Ok I was talking to a friend (suprising i have one) anyways he asked me the differance between a rifle and a carbine, I told him the only diff. i know is that the carbine would be shorter but thats all i know about it, is there more to it?
Other than length and weight, there's not much difference. Here's what Wikipedia says about it. Of course, they refer to it in general military usage terms.
A carbine (
/ˈkɑrbiːn/ or /ˈkɑrbaɪn/[1]), from French carabine,[2] is a longarm similar to — but shorter than — a rifle or musket. Many carbines are shortened versions of full rifles, firing the same ammunition at a lower velocity due to a shorter barrel length.
The smaller size and lighter weight of carbines makes them easier to handle in close-quarter situations such as urban or jungle warfare, or when deploying from military vehicles. The disadvantages of carbines relative to rifles include inferior long-range accuracy and a shorter effective range. Being larger than a submachine gun, they are harder to maneuver in tight encounters where superior range and stopping power at distance are not great considerations. Firing the same ammunition as rifles gives carbines the advantage of standardization over those personal defense weapons (PDWs) that require proprietary cartridges.
Carbines are issued to high-mobility troops such as special-operations soldiers and paratroopers, as well as to mounted, supply, or other non-infantry personnel whose roles do not require full-sized rifles.
There is no official difference. The main thing is that in the "era" of both weapons one would have been shorter than the other. In the early days the carbine would have been slightly shorter and lighter for cavalry troops.
During WWII the M1 Garand was longer than the M1 Carbine. The M1 Carbine was more for support troops or some officers.
However, if you compare the M1 Garand to an M91 Mosin Nagant then the Garand could be considered a "carbine" due to size comparison.
I think the best way to look at it is to think of the combat rifle as being designed to maximize the killing range during the era it was made and the carbine being used to mix the killing range of the rifle of the same era with slightly smaller, more compact portability without dropping to a pistol - thus creating the "carbine."
However, both could be called "rifles" in the loosest sense.
You are correct. Length is the biggest issue. It was more of an issue 100 - 150 years ago.
See, some of the rifles and muskets back then could have up to 6 foot long barrels. It was a necessity of the technology of the time...aka black powder. But when smokeless power was invented, rifle barrels were able to be much shorter due to the much higher power of the smokeless powder. At first a lot of the smokeless powder rifles still had barrels in the high 20 inch range. So the term carbine was generally used for items with a barrel shorter than 20 inches.
Historically it used to be a fact that having the much easier to lug around carbine was a compromise due to loosing velocity and / or accuracy with the shorter barrel. However, with modern barrel technology, power technology and bullet technology, that is not always the case anymore. It is more and more common to see new ammunition tuned to run in carbine barrels giving us the best of both worlds.
I was recently asked this question and I answered it similar to what is being answered here.
A rifle is typically a longer "full size" gun. The carbine is often a shortened version of a rifle.
When answering this question, its important to address the AR15 because it is so prevalent. The technical difference in the AR15 between carbine and rifle is the gas system length. I couldnt quote the exact lengths at this particular time but just know that the rifle is longer than the carbine (naturally ). I would suspect that more platforms than the AR15 share this trait, in that the carbine gas system is shorter than the rifle.
Back in CW times, the rifle was full length barrel (30" or so) with a full length stock. The carbine had a shorter barrel and a half stock (or no) forearm. In many cases (Sharps & Hankins, Spencer) the rifle came first. Others (Burnside, Gallagher, Cosmopolitan, Maynard) there never was a rifle.
It really is amazing the evolution that a word goes through, ain't it?
Especially true in English where words can have several meanings. Many languages, (Greek-based, Latin-based and Coptic are what I'm most familiar with) - words generally have one meaning. Change the meaning slightly - get a different word so there isn't any confusion!