T29 (M3 Carbine)

This

It was either a strawman or you were talking to someone else, take your pick.

Ok, fair, if you account for barrel length (The lower end is still almost 1/4 of .30 Carbine) . Still doesn’t address the comparison with the 5.45x39 unless you want to argue that it too is not an intermediate rifle cartridge.

We’re talking about combat roles.

And I was paying attention to something you didn’t, the fact that the M1 carbine was used by pretty much all strata of boots on the ground forces.
“The M1 carbine with its reduced-power .30 cartridge was not originally intended to serve as a primary weapon for combat infantrymen, nor was it comparable to more powerful assault rifles developed late in the war. However, it was markedly superior to the .45 caliber submachineguns in use at the time in both accuracy and penetration,[15] and its lighter .30 caliber cartridge allowed soldiers to carry more ammunition. As a result, the carbine was soon widely issued to infantry officers, American paratroopers, non-commissioned officers, ammunition bearers, forward artillery observers, and other frontline troops.[41] The first M1 carbines were delivered in mid-1942, with initial priority given to troops in the European Theater of Operations (ETO).[15]”

Once again ignored the comparison with the AK-74.

explanation why it has been removed from your article.

And which one of them transfers more kinetic energy to target ?

And it changes the subject of for who carbine was invented to ?

So was spades, but I dont still hear people calling spades as infantry assault rifles.

Again, doesnt magically change the subject for who carbine was invented.
Regardless was it used in different roles or not.
^ above example of spade, I doubt it was invented to make soldiers life miserable somewhere between bigbang and stoneage.

Perhaps because its absolutely idiotic comparison to start with.
Newsflash, things have developed quite alot since the developement of carbine ~1930?
AK-74 ~1970

This will be the second time this topic will be closed (yeah second time this was already suggested but due to arguments were closed)
so guess this is going in the same direction

2 Likes

there are always exceptions, a shotgun slug can have more energy than a sniper round, yet it wouldn’t be considered as a rifle round because a shotgun barrel has no rifling - yet just because a gun barrel has rifling, doesn’t make it a rifle.

your way of arguing is childish.

again, claiming that 30 cal is an intermediate cartridge and guns like the M2 are Assault rifles is simply as a matter of fact NOT a clear fact, rather there has already been a huge controversial discussion about that specific topic around gun nerds, Korea war veterans and historians.

this discussion will lead to nothing, just like it did for the past 60 years.

they are arguing about definitions, which are subjective to begin with.

what’s the point?

what the fuck are you talking about?

About the same? The 5.45x39 has less than 20 more joules

Perfect, bad faith, that’s all I needed

And?! Definitions of terms don’t change just because the thing you’re applying it to predates the term…

it really a shame tbh cause this gun is pretty niche imo (would buy 1 tho if it ever got added)

Maybe just skip that part since it clearly is too much for you.

Terminal ballistics, hence the question which one transfers more kinetic energy to target.

And no, your carbine doesnt come even close.

Just using your logic

Sure, so let me spell the obvious since apparently you dont know it.

Roughly at 10cm penetration .30 carbine has transferred about 70J to gelatin target.
At same depth 5.45 has transferred about 400J to gelatin target.

Now tell me again how this comparison of yours of inadequate & obsolete 1930 round compared to somewhat modern 5.45 makes any sense ?