There is nothing wrong with this round and it should make a comeback
No lissen here sonny! That there .30 carbine is too weak, it bounced right off them Chinese winter coats!What? No, don't ask me how a cartridge with 40% more velocity and energy transfer than modern .357 magnum was somehow beaten by cheap cotton jackets! How dare you imply I was just a shitty shot!
On what gun or platform...?
>>65060277There were a handful of more modern firearms chambered for it like the IMI Magal because for some reason the IDF really loved the round for their border guard
>>65060266>soft recoiling>decently flat shooting>performs well from both long and short barrels>softer on the ears, doesn't require as much earpro as 5.56 to shoot comfortablyit really should. a reduced size AR15 in .30 carbine like a modern M1 carbine would be amazing.
>>65060274It's insane to me that in the age of Youtubers being able to make and show direct comparisons between .30 Carbine and .357 that we still have unironic boomers on the internet spreading this Fudlore, we even had some in an M1 Carbine thread on here a couple of weeks ago
>>65060297Boomer's don't want to learn, they want to be right, they came from an era where elders were basically gods of knowledge and were looked up to by the young, but then the internet happened, people could fact check anything they said in seconds and find out they were wrong, and that god like status they were so eager for was just straight up denied to them.
how does it compare ballistically out of 16" barrel to 7.92×33mm?
>>650603767.92 Kurz is slightly more powerful but overall the two are somewhat comparable
>>65060376the main difference is the round nose bullet vs spitzer bullet, which is slowed down much less in flight due to a better ballistic coefficient.if you loaded .30 carbine with modern 110gr spitzer bullets they'd have near identical trajectories, although the round wouldn't fit into any existing mags.
>>65060397>if you loaded .30 carbine with modern 110gr spitzer bullets they'd have near identical trajectoriesHas anyone actually tried this?
>>65060266We already have 300 aac for this. 30 carbine with modern bullets would be a good hunting round though, if for some reason m1s become a fad
>>65060412>if for some reason m1s become a fadM1 Carbines were basically the AR-15 before the AR-15. Lots of WWII vets ended up buying civilian versions for home defense and passing them onto their grandchildren, the round was under 40 cents per round as late as the late 2010s but more recently prices have gone absolutely insane
>>65060382>>65060397What about energy, at (let's say) 200 yards?standard bullet for each
>>65060435Based on a completely cursory google search, I'm looking at 7.92 Kurz having 750 ft-lbs of energy at 200 yards vs .30 Carbine's 400 ft-lbs of energy, nearly half. Which I'm guessing is probably expected to do the aerodynamic differences between ball ammo and spitzer rounds
Keep in mind that in the real world, while they can be ballistically similar at the muzzle, the M1 Carbine itself is extremely lightweight compared to the somewhat heavier STG-44, which is why German soldiers often found advantages using captured M1 Carbines on the battlefield
>>65060445Kind of want to build out a khyber pass-esque 8mm kurz rifle since real stg 44s are either unobtanium or too expensive for me to entertain buying. I just find the round interesting.
>>65060474I've considered something similar but 8mm Kurz itself seems like it's a lot less common on the market since there's way less demand for it than even .30 Carbine
>>65060277Modernized M1s of course.
>>65060490Hand loading lessens the blow as the brass can be made out of cut down 308 brass, but yeah factory ammo is basically unobtanium.
>>65060491They make Polymer Stocks with grips with Picatinny rail that replace the top hand guard. Apparently there were a lot of Israeli Border Patrol running around with these in the 2000s since there was a modernization effort for their massive stockpiles of M1s and .30 Carbine ammo. I considered getting one of those stocks but people told me it was Bubba. I don't think retards realize that the action can just be unscrewed and put into another stock without mangling anything
>>65060411there are no bolt actions in .30 carbine so you'd need an M1 carbine and single feed the rounds into the chamber without a mag to do it, which would pass as an experiment but is not really practical.110gr .30 cal bullets are quite common and readily available, they are one of the most common bullet weights for .300 blackout, for example.i've actually designed a 10mm based wildcat that has the ballistics of .30 carbine without the excessive bullet length so that it can be used in both pistols and rifles effectively, basically an autoloading .327 fed mag which is almost an exact copy of .30 carbine ballistically.
>>65060266Yeah, it's basically just autoloading .357 Magnum which is a nice light rifle round or powerful magnum revolver round. The issue with .30 Carbine is that it has mediocre performance out of a short barrel and it makes for a really awful pistol grip due to the length of it. There's also just not a lot of light .30 caliber bullets compared to something like .223 which would drive up the cost. It's a really small market niche but 5.7 and .300 Blackout fill it for tacticool stuff and .357 Magnum fills it for niche fudd stuff
>>65060266it got superseded by cheap .223 and 7.62x39. Like it doesn't really do anything .223 doesn't and most other popular rounds are used for hunting
>>65060502If you knew that at the time, why did you let anyone's opinion stop you from buying what you wanted?
The 30 carbine could actually serve as an excellent parent case for a high pressure pseudo 5.56 FABRL. Would increase mag capacity by a couple percent (+5rds for quad stacks) and weigh less than 5.56.Picrel is a mockup of what I’m talking about. Flanked by 5.7 and 5.56. It’s been over a year since I modeled it in an internal ballistics computer but from what I remember, it should make about 1200ft*lbs at the muzzle, 58gr bullet (assuming all-steel with a copper jacket), 5 calibers long with an i7ff of ~0.8 (scaled down 750gr a-max), eclipsing 5.56 (m855a1 from 14.5”) in retained energy at about 150yds.. flatter trajectory at all ranges due to both a higher BC and higher muzzle velocity. This is the proper application of high pressure cases, not slightly scaling down magnum cartridges for hunters (7mm BC, looking at you)
>>65060274>>65060297>>65060315I'm too lazy to go find the PDF, but there's a korean war report that has such based things as>only 1 in 10 soldiers in korea ever sighted in their guns>1 cleaning rod per platoon>only 8% of soldiers used their sights when shooting
>>65060285>or some reasonthey are jews. they had a large stockpile of free surplus .30 carbine from the US and they weren't going to turn down free ammo
>>65060620this is one of the thingsi think besides showing how stupid the people were, it showed just how much they needed a man portable lmg (which they then made)
>>65060289>a reduced size AR15 in .30 carbine like a modern M1 carbine would be amazing.So a CMMG Banshee in 10mm that takes Glocko mags. Got it.
>>65060266The only reason to shoot this is training juniors. The 110grn .30 ball has no expansion and the cheap surp is gone. Any Ruger 10/22 can train the juniors and you should step right up to .223 Rem next anyway. The M1 .30 Carbines are too pricy as collector guns for new shooters, but damn, it was good for that.
>>65060289>reduced size AR15 in 30 carbineDream bigger. Feed the mag through the grip. Now you’re over a foot shorter than the m4 and like 2lbs lighter,
>>65060445>>65060474I still think that 7.92×33 could and ought be brought back as a niche round. And for supply of new-build select fire StG 44s.
>M1 carbine thread>get to post pic rel
I shoot 10mm.
>>65060266The m1 carbine was such a great weapon.
>>65060642>10mmno range>Glocko magsabsolutely disgusting
>>65060277
Does anyone sell ammo for this thing? I got a carbine from my dad and it's so fun to shoot.
>>65060770NTA, agreed, though I arrived at this conclusion in a different way. Picrel has a case head of 11.5mm, caliber of 7.62, and OAL of 1.85”. Bullet is a 110gr vmax (same length and bearing surface to ogive ratio) At 80kpsi, the powley computer predicts above 1700ft*lbs from a 10” barrel. why the weird OAL? Cause this can feed through the grip. A steel grip with the magwell cut by EDM. All this yields an mp7 style stg44 or AKPicrel. Flanked by 5.56 and 300 blackout
Yeah
>>65060770>>65060808(me)And I should’ve mentioned. The reason for the cartridge’s dimensions are because that’s the max size that can feed through a human-sized grip, and the reason for the caliber is that will retain max energy at 300yds (but anything from 6.5 to 30 cal will land within ~5% of eachother, but 30 cal will have more at the muzzle)
>>65060777Checked. Oh lawd. I forgot about this. Now I Can’t believe it took this long for someone to post it
>>65060637I'm kinda puzzled by this. Why did soldiers aim so much more consistently with the regular M1 but just shoot wildly with the carbine?Was the increased magazine capacity and lighter recoil really that bad for discipline, or was this more a matter of who was equipped with which type of rifle?
>>65060266I agree. They should also make handguns in this caliber.
>>65060846Well they did for a time...
>>65060843I'm honestly confused by this as well since in my experience Vietnam era and newer M1 Carbines have excellent sights and are fairly solid shooters out to 150 yards
>>65060843>>65060859Carbines were issued to men who had responsibilities other than shooting. One would expect a guy whose entire job it is to fire machine guns not to panic when firing them.
>>65060843I think they were really poorly trained in general.
>>65060266I think it has some conceptual potential, but you'd want to reinvent it for a longer and more modern bullet.>>65060277I'd like to see AR15s with shortened recievers (and overall light builds), for it. Also, brand new magazines, none of this using the old Carbine mags, they're shit.>>65060624That's also true, but the M1 Carbine is also just a really light and handy little gun that's easy for anyone to carry around (yet packs some power), which is why everyone else also loved it, like the French or the Koreans.>>650603767.92x33mm is a decent bit more powerful, but more importantly it benefits a lot from its more aerodynamic spitzer projectile, allowing for much better effective range.>>65060397>although the round wouldn't fit into any existing magsWhich is why it's kind of a moot point. Though with .22 Johnson Spitfire, you COULD fit it in Carbine mags, and it was a much better cartridge (though not as powerful as .223 Remington).
>>65060846wouldn't be comfortable for the hand
>>65060445The bullet makes a big difference.>>65060528>there are no bolt actions in .30 carbineThere's a rare few, but generally it was a hard sell since there were dirt cheap surplus carbines.>>65060642I'm sick of Glock mags, fuck you.>>65060672Potentially also valid (though it can be questioned if you want to reinvent it for modern and more aerodynamic bullets, will it still fit?), however, you could bullpup it to make it even shorter and save on even more weight.
>>65060770There's no practical point to that, supersonic loads of .300BLK are almost identical in ballistics to 7.92x33mm, but they're slimmer and fit in normal .223 magazines.The fat as fuck diameter of the 7.92x33mm cartridge means that a 30 round magazine of it is as long as a 40 round magazine of .223/.300 is (pic related).
>>65060972>redesign for sleeker bulletsOAL is at a premium, so concessions in form factor are required. Slightly longer - around 1” in length would retain a bit more energy at 300 but I was thinking I really want 1) sufficient velocity for a 300yd MPBR on a 7” target and 2) if someone actually made this, the recoil would already be punishing. Don’t want to make it any worse. But other combinations of caliber and bullet length, within reason, would work. .224 VLDs would be neat.>bullpupGross.
>>65060982>almost identical in ballisticsMay we see some comparison data?
>>65060843they legitimately were just that stupid and poorly trainedthe U.S.'s training was severely lacking until vietnam (where they gone and massively upgraded it), and the people weren't the best choices for service eitherlistening to some of the stories out of the war, you gotta wonder how they even won it, and how much more they could have done with even a bit better discipline
>>65061190NTAWhich metric? The 300 blackout only suffers a very slight muzzle energy penalty, one that it can actually overcome with a >16” barrel. It otherwise has a higher BC bullet with a finer shape going faster. Besides all that, the cartridge is smaller, less tapered, loads in higher capacity mags, and requires a smaller/lighter action.It’s really hard for a new wildcat cartridge to achieve any traction, much less become the 2nd default rifle chambering. They’re typically shilled for a year or two then die an unceremonious death. It’s not for no reason that 300 blackout has stuck around and is one of 2 (or 3) default rifle chamberings. It’s a fine cartridge, especially out of an SBR.
>>65061255Claim was :>almost identical in ballisticsLet's see some 100 yd and 200 yd energy and velocity comparisons for each cartridge with comparable-length (~16") barrelsIn 16.5" barrel (<--the StG 44) 7.92×33mm out of the muzzle:>123 gr FMJBT2,250 ft/s 1,391 ft-lb>125 gr Ball2,250 ft/s 1,406 ft-lb
>>65060798Based.
>>65061268300 blackout makes something like 1300-1400ft*lbs from a 16” barrel, so they start off the same, and with bullets of equal weight, the superior form factor of the 300 blackout confers higher BC thus better energy retention. So though it MAY have a slight disadvantage at the muzzle, 300 will overtake the Kurz by 100-200 yards. But this is a delta of at most double digit foot pounds we’re talking about in the first place. It doesn’t even matter.
>>65061268Here it is. You made me go to Reddit, dick.110gr, 1400ft*lbs, 16” barrel. A 110gr (113 actually) 30 cal has the same SD as a 123gr 7.92mm. But the 300 blackout has a form factor advantage, so will have a higher BC than the 123gr kurz.. If you want to keep bullet mass the amme, then Assume a 123gr bullet would intrude only slightly on the powder column, costing about 50ft*lbs in energy. No matter, the 300 blackout permits use of longer ogives, thus this energy gap will be bridged by a superior BC (higher SD and lower form factor).You know we’re splitting hairs, right? 50ft*lbs has never made a difference in anything, ever.
>>65060266I want 7.62x25 and .30carbine back. They are just good.>>65060289Instead we got 300 blackout...
>>6506027730 carbine should be on a short stroke system like an ar18 to maximize carbine compactness. Also 16in bolt action on 30carbine would be kinda nice.
>>65060972fun fact, those muzzelite bullpup stocks (for the Mini-14) were the basis for the prop rifles in Startship Troopers
>>65060266The only .30 carbine anyone needs. Taken more deer than any other cartridge.
>>65061984>leverNah
>>65060499which is really unfortunate because im down to ~100 rounds of 7.92x33 for my mp44
>>65060528What about a Thompson Contender?
I'm honestly surprised it was basically a "genetic dead end" of ammunition, even with 1940's era powder it outclasses most modern .357 magnum loadings while still being light recoiling enough that some handguns could be chambered in it, imagine just how hard a .30 carbine would be with modern powder and defensive bullets would hit.
>>65061920I know. Also Muzzelite stocks are kind of shit (which is usually the case for bullpup kits, but those are one of the worst types).Also they never made those for the M1, some boomer just modified it to take one as a proof of concept of his ideal light rifle.>>65061123I don't love bullpups either (yet also don't hate them), but using a lighter rifle cartridge like this gives you a lot of opportunity to make a particularly lightweight and compact carbine, and a bullpup design would be a way to maximize weight and length reduction, but while still having a lot of good barrel length to work with (also so you don't get such a blasty gun).There's also ways to make better triggers for bullpups than many designs tend to do.>>65061637desu you would want to be looking at something like the Korobov, with its vertically traveling bolt group, and forward ejection. Go for that .22 Spitfire and you can also have lighter recoil, ammo weight, etc.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atyPwvgYH-c
>>65062418>bulloupsMag-in-grip takes you halfway to bullpup (mag moves half the distance back and superimposes with the grip) without incurring the penalty of weird weight distribution and weird ergos. And with a collapsed stock, the OAL of both are the same (length = barrel length + BCG + negative cycling space + buttpad). The only difference is the mag-in-grip is about 6” longer with the stock deployed.>i [don’t hate] bullpupsI do, especially SBRs. Picrel, how the fuck am I supposed to hold this thing? And that barrel is 11.5”. It’s even stupider with a 10”. I can see their merit if the barrel must be extremely long.
>>65061920Is that so? I thought those were mini 14s
>>65061920neat>>65061984why didn't they make a lever gun in .30 carbine?>muh rim.35 rem, 10mm and 9mm all work in lever guns
>>65060277Hillberg carbines, of course
>>65062791They are. The Muzzelite MZ-14 is a bullpup conversion kit for the Mini-14, a cheap plastic clamshell with a pretty awful trigger linkage.It looks kind of neat though, so it worked well in sci-fi for a while, the Morita rifles in Starship Troopers were Ruger AC-556 rifles (select-fire Mini-14) in built up and modified Muzzelite stocks. Some also had underbarrel Ithaca 37 shotguns built into them.Muzzelite also made/make these stocks for the Ruger 10/22, the Marlin 60, I think, and also the Marlin Camp carbines.
>>65063349>advanced scifi rifle>wood ass ithaca 37 underbarrel
>>65063356They used plastic or painted handguards IIRC. Mind, you barely get a good look at the shotguns in the movie, and the rifle part is a Mini-14 with a rod pushing on the trigger for a linkage.
>>65060528>there are no bolt actions in 30 carbineBehold!
>>65063716
>>65063716>Straight PullWould be kino if it had a proper wooden stock and wasn't just ARslop
>>65063716>straight pull
>>65063733ALSO BEHOLD!
>>65060957>.22 Johnson SpitfireWould be happy to see a revival of this.
>>65060637>SLA MarshallI immediately don't trust this data. I want to, but that guy was so up his own ass about making shit up to prove his preconceived ideas that I just can't take anything with his name on it at face value.
What does .30 carbine do that 5.56 isn't better at.
>>65063983Fitting in the M1 carbine
>>65060620Isn't it that only ~5% of male population are natural-born killers and in military there's ~10% of such people?
>>65063971>SLA Marshall was completely full of shit, everyday, all the timeExactly correct
>>65060849I want one. It fucks.
>>65060777Checked and keked>>65061637Blessed retard. The m1 carbine was the first short stroke. Its a tiny action for shooting something with 80% of the power of 5.56
>>65064760I know which is why it should stay this way. You just know someone would fucking DI a modern 30 carbone gun
>>65060266As much as I like my M1 the round gets brutally mogged by .223 while being >50% more expensive and only a tad softer shooting and more compact.
