Any innovations over the last year in plate technology?

[rob_s]

For a variety of reasons I had put off getting the plates for my armor setup and now for a variety of other reasons I find myself interested in picking up where I left off.

In shopping around, it doesn't look like much has changed in the last 12 months. Is this accurate? It also appears that things have not gotten any easier in terms of chasing down non-LE civilian purchase?

Have we hit a plateau?

It does, however, appear that the carrier market has exploded with innovation, which almost has me rethinking my overall armor setup. Almost.

[Apricotshot]

Did you see those SKD level IV plates? $550 for a pair. Not too bad.

[rob_s]

Standalone plates seem to be where the focus has gone, which has me considering a simple, low profile, plate carrier.

My preference, however, would be in-conjunction plates which will work with my existing soft armor (Mayflower lo-profile carrier), which there doesn't seem to be much movement in terms of price. What I really want are these
http://www.atstacticalgear.com/cgi/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=ST-4615

On the one hand, I'm having a very hard time justifying $1400 for the set. On the other hand, the combination of weight and profile means I'm more likely to actually be wearing them when I need them, and there's a lot to be said for that.

I guess what I'm wondering is if any lower-cost alternatives to these plates have popped up yet, or if I need/want to start think about selling off some rifles to pay for the plates.

[rero360]

Whats wrong with wearing soft armor behind stand alone plates? Granted its not needed and is probably overkill in terms of weight and bulk. I find myself researching armor, probably will be a while before I can scrounge up the funds, finishing my carbine build and replenishing my ammo supply comes first. I know that I want soft armor panels so that I can use my PC in conjunction with issued ESAPIs if I get deployed and they have us use either the IBA or KHD PC (already have verbal permission from the CoC) But I'm thinking I might go with stand alone plates for my personal use, depending on weight and cost differences and just have that extra layer of protection.

Looking at the weight issue, I'm willing to bet fully loaded, armor, ammo, water and all other gear on my PIG will still be lighter than my IBA with side plates, daps, neck, throat and groin panels without my MAV with the combat load.

[militarymoron]

On the one hand, I'm having a very hard time justifying $1400 for the set.

i'd just get one of those for the front. the low profile is less important for the rear plate.

[rob_s]

Whats wrong with wearing soft armor behind stand alone plates? Granted its not needed and is probably overkill in terms of weight and bulk. I find myself researching armor, probably will be a while before I can scrounge up the funds, finishing my carbine build and replenishing my ammo supply comes first. I know that I want soft armor panels so that I can use my PC in conjunction with issued ESAPIs if I get deployed and they have us use either the IBA or KHD PC (already have verbal permission from the CoC) But I'm thinking I might go with stand alone plates for my personal use, depending on weight and cost differences and just have that extra layer of protection.

Looking at the weight issue, I'm willing to bet fully loaded, armor, ammo, water and all other gear on my PIG will still be lighter than my IBA with side plates, daps, neck, throat and groin panels without my MAV with the combat load.

From what I've seen standalone are heavier/costlier/thicker than an otherwise identical plate meant for in-conjunction.

For me, the plates will be part of a system that is armor-only at times; no load-carriage, not part of a larger plate carrier in the military sense of the term.

[Failure2Stop]

i'd just get one of those for the front. the low profile is less important for the rear plate.

Very good point for those that have to buy their own.

[rero360]

From what I've seen standalone are heavier/costlier/thicker than an otherwise identical plate meant for in-conjunction.

For me, the plates will be part of a system that is armor-only at times; no load-carriage, not part of a larger plate carrier in the military sense of the term.

But how does that stand alone compare to the other plate plus the soft armor backer in terms of weight and bulk? I personally don't have that info.

I can't fault you for wanting an as low profile, lightweight set up as possible, even worn properly it wears on you over the course of the day. One thing to consider if you don't already have a carrier, SKD just announced a new carrier, the PIG Brigandine, pre-production. Saw it on facebook this morning. http://www.skdtac.com/PIG_Brig_p/pig.506.htm Allows you to run different sized plates front and rear if you so choose.

[rob_s]

I do already have a carrier, a Mayflower Low-Profile. Being able to conceal the armor, even under bulky clothes, is a criteria I'd like to meet.

I started this thread to see if there had been any breakthroughs in size:cost since my previous shopping. Based on the responses so far the answer appears to be "no".

[Ironman8]

Rob,

Have you looked at the Velocity Systems Lvl III/IV ICW Plates (http://www.skdtac.com/Velocity_Systems_Plate_LEVEL_III_IV_ICW_p/amr.108.htm)?

I have these for both front and rear, and can tell you they are very comfortable, reletively light weight, and with the soft armor backers only stick off my body about .75 inches when wearing them in my Mayflower APC. If you already have the soft armor, these might be worth looking into. The guy at Velocity Systems told me that he put 4-5 rds of M855 (IIRC) in just the plates and had no perforations.

[MIKE G]

I highly recommend the velocity systems Level III/IV ICW plates. They are very economical and come from an excellent source. They are lower profile than my SAPI plates.

I prefer ICW plates because I can add or subtract armor based on the threat without excess weight, i.e. I can run a PC with plate backers or slide them into a full vest without the added weight and bulk of stand alone plates in a full vest.

I sell quite a few velocity system armor setups and by far the most popular is kevlar backers and III/IV ICW plates.

[MIKE G]

In regards to new technology, no nothing has really come out in the last 12 months. What has happened is items such as the standard 10x12 plate such as I posted above have become more prevalent and affordable.

Also, be sure to look at what the plate is tested and rated against. The BAE plate that you (Rob) posted is not a level III/IV plate, it is tested against M855, 7.62 x 39 MSC, and 7.62 x 39 API. I am not saying that it won't stop other threats but when you look at thinner lighter plates you have to remember that it often comes at an adjustment to the test protocol. Consider this when you think about the threats that you will potentially see in all possible uses of your armor. Will it be billy bob and his 30.06 or some one with an AK intent on gunning you and your team down, or is it protection in a shoot house course? Just something to thing about.