Applicability of pistol training to carbine use?

[Johnny Rico]

New guy here. I've actually been lurking for a while, but I finally signed up. A little background is probably in order. I'm an Everyman -- non-military, non-LEO. I've always liked firearms, but I've only been a gunowner for the past few years. I'm a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, although at times it seems that I'm part of an endangered species in my left-leaning state. Guns represent different things to me. They are a political statement, a means of defending myself and my family, as well as hobby and a source of enjoyment.

I have a couple of ARs in the stable. Thanks to the information I learned from this site, I avoided many of the mistakes that neophyte AR owners usually make. My first AR was a BCM/LMT mixmaster carbine. I have since added a Noveske Light Recce and just recently picked up a KAC SR-15 upper to pair with the LMT lower. That's it for a while, I'm not a collector and a couple of good rifles is all I need.

I know that a primary focus of this site is to educate AR owners on the importance of training and learning to properly use the AR platform for serious purposes. I fully agree with that philosophy. But despite the fact that rifles are inherently more effective than pistols, my own personal circumstances dictate that my 1911s take primacy over the ARs.

As a result I have decided to prioritize my training in favor of the pistol. I am planning to take a Louis Awerbuck course later this year. My question is this -- gunhandling aside, how much of the training that you get from pistol classes is applicable to the use of the carbine? I'm curious about how much crossover there is between fighting with a pistol and fighting with a carbine.

I hope this long winded intro makes sense. I appreciate any help you guys can give an average Joe trying to figure out the best way to protect himself and his family. Thanks in advance.

[jenrick]

Shooting a pistol well requires good trigger control and the ability to maintain sight alignment. Shooting a rifle well requires at most average trigger control and the ability to maintain sight alignment.

Normally if you can run a pistol good and hard, a carbine is a piece of cake.

-Jenrick

[J8127]

I've heard many top level Instructors say things along the lines of, "If you can shoot a pistol well you can probably shoot a rifle well."

You can't replace the manual of arms muscle memory, but the fundamentals are hardest to apply to a handgun, so mastering the fundamentals on a handgun sets you up for success with every other platform.

[Littlelebowski]

No doubt that pistol training's the bedrock. I'd schedule a basic pistol class, an advanced, and a basic carbine class. Vickers also does combo three day classes.

[GermanSynergy]

No doubt that pistol training's the bedrock. I'd schedule a basic pistol class, an advanced, and a basic carbine class. Vickers also does combo three day classes.

Concur & welcome aboard.

[rob_s]

Picking a nit, but I'd say that pistol proficiency carries over pretty well to carbine, but less so to rifle, where "carbine" is defined as something like a 16" barrel AR and "rifle" is defined as something intended for longer ranges.

IMO for anyone not paid to carry a rifle, the handgun needs to be where the focus lies in terms of defensive use because (given a CWP) that's what you're more likely to have on you when you need it.

I have seen several competent shooters make a very seamless move from the handgun to the carbine with a pretty short learning curve on manipulations.

[YVK]

I know that this goes against general opinion, but I've not found much of carry-over from pistol to carbine. Yep, carbine is more forgiving in regards to trigger control, but there is more to shooting - both pistol and carbine - than trigger control, with entirely different host of challenges for each weapon system.

People try to link some cause-effect connection between pistol proficiency and carbine proficiency; to me it is not a causative but associative relationship. Learning how to shoot pistol well is a demanding task, and those who spend time and resources mastering one weapon system are more likely to put efforts on training with other weapon systems.

[Magsz]

I know that this goes against general opinion, but I've not found much of carry-over from pistol to carbine. Yep, carbine is more forgiving in regards to trigger control, but there is more to shooting - both pistol and carbine - than trigger control, with entirely different host of challenges for each weapon system.

People try to link some cause-effect connection between pistol proficiency and carbine proficiency; to me it is not a causative but associative relationship. Learning how to shoot pistol well is a demanding task, and those who spend time and resources mastering one weapon system are more likely to put efforts on training with other weapon systems.

This is a great post and i agree with it 100%.

I always like to say that there is a difference between shooting and actually being able to run a weapon system.

Anyone can post up on target, pop off a shot and hit where they want to.

The difference between someone that is trained well and has a good grasp of the fundamentals really becomes apparent when you're asked to perform on command with say an elevated heart rate in a compromised position.

Ultimately it comes down to the type of person behind the sights. Are they a critical, analytic thinker that is willing to solve problems or are they merely a trigger mashing, loud sound loving goon?

[Shawn.L]

My first Carbine course (after spending time and energy training and practicing pistol) I remarked " Damn! I thought this was supposed to be easier !"
The main problem for me was actually learning to get an intuitive response to mechanical offset and my hold over with the carbine. For the most part at pistol ranges one puts their sights where they want the bullet and sends it. With a carbine that sight to impact point relationship changes , sometimes dramatically, at short ranges especially. It meant I needed to think about aiming in a way I hadnt before.

Otherwise I find skills that complement one another from both disciplines , and plenty of learning that is much broader in spectrum than either.

[Failure2Stop]

The general concepts of marksmanship and fighting will have cross-over, but as pointed out by others, there are different aspects of focus for both platforms.

[Johnny Rico]

I've been doing some additional thinking and I'm curious as to what makes an effective gunfighter. I can come up with six different elements -
1. Gun/gear
2. Mindset
3. Physical condition
4. Tactics
5. Shooting skills
6. Gunhandling skills
7. Training/practice
8. Critical thinking

Am I missing anything here?

I don't know which element(s) take priority, but my gut feeling is that the gun is most important, followed closely by mindset. As Jeff Cooper so succintly put it, "Remember the first rule of gunfighting...have a gun." Fortunately this is the easiest element to fulfill. With regards to mindset, I think that if you're not willing to fight, then what's the point of having a gun? The problem is how to cultivate the proper mindset, or warrior spirit if you will.

The other elements I am less sure of. But I have the feeling that if you have the proper mindset, these four will naturally follow given time, training, and practice.

What say you?

[Failure2Stop]

I've been doing some additional thinking and I'm curious as to what makes an effective gunfighter.

Experience and discipline.

However, you aren't a gunfighter until you have been in a gunfight.
Don't take that as an insult, be content with being a well-prepared shooter. I know disciplined and prepared "shooters" I would take over hundreds of "gunfighters" that earned that title due to survival of a shootout more than any other factor.

Step 1- hit what you are aiming at and know your limitations.
Step 2- push those limitations

Everything else will fall in line.
When the student is ready, the master will appear.

[rob_s]

I've been doing some additional thinking and I'm curious as to what makes an effective gunfighter. I can come up with six different elements -
1. Gun/gear
2. Mindset
3. Physical condition
4. Tactics
5. Shooting skills
6. Gunhandling skills
7. Training/practice
8. Critical thinking

Am I missing anything here?

I don't know which element(s) take priority, but my gut feeling is that the gun is most important, followed closely by mindset. As Jeff Cooper so succintly put it, "Remember the first rule of gunfighting...have a gun." Fortunately this is the easiest element to fulfill. With regards to mindset, I think that if you're not willing to fight, then what's the point of having a gun? The problem is how to cultivate the proper mindset, or warrior spirit if you will.

The other elements I am less sure of. But I have the feeling that if you have the proper mindset, these four will naturally follow given time, training, and practice.

What say you?

Try not to pave new roads where there is already a super-highway to get you where you want to go.

http://www.morr-con.com/combattriad.html

[rob_s]

I know that this goes against general opinion, but I've not found much of carry-over from pistol to carbine. Yep, carbine is more forgiving in regards to trigger control, but there is more to shooting - both pistol and carbine - than trigger control, with entirely different host of challenges for each weapon system.

What do you mean by "carry over". What you post goes exactly opposite to what I've observed at our drills nights. If I can get a proficient pistol shooter, explain holdover to him, show him where the buttons are, and over the course of a couple of hours offer some pointers, I usually end up with a pretty proficient carbine shooter.

As I posted above, I differentiate between a carbine shooter and a rifle shooter. Since most classes these days are really just pistol classes with a carbine, the carryover is even more stronger.

[Johnny Rico]

However, you aren't a gunfighter until you have been in a gunfight.
Don't take that as an insult, be content with being a well-prepared shooter. I know disciplined and prepared "shooters" I would take over hundreds of "gunfighters" that earned that title due to survival of a shootout more than any other factor.

Noted. And I don't want to be a gunfighter. My hope is to never have to use my guns for serious purposes. I would be well content if I spent the rest of life just shooting my guns for fun.

[YVK]

What do you mean by "carry over". .

I mean that technical challenges are too different, imo. Even mechanics of shooting is different, considering differences in arm position, wrist position and tension etc.

With pistol, the trigger control and anticipation are huge so actual shooting is difficult.

With 8-lbs .223 carbine equipped with 4 lbs trigger, neither trigger control nor anticipation are much of a big deal. Whether person is pistol-proficient or not, most people have little trouble pulling AR's trigger without taking sights out of alignment or flinching. With AR, the biggest issues - in my opinion - are manipulations and support arm strength and skill. Neither have much similarity with pistol manipulation or support hand demands.

[Johnny Rico]

Try not to pave new roads where there is already a super-highway to get you where you want to go.

http://www.morr-con.com/combattriad.html

Thanks for that.

[rob_s]

I think that most proficient pistol shooters are also intelligent pistol shooters. I haven't seen anyone that I would consider "good" with a pistol that hasn't evaluated WHY they do things the way they do vs. just doing what they are told.

This is where that two hour block of guidance comes in. I wouldn't even call it instruction. If I get a guy out that I know is a good pistol shooter but hasn't spent any time with a carbine, I simply let him do what he thinks is natural and provide advice from there. There are some basic things he may need to have explained, and IMO they go in this order:

lower-level manual of arms (trigger, safety, bolt release, CH, load/unload)
Sight above bore offset
higher-level manual of arms (speed load, tac load, etc.)

and it doesn't even take constant 1:1, these things can be ingrained in passing after the initial familiarization training ("put your hand here" or "hit this with your thumb not your finger" etc.).

IME, it's not about any of this though, it's about understanding the higher order concepts. A proficient pistol shooter understands these things, and can easily adapt them to the carbine. Stance, mitigating the effects of recoil, target transitions, etc.

FWIW, I am not basing this off of my own experience going from pistol to carbine, I'm basing it off of my experience helping others go from one to the other.

[catargadelendaest]

I've had pistol courses, a shotgun course, and a carbine course. I've never carried a firearm for a living. Mine is a docile and typical life. Nevertheless, I've been shot at a few times (I was the unmistakable target).

A couple of months ago my three young (ages 8 to 11) sons twisted my arm and made me take them and a couple of friends to the local paintball park. It was my first trip to such a place in twenty years. Being so young my sons and their friends were made to stay on my team. We played against teenagers with ticked out personal guns. The teenagers appeared to go paintballing alot. The judge (rangemaster of sorts) required the teenagers to use semi-auto settings rather than FA. Still, we were outgunned to a man.

As an academic exercise I asked myself, "Self, what would you do IF you really had too defend these kids." Answer one was, "I would use my sights." (Interestingly, sights on a paintball gun are virtually useless.) Answer two was, "Get inside their OODA loop, one at a time, as quickly as prudence allows." Answer three was, "Flank them and roll them up, getting inside the OODA loop of each as quickly as prudence dictates.

We won most of the time despite our disadvantages. In the paintball scenario situational awareness and expoitation of the teenagers' OODA loop proved very effective. I think the same would have been the case if we were using paintball pistols or paintball ballpeen hammers.

[tradja]

I've only taken 2 carbine classes. Carbine 1 was at a 20-yd indoor range and Carbine 2 was out to about 50yds, with the vast majority of the shooting within 25yds.

Based on these training conditions, I almost see the carbine as a big pistol. I'd be keen to find a carbine (not precision rifle) class that focused specifically on 50-200 yards and plan to start exploring this middle ground on my own in the meantime.

Lately I've introduced a friend of mine from our local club matches to the AR. He is a relatively new, very competent, ambitious and mostly self-taught pistol shooter. He is analytical by nature and by profession, but drawing on his pistol skillset, he quickly applied stance, grip, reset, manipulations, and other fundamentals to carbine. The RDS (EoTech) was new to him but intuitive to use.

I don't know if carbine skills translate "down" to pistol as well. Something Chris Costa taught in a class once made me think: regarding transitions to pistol, he noted the difficulty in moving quickly from a 9lb carbine with a 5lb trigger to a 1.5lb pistol...with a 5lb trigger. From about 15yds (may have been 12), he had us do a man-on-man drill where we put 4x carbine rounds on each of four 8" targets, then transition to pistol and do 2x hits on each target. He called it, but almost every student in the class missed only 1 shot: the first shot with the pistol.