Inland .30 Carbine vs Kel Tec SU-16CA - opinions?

[Phillip Gain]

I went to a gun show yesterday, my first one in a few years. I was thinking about purchasing my first semi-auto rifle, but was overwhelmed by the choices.

I eliminated the AR-15 and AK-47 / SKS platforms. These are very common, and I feel like I can pick one up pretty much anytime and anywhere.

I really want something a little different. I've narrowed it down to two choices:

1) Used Inland M1 Garand (.30 Carbine), manufactured circa 1949. It only has the Choate folding stock, does not come with the original wood stock. Barrel has been cut and crowned. Cost is about $550.

2) New Kel-Tec SU-16CA (5.56 NATO). I like the collapsible stock (for storage only, will not fire with stock collapsed) and the ability to carry two spare magazines under the butt of the weapon. Uses standard AR-15 or M-16 mags.

Can I get some input from folks who one one or both of these firearms?

 

[B2Tall]

I don't have any direct shooting experience with either but I like them both. I like going to gun shows just to see what's out there and pyisically handle the stuff instead of just reading about it. I've even worked a couple of shows for a dealer friend. You can learn a lot.

I've always wanted an M1 carbine and some day I'll get one. $500 is a pretty good price and accessories (including vintage surplus stocks) are readily available. I've always looked upon them as a "fun gun" but they certainly can be used for home defence, especially the folding stock models. That longer barrel will get the most out of what basically amounts to a revolver round.

I also like that Kel-Tec - the one that you spoke of with the larger folding stock and full foregrip. I'm not crazy about the one with the tubular type stock. I think the Kel is more versatile than the M1, and the company has come a long way from when it was known for producing little more than "Saturday Night Special" kind of guns.

Tough call. If it was my first rifle I'd probably go with the Kel-Tec.

 

[Phillip Gain]

It won't be my first rifle. Far from it! I still have the .30-30 and .30-06 (both bolt action) that I grew up shooting. And I was plenty proficient with the M-16 and M-60 in my Army Reserve days. This would be the first semi-auto rifle in my safe. I figure maybe it's time to add one to the collection. (You know, in case of the apocalypse, zombies, ninjas, werewolves, etc.)

I should clarify - BOTH guns are available here in my area, for about $550.

Also, before others come along and turn this into a caliber war...I'm perfectly aware of the ballistics of BOTH the .223 and the .30 carbine round. I know the .223 has a lot more velocity and is effective at longer distances. (Again, I used to plug 300 meter targets with .223 in the Army Reserve, and I doubt it would be as easy, if possible, with the .30 carbine round.)

What I'm mainly looking for is comment on reliability, durability, and quirks from owners of these guns.

 

[B2Tall]

I should have been more specific - your first semi-auto rifle in your safe. Sorry.

Don't be too quick to discount an AR platform. S&W's new M&P Sport model is an excellent, basic AR that has all sorts of room for customization. I've seen it in the $600 range - not too far from what you're looking at. Also, as far as the ammo goes, the .223 is gonna be a lot easier to get as opposed to the .30 carbine.

In any case, good luck.

 

[Phillip Gain]

Yes, I had considered the M&P 15 Sport. One dealer up here has it for $599, but they never have them in stock. Then again, no one stocks the SU-16CA either. (One dealer has one in stock, but he doesn't list prices on his website, and he's closed on Mondays. I'll have to call down tomorrow.)

There's nothing inherently wrong with the AR platform. It's just that EVERYONE is going nuts over the stupid things. It's driving up the prices. As someone who got intimately familiar with this rifle over 8 years in service, I just fail to see what the fuss is about. (Of course I feel the same way about 1911 pistols and Humvees too, and they're still pretty popular.)

Also, a lot of the AR guys I see are hanging 10 pounds of ridiculous crap from all the rails on their once-light 6 pound firearms. I mean, do they think they're going to get an officer commission in the Swiss Army with it? I fail to see the point of having $2000 worth of junk hanging from a $1500 gun that should be priced in the $300 to $500 range. (AR-15 platform is cheap to produce, and manufacturers aren't exactly having to amortize high R&D costs either.)

 

[Keykutter]

The Garand is not the .30 Carbine, it's 30.06. Being that it is Inland, it must be the Carbine. They are fun to shoot but can be expensive. That has got to be a consideration.

That KelTec is cool looking and the ammo is a lot cheaper.

Take a loook at the KelTec SU2000 before you make a final choice.

If you have never dealt with Gunbroker.com, they make it very easy to buy a gun at very compoetitive prices and then just ship it to your FFL guy.

KK

 

[Phillip Gain]

The Garand is not the .30 Carbine, it's 30.06. Being that it is Inland, it must be the Carbine.

Ugh. Yes, I meant the M1 Carbine, not the Garand. I had been looking at both this morning on the Civilian Marksmanship Program website, and totally mucked the terminology. I actually do know the difference between the two.

What's expensive about the M1 Carbine? The ammo? I hadn't priced that yet...but could definitely be a consideration.

 

[obxfshr]

I've been a Keltec customer for years. Have the P11 in 9mm, P32, P3AT, and Sub2000 in 9mm. Had and sold the .40 cal P11 and .40 cal Sub2K.

I've shot my neighbors SU-16 several times and while it's a fun one to shoot its not an MOA tack driver. It will keep you on a pie plate at 75-100 yards but 6 inch groups are as good as it gets with his. That being said that rifle will keep you in Zombie head shots all day long if that's what you are looking for.

Also a +1 for the 9mm Sub2K. 9mm is plenty for zombie defense and cheap to shoot. It folds up and can be easily stowed in a ruck sack or behind a truck seat. I put a 30 rd mag in mine and it's tons of fun. Pretty accurate for rudimentary sights at 50-75 yds but you can add rails and optics to it too.

That one is along side my 12ga 870 as home defense tools.

Rick

 

[dcopper]

Kel Tec vs M1 Carbine

You are comparing Apples to Oranges. With the inland carbine comes years of History. Where has it been? Whom was it issued to? etc, etc. Spare parts are readily available, as all carbines usgi type were made to swap parts with. Buy the carbine, you won't regret it. dcopper

 

[m444ss]

If those are your choices, .30 carbine.

I guess it depends on what you plan to do with it. If it's mainly for fun - targets and plinking - get the .30 carbine. Frankly, I think the .30 carbine is a fairly useless round (and I have an M-1 carbine), but it's fun to shoot, easy to reload, and ammo isn't expensive. I've shot plenty of 5.56/.223 (22 yrs active duty) and I just don't see any reason to own a gun in that caliber unless you want to shoot competitively (in which case you'd probably want a different platform).

 

[Keykutter]

Unless the .30 Carbine ammo has come down in price, it was the most expensive of all between the .223, 9mm, 5.56, yes there is a difference between 5.56 and .223. Don't ask me exactly what it is and most will work for each others uses but some AR's will just not shoot .223. Especially Remington.

Now, with that said, I have a stockpile of .30 Carbine and have not priced it in quite a while. Maybe it has come down. Do check the prices before you decide though because it used to be pricey to shoot the 'War Baby'.

KK

 

[karle]

yea .30 carbine will be MUCH more expensive to shoot...... would go with the su-16ca given ur 2 options......BTW do u live in a state that won't allow the plain C model?? because if not would suggest that one.....tho they do tend to cost 50-100 bucks more because of higher demand....

also am with the other ppl depending on ur intended use also look at the sub 2k.......and YES i also recommend the 9mm over the .40 due to ammo cost

 

[Turtlez06]

Inland .30 Carbine vs Kel Tec SU-16CA-opinions?

My 2 cents. I agree that it is apples to oranges comparison. But, I do own both an ar-15 and m1 carbine. I love my carbine. It is a blast to shoot and my go to gun for home protection. There are many aftermarket parts for the carbine if you chose to alter it. There are rails, stalks, barrels. The are of course a few drawbacks. The 30rd mags can be had cheap from korea, but do not attach well. The GI mags are the best but hard to come by. It is a short range rifle with just ok accuracy. Rounds are expensive in comparison to the AR. Of course there are infinite alterations for the AR platform and rounds and mags are inexpensive. I vote for the carbine. The AR can be had anytime. Good luck with your purchase. Either way you come out a winner.

 

[Phillip Gain]

Thanks for all the input, folks.

I'm actually going to delay purchasing either, for now, in favor of purchasing a carry pistol for my wife. She's had her LTC for a few months, but hasn't carried at all. She's re-taking the class as a refresher and getting some range time with an instructor, then we'll go shopping.

(If you're about to ask why I'm not instructing her, it's because she doesn't react well to me as a teacher. Of anything.)

 

[GoBangz]

+1 on the Sub2000 in 9mm. Go with the Glock version, and you can get your wife a Glock as well. Glock magazines are everywhere. I have a Sub2K in 9mm Glock and a 9mm XDM. I'm thinking of trading in the XDM for a Glock, just for the interchangeability.

 

[mactex]

Carbine seems the logical choice in your case

I own three Ar15 (Bushmaster) and 4 M1 carbines. Keep in mind they will be making those Kel-tecs for a while to (come barring any unforseen circumstances), but the Inland M1 haven't been made in years. With the right ammo the .30 ammo can delever the muzzle velocity of a .357 mag at 100 yards. I think they make a good home defense gun. Most of mine are WW II/Korea vintage but I do have one of the newer Auto Ordance reporductions w/ the folding stocks that has served me well through a lot of rounds. You are going to spend about the same on a case of ammo in .223 and .30 carbine, but there is not denying that in a bind, there is a lot more .223 around. {NOTE: Just to avoid any misunderstandings, most guns that will chamber and shoot 5.56 will shoot .223 but NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. The 5.55 is a hair longer and is loaded to much higher pressures, so it IS NOT SAFE TO FIRE 5.56 IN GUNS CHAMBERED FOR .223. Even if the 5.56 round will chamber in you .223 weapon does not mean it will be safe nore prudent to fire it in that weapon.** I would go with the M1 at this point as they will only go up in price as they become more scarce. It is a fun gun to shoot and I have found many novice or first time shooters are more comfortable with the M1 than the AR. Either way good luck, good luck and enjoy which ever you decide on.

 

[gunnerbob]

I own both. Get the M1 Carbine. It's a blast to shoot, a historic piece, parts are common for making it a little more vintage. It does make a decent Whitetail rifle when within 75yds using SP/HP. It makes a decent home defense weapon as well, when loaded with the same SP/HP. It hits harder than a 9mm/.45acp pistol.

The Kel-Tec is a cool gun. The ammo is cheaper... it again makes a good plinker. Wouldn't hunt with it(even where legal). I think .223/5.56 is not a prefered home defense load, even with SP/HP... too much chance of over-penetration unless you hand load it sub-sonic.

Get the M1.

 

[JohnD13]

DO you reload? If you do then the M1 carbine is relatively budget friendly, if your buying factory ammo, it gets a little expensive. Not really bad, but not as cheap a 5.56. Loaded with a soft point, it has impressive expansion at reasonable ranges, up to 75 or 100 yards, and you can hit pretty well out to probably 200 yards with the sights on the gun. I went with the carbine myself.