Discussion in 'Small Arms and Edged Weapons' started by Allied-vs-Axis, Jun 8, 2016.
That is very true, the .45 ACP even today is a pretty large thing to have your gun throw at someone.
I have read that the Czech ammo is especially hot; more so than other Comblock countries. Does anyone have any info on that? I know the Czech ammo has a specific warning not to use it in c96s. A famous German Tiger tank commander was wounded and a lying in a ditch when a Soviet officer shot him several times in the head and neck. He lived which isn't a sterling recommendation for the cartridge.
I don't know quite why we wandered into a discussion of the C96 Mauser, but this is the authoritative site on the weapon and its ammunition (including Czech & other Combloc stuff):
Perhaps Terry, because the c96, AKA "System Mauser" was designed to be both a pistol and a carbine-hence the stock. Therefore, it had some commonalities in intended usage with the American carbine
When I first got my reproduction Colt Walker Dragoon I noted that the muzzle energy was in the same range as commercial .357 Magnum rounds. It predated all of the above I believe.
Very true LWD. I believe the Walker had the title until 357 Mag came out (about 85 years). I can think of a few other pre-1900 handguns that used loads similar to the "high-power" stuff out there today too.
But, see my follow-up clarification / weaselling-out-of-a-bad-spot statement
I did see your clarification but have a hard time resisting bringing up the Walker when I can.
Now for a short digression possibly OT soapbox statement.
IMO (and I'm hardly an expert here so discount it how you will) one of the problems with determining power/wound capability/lethality of various weapons is the tendency for people to look at a single mechanic when it's usually a blend of mechanics and indeed one that varies with the situation that really determine the these things. I.e. it isn't just KE or wound cavity or hydrostatic shock but a blend of those as well as momentum, bullet placement, physiology, etc. The measures of the above or at least the ones that are amenable to reasonably well defined measures are of import but they aren't the whole answer and shouldn't be considered as such.
Absolutely right. I'd also add penetration, since some of these lighter rounds don't have a long wound track. A round that goes through a forearm and perhaps some web gear and a heavy jacket, then into the chest and penetrates all the way to the spine or back ribs before exiting is much more lethal than one that stops within the body cavity. Or, perhaps more quickly lethal.
That can take us back on track with the Garand vs the Carbine. Both rounds are .308 in diameter, but it isn't just the difference in velocity that makes the Garand more lethal, it also the heavier slug (kinetic energy) which in almost every case will go all the way through the torso and exit. A longer wound track destroys more organs, bones, etc. An exit wound tends to gush blood, while entrance wounds don't (I'm drawing on hunting experiences here). Internal wounds tend to self-compress and slow bleeding, and thus slow incapacitation. In effect, and I've witnessed just this, somebody shooting a deer with too light a round will still kill the deer, but they may find it a mile away or not find it at all. The same would be true with humans. A guy hit in the torso with a 9mm or .30 Carbine may continue to shoot back for a while before he weakens enough to no longer be a threat. A guy hit with a 30.06 is far more likely to be dead or incapacitated on the spot.
Oh boy we're really getting into it now. Yes, I fully agree. "Power", "stopping power", "leathality" and the like are always subjective. There is not one metric (or even a good set of metrics) that can be used to determine which is "the best". Many have tried to quantify this -- the Thompson-LaGarde tests come to mind. I based my simple ranking solely off of kinetic energy which as we all know is not the only determinant. Lets avoid getting into the details here because this could go on forever. But please, go back to discussing the Colt Walker!
Well we could simply agree that by power we mean muzzle energy or (KE at a given range if more info is needed).
That said the Walker is a blast to shoot, at least until it becomes too fouled to pop a cap. Of course that can be said of most guns I've fired. The Walker is one of the cheaper to feed especially on a timed basis.
I generally agree KB, however, some bullets were made to be more destructive than others. I have read that the 303 British rounds had a wad of aluminum right under the nose cap. This altered the point of balance and allowed the bullet to tumble. Accordingly, the 303 round have been touted by some as one of them more destructive fmj rounds. Therefore, we need to add the bullet's behavior to your mix.
Those of you who know my writing understand that I look at things from the human element. In my interviews with Glider guys, there was no question. They wanted to carry the Garand instead of the carbine. Those who carried a carbine would dump it as soon as they could find a Garand.
Why? They described the Carbine as a "Pea Shooter" and the Germans weren't very afraid of them. The Garand would change how they "interacted" with the glider men.
Perception? Reality? Human? Yes for sure the human element.
Perhaps, llhawk, but I have seen one or two pictures of German soldiers carrying U.S. carbines. They possibly lost their weapons but they could have picked up a Garand instead.
There was no perhaps to the comments. They said it. One or 2 pictures really doesn't mean much, but I do see the point. Were the soldiers newly arrived from the east for the Ardennes Offensive? Generally in the west, accept for that, the general directly was heading east, not back west (OK 2 steps forward 1 back). When you are retreating maybe a lighter weapon might be useful?
The guys also said that later in the war they began to feel sorry for the Germans as it (their words) wasn't a fair fight. Many of the Germans they faced were fighting with bolt action rifles against modern US weapons. Again their words. Just passing it along.
I used to play war games with a gentleman who had been an army Captain in an infantry unit involved in the Okinawa campaign. He carried a M1 Carbine. If I remember correctly he mentioned that he used it almost exclusively for directing fire. Kept it loaded with tracers (again from what I remember). Since he was a Captain he was more concerned with controlling his unit than engaging individual Japanese soldiers with his personal weapon. For that purpose the Carbine arguably better than the Garand and the M1911.
In regards to the German soldiers above if they had had their positions over run or been in danger of the same especially on multiple occasions a semi automatic with a large magazine supply that was "handy" might seem quite attractive.
I doubt any German soldier would have thrown down his MP40 to pick up a K98. A semi-auto like the Carbine has several advantages over submachine gun. The round is more powerful, it has greater range, and as a semi it is capable of aimed fire for each round.
Thanks. Your parody response does a much better job than my feeble semi-serious attempts to point out the pitfalls of using pictures to draw inferences about historical events. And you didn't spoil it by considering what the US unit they got those two carbines from might have been armed with. Good job!
The Garand for long and medium work the carbine for close in stuff and Tommy gun for room clearing.
As long as this thread has popped back up, it should be mentioned that our current resident in the White House has been blocking a sale of surplus Garands and M1 Carbines back to the US from South Korea via executive order. They are antiques as far as the South Koreans are concerned, sitting in warehouses neatly covered in cosmoline and wrapped in waxed paper. They don't want them. Obama won't let them back into their country of origin (our country).
With a new president that has vowed to waive all of the executive orders by the former president, we might just see those rifles flooding our market via the CMP and/or private concerns.
The numbers are staggering. 86,000 Garands and 770,000 (not a typo!) M1 Carbines.
Wow! I've wanted a carbine for a while. A Garand would be nice, too.