Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 614151617 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 163

Thread: Should I have body armor?

  1. #151
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    2,345
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    You said before you didn't want plates, but you also said you didn't really care about it being concealed. These are kind of mutually exclusive statements usually. That is, if you're in a scenario where it's not a liability to go around in visible armor, then you're by default in a scenario where long guns are fully in play.
    Sorry, I wasn't clear:

    I'm not worried about soft armor "printing" or whatever. I'm medium-height, medium-build, and it's never hot here, so I can easily conceal a vest under a sweatshirt or light jacket...

    I still don't want to deal with plates.



    Quote Originally Posted by Naphtali View Post
    The biggest advantage is that most people don't see what they don't expect to see, even when it is relatively obvious.
    This. I doubt the local trash would ever notice...

    I'm not worried about a pro noticing that I'm wearing soft body armor under an outer garment. (It's not the pros that worry me.)

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    150
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Bimmer View Post
    Sorry, I wasn't clear:

    I'm not worried about soft armor "printing" or whatever. I'm medium-height, medium-build, and it's never hot here, so I can easily conceal a vest under a sweatshirt or light jacket...

    I still don't want to deal with plates.
    A concealable vest with just IIIa panels is not going to print at all, even under just a shirt, as long as it's not some compression tight-fitting shirt.

    Throw in pistol plates and you'll need to upsize your shirt, but it will be barely visible only to those who are looking for it. With a sweatshirt or jacket it will not be possible to see.

    The only reason not to get 11x14" (or smaller, if your vest can't fit that) pistol plates is cost. You're going to get hurt bad being shot in a IIIa panel - the panel containing the captured bullet will effectively "stab" ~1.5 inches into your chest - that's the NIJ standard.

    So you'll have a hole in your chest or upper abdomen that needs surgical closure, unless it hit and shattered a rib or your sternum / vertebra, which would decrease penetration depth (though it can still directly hit and bruise your heart after fully penetrating through your sternum). But then you can easily get a pneumothorax / hemothorax / hemopericardium. It is very possible to die after getting hit by a 9mm round in a IIIa panel that performs properly, usually via pneumothorax.

    With a thin pistol plate you're uninjured, except for a bruise (rifles not part of this discussion).
    Last edited by Naphtali; 09-22-20 at 20:33.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    1,665
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Naphtali View Post
    the panel containing the captured bullet will effectively "stab" ~1.5 inches into your chest - that's the NIJ standard.

    So you'll have a hole in your chest or upper abdomen that needs surgical closure, unless it hit and shattered a rib or your sternum / vertebra, which would decrease penetration depth (though it can still directly hit and bruise your heart after fully penetrating through your sternum). But then you can easily get a pneumothorax / hemothorax / hemopericardium. It is very possible to die after getting hit by a 9mm round in a IIIa panel that performs properly, usually via pneumothorax.
    Do you have a source for this information? Or are you taking the 44 mm allowed BFD from the NIJ testing as being the reasoning behind that? Because I do not believe that is a valid comparison; the clay used is not to simulate the amount of penetration a person wearing the plate would receive, but merely to have a repeatable metric that can be easily measured, as trying to use ballistic gelatin would need the use of high speed cameras and cannot be reused, while clay could be.

    Remember, the 44 mm BFD was developed specifically for soft armor; the application of it toward hard armor is arguably a misuse of the model that generated the 44 mm figure.
    Last edited by Defaultmp3; 09-22-20 at 21:40.
    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

    老僧三十年前未參禪時、見山是山、見水是水、及至後夾親見知識、有箇入處、見山不是山、見水不是水、而今得箇體歇處、依然見山秪是山、見水秪是水。

    https://www.instagram.com/defaultmp3/

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    150
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Defaultmp3 View Post
    Do you have a source for this information? Or are you taking the 44 mm allowed BFD from the NIJ testing as being the reasoning behind that? Because I do not believe that is a valid comparison; the clay used is not to simulate the amount of penetration a person wearing the plate would receive, but merely to have a repeatable metric that can be easily measured, as trying to use ballistic gelatin would need the use of high speed cameras and cannot be reused, while clay could be.

    Remember, the 44 mm BFD was developed specifically for soft armor; the application of it toward hard armor is arguably a misuse of the model that generated the 44 mm figure.
    Yes to the NIJ standards, but I'm also a surgeon who did a year of general / trauma surgery internship before my residency in a different subspecialty surgical field. Took care of 2 LEOs shot with handgun rounds in their vests. Wasn't part of the initial team but rotated on prior to their discharge.

    Both survived with vests that captured the bullet, but 1 spent some time in the unit with hemopericardium / significant myocardial bruising / sternal hole after the vest (+ captured bullet) hit the heart directly after fully penetrating through the sternum, and the other had an exploratory laparotomy due to a penetrating abdominal wound. There was nothing to find though - it had just penetrated the abdominal wall. But that's why I don't wear IIIa panels without a pistol plate. I'd infinitely prefer to be shot with a 1oz slug wearing that vs 9mm on a IIIa panel alone.

    I've shot one my own plates before (shot it to death to torture test it, 3 rds in the same hole, ball vs HP, etc.), and the deformation pattern is very broad (for 1 round striking 1 place). Think of a hill with a very gradual slope on the backface of the plate. It's blunt trauma without penetration.

    IIIa panels are the opposite (worse) - think of a bigger-diameter-than-the-bullet sized finger (because it's the bullet + the panel thickness surrounding it on all sides) that pokes directly into you. It's basically being stabbed 1.5" deep by a piece of rebar. Death is unlikely with prompt hospitalization, but you really do not want to go through that recovery.
    Last edited by Naphtali; 09-26-20 at 11:09.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    2,345
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Naphtali View Post
    The only reason not to get 11x14" (or smaller, if your vest can't fit that) pistol plates is cost. You're going to get hurt bad being shot in a IIIa panel - the panel containing the captured bullet will effectively "stab" ~1.5 inches into your chest - that's the NIJ standard.

    So you'll have a hole in your chest or upper abdomen that needs surgical closure...

    You have my attention.

    Could you post a link to pistol plates?

    And 11x14 would be super... One of the reasons I'm not excited about plates is that the coverage seems so limited vs. a wraparound vest.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    1,665
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Naphtali View Post
    Yes to the NIJ standards, but I'm also a surgeon who did a year of general / trauma surgery internship before my residency in a different subspecialty surgical field. Took care of 2 LEOs shot with handgun rounds in their vests. Wasn't part of the initial team but rotated on prior to their discharge.

    Both survived with vests that captured the bullet, but 1 spent some time in the unit with hemopericardium / significant myocardial bruising / sternal hole after the vest (+ captured bullet) hit the heart directly after fully penetrating through the sternum, and the other had an exploratory laparotomy through a penetrating abdominal wound. There was nothing to find though - it had just penetrated the abdominal wall. But that's why I don't wear IIIa panels without a pistol plate. I'd infinitely prefer to be shot with a 1oz slug wearing that vs 9mm on a IIIa panel alone.

    I've shot one my own plates before (shot it to death to torture test it, 3 rds in the same hole, ball vs HP, etc.), and the deformation pattern is very broad (for 1 round striking 1 place). Think of a hill with a very gradual slope on the backface of the plate. It's blunt trauma without penetration.

    IIIa panels are the opposite (worse) - think of a bigger-diameter-than-the-bullet sized finger (because it's the bullet + the panel thickness surrounding it on all sides) that pokes directly into you. It's basically being stabbed 1.5" deep by a piece of rebar. Death is unlikely with prompt hospitalization, but you really do not want to go through that recovery.
    Well, do you know what kind of armor they were wearing? And how long ago was this? Level IIa is issued as patrol armor still, and advances have been made over the last couple of decades in soft armor in general. Again, I'm questioning the emphasis on 44 mm of BFD in clay; I want to stress that this figure does not translate 44 mm of BFD against a live target. I would also stress that it is the maximum allowable BFD, but that does not mean that it is reached; after all, for IIIa, it also needs to have 44 mm of BFD or less for .44 Mag with a 240 gr bullet moving at 1400 FPS, while the 9mm testing protocol is just a 124 gr bullet moving at 1400 FPS.
    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

    老僧三十年前未參禪時、見山是山、見水是水、及至後夾親見知識、有箇入處、見山不是山、見水不是水、而今得箇體歇處、依然見山秪是山、見水秪是水。

    https://www.instagram.com/defaultmp3/

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    2,584
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bimmer View Post
    Sorry, I wasn't clear:

    I'm not worried about soft armor "printing" or whatever. I'm medium-height, medium-build, and it's never hot here, so I can easily conceal a vest under a sweatshirt or light jacket...

    I still don't want to deal with plates.





    This. I doubt the local trash would ever notice...

    I'm not worried about a pro noticing that I'm wearing soft body armor under an outer garment. (It's not the pros that worry me.)
    If you have decided you never want plates, just get a used concealable vest. Were it me, I would just put a want to buy ad up on Armslist. Or if you have the funds, get a police vest from one of the many online suppliers. That's going to be 10 times more concealable, comfortable, and breathable than BALCS or anything of that sort.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    150
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Defaultmp3 View Post
    Well, do you know what kind of armor they were wearing? And how long ago was this? Level IIa is issued as patrol armor still, and advances have been made over the last couple of decades in soft armor in general. Again, I'm questioning the emphasis on 44 mm of BFD in clay; I want to stress that this figure does not translate 44 mm of BFD against a live target. I would also stress that it is the maximum allowable BFD, but that does not mean that it is reached; after all, for IIIa, it also needs to have 44 mm of BFD or less for .44 Mag with a 240 gr bullet moving at 1400 FPS, while the 9mm testing protocol is just a 124 gr bullet moving at 1400 FPS.
    It was between June 2007 and May 2008.

    No idea what their armor was. Hospital discussions in that setting are basically limited to: was it a pistol or a shotgun / how many bullet holes / what got hit that matters.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    150
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Bimmer View Post
    You have my attention.

    Could you post a link to pistol plates?

    And 11x14 would be super... One of the reasons I'm not excited about plates is that the coverage seems so limited vs. a wraparound vest.
    I am extremely satisfied with these, and as noted above, shot the crap out of one and was really impressed at how even 3 x 124gr ball rounds through the same hole resulted in only partial penetration of the 3rd round, and BFD was not bad and broad for single strikes (= more surface area over which the force was distributed = less trauma to the wearer). Only tested 9mm, and then for fun verified that m193 went right through (it's not a rifle plate).

    https://www.pointblankenterprises.co...ates-pbba.html

    You can find YouTube videos of 30rd mp5 mag dumps into these with good BFD and no penetration.
    Last edited by Naphtali; 09-23-20 at 13:30.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    150
    Feedback Score
    0
    Posted also here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...tion&p=2889451
    ... but this is a separate and good thread for the same info.


    OK a lot of good info from Hesco today, and about more than just Hesco products.

    -- There is no ceramic armor on the market under 0.9" thick (they think) that is level III. Any company claiming this is "bullshit", as no one has invented some new god-material, and you can't cheat physics. This ignores steel / other bad materials that you would never want to use due to weight / spalling.

    -- The 4800LV stops M80 ~ 75% of the time with NIJ-level BFD. The other 25% of the time it is mildly over. M80 never penetrates in the first 3 rounds.

    -- The 4800LV stops .308 AP (M2) ~ 33% of the time with NIJ-level BFD. The other 67% of the time it is mildly over. M2 never penetrates in the first shot.

    -- The 4800LV has trivial BFD against 5.56 - you won't be injured. Broken ribs etc. are generally a .308 thing, moreso AP.

    -- The U210 has trivial BFD against 5.56 - you won't be injured. Broken ribs etc. are generally a .308 thing, moreso AP.

    -- U210 stops M80 ~ 33% of the time with NIJ-level BFD. The other 67% of the time it is mildly over. 1st round M80 never penetrates. 2nd round M80 rarely partially penetrates but never fully. 3rd round M80 sometimes partially penetrates but never fully.

    -- M2 always penetrates the U210.

    -- No ceramic armor (from any company, as far as they know) under 0.9" thick passes NIJ drop testing. You have to have external foam all over for that to happen on a ceramic plate, which means you're basically at / over 1". Also adds quite a bit of weight.

    -- The only NIJ drop test that 4800LV / U210 fail is the one where the plate is dropped on its front face with weighted clay on the back of the plate. SOCOM / LE agencies are generally not concerned with NIJ drop testing, which they consider overkill. NIJ attaches extra clay weights and drops the armor on concrete. SOCOM / LE are more concerned with just dropping the plate on concrete (no extra weights). 4800LV and U210 both pass this lesser mil standard. 4800LV is more drop-resistant than U210. SOCOM / LE don't care about NIJ drops b/c they don't want to wear heavy 1" plates, and think a bit greater BFD in .308 and .308 AP, and less drop resistance, is totally worth it for a lighter 0.6" plate.

    -- 4800LV will have better BFD for all rounds vs U210. Only really matters at .308 though, in tested rounds (6.5 / 6.8 etc. are never tested). Also resists drop damage better as noted above.

    -- From Hesco's tech support - "I can't tell you who this is, but imagine the highest level / Tier One Law Enforcement guys in the U.S. dealing with hostage rescue / terrorism, etc. They use the 4800LV. They wanted to better handle larger calibers than the U210 but don't want to wear a 1" plate." I probed a bit and my best guess was that he was talking about either the FBI's hostage rescue teams or stateside Tier One military guys who function basically as federal LEOs.

    -- There are no NIJ standards for rifle rounds that aren't M80 or AP M2. Other rounds are all special threats, and whether companies choose to claim their plate "stops" them is completely up to them, without NIJ requirements. Just can't penetrate, but no BFD requirements. So when Velocity Systems claims their U210-clone stops M80, but Hesco says U210 BFD isn't good enough to claim this, it's basically the exact same plate (Hesco makes a lot of Velocity System's plates). Same with the STOP-BZ plate. They're all Boron carbide in the same thickness, without foam, and work the same.

    -- The 4800LV (or 4800 which has the extra foam) is an amalgam of multiple different ceramic materials and is the most advanced armor material commercially available today, from a weight and thickness to performance ratio. Extremely expensive to make correctly. One of the few things better than pure Boron carbide.

    -- Putting a IIIa panel behind a 4800LV plate should give it NIJ level IV equivalent BFD performance 100% of the time, instead of 33%. This has not been tested, but the foam on the 4800 plates is thinner / less impact-protecting than a IIIa panel.

    -- 4800LV and U210 are both wearable concealed under a shirt one size larger than your standard size. I didn't think this was the case - and was skeptical on the phone when he said this - until my LAPG low-vis carrier arrived coincidentally this afternoon, and I wore my 10.25x13.25" U210s while walking the dog. It was actually much thinner / much more concealable than my pistol vest I've worn for years with a IIIa panel and 0.3" pistol plates. My wife - who is used to looking at (and bitching intermittently about) my vest printing - thought I wasn't wearing any armor until I asked her to feel my shirt. I should be getting 4800LVs in another month, which is 0.11" thicker than U210 (0.56 vs 0.67), and will post about this later - I'd imagine it's still pretty concealable under a large shirt. You do lose a lot of IIIa protected areas compared to a vest, like your entire both sides / higher on your back / navel-height in the front and a couple inches up / clavicles & axillary crease. In an impossibly-guaranteed pistol or shotgun fight, I'd much rather have my vest on for its probably 50% greater area of protection vs just a front and rear rifle plate.


    My take home is this - 1" plates do everything NIJ asks, but I put my old thick level III plates in a closet years ago b/c they just sucked to wear from a bulk standpoint. Weight of 7.5 lbs per plate then (for 10x12) vs 4.7 / 5.6 lbs now (for 10.25 x 13.25 in U210 / 4800LV) is also a big difference. And performance is a tie in 5.56, and a tie in 7.62 x 39, and it should still save my life in .308 meeting NIJ BFD 75% of the time. I'll take a bit greater BFD at .308 for the sake of never wearing (or leaving in a closet) another 1" plate. It doesn't matter how good the heavy & thick armor that you don't wear is.
    Last edited by Naphtali; 10-07-20 at 18:37.

Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 614151617 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •