JASmith Wrote:The cartridge design and bullet selection all suggest that long range was not one of the design criteria.:confused: No one has ever claimed that long range was a design criteria of the M1 carbine.
JASmith Wrote:Further, the often stated intent was to replace the 1911 and 38 caliber revolvers.That is a false and misleading statement. The intent was to provide a lightweight rifle for select personnel.
The M1911 was not replaced. It remained in widespread service for four decades after M1 carbine adoption. (And about two decades after the M1/M2 carbine was replaced.)
JASmith Wrote:In my view, the carbine was successful in that the hit frequency went way up, even though the probability of downing an adversary given a hit was not what any of us today like.There's no question that the M1 carbine was successful, by pretty much any metric. It's just a shame that it wasn't given a well-designed spitzer bullet. That probability of downing an adversary would likely have gone way up.