View Full Version : C.A.R. Tactical Training

March 31, 2006, 08:41 PM
Anyone here taken the C.A.R. tactical training course? I did a TFL search and found a thread from back in 2001-2002. Just wondering if anyone has heard or read any more on the CAR system more recently, besides what is available on the Sabre website. Here is a link to the Sabre Tactical Training site. http://us.sabretactical.com/ I am planning on taking the basic course with Paul Castle in Nashville, TN in mid May, as one of few civilians trained. I would be very interested in hearing from anyone with experience, that has actually taken training in the C.A.R. system. Also if anyone knows of any links from this or any of the forums that discuss the CAR sytem, please reply with them. Any LEO's or military people here who have adopted the system? Thanks, Wade

April 1, 2006, 07:22 AM
Don't know if I understand your comment. Should I take this to mean you don't agree with the CAR system, Erick? Would you mind elaborating on why you feel the way you do. I'm looking for serious information. I'd really like to hear what you know. Wade :)

April 8, 2006, 06:53 PM
Quote: "I don't agree with it. It is not proven, as other, accepted systems are. I do not believe there is a valid basis for the thesis it is based on."

I really wish I could hear from someone who has taken the course. As far as what I read, the CAR system is based on staying balanced. Keeping your arms/hands and gun closer to your body certainly would increase balance, and also would make it more difficult for an adversary to disarm you. I know that a couple of videos don't constitute "proof", but it sure looked like the system worked for Paul Castle and the other guys shown shooting in the videos. I have tried holding and shooting a pistol from the chest position, blading the body toward the target, and while I was not nearly as accurate, I did get better in just a few shots. And the felt recoil was greatly reduced, making it easier to make follow-up shots. I have also tried the CAR style of bringing the pistol up closer to eye level to aim and find that target aquisition is much quicker and I hit much closer to point of aim, with much quicker follow-up shots. Everyone has the right to their own opinion, but I would love to hear an opinion that was at least based on first hand experience. Anyone? :confused:

April 21, 2006, 09:00 PM
I've tried it on my own after reading a bunch about it and have found it's excellent if you're extremely beefy and strong and don't mind gunshots going off within inches of your face and ears. Firing a 45 from my chest or right in front of my face even with ear protection was extremely disturbing. After 10,000 rounds of training it might be tolerable, but then by that time you might be deaf.

Also, I found myself to be incredibly inaccurate from the normal CAR (chest) position. Plus if you do it left-handed you have shell casings ejecting up into your nose. I think the only time it could ever be used is when your assailant is within arm's reach. Then it would be fine only because you could keep a hold of the weapon better and at point blank range accuracy is not a problem.

If you had to use it with any large caliber pistol without earplugs you would be in a world of hurt. :(

May 27, 2006, 02:51 PM
Was digging around and found this thread. I realize the last post was more than a month ago, but I felt that I actually had something of value to add.
I have taken the C.A.R. training and am a certified C.A.R. Instructor.

I read where Erick stated that he doesn't agree with it because it's not a proven system, as are others. I would welcome the opportunity to further that discussion. Let's keep in mind that at some point, even F.S.A. was unproven and unaccepted - in fact - ALL systems are unproven until they aren't.
In line with that, what criteria would establish a "proven" system?
Where one department disregards, another one accepts.
I'm not sure I understand the comment about there being no valid basis for the system. Quite the contrary, we spent countless hours discussing both medical and physiological research and real-world experience. In fact, TWO of the gentlemen in my Instructor's course were surgeons and neither of them took issue with any of the system's teachings.
I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this in depth, but it really sounds as if Erick has dismissed the system out of hand.

I personally would place C.A.R. against Iso/Weaver in any situation, and fully believe that C.A.R. is a valuable tool to put in anyone's bag of tricks.

Doggieman's comments about needing to be beefy and strong are inaccurate. I do not fault the man, simply the chosen medium for learning. One has about as much a chance of reading a Tae Kwon Do book and using it's teachings successfully, accurately, and correctly as they do by simply reading about any endeavor dealing with technique and skill. C.A.R., like many other things, cannot be fully learned by watching a few videos and reading a book.

If anyone has questions I'll be happy to discuss and/or answer.

May 27, 2006, 04:18 PM
Pickpocket, I was planning to do the training course in Nashville with Paul earlier this month, but my wife fell ill and was hospitalized for over a week, so I had to cancel the trip. I admit I was a little swayed by the naysayers, but still wanted to keep an open mind and try it before I get too old to take the abuse. I would welcome a fuller, more detailed description of the course and the CAR system itself. If you like, you can feel free to PM or email me with any information you think would be helpful. Thanks for the offer of info. Wade (badman):cool:

May 27, 2006, 04:41 PM