Going to a week long training next week on CAR. Was curious of your opinion if you’ve tried it. Anyone use it exclusively? Looks a bit funky. Just looking at it so far I’m not sure I’m going to be a big fan.
I’m real happy I’m getting sent to the training though.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=14262
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?154978-Center-Axis-Relock-Paul-Castle
http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-carry-tactical-training/112123-car-center-axis-relock.html
CAR has massive mall ninja potential, yet might be useful for shooting from retention (i.e. bad guy is right on top of you / grappling with you). Semiautomatic pistols and contact shots don’t play well together.
My personal take on it: skeptical. Would depend greatly on who’s teaching it and what their agenda is.
I have never attended a CAR class. I have seen plenty of people who have, try (please note the usage of the word “try” in this sentence) to use it in FOF scenarios (LE active shooter response training). It does not hold up well under stress at all. One of the biggest things I’ve seen over and over is guys whacking there eye pro with the slides during recoil. Not a huge deal with a sim gun, but could be a show stopper if done for real. I have never seen anyone adopt the completely bladed stance Paul Castle always demonstrates when under stress. It always turns into either a straight iso or a very sloppy and ugly looking compressed weaver.
Accuracy is usually abysmal at anything other then contact range. This is normal even for folks who are using sighted fire that have never been exposed to FOF training. Stress will do that to you. The issue is that one the stress level starts to settle down as people get a little more comfortable the CAR shooters never bring their hit ratios up. Maybe it’s a lack of practice on targets that move, I don’t know.
I’ve seen several guys who use bits and pieces of CAR (some of the ready/index positions, and the shortened weapon extension) and they have done fairly well with it.
Just like anything else, there’s some value in it somewhere. Find what works for you and use it. Discard the rest.
-Jenrick
Well, I just wanted to do an update for those who may be interested.
I was told last Thursday that I was attending a CAR class. I didn’t know what the hell it was. I too was skeptical after reading what others thought of it by seeing 1-2 minute videos about it on youtube. Mainly because it was DIFFERENT. I mean, nothing can ever be improved on, right?
I show up Monday and was greeted by Paul Castle (the inventor, if you will, of CAR) and another one of his instructors. I found out that day that it was a CAR instructor development class (I’m a POST cert firearms instructor and one of my dept’s FA instructors and now a CAR instructor:D). I’m not really long winded so I’ll try to cut this short and if anyone has questions shoot…
I really can’t tell you how lucky I feel to have been personally trained by Mr. Castle. It’s my intention to attend more of his classes when I can. Anyway, he’s an absolute professional and master at many things. For those that have had the pleasure of meeting him, I’m sure you’ll agree. Passionate dude, great guy.
Back to CAR. I honestly CAN NOT think of anything the Weaver or isosceles has over the CAR system. I’m an absolute believer. Superb retention; fast and accurate; consistent under extreme stress. And yes, even in the extended position accurate out to 25 yards. If someone’s slide is hitting their glasses that’s 100% operator error.
Cool. Thanks for the followup. Sounds like it was a good class.
Could you please post speed and accuracy standards at various distances that were demanded in this class? Any well-known and time-tested drills that can be used for comparison?
I’ll fully admit I am very skeptical of this system, but I would love to be proven wrong. Having some objective performance data would really be helpful.
I’m going to tag this. I remember reading about this topic many years back. I tried some of the techniques and they seemed workable.
But many of the internut commandouches condemned it. 
20 yard head shots on B-27 from the extended position. That’s the one where your gun is closer to the face. The apogee position is extended out further similar to the isosceles, and admittedly we didn’t work a lot on that, but if the extended is good to 2o or so, the apogee is for 20+. There’s a few of us going out tomorrow on our own to practice more . Remember, this was an instructor class, so we focused more on the ‘whys’ than your typical class. Oh, I should mention we also did carbine and shotgun which use the same principles.
My left eye sucks. The eye doc explained to me recently that it never learned to see and cannot be corrected even with glasses. I was one of those kids that shoulda worn a patch but didn’t. I had surgery to correct my lazy eye. It really is that bad. My right eye is great. When shooting right handed, you use your left eye; left handed, right eye. Well, I was in the 10 ring with my left hand from 5 yards. Before I was lucky to be on paper, no shit. And I feel I shoot better with my right hand and left eye! It’s worth a shot fellas. I’ve got nothing to gain, give it a try. If it doesn’t work for you, does it hurt?
And those internet commando comments are by people that refuse CHANGE and don’t want to try something new. Their loss. My only bitch is that I didn’t try this earlier.
No certainly not. I am up for trying anything once, just a matter of opportunity. Admittedly, if you’re trained to use front sight if at all possible, it is hard to change.
I avoided this thread for reasons that they have gone poorly in the past. I will say that many of his techniques are naturally adapted and used by many shooters who actually do a lot of close in work searching and moving around tight objects. Techniques from contact distance retention shooting to just outside of arms reach shooting.
So in essence I don’t have issue with some of what he teaches as with many improvised shooting techniques, it is just another technique to draw from. What I do have an issue with, is that this was packaged as a “complete system” so to speak and touted by the founder as the “best” technique out there. Which he has said in video. I find it a bit less than kosher to package something, call it your own, tout it as the best and sell it.
As I mentioned there are many benefits to the techniques found in the CAR system but they were around as improvised shooting positions long before he packaged them. There are also many drawbacks to the techniques also such as movement and balance, body armor presentation, etc, etc…
I’ve used CAR before. I have problems with cross eye dominance.
It works very well when you shoot on the move at handgun distances (less than the length of a parking space). I’ve only tried the basic handgun grip.
I’ve run MI Vs CAR using a timer, keep in mind before trying CAR I shot USPSA for years using MI. It only took me a few weeks to blow my MI times to hell. Again, this was shooting on the move.
I’ve also used it in FoF drill, again for me it worked well in particular when I moved to my opponent’s 1:00. Think of a simple lever. What will be more stable when you move, holding the gun at arms length or close up?
NOTE: I’ve never hit my eye or glasses with the slide. Just because some dumb ass does something stupid does not mean I have to. Also “slicing the pie” is another area folks will have knee jerk reactions. Does anyone keep a “perfect MI” stance while slicing the pie? Let Darwin influence what you do.
Give it a try and objectively measure it against other techniques. I think it has its place, it’s up to you to use it in a good context.
EDIT: I measured MI VS CAR using Jim Higginbotham’s Dynamic Marksmanship Index
When the stance and technique is used correctly body armor isn’t an issue because your arm is also there to protect your armpit area. You’re also a smaller target.
Balance- When you’re in an FI stance, isn’t that more balanced than standing squared off?
Movement- I don’t care where the threat is coming from, the CAR is faster, based on what I’ve been practicing so far. We practiced shooting from isosceles and CAR with a threat behind and in front, side to side etc. More than twice as fast.
I’m not saying Mr. Castle didn’t say what you claim, but he told us if your use something better use it, and if you can use something from CAR use that. The only thing I recall he may have said is best is that it’s much more natural. Body harmonics.
Disclaimer: Look, I’m not a pro at CAR, and I’m probably the wrong person to be praising it on the internet because I don’t know it all. I’ve shot it for four days, and today will be five. I want to be and will be training to be more proficient. Like he said, for every year you’ve been shooting, you’ll need to train on CAR for a week or more. Admittedly it takes some getting use to using my left eye because it is so weak.
What works for some doesn’t always work for others. But after googling CAR this week, there sure is a lot of hate from arm chair commandos that haven’t even tried it.
I have practiced heavily in these techniques and teach very similar concepts. We mostly refer to such techniques as “improvised shooting positions”. In a close quarter environment, most shooting will be from a variation of a technique or a non-standard stance. I do have issue with taking long established techniques, packaging them as a system and calling it your own and the best out there. There is a video of him actually saying that his system outperforms any other system. This is where I have a problem. I do not say a standard technique is the best there is. I always say that a shooter needs to develop a style and incorporate many things. I also hate to lump things into “systems”.
As mentioned I really don’t want to get into arguments over the good and bad things of the techniques. I will give 2 points that are much to be considered which directly involve safety. The primary stance is to be bladed to the target. You shouldn’t rely on your arm to do a darn thing because more than likely it will not. When you raise your arm in extension, you give up the most soft spot on your upper torso, besides the head. There is a good reason to present your body armor to the target. There is a figure from the FBI that says something like 80% of Officers killed who were wearing body armor, get hit via the side opening around the arm area, if you are a stats type. Common sense dictates that the weakest point in my armor is my arm pit / arm side openings on my armor. If anyone knows anything about bullets and ballistics on soft targets, even bone, would not rely on an arm to stop anything.
The second biggest drawback when using this technique that I found was that when moving or progressing forward your range of forward vision is very obscured to your opposite flank. I understand you open up a bit, but the weak side flank is very vulnerable. It is also harder to engage to that flank also. Force on Force shows quite a bit of the goods and bads.
Just keep an open mind and attempt to pick out the good and the bad. Many people get so wrapped up in a type of instruction while directly involved. Give it some time away from the course and then re-evaluate the tactics and techniques. Hopefully not just shooting paper targets. Keep what works for you and dump what doesn’t. Just try to avoid buying into anything “hook, line and sinker.” It happens all the time with people and this is a bad thing.
I always take the stance that almost all training is a good thing. Even if I learned that something sucked, at least I learned something. If I learned 1 good piece of information, that is usually worth my time.
Preface that: I have been exposed to CAR techniques by people who have trained with Mr. Castle and have little opinion on the efficacy of a practiced shooter using any technique. It’s a tool in the toolbox.
Muscle is not a sufficient replacement for kevlar. Not only is it less protective, but if you do take a hit that does not reach your torso, your capacity to fight has still been diminished, likely much more so than if you take a hit to armor. To ignore that compromise is to do so at a detriment to the techniques you are training with.
I believe you are interchanging the terms “balanced” and “braced”. You can brace yourself in most any position, but you cannot move in a braced position. During movement, you have to maximize your body mechanics to balance force you are generating vs. that being applied against you and are strongest in a squared position.
With the CAR system, are you using your left eye to aim the gun, assuming you are right handed?
I have noticed that some people who favor this system tend to be cross-eye dominant.