Rifleman Q&A: M1 Garand Vs. M1 Carbine Rebarrels

by
posted on October 15, 2021
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
Qamain

Q. It seems to me that few World War II-vintage M1 Garand rifles retain their original barrels today, whereas most M1 Carbines of the same era I have seen still have the original barrels? Is this true and, if so, why?


Right side wood rifle brown gun M1 Garand

A. Your observations are valid. The majority of M1 Garand rifles manufactured during World War II have, indeed, been re-barreled, typically as part of a post-war arsenal rebuild. It is also true that most M1 Carbines manufactured in the same period were arsenal overhauled after the war as well, but many retain their original barrels.

The primary reason for this is due to the type of ammunition used with each. The .30-cal. (.30-’06 Sprg.) cartridges manufactured during World War II were all made with corrosive primers. This resulted in the need to thoroughly clean the bore after firing. If a barrel was not properly cleaned, the corrosive primer compound could quickly ruin the bore, thus necessitating replacement of a barrel when the rifle was overhauled. Extensive cleaning over a period of time could also contribute to bore damage, especially since the M1’s barrel could only be cleaned from the muzzle.

right side rifle gun m1 carbine pouches metal wood

All World War II .30-cal. M1 Carbine ammunition was manufactured with non-corrosive primers. If the barrels were not routinely cleaned, there were no corrosive primer salts to ruin the bores. This also meant that scrupulous cleaning was less important for extended barrel life, which would have been the case if carbine ammunition had corrosive primers. Therefore, carbine barrels were much more likely to be retained during rebuild as compared to Garand barrels.

—Bruce N. Canfield


This “Questions & Answers” was featured in the February 2005 issue of American Rifleman. At time of publication, “Questions & Answers” was compiled by Staff, Ballistics Editor William C. Davis, Jr., and Contributing Editors: David Andrews, Hugh C. Birnbaum, Bruce N. Canfield, O. Reid Coffield, Charles Q. Cutshaw, Charles M. Fagg, Charles Karwan, Angus Laidlaw, Evan P. Marshall, Charles E. Petty, Robert B. Pomeranz, O.D., Jon R. Sundra, Jim Supica, A.W.F. Taylerson, John M. Taylor and John Treakle.

To subscribe to the magazine, please visit the NRA membership page and select American Rifleman as your member magazine.

Latest

Wilson Combat Bulwark 01
Wilson Combat Bulwark 01

Beyond the 1911: Wilson Combat's New Bulwark

The Bulwark is designed as a “hard-use service pistol” that combines the best features of a 1911 with those of a daily-carry duty gun, and Wilson Combat delivers it all at a price point below Wilson’s traditional handgun offerings.

Rifleman Review: Walther Arms PDP Pro-X PMM

Recently, Walther Arms has combined several PDP feature sets with a Parker Mountain Machine compensator to produce the Pro-X PMM.

The DOJ Civil Rights Division Strikes Again

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) just opened an investigation to “determine whether Philadelphia Police use a vague ‘good cause’ standard to cancel permits to carry legal firearms.”

Review: Smith & Wesson M&P FPC 5.7

Having more guns chambered in 5.7 mm is a great thing, and the Smith & Wesson M&P FPC 5.7 is a welcome addition to the growing world of 5.7 mm firearms.

Ruger Moves HQ to North Carolina

Ruger quietly relocated its corporate headquarters from Southport, Conn., to Mayodan, N.C., marking the end of the company's management presence in the town where it was founded in 1949.

Honest EDC: A Realistic Assessment of Your Concealed Carry Kit

The problem is not that most concealed-carry loadouts are bad. The problem is that most concealed-carry kits are never re-examined against reality.

Interests



Get the best of American Rifleman delivered to your inbox.