Great looking rifles, I have a couple also.
According to our Sec. of State all these weapons are “assault rifles”.
At one time or another, everything was an assault weapon.
Now I feel assaulted.
True but she use the title “Assault Rifle” to prohibit the importation to the US of M1 Garand’s from the ROK.
Actually, it was likely that Hitler coined the term ‘assault rifle’ [‘sturm gewehr’] to describe his [AK 47-like] StG 44- but really, it does not apply to the Garand. Indeed, it took the M1 another ~15 years development to enter service as the M14,- with a decent sized, detachable magazine & selective auto-fire - to qualify as such.
I might be wrong, but I thought the importation of the ROK M1 Garand rifles were allowed, but the M1 Carbines were denied. Things may have changed since I last checked, it’s difficult to keep up on such things anymore.
okay so I an’t out of high school yet so my income is pretty low and my knowledge to find these weapons aren’t to high either. Is it possible if anyone can help me with this?
This all assumes that you are a Citizen of the United States. For starters, the minimum legal age for purchasing a long arm, (rifles, or shotguns) is 18. Parents may also purchase a firearm in their name for their children. This all assuming there is no disqualifying history, Criminal record, that sort of thing. Next there is price to consider, an M-1 Garand will be expensive depending on maker, condition etc. Prices will range between 600-2,000 USD service grade being at the lowest end of the scale. It would be prudent to research them online, gun brokers, gunsamerica, there are a number of sellers who showcase the different offerings much like Ebay. Even though you might make a deal online, the transfer must still take place at a licensed dealer near you. The seller will ship it to the local shop of your choice, and you do the paperwork, and Nics check there. :Take particular notice : Do not buy any such firearm from a Chinese manufacturer. The quality is horrific, and not to be trusted… Same goes for Chinese ammunition.
One reason the M-1 Carbines were barred from import is that they have a detachable magazine, where the Garand has a fixed internal magazine. (A truly B.S. reason, but thats why)
Attend gun shows, talk to people who are selling what you are interested in, research on line, and you will be able to learn all you might want to know about any firearm.
o okay thanks
If this is correct I damn sure haven’t seen any ROK M-1 Garand’s on the market here! I’d like to have one, and one chambered for 7.62mm too.
I remember reading a a book about some F (fox) company of marines fighting in Korea during the Korean war and with the m-1 carbine they would have to aim at the heads. Since the Chinese had body armor on the them. Quite interesting I say.
It wasn’t body armor, I think. It was the thick, quilted Chinese PLA “Volunteers” winter uniforms. The relative low velocity of the carbine round lessened its effectiveness at ranges beyond 50m, IIRC. In open terrain of much of Korea and against often much greater numbers, that was a problem. Incidentally, it was the M-2 Carbine, that was effectively a sub-machine-gun…
The cartridge used by the M1 carbine can be classed as a pistol cartridge, and was based on the .32 Winchester case. It was 1.6" / 42mm long and used a .30 cal (7.62mm) 110 grain FMJ bullet driven to a velocity of 1,995 FPS / 606.5 MS giving an energy of 967 Ft. Lbs. / 1,311 J . This performance exceeds that of the .357 Magnum cartridge using the same weight of bullet. The one problem is the very short,and light 110 gr bullet. It lacks the mass to carry the energy to a more distant target. 200 yards 1,236 FPS/ 373 Ft.Lb. 300 yards 1,035 FPS/ 262 Ft. Lb. Bullet drop from line of sight at 200 yds is 13 inches, and at 300 yards 48 inches.
The M2 selective fire was the better of the two, even though it had no better performance at distance, it was a bullet hose, and very controllable.
You apparently know your stuff! Do you think an SMG firing this round been of more use then the .45 Cal ones we used then?
okay well thanks. I just really saying what I remember reading and well thats what they say. But as always they could be wrong
For a true SMG, the .45 a.c.p. was the better choice of cartridges due simply to the size, and weight of the bullet used. This is my own opinion, which I base on the original reason for the adoption of the .45 a.c.p. by the U.S. It was found to more reliably stop an aggressor than were the .38 long Colt cartridge of the 1911 pistol’s predecessor the Colt Model 1892, and even the service rifle. This was a particular situation involving the Moro Tribesmen in the Philippine Is. who would attack with knives while drugged, and bound tightly to decrease blood loss. Smaller diameter bullets did not inflict enough trauma at impact to stop them.
A carbine is kind of middle of the road weapon, and is often expected to the job of a rifle, and in the case of the M2, a subgun all in one package. In some conditions, the .30 carbine round would perform well in a subby, but if ranges increase, or heavier equipment, and clothing are used by the adversary,particularly when using cover, that smaller, lighter bullet loses what benefits it might otherwise offer. There was work done by Thompson on a .30 cal version to be considered a “Light Rifle” and was considered for a time before it was decided that it would be too costly. This was prior the the M1 Carbine coming along.
If my recollection of what I’ve heard is correct, the M-2 Carbine (SMG actually) was pivotal in the development of the AR-15/M-16 as junior officers that saw combat in Korea became senior officers overruling the more conservative and stogy, ossified officers that still had the WWI mentality. That is, they wanted a lighter arm like the M-2 but one with the projectile fired that had the velocity to penetrate at distance. A rifle that could match the AK-47…
I agree that the M-2 looks much like a subby, and acts like a subby. but would fall more easily into the assault rifle category(whatever an assault rifle is). Sub guns were chambered in calibers already in use in pistols, and the .30 carbine round was developed specifically for the M-1, and 2. I must point out that it was adapted from the .32 Winchester self loading cartridge with some small changes to case, and propellant. This trait is shared by both the Sturm Gewehr’s 7.92x33 cartridge, and Kalashnikov’s 7.62x39 cartridge. (mind you this is only my opinion based wholly on comparative attributes of these firearms) Post M1-2 the .30 carbine round found a following in the handgun community with MFGR’s producing perhaps 10 models of hand guns in this caliber.
Barrel lengths of sub guns tended to be shorter than 12" ranging in length from the 8" Grease gun tube, to the 10-1/2" Soviet PPSH-41. The M1-2 had a length of 18" The other trait shared with assault rifles is the action, where sub guns normally use a simple blow back action, a sliding bolt with a fixed firing pin,firing from an open bolt position. The carbine used a system very similar to the Garand with a locking bolt firing from the closed position, and having a recoil system using an operating rod of some type.
The idea of the carbine was a good one, and I agree the concept of a very light rifle could be, (and was) inspired by it. In truth, (again my opinion) Had the carbine been rechambered to fire a more effective cartridge it would have as suggested by Nick, been the ticket for use in WW II, Korea, and Viet Nam. The image shows the .30 carbine rounds next to two more modern cartridges used in similar types of firearms. L. 4.6x30 mm round intended for the H&K MP-7, and the 5.7x28mm used in the FN P-90. H&K left, P90 Right. (My personal favorite is the P-90 mainly because of it’s large cap. magazine that mounts in parallel along the top of the weapon instead of perpendicular to the weapon. I would even go the extra effort to get the shorter service length version. ) It is a bit odd that the modern firearms also have very short barrels, unless they are sold in the civilian versions which require a 16" barrel minimum.
