|
|
|
|
#1
05-29-2011, 02:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
I believe the "underpowered" nature of the .30 Carbine is, like a lot of commentary in the gun world, pure rumor, and I'll think that until I see extensive reports saying otherwise. On paper, of course it's weaker that the full powered rounds, but by no means is it weak, from a ballistic point of view. And, again, it accomplished what the military needed it to, so no complaints. Stacking it against actual battle rifles is unfair though.
There's also this for what it's worth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7ktaTbgQsU Not sure at what range that is, but that's 6 layers of wet denim, and a 6 inch wooden block, and it goes clean through, so anything on penetration I'll about dismiss. If you say it's underpowered too, you have to say that the .45, which is ballistically weaker, is also underpowered, and the ever potent 7.62 Tokarev, is underpowered too. 
|
|
#2
05-29-2011, 02:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It was good in its original role (scout/rear echelon rifle) but then it tried to fill the battle rifle role, which was stupid.
__________________
"I don't need luck, I have ammo!" Grunt, Mass effect 3
|
|
#3
05-29-2011, 02:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
As if the gun acted of its own accord... the military rotated it into that role after nations were trying to phase out the several guns they would issue for specific roles for all around guns like the FAL and AK47. Even so, during the WWII era, it was built for a specific role, filled that role and perhaps then some. Comparing it to a main battle rifle during that era isn't fair, it wasn't supposed to be that during the time period.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
