Monday I was eating lunch with a former member of the 508th PIR who had jumped at both Normandy and Holland. Among other questions I asked was "What firearm did you jump with at Normandy?".

He said that he jumped with a folding stock M1 carbine but dumped it and picked up a Garand as soon as he landed. In his words the carbine would get you killed because it would not hold zero. I've not heard this before and wonder it this was a problem with the folding stock versions in particular. Anyone else run into this problem?

He felt the Garnads would drift a little as they heated up, but the drift was always vertical. Which he could live with. Interestingly he still remembered the name of the dead man whose rifle he picked up and finished out the Normandy Campaign.

The problem is the recoil plate at the rear of the receiver well on the stock. There are three types of recoil plates generally referred to as Type I, II or III. Early carbines with the Type I recoil plates did not seat firmly in the stock and this caused the pint of impact to shift significantly during fireing with a negative effect on accuracy.

To help correct the accuracy problem associated with the Type I recoil plate, the Type II was designed to lock in the stock more snug. This change was implemented in mid 1942.

By August, 1943, the Type III recoil plate was designed and substituted. The front area of the recoil plate (where the receiver wedges into the place) was changed by cutting it deeper and changing the angles. This held the receiver firmly and increased the carbine's accuracy. Carbines manufactured after this date had the Type III recoil plate and most carbines were retrofitted with them during rebuilds and post war upgrades.

Carbines in the M1A1 folding stock did not typically have this issue, but the folding wire stock could be problematic.

Interestingly, the most decorated soldier of WWII, Audie Murphey, found his M1 carbine to be very accurate and was his weapon of choice and is reported to have taken a number of head shots with his.

__________________
- Change it back -

That is why I was wondering if it was a folding stock issue. My Brother-in-Law carried a folding stock M2 carbine in Vietnam and liked it. But he was a RTO in an Infantry Company in 1966-67 and the few times he actually needed it long range accuracy was not an issue.

Thanks for the education on the upgrades of the Carbine. I guess another possibility is the he had lost confidence in the Carbine due to the early wandering zero problems and nothing would change his mind.

It's kind of like how some Viet Nam vets will swear that their M16 was made by Mattel.

__________________
- Change it back -

I can pretty much keep up with my wife and her tricked out AR15 out to 100 yards-The M1's short length of pull, combined with a rear sight that can move a little-limits accuracy-BUT-it has a good trigger pull, and no recoil-handy for laying down a volume of fire.

I'm impressed with that. The ability to hold on center and rapid fire. If the ammo wasn't so darned expensive I would love to empty my 30 round magazine as fast as possible. Maybe I will make that an annual event.

I don't have an M1A1 with folding stock (which I think was the standard issue for paratroops), so I can't say anything about a wandering POI. I have owned three different M1s (one original WWII ca. 1944, and two with Korean War modifications), and none had that problem. Of course, I never used any of them under combat conditions either. In my experience the typical grouping of the Carbine at 100 yards is about 4"-5" at 100 yards (5-shot groups). That's plenty good enough for the conditions of use for which it was designed.