Carbine performance.
Hypothesis: Bad Ammunition
The military has a pretty well established history of mucking with ammunition and not mentioning it to the people who should be told. Happened with the .30-06 a bunch of times during the life spans of the Springfield and Garand. Early on during M1 Carbine production velocity and pressure were increased arbitrarily from 1,600fps to the current 1,970fps. The manufacturers of the Carbines found out when suddenly bolts were lasting 1/3 as long; no one ever bothered to mention to the manufacturers that there was a 40% increase in chamber pressure. And we all know about the M16 ammunition debacle.
Some powders can be very temperature sensitive, and some are much less temperature sensitive. What if there was a sudden change in propellant for .30 Carbine ammunition to a powder that was more temperature sensitive. Then you transport that ammunition to the battle of Chosin Reservior where temperatures were as low as -35?
Well, I can tell you what it would do to an M1 Carbine’s function…
One of the most reliable weapons the US has ever made, suddenly has a 30% failure rate in one single battle alone? The M1 Carbine's gas piston is a short throw piston, it needs a solid boot to work correctly; the M14 is the same way. If there was a significant change to pressures or pressure curves, that solid boot needed could easily be turned to a soft push; a push insufficient to cycle the action.
And you wanna know the reason the US Ordanance Dept made that change to the .30 Carbine ammo early on? You guessed it, to improve reliability in the field by giving a harder strike to the gas piston. So take that information and think a little; it explains everything.
1 – 30% mechanical failure? Insufficient gas piston power to operate the weapon. Compound that with those garbage 30 round magazines and I could EASILY see a 30% failure rate.
2 – Insufficient killing power? If there suddenly were a significant decrease in projectile velocity, then the effectiveness of the M1 Carbine would go way down as well. The .30 Carbine has very good penetration, but that’s because of projectile velocity. Take away the velocity and penetration would suffer exponentially.
How plausible is this?
Based on US Ordnance history, I’d say it’s not only plausible; it’s likely. I could totally see someone in Ordnance giving off the cuff approval for a manufacturer to use a substitute powder, and never mention it to ANYONE. Why? Well because they've done it before God knows how many times.
Now if only we could get several lots of ammunition that was known to be at Chosin, then take that to Antarctica and…wait, you lost me at Antarctica…
They, like the Nam Vets and their M-16's,,,,they obviously "didn't know how to 'run them right'" (your words). Ya think? Reminds me of some LC 67 5.56 I bought in 1969. Ten rounds of that and there was already thin caking of what was apparently the calcium carbonate from the ball powder on the bolt including the bolt face. A few hundred rounds of that through your M16 and you'd probably be up a creek.
Retired cat herder.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,485
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,485 |
short supplies to start, everyone knew the war was just about over. A fighting retreat with no time to service weapons, the Chinese right on top of you all the time, lubrication probably the consistency of karo syrup, if you had any, and cold, cold, cold. Does anyone know how the M1 Carbine faired in the Battle of the Bulge in the Winter of 1944-45? Were there similar malfunctions? If there weren't similar failures in the Ardennes I suspect an ammo problem No there weren't, but the battle of the bulge wasn't anywhere near as cold. Temps were about 14F, vs. Chosin at -35F. But in extensive arctic testing, the issues with the M1 Carbine that they had at Chosin didn't happen; Chosin is a bit of an anomaly. There is ZERO reason the M1 Carbine wouldn't work, and the Garand would. The Carbine has always been more reliable than the Garand in every test I've ever seen. That's why the whole thing doesn't make sense to me. Only a bad lot or two of ammo really explains ALL of the problems they had. Thats wild on the testing, I did not know that. I've shot garands and carbines since the late 80s. I"ve never had a garand jam, I have had jams and failures to feed with the carbine. Granted I shot good reloads mostly in the Garands, and LC ball, the ball had a round now and then with a dud primer though. Shot the carbine with only LC ball or WW Factory HP for pigs and such. Had probably 5-6 issues over the years with the carbine, probably half with the HP ammo. But some with factory LC. Was to the point in my mind there were lots of thigns I trusted to function all the time, but the carbine was not one of them. Granted all I have is a CMP Winchester carbine though.
We can keep Larry Root and all his idiotic blabber and user names on here, but we can't get Ralph back..... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,007
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,007 |
The 30 carbine is balistically very similar to the .357 mag. Which, from a handgun, was (and still might be I don't know) the best one shot stopping cartridge.
A 357 from a carbine sounds good at short range.
I suspect most "failures" of the 30 carbine (other than reliability issues related them not liking full auto) are due to trying to kill something too far away for a carbine shooting a pistol type cartridge.
Would any of you expect to shoot an elk at 200 yards with a 357 mag lever gun and stop it?
The only time my carbine doesn't work is with a cheap non GI magazine.
Last edited by Paradiddle; 04/29/16.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,448
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,448 |
I vaguely remember reading something about the thick quilted winter jackets worn by ChiComs being a factor with penetration also.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,955
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,955 |
Never pulled any military issue 30 Carbine ammo of the era, but would bet a sugar cookie it was loaded with the infant ball powders of the time. Bad ju-ju at low temps.
Even today, H110/296 is probably the most used component powder for 30 Carbine reloads and it sucks as temperature drops....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 944
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 944 |
Many folks may not remember that at the end of WWII, a majority of the vets that were drafted and fought in WWII were not actually discharged from the military at the end of hostilities, but rather they were placed in the reserves, only to be called back to active duty in the event of a National emergency.
The vets thought that to mean if the US were invaded, and that seemed unlikely, but somehow Truman figured a civil war in Korea qualified as such an emergency, so my dad was immediately placed on the call-up list.
My father-in-law, being that he was now a college grad and an Accountant with a family...he didn't qualify to be on the list.
No, you see, since he was a Lieutenant in WWII, and a commissioned officer, well, they decided to re-activate him without bothering to put him on the list first.
He said they called him up before the echoes of the first round fired in the conflict died away. They called him back up to do the same job he did in WWII.
So one day he's working at an Accounting firm and a few weeks later he was in in Korea as a forward observer.
He carried the M1 Carbine in both wars...actually, a Carbine, binoculars and a radio. He said he was lucky they gave him a parachute for the trip down...yeah...he was real overjoyed about the whole affair.
Anyway he said that at times it got so friggin cold in Korea that none of the rifles would fire, Garands, Carbines, MGs, it didn't matter.
He said that he would not even be standing here talking to me if not for the fact that the Chinese rifles wouldn't fire either.
"Supernatural divinities are the primitive's answer to why the sun goes down at night..."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,328
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,328 |
My buddy John was on a 30-cal water-cooled Browning team that landed at Omaha on D-Day +14 and spent the the winter of '44-45 just north of the Ardennes.
Everyone in his squad was issued carbines to cut down on the weight they had to carry. Everyone quickly threw them down and picked up Garands. John said the carbine was useless on Germans unless they were too close.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284 |
My buddy John was on a 30-cal water-cooled Browning team that landed at Omaha on D-Day +14 and spent the the winter of '44-45 just north of the Ardennes.
Everyone in his squad was issued carbines to cut down on the weight they had to carry. Everyone quickly threw them down and picked up Garands. John said the carbine was useless on Germans unless they were too close.
Everybody I knew who actually had to shoot somebody with them, didn't like them. People who just carried them, loved them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,485
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,485 |
The 30 carbine is balistically very similar to the .357 mag. Which, from a handgun, was (and still might be I don't know) the best one shot stopping cartridge.
A 357 from a carbine sounds good at short range.
I suspect most "failures" of the 30 carbine (other than reliability issues related them not liking full auto) are due to trying to kill something too far away for a carbine shooting a pistol type cartridge.
Would any of you expect to shoot an elk at 200 yards with a 357 mag lever gun and stop it?
The only time my carbine doesn't work is with a cheap non GI magazine. Master Sergeant Slade spoke to us a lot about the distances the 45 vs carbine was useful. Not a single one approached 100 yards. IE it was close combat and the carbine didn't cut it for him while the 45 worked extremely well. That said, I doubt a 357 would be much good with a round nose FMJ vs a good expanding bullet...
We can keep Larry Root and all his idiotic blabber and user names on here, but we can't get Ralph back..... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,274
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,274 |
The Garand had a longer sight radius, which at least implied better practical accuracy. Combined with a much harder hitting cartridge, I'd wager you had a much higher percentage of DRT enemy, compared to the carbine.
"...the designer of the .270 Ingwe cartridge!..."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,573
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,573 |
Never pulled any military issue 30 Carbine ammo of the era, but would bet a sugar cookie it was loaded with the infant ball powders of the time. Bad ju-ju at low temps.
Even today, H110/296 is probably the most used component powder for 30 Carbine reloads and it sucks as temperature drops.... I think you have something there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,485
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,485 |
The Garand had a longer sight radius, which at least implied better practical accuracy. Combined with a much harder hitting cartridge, I'd wager you had a much higher percentage of DRT enemy, compared to the carbine. Heavier, bulkier, kicked harder etc.... I think the two even out IMHO IE if you shot fine with one, you did same with other. Might have even shot better with the carbine due to maneueverability and less recoil. At close range. Hence I don't believe for a second about missing with the carbine but hitting with a Garand had anything to do with it.
We can keep Larry Root and all his idiotic blabber and user names on here, but we can't get Ralph back..... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,328
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,328 |
If my memory serves, John's big concern was not just about hitting a guy, but incapacitating him. John would freely give advice on deer hunting, etc. based on his war experience. He had not hunted whitetail deer, but he had hunted deer-sized things with the 30-06. I remember him being vehement about "shoot 'em, and keep shooting 'em until you're sure they aren't going to shoot back."
Additionally, I think he appreciated he could hit a Kraut with the Garand a lot further out than the Kraut could hit him with his MP 40. John had a real dislike for the "Burp Gun." A relative of his acquired one and came up behind John one night and threw the bolt. John had not heard one in 40-some years, but he came up out of his chair like he'd been hit with a cattle prod and was going to engage the fellow in hand-to-hand before we got him to his senses. The cousin had wanted to test John's story about being on guard duty one night and he heard an MP 40 being cycled on the other side of a fencerow. John stayed quiet and got back to his buddies and they lobbed in some rifle grenades. John's memory of an MP 40 was indeed intact.
I'm down at turkey camp today with SuperCore. I just mentioned this thread to him. We both knew John. SuperCore was stationed in Japan in the early 60's, listening in on the Russians. He had an M2 carbine and said that he was glad he never had to use it-- very unimpressed with the cartridges.
Last edited by shaman; 04/30/16.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,540
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,540 |
This thread sparked my interest because I have a friend, Tom, a fellow Marine who is a veteran of the Korean War Battle of the Chosin Reservoir.
Yesterday I visited with Tom, now 83 years old. He is still in good shape for his age, mentally and physically, and does all of his own yard work on a two-acre property where he has lived for 45 years with his lovely wife.
I told Tom about the topic of this thread, how the cold affected the firearms, and his opinion of the M1 Carbine, in particular. Tom got agitated. Here are some of his thoughts:
Tom:
"The M1 Carbine? Worthless! It couldn't kill anything! My son is a gun guy. He has one. I guess he thinks it is pretty. It isn't good for anything except shooting pop-cans!"
(Tom is a very small guy. Which probably explains why he was assigned as a tank crew-man. As such, his assigned weapon was the Carbine. He said the Garand was the much preferred weapon for most, but too big, heavy and impractical for him, personally. He would have liked to have had a Thompson, which he didn't have, though he did also complain about its weight, for him personally.)
I asked him about the extreme cold, if it affected different weapons to different degrees, and if it affected the ammo's power and effectiveness. He didn't seem to have an opinion about the ammo, but he was emphatic about the cold:
Tom:
"It was so cold nothing worked right! You couldn't count on anything working! The .50 cal. (machine gun) on top of the tank froze up on us, useless!"
(Then Tom calmed back down.)
Tom:
"Actually, the 30 cal machine gun kept working well, because its body was inside the tank. And (with a grin) the 90mm cannon never failed to fire (grin)" (It was obvious Tom liked the cannon). "We kept all our weapons as dry (oil-free) as we could. Any oil at all was bad news in that cold."
I asked Tom a bit more about the tanks. I had read that the tanks had a difficult time, there, due to the cold, the icy, one-lane mountain road, and a favored target of the enemy. Tom said of the 24 tanks he started with, only five (including his) survived. Some slid off the icy road and down the hill. Some just died in the severe cold, and some were destroyed by the enemy. Ironically, some were even destroyed by captured American bazookas.
Tom became a little emotional as he told me that only about a third of the men in his company survived, and of those only about a third were fit for continued service, due to wounds and frostbite. (About 4,000 Marines died and 14 Marines got the Medal of Honor). Our conversation about the war ended at that point, and turned to happier topics.
Tom served out the war and became a civilian again, looking for a job. Civilian jobs for cannon operators and machine-gunners were few, so he applied for a job opening at the power company. He lied, saying that he had been a signalman in the Corps with experience climbing poles. They hired him, and he had a successful career of 40 years as a lineman for the power company.
So, for what it is worth, there is one man's experience in the Korean War. I am proud to call Tom a friend, and fellow Marine.
Nifty-250
"If you don't know where you're going, you may wind up somewhere else".
Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,734 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,734 Likes: 1 |
Never pulled any military issue 30 Carbine ammo of the era, but would bet a sugar cookie it was loaded with the infant ball powders of the time. Bad ju-ju at low temps.
Even today, H110/296 is probably the most used component powder for 30 Carbine reloads and it sucks as temperature drops.... I think you have something there. I have read in some CMP type articles that the canister powder we now know as H110/296 was originally developed for the the 30 Carbine. As pointed out above, this powder is finicky in cold weather; I can see where -35F could cause not only low velocities but compromise reliability. 405wcf
|
|
|
|
|
604 members (16penny, 007FJ, 1936M71, 160user, 12344mag, 17CalFan, 58 invisible),
2,392
guests, and
1,302
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,144
Posts18,484,119
Members73,966
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
