I think I would stick with my modified weaver stance. This stance could be very effective but I would have to dump everything that I have learned about shooting and start over. I don't know if I would be willing to do that.
I posted a question about CAR a while back and got 0 replies. I have been trying it at the range based on some of the video's I've seen on the internet. I'm left eye dominant and right handed and I do find the way they have you hold in the extended position helps me acquire the front sight quicker since your hand is blocking the right eye.
I still find firing from the initial position, um, awkward and I don't have the practice to be able to put a round where I would know its going. But, that's also one of the reasons I have a .22lr semi auto pistol, so I can practice and not spend a bunch of money.
I wish there was internet access at the range so I could watch one of these video's while I'm there instead of trying to do it all from memory.
I haven't seen anybody talk about CAR in a long time.
The system had a little bit of a following a few years ago but there are some glaring flaws that most have come to realize.
One is that you will generally not be shooting at a static "target". It is hard to line my left shoulder up with his right shoulder when he is moving or ducking in and out of cover.
The other is that it simply does not stand up to force on force training in realistic situations. The bladed stance makes you very unstable when fighting over a gun or trying to keep from getting tackled. Would you stand like that in a fist fight? Then why would you stand like that with a gun?
The other issue is recoil control. It is pretty much a universally agreed upon truth that the "modern" isosceles or modified isosceles stance with a thumbs forward grip provides the most recoil abutment to allow more control and faster follow up shots.
Let's also remember that the stance they teach flies in the face of how our bodies naturally react to a threat.
Sure it is another tool in the toolbox as people say. My response would be why do I want to go through a mental checklist of umpteen options when I can use one or two which will work 99.9% of the time. This cuts down on my response time since I can train to systematically have the same response and train to that response until I reach a level on unconscious competence?
I have an instructor that I work with that does teach the CAR method, and since his experience as small arms instructor with the Marines is significantly more than I have now, or could possibly ever gain, I accept his training.
The method, as mentioned, is useful in clearing a house & moving around corners, from within a vehicle, and several others.
It is different from the Weaver / Isocolese or modified versions of them, and if done right the recoil is significantly more controlable and the transition from one target to another is very fast.
I'm still learning and have a long way to go, but I do feel there are some good positives to the CAR method, not the least of which is being able to manipulate and "deploy" your weapon in more than just one set stance/position.
A forum community dedicated to Springfield Armory XD and XD-M series firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!