Should I have body armor?

[Naphtali]

I've been looking into it now since the unrest and the fact that I have food and fuel stacked (put my funds to the most useful tools for my party).

I considered the AR500 stuff. I figured something is better than nothing. But I've investigated more and will want quality multicurve plates. Let's just say I'm in the market, but pending funds. I've asked local LE friends for a deal on used department issued stuff, but they all 100% say you don't want to mess with our junk...it's junk!

Again, when I do acquire some I'll feel guilty for having BA and my family not. So I know I'll be making a big purchase. As mentioned above, on my ship, when conducting crowd control during "lockdown" drills I felt guilty for having body armor while 170 of my shipmates did not.

Check out Hesco's L210 plates. It's the cheaper version of the U210 that's a bit thicker and heavier. If you're comfortable assuming CONUS criminals with long guns will not be carrying .308 or larger, for meaningfully greater ergonomics / mobility than any quality Level IV plate.

If you have to have Level IV, check out T. Rex Arms' website - the other Hesco plate they sell is a Level IV. But it's like $1300 per plate I think and definitely thicker and heavier.

[Defaultmp3]

Stops everything non-AP less than .308 (e.g. M855A1, 7.62 x 39)

Needs citation. I have not seen any credible testing of the U210s against, say, 6.8 SPC or 6.5 CM. The U210s are awesome plates, but armor is a funny thing, so to claim that it stops everything non-AP under .308 Win is not something I would believe unless there's been actual proper testing. Now, would I say "**** it, it'll probably work good enough"? Sure. But it's not something I would throw out with zero qualifiers like that.

The weight is a bit noticeable, but everything else out there is worse. No .308 protection is a downside, but criminals with long guns are generally carrying shotguns / 5.56 / AK clones. And getting .308+ protection leads to so much more weight and bulk that imo it isn't worth it, unless you're LE or mil (Hesco's armor head prefers these for home defense over their level IV plates).

The AT Armor STOP-BZ-IPs are rated to stop all the rated threats that the U210s do, also rated to stop M80, and are almost the same weight and thickness. Same with the Velocity Systems PBZSA. Now, my assumption is that the U210 will probably do okay against .308 Win, probably just have a bit too much BFD to count it as a pass, but the fact that reputable dealers like AT Armor and Velocity Systems are willing to certify those plates as stopping M80 is good enough for me (even if it's by the skin of their teeth, as my guess is that these are rebranded TenCate 6450s).

[Naphtali]

Needs citation. I have not seen any credible testing of the U210s against, say, 6.8 SPC or 6.5 CM. The U210s are awesome plates, but armor is a funny thing, so to claim that it stops everything non-AP under .308 Win is not something I would believe unless there's been actual proper testing. Now, would I say "**** it, it'll probably work good enough"? Sure. But it's not something I would throw out with zero qualifiers like that.

I was sent a PDF of defeated rounds and counts by Joe Kawaki and asked not to share it. He said there were defeated threats also not on the PDF that he was hesitant to get into, and I didn't press him at all to elaborate. I'd call Hesco if someone is interested in purchasing with these specific concerns. I did not speak about, nor does the PDF mention, 6.5 / 6.8 or other very rare intermediate caliber rounds, but Joe Kawaky may if asked. Even worst case scenario, that these rounds were either untested or penetration occurred, then (A) I'm fine with that given their rarity, and (B) I would guess with 99% confidence that the exit energy would be low enough that these rounds would have the terminal ballistics of an equal diameter FMJ pistol round, not a rifle round.

The AT Armor STOP-BZ-IPs are rated to stop all the rated threats that the U210s do, also rated to stop M80, and are almost the same weight and thickness. Same with the Velocity Systems PBZSA. Now, my assumption is that the U210 will probably do okay against .308 Win, probably just have a bit too much BFD to count it as a pass, but the fact that reputable dealers like AT Armor and Velocity Systems are willing to certify those plates as stopping M80 is good enough for me (even if it's by the skin of their teeth, as my guess is that these are rebranded TenCate 6450s).

There are lots of options, and many variables to consider. Your 1st plate is quite a bit more expensive, though stopping M80 may be totally worth it. Backface deformation / spall / etc. are not part of the info you have access to in general, but are extremely relevant in causing severe injury to the wearer even when the round was "stopped." Backface deformation can kill you with rib fracture causing pneumothorax / hemothorax. The U210 getting the highest score in all USSOCOM testing areas was good enough for me.

AT's site ( https://store.atarmor.com/AT_Armor_S...at-stop-bz.htm ) has the U210 specs (they sell it), and the weight and thickness are wrong in a charitable way (0.5" when it's really 0.56", and 4.4 lbs in Large when it's really 4.7 lbs), so the other plate you mentioned may similarly be thicker and heavier than the site claims, meaning you may be dealing with more weight and bulk increase vs the U210 than what the site claims.

The Velocity Systems plate also looks nice - would like to see what the military would say about it in head-to-head trials vs other plates.

Boron carbide is great in general - the question is what level of protection / weight / thickness is the right balance for your mental and physical comfort, and are you comfortable with a general NIJ rating in the absence of mil head-to-head testing.

[HKGuns]

Better to have it and NOT need it, than need it and NOT have it. That's why I have it.

^This^ is exactly why I own a set of L4 ceramic plates capable of stopping several 762 hits.

If you can afford it, there is no good reason not to own a set.

http://www.bulletproofme.com/RP-Leve...ml#Lightweight

[Don't Tread On Me]

While not the latest and greatest, anyone who purchased the old TAP Gamma plates via DRMO still using them or has everyone upgraded to the latest and greatest? I ask because I personally feel that a set of these with plate backers are leaps and bounds ahead of steel plates, both in weight and protection. If my line of thought is wrong, please chime in.

[Naphtali]

Needs citation. I have not seen any credible testing of the U210s against, say, 6.8 SPC or 6.5 CM. The U210s are awesome plates, but armor is a funny thing, so to claim that it stops everything non-AP under .308 Win is not something I would believe unless there's been actual proper testing. Now, would I say "**** it, it'll probably work good enough"? Sure. But it's not something I would throw out with zero qualifiers like that.

The AT Armor STOP-BZ-IPs are rated to stop all the rated threats that the U210s do, also rated to stop M80, and are almost the same weight and thickness. Same with the Velocity Systems PBZSA. Now, my assumption is that the U210 will probably do okay against .308 Win, probably just have a bit too much BFD to count it as a pass, but the fact that reputable dealers like AT Armor and Velocity Systems are willing to certify those plates as stopping M80 is good enough for me (even if it's by the skin of their teeth, as my guess is that these are rebranded TenCate 6450s).

A few answers from Hesco on the good points you raised.

First, the U210 was not required by the military to stop M80 for the contract they competed for. So they didn't do the volume of M80 testing on it that is required for an adequate sample size. Out of curiosity, they did shoot M80 though, and it generally would stop 3 x M80 rounds. One plate showed partial penetration on round #2, and several on round #3. There was no full penetration on any M80 in the 1st 3 rounds. The backface deformation was as great as 46mm, while the NIJ max is 44mm.

So they'd call it a 1-shot stop for M80 that barely failed NIJ backface deformation requirements. And a majority should stop 2-3 M80s, and historically no M80 has fully penetrated in the 1st 3 shots. If you're wearing a IIIa panel under the plate (which I do), backface deformation trauma to the user is meaningfully reduced, and partial penetration would be possibly negated.

The U210 is the lightest vs the other 2 you listed, though they are both only 0.15 lbs heavier in Large. You can't buy the Velocity Systems armor without LE or mil ID - a requirement VS places on its distributors as well. The AT plate isn't available anywhere I can find, and it's quite a bit more expensive at $950 in Large.

It seems like there are a number of boron carbide plates that are generally the same specs and stop M80, with some a bit lighter but barely fail the NIJ BD, and others a bit heavier that pass. Again, that's the standalone plate, so IIIa underneath really helps even with "passing" NIJ standards. M80 shot #1 is going to break your ribs / sternum on any of these plates without soft armor underneath. They're all expensive, so imo any of the plates in this category would be top-tier currently for those not wanting level IV plates. Especially if you want ~1/2" plates, not barely sub 1" plates for level IV. 1" plates just suck ergonomically, at least on me.

The U210 is also in use by the FBI and various LE depts (recent Pennsylvania State Police contract), and I like larger organizations having (torture) tested large volumes of the gear I use.

Oddball calibers (6.5 /6.8) are generally not tested or reported for plates. I've not found any reports of plates stopping M80 but being unable to stop lighter non-AP rounds.

My nutshell is still that I want the unnoticeable 1/2" plate ergonomics more than I want to hassle with a 1" plate that gets in my way but stops rounds that I'm very unlikely to encounter in the civilian long gun world.

[Defaultmp3]

I've not found any reports of plates stopping M80 but being unable to stop lighter non-AP rounds.

Oh, that's quite easy, just look at the plethora of Level III rated plates that can't stop M193 or M855 (steel and UHMWPE respectively), Level III being able to defeat 6 hits of M80 at whatever spacing NIJ specs. Hence why I'm very hesitant to accept the claim that the U210 "stops everything non-AP less than .308". Now, since the U210s appear to have a ceramic strikeface, it's an educated bet that it'll do okay, given the info you've provided on the M80 testing, but that's still just a guess based off of what information that is out there. It's quite conceivable that the higher velocity of the intermediate cartridges would overcome the plate more than the larger mass of the M80, while still having enough ass compared to M855A1 or M193 despite being slower, that might have a great enough BFD to be considered a serious failure.

So yeah, I would strongly caution against throwing out statements like based purely on conjecture, even if on the face of it the claim seems reasonable. It's unfortunate that we have to be so cautious about it, and like you noted, the intermediate cartridges are very unlikely to be a threat, but I do believe we need to be careful in understanding the limitations of armor. Other than that, excellent information on the U210.

[pag23]

As a civilian..I picked up a SKD Paraclete SOPHC plate carrier and RMA level 4 a few years ago...a bit on the heavy side with side armor and stuff.

I just got the Condor MOPC? With LAPG level IIIs. It is a lot lighter and it allows soft armor inside as well..

I live in the burbs but borderline rural, so rifle is the bigger threat than handgun..

[Naphtali]

Oh, that's quite easy, just look at the plethora of Level III rated plates that can't stop M193 or M855 (steel and UHMWPE respectively), Level III being able to defeat 6 hits of M80 at whatever spacing NIJ specs. Hence why I'm very hesitant to accept the claim that the U210 "stops everything non-AP less than .308". Now, since the U210s appear to have a ceramic strikeface, it's an educated bet that it'll do okay, given the info you've provided on the M80 testing, but that's still just a guess based off of what information that is out there. It's quite conceivable that the higher velocity of the intermediate cartridges would overcome the plate more than the larger mass of the M80, while still having enough ass compared to M855A1 or M193 despite being slower, that might have a great enough BFD to be considered a serious failure.

So yeah, I would strongly caution against throwing out statements like based purely on conjecture, even if on the face of it the claim seems reasonable. It's unfortunate that we have to be so cautious about it, and like you noted, the intermediate cartridges are very unlikely to be a threat, but I do believe we need to be careful in understanding the limitations of armor. Other than that, excellent information on the U210.

Didn't know that but you're correct. I had always thought M80 was considered higher level protection than m193 (I don't really count m855 or A1 in the same category as m193, as these are basically AP rounds - just m855 is important because civilians own tons of it) - NIJ level III isn't rated to stop m193 at all, while 6 shots of M80 is a requirement.

"Level III rifle plates are designed to stop 6 spaced hits of 7.62x51mm NATO FMJ (U.S. Military designation M80) at a velocity of ~2780 ft/s, which is very similar to the .308 Winchester round often used in hunting. Some manufacturers (ourselves included) also offer hard armor rifle plates that are referred to as level III+. While the NIJ does not recognize the rating of level III+, these plates typically have the + to indicate that they stop the same rounds at higher velocities or to indicate protect from NIJ threat level III plus additional threats such as M855 and M193."


Also found this interesting, although I don't know to what extent this theoretical concern is true of current armor:

"Level IV ballistic plates are the highest rated hard armor plates under NIJ 101.06 standards. These hard armor plates were designed to take 1 hit from an armor-piercing rifle. These rifle plates are tested to defeat 7.62MM armor piercing (AP) bullets (also known was .30-06 or 30 ot 6) traveling at a velocity of 2880 ft/s. Please note that since level IV ballistic plates are only tested to stop 1 shot compared to 6 shots from a level III hard armor plate, a level IV hard armor plate is not always better than a level III hard armor plate."

https://www.securityprousa.com/blogs...llistic-levels

If the above concern were ever true, then those Level IV plates would actually be worse in every way, compared to their Level III equivalents, for civilians who would almost never expect to face 7.62+ AP rounds.

[ViniVidivici]

That's why it's important to look at the "special threat" ratings of any plate (which should include velocity of round tested, not just specific round type), not just whether they're level III or IV. It's misleading for some folks.

Helps too see tests from independent labs too.

You'll notice the better manufacturers put this data out, in addition to the NIJ equivalent level.