Body Armor: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Status
Not open for further replies.

D-R

Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2003
Messages
12
Ok, lots of gents have requested I repost this here, so here ya go. It is an overview of body armor MATERIALS, rather than specific manufacturers. I have been designing and building armor for 12 years, so have a fair amount of experience creating and destroying all sorts of bullet stopping goodies. I will add to this as needed, and as people request. If you have any questions, please let me know. If I don't have the answer, I will tell you so, and see if I can get it for you. I am not the ultimate expert on this, just have a strong fondness (my wife calls it something else) for armor.

Just some recommendations (and this goes for any armor you buy, new or used):

Avoid Spectrashield, Spectra woven, or Dyneema: This material is based on polyethylene, the same stuff that milk jugs are made of. The armor version is referred to as Ultra High Molecular Weight Poly-Ethylene (UHMWPE). In situations where it gets hot (and most car trunks in the summer can get HOT), it will denature, reverting back to simple milk jug plastic. Armoring FAIL. I used to be a fan of this stuff until I read some great info by Kevin "Mad Dog" Mclung and Doctor Roberts ("DocGKR"), two names that you should look up and listen to. They did some eye opening tests (especially Mad Dog) on the dangers of Spectra. If the material goes over 180 F, it becomes a danger to its wearer.

Avoid Laminates: Something else both of these gentlemen strongly advise against. Laminated armor materials have huge drawbacks (Spectra laminates more so). They suck against contact shots (the muzzle blast literally melts them, allowing rounds to go right through), they delaminate with wear, they don't breathe (try wrapping yourself in saran wrap- that's how comfy they are), and they don't have anywhere near the shelf life of woven kevlar (which is practically immortal as far as I have seen). Steer clear of laminates:

Spectrashield contact shot- massive penetration:
http://www.itstactical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/spectrashieldpb-150x150.jpg

Spectrashield vs. Woven Kevlar BALCS panels contact shots- Spectrashield, massive penetration, with one shot .44 Mag, Woven Kevlar took 9 rounds before penetration:
http://www.itstactical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/34066-pbalcs44mag_contact-150x150.jpg

Spectrashield contact shot- massive penetration
http://www.itstactical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/spectra_contact_exit-150x150.jpg

Woven Kevlar Contact Shot- No penetration:
http://www.itstactical.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/kevlar_contact_exit-150x150.jpg

PHOTOS COURTESY ITS TACTICAL

AVOID ZYLON: For the love of everything that is holy. There was an amendment passed in congress outlawing this stuff for pete's sake. It was supposed to be the next great armor material, and lots of manufacturers jumped on it. Trouble is, combine heat with humidity (um, your body?) and the material degraded rapidly. This lead directly to the deaths of at least two police officers, and Zylon was (after much foot dragging) pulled. Don't ever use it.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR IN SURPLUS ARMOR TO AVOID THE ZYLON BLUES:

POINT BLANK FUSION (ZYLON AND SPECTRASHIELD)http://www.us-elitegear.com/fusion.htm
Z-SHIELD (A ZYLON LAMINATE, YECCCH!)
Z-FLEX (SAME AS ABOVE)
THERE ARE MORE, BUT THIS IS A START.

If the label does not say, and the seller cannot/will not swear to it, assume any surplus armor contains laminates, Zylon, or both. Zylon containing vests were universally deep-sixed after the Berry Amendment, and could be rooted out of dumpsters. These are appearing on Fleabay and forums (Currently there are Zylon containing vests in the Equipment Exchange), being sold to unsuspecting buyers. ASK, ASK, ASK, and if you get a song and dance, walk away. Your life is much too precious to risk anything but woven Kevlar.

Pretty muchly that leaves woven aramid as the last man standing. This stuff is, as always, a great material. It is tough, fireproof (it will char but not melt at above 700 F) and will retain most of its ballistic effectiveness even after reaching this temp. Being woven, it breathes better. Contact shots have a much harder time getting through. It lasts virtually forever- the 5-7 year warranty is not there to tell you when it goes bad. Nominally, it is just there as a CYA measure by the companies to limit liability. In one test, it was actually shown that older vests did BETTER than new vests at stopping rounds. Weird, I know. Here are two references:

“NIJ tests failed to demonstrate any significant differences in 10-year-old armor, regardless of the extent of use or apparent physical condition”

“The warranty exists solely to limit the manufacturer's liability on the product and is not a reflection of the anticipated service life of the product.”

...Guide to Police Body Armor, National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC)

You can also find an abstract here:

http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publication...aspx?id=111390

So kevlar, kevlar, kevlar. Woven, not laminated. ;)

Regarding plates, Doc is on the right track. Rifle armor is important, as soft armor is completely useless against rifle rounds. M193 will go through about 120-140 layers of soft armor with enough zip left to seriously ruin your weekend. Believe me, I have checked.

Jpanzer- Just to reiterate, soft armor cannot be level III. Max rating is IIIA. And don't assume, get the specs, or better yet, test it yourself!

Rifle armor is rated either level III or IV. Now, the interesting thing is, the higher rating is not necessarily better. If you expect to be facing enemies with AP capability, the IV is nice to have (the spec calls for the plate to stop ONE round of .30-06 M2 AP black tip. One round). If you are expecting normal mild steel or lead cored, go with III by all means. The spec for III calls for stopping 6 rounds of M80 .308 ball @ 2750FPS within a 6" circle. So much better multi hit. Always read the specs!

Then there is the question whether the plate is designed to stand alone, or be worn with soft armor behind it ("In Conjunction With"). The stand alone plates tend to be heavier, as they typically have much thicker backings. This is nice if you are wearing just the plates and nothing else, but usually you have some sort of soft armor on, so the ICW are usually a better bet. Plus, just me, I like having extra padding. But if (like Doc Jarhead mentions) you like mobility, then stand alones might be for you.

Materials for rifle armor usually focus on hard stuff- soft armor defeats pistol rounds by catching, slowing, and deforming them. They are low velocity (relatively) with a fairly large frontal area. Rifle rounds are fast, with a small, pointed frontal area. The defeat mechanism is yawing, deforming, eroding, shattering, and frictive braking (the last one is unusual).

Steel- Tried and true, this material is great for stopping rounds (millions of steel targets can't all be wrong). It stops by deforming rounds. It can keep stopping them as long as the structure is uncompromised. Heat and mistreatment do not affect it. Drawbacks- it is heavy for its protective levels, it can rust if you chip the paint, and it spalls. What is spall? Well, it is the reason most steel target manufacturers recommend being 50-100 yards from the target. When a round hits, it splashes little bits of copper and lead in a cone at an angle. If you are wearing one of these plates, that high velocity splash can end up in your throat and face. Make sure if you run steel plates you wear spall guards in FRONT of the plates. Just a few layers of kevlar are all that is needed. One final drawback to steel plates- certain high velocity threats can penetrate it. A few years back, there was a dustup over a certain manufacturers plates not stopping M193 @ above 3000 fps (but remember, M193 is not in the spec!). So do your homework.

Titanium- Ahhh, Titanium. The very word brings to mind a supermetal that can do everything. More misconceptions surround this metal than just about any other. While true, it does make superior armor in some regards, it is not a panacea. Ti has been used for several decades in the construction of advanced airframes (the A-12 was over 60% Ti, a strategic metal mostly found in Russia...). Its claims to fame are: lightweight (60% the weight of steel @ comparable strengths) and corrosion resistance. It is virtually impervious to corrosion (ironically, because it oxidizes so quickly, forming a tough layer of TiO2). It cannot be hardened appreciably above the high 40s low 50s Rockwell C, and even that requires exotic precipitation hardening Beta alloys. The most common alloy in use is referred to as 6-4, which is short for 6Al4V (6 points of Aluminum and 4 points of Vanadium). Ti is a fairly tough metal, which makes it a good choice for armor plates for AFVs and APCs in thick section (I don't have the TE numbers compared to RHA in front of me right now, but they are pretty good). In soft armor vests, Ti plates are sought after as trauma plates vs. steel because they are lighter and do not rust. In sufficient thickness (2-3mm) they will stop all handgun rounds, up to and including some AP like the steel cored Tok rounds that play merry hob with most soft armor.
For rifle armor, Ti falls short- it is not hard enough to shatter high velocity rifle rounds (see above re: hardness). This is where the TE (thickness equivalency) comes into play. Ti can stop rifle rounds, even larger caliber cannon fire, but in thicknesses and weights that are prohibitive to us groundpounders. My research has shown M80 will be stopped by a 14mm thick plate of 6-4 backed by 4mm of Aramid. Most steel plates are between 4.5mm and 6mm depending on backing. There have been some hybrid steel/Ti plates, but at that point, you might as well just go all steel. Choose the right material for the job- for pistol rounds, Ti is a champ. For rifles, look elsewhere.

Ceramic- This material encompasses several types of ceramic. The most common is Alumina, also known as Aluminum Oxide or Al2O3. It is very hard (upwards of 9 on the Moh's hardness scale), fairly light, inert, and not TOO expensive. It stops projectiles by erosion, shattering, and yawing. It is almost never used alone, relying on a backing to keep the high velocity rubble and projectile fragments from continuing into your body cavity. It is great against lots of rifle rounds, and can be made proof against some AP rounds. It is insensitive to heat and water. Drawbacks- more expensive than steel, can be sensitive to mishandling (think cracked plates if you toss them in your gear bag). Other ceramics include Silicon Carbide and Boron Carbide (more expensive and VERY expensive respectively). These are lighter and harder materials, and can stop the very highest of threats (tungsten carbide cored AP for instance). Most level IV plates are B4C.

Spectra- Wait, didn't I just say don't use this? Yes, yes I did. I am including this here for information purposes, and also because it is a gray area. Spectra in hard armor is not as HUGE a danger as soft armor (this from DocGKR) because of the amount of heat required to get it isothermic (the same temp throughout). So, if you have Spectra hardplates, there you go. Standalone Spectra plates can stop rifle rounds with enough layers. It stops rounds via frictive braking (think of bullet brake). However, be advised there are some rounds that will penetrate UHMWPE plates, such as M855 green tip. So again, do your homework. AN EXAMPLE IS FOUND HERE:

http://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-32839.html

GREEN TIP M855 IS NOT IN THE SPEC FOR LEVEL III, SO DON'T ASSUME.

The Future/New Advances- Current research is focused on several different threads. In the area of soft armor, the Next Big Thing(tm) looks to be Magellan (Now Dupont) M5 fiber. A fiber discovered in the late 90's, this material has been under development for the last 12 years. Preliminary tests have shown it to be superior to Kevlar in nearly every category- tensile strength, durability, fire resistance (it is the most fire resistant fabric ever designed). On a per unit volume basis, it would allow for a 60% reduction in armor weight for the same protection level as Kevlar KM2! The material is a light blue color, and has not been made widely available due to continuing engineering difficulties. Spinnerets that are used for processing Kevlar filaments are not strong enough for this fiber, and will break under the strain! This has required a redesign of the manufacturing processes, which = delays.

I hope this has been helpful- armor is one of those things that should be in everyone's kit bag. Please IM or email me if you have any further questions. I will do my best to answer them.
 
I would also like to hear about dragon skin. The test i have seen were very impresive.
 
Thanks for such a great post. Seems real informative.

I have a PACA model 221d, and a set of interceptor armor. I believe in keeping standard rifleman issue gear in general around in case of bad times, the whole kit and kaboodle, including some stuff for the wife. Also canned/boxed/bagged food, water, and medical supplies --that stuff to me is a given. Save the armor and pro mask and stuff, the rest gets used for camping and the food gets cycled through, so not all of it collects dust.

Anyway, what do think of the interceptor and the 221d? The interceptor is obviously kevlar and is only a few years old, but the 221d, it looks different and doesn't specify what the panels are. It was made in 1998. Do you know what it is, what they used? The armor is new, just old. Also, what do you think of the PASGT helmet we used to be issued?
 
There are some poor assumptions here. Please explain why a III is better than a IV for rifle ballistic armor. It is disingenuous to say that the III is superior to a IV, when the III can stop more non-AP .308 rounds when compared to AP .30-06 rounds on a IV. Stopping 1 AP 30-06 round could very well translate to stopping between 1 and 1000 M80 .308 Ball rounds. The same goes for the milk carton/ballistic armor material. Kevlar is commonly used in pans, some of which can be penetrated easily.

Apples and Oranges don't compare well. They also don't give us good data or understanding when compared.

That said, any information is usually better than none, and the raw data presented here is useful.
 
There are some poor assumptions here. Please explain why a III is better than a IV for rifle ballistic armor. It is disingenuous to say that the III is superior to a IV, when the III can stop more non-AP .308 rounds when compared to AP .30-06 rounds on a IV. Stopping 1 AP 30-06 round could very well translate to stopping between 1 and 1000 M80 .308 Ball rounds. The same goes for the milk carton/ballistic armor material. Kevlar is commonly used in pans, some of which can be penetrated easily.

Apples and Oranges don't compare well. They also don't give us good data or understanding when compared.

That said, any information is usually better than none, and the raw data presented here is useful.
No, I don't think you got it right. I know a little about this from the army. The IV rated ceramic plates are rated for one AP round. The stuff is more brittle than steel, but very hard. Works well until it gets hit or broken, then it is junk. Some will stop AP rounds, but break when dropped from the top of a wall locker or bunk.

The III rated steel plates, they can stop more non AP rounds because the material doesn't break down as easy as ceramic, it can just take more hits. Steel, obviously, doesn't break when dropped either.

If you shot the ceramic plate one time, it would stop the AP bullet. If you shot the ceramic plate one time with M80, it would stop it. If you shot the ceramic plate six times with the M80 you'd have broken pieces almost surely.

It is comparing apples to oranges, because like he said, use the ceramic plate when worried about the enemy having AP ammo, but the steel will take more hits reliably provided the ammo is not AP. It is a tradeoff, like everything else. III is better if using steel and the enemy doesn't have AP. Steel is better if this is true and you don't have the military supply line to replace that ceramic plate once it takes that one single hit.
 
Thanks gents. Much appreciated.

FadingSwordsman, I will try to address your concerns. It is not disingenuous to say level III is superior, since the purpose of the statement was to remove false assumptions re: the superiority of level IV vs. level III armor. Most people will make the same assumptions you mention, ie. that level IV, because it stops one round of .30-06 AP, MUST obviously be able to stop 1-100 rounds of M80 ball. Again, read the specs. Level IV plates CAN often stop multiple rounds of a different threat, but they were not DESIGNED to do so, and it is dangerous in the extreme to expect them to do so. Level IV is a DIFFERENT spec than III, and is not superior because it is a higher numbered threat.

Strykervet is correct in his explanation. The strike face for level IV armors are engineered to be extremely hard (B4C), but with very little cohesion once they have achieved their goal. Typically, the plate will disintegrate rapidly after the one round- be that a .30-06 black tip, or a 9mm ball round. Level III plates on the other hand, are designed to keep their structural integrity, often being capable of surviving more than the 6 rounds of M80 ball and lesser threats. It is all about the spec. There are exceptions to everything. For most cases requiring rifle plates, III is the way to go. YMMV.

Kevlar is never, EVER used in pans, pots, or cookware of any kind. I am not sure where you came up with this? Teflon is not Kevlar, though made by the same company (Dupont). And pans are not engineered to stop bullets, ever. :)

Spectra is a demonstrably inferior material for soft armor. I am comparing apples to apples here: materials used in soft armor construction. If I was comparing rigid Spectra to Kevlar soft armor, that would be apples to oranges. Spectra in armor was pushed by the manufacturers (DSM and Allied Signal), and aided and abetted by the NIJ's testing protocols that neglect to address the environmental factors that can degrade this material. If the protocols were changed to reflect situations that are LIKELY in the course of armor use, woven Kevlar/Twaron would be the only materials used, until M5 is brought online.

Charging people 30-40% more for crap materials that WILL fail is irresponsible and unethical. I am just trying to get the information out there so people can make an informed decision.
 
Last edited:
Sorry. But I am smelling an agenda.

And as much as it may or may not have anything to do with the truth, I smell way too much marketing here.
 
I'm a fan of hardened steel plates. I've seen simple 1.75" thick plates you can buy at a construction materials site hold up to .308, .30-06, .45-70 and 7mm rounds (No green tip, steel core or any other AP ammo, though); we still use those same plates, btw. Just gotta spray them with Rem Oil and wipe em down every now and then. They do have some monster bulging going on, though...I guess it's time to replace them, the concave of the bulges might start redirecting rounds into wierd directions; that wouldn't be good.
 
Nushif - In seven words you attempt to discredit D-R who apparently took quite a bit of effort and time to bring this information to our table.

If you have something concrete to make your point then by all means let’s hear it. If I was to tell a lie or half truth then I would expect to be called on it. So, let’s hear what you’ve got or you might consider being gentlemanly/womanly and give D-R an apology.

I am going to take D-R on face value until I or others can prove otherwise.
 
After reading his posts it really is just a gut feeling. The guy from the power company that you are paying your bill too sounds pretty knowledgeable at the various town halls, too, when he tells you that alternative energy doesn't work and you should just stick with them.

Marketing is designed to do exactly what is being done to your opinion right now, and that is what tipped me off.

Do I know the first thing about "proper" body armor? No. But I do know a thing or three about the scientific method. And frankly this is way too unambiguous to be anything but either a strong opinion piece or marketing.

As for me and body armor? I wear what they issue me, minus the nutcrusher that inflicts pain when going prone.
 
Nushif, essentially what I hear you saying is "I know too much for this not to be about marketing." So based on that, any well-written essay that is posted here is about marketing? Should I have included a certain number of errors to fit your expectations? I provide evidence, and sources, citing much of the work of DocGKR, a giant in this field. Would you accuse him of marketing?

You admit to knowing nothing about armor, yet you cite both "the scientific method" and "your gut." Which is it? One is objective, the other subjective.

If anything, this essay is designed to shatter the marketing that is still being done regarding inferior materials. It provides hard evidence that woven Kevlar is the only current suitable material for body armor. If you disagree, that is fine. At least you are now informed, and can make an INFORMED choice. I provide disclosure in the beginning of the essay- I have been designing, building, and shooting armor for 12 years. I am not an employee of Dupont, or Azko Nobel.

What I am is tired of seeing crap materials being MARKETED and sold to people that trust that the companies have their best interests at heart. Ask Officer Zapatilla about marketing a product that is not suitable for protective use.

If you get any use out of the above, then I am happy I took the time. If not, there is a little button at the top of the page. Click on it and look at something else. But this is The High Road- if you felt I had an agenda, send a PM and we can discuss it.

Thanks!
 
Actually, just leaving out any kind of negative or positive manufacturer and brandname mentions would have made perfect sense to me.

But hey, if you don't like my critique of your persuasive essay, mentioning brandnames specifically, under the guise of an informational essay, I recommend you don't read my critiques. 8)

[edit]
I do like the quaint mention of "gut" and "scientific method" though, seeing as in my posting the two were not related to the same subject, yet somehow you manage pulling a contradiction out of this.
In any case, I think the difference between a persuasive essay, much like your is written to form and an informative essay should be clear at this point.
Have a lovely thanksgiving.
[/edit]
 
Last edited:
Well I clearly see an agenda, one that is based on sharing information. Shame on you, D-R!

Nushif, if you have some sort of proof that D-R is acting inappropriately or spreading false information, then let's have it. In going through the links, I don't see this as being the case, although the following link doesn't work...

 
Kevlar is never, EVER used in pans, pots, or cookware of any kind. I am not sure where you came up with this? Teflon is not Kevlar, though made by the same company (Dupont). And pans are not engineered to stop bullets, ever. :)

Actually, yes, it is. It's also used in other things that aren't engineered to be bullet proof. Saying that Spectra is used in milk jugs follows that same line of thought, and is extraneous information which doesn't pertain to what you're saying. Either one way, or the other. Other uses of a material either make them bad for armor, or are inconsequential to their usefulness in armor. It can't disqualify some materials, but not matter for others.

IV armor can also be made of steel. It may be prohibitively heavy to wear, since it has to be twice as thick. (And around twice as heavy) That ceramic falls apart on one shot could be a perfectly valid point, but it IS disingenuous (And flat out untrue) to say that's always true for all IV armors. Always make sure to read and understand the whole spec, especially the at least part. Like I said previously, the IV armor in question could be designed to stop anything north of one round. That includes 5, or even 10 rounds. Strykervet was referring specifically to the IV ceramic armor, and is perfectly correct. The original statement, however was a general one.

The information you're leaving out is just as important as the information that you're giving, and in at least a couple places, your findings contradict the left out information.
 
FadingSwordsman- Show me. I welcome education. But there is NO benefit to using a FIBER to coat or make a pot with. Links to the actual product. Until you do, NO, Kevlar is NOT used in or on pots or pans.

And milk jugs ARE made of MWPE or PE, which is what UHMWPE becomes when subjected to high heat. Proof otherwise? You don't think it pertains to what I am saying that a supposed armor material transforms into a common household material not known for its bullet stopping properties? Hmmmm.

Essentially, if we are using the scientific method (this applies to you too Nushif), then I am completely open. Please provide links and proof, instead of just saying "this is so." I made every effort to cite what I say. Brand names are used because most manufacturers do not sell their products by saying "Made with woven Para Aramid" or "Made with 90 degree bias ply unidirectional UHMWPE fiber laminate." Humans are wired for brand recognition, and my use of the brand names was 100% intentional.

Link to steel level IV plates for personal use please. :) Yes, there are multi-hit steel level IV plates. They are called armored cars. In the context of personal wearable armors (which is the context of the article), there are NO level IV steel rifle plates. But if you can find one, I will buy 4!

Link to pot, pan, or baking implement made with Kevlar or Kevlar coating. I am quite intrigued. If Wikipedia mentions it, it must be true, so you should have no problem providing multiple citations. ;)

Nushif-there is a contradiction. You are saying you feel it in your gut (subjective opinion) then citing the Scientific Method (which you fail to utilize by posting contrary evidence). It is one or t'other.

No malice, no irritation, freely given, freely received. I like to think I am teachable- if I am wrong, it is merely an opportunity for ignorance to leave the mind, and I seek it actively! :)

DN Spy- You caught me....guilty as charged. Thanks for calling me out! ;)

DPrice- Thanks for those links on DragonSkin. I was quite interested in this when it first came out. There was a huge broughaha regarding adoption by the military- seems some of the current .mil contractors stood to lose some money if it was adopted, and caused the tests to be skewed (such as the test armor being shot where there was no protection against rifle rounds for one). It was a big mess. Having said that, I *DID* and still *DO* have some misgivings about it due to the method of adhering the discs to the armor package- seems there are problems with melting of the adhesive in high heat environments (The Sandbox?) allowing shifting of said discs. Great concept if they can solve this problem, just needs some more engineering.

Again, this is here as a resource. As I say, I am not the ultimate resource on this. If I am wrong, or there are errors in this, I will happily, eagerly change them. I am just tired of internet rumor and BS- Nushif and FadingSwordsman, I humbly await your evidence regarding suitability of UHMWPE for use in soft armor and Aramids in cookware/wearable steel level IV plates respectively. :)

To the rest of you, a happy, safe, and massively Turky-riffic day of Thanksgiving!
 
Last edited:
Thanks dprice, that's good to know. Not that I'm in the market for any of this stuff, but I sure heard a lot of hype about dragon skin.

Sounds like woven kevlar and hardened steel are still top of the heap for most purposes.
 
Link to pot, pan, or baking implement made with Kevlar or Kevlar coating
Not exactly what you are looking for but i'd consider kitchen gloves/mits to be baking implements. Dupont says the "OVE GLOVE" has 86% nomex and 14% kevlar. Plenty of stuff is made out of kevlar that isn't to stop bullets. I wear kevlar gloves and sleeves at work to keep sheetmetal parts from cutting me. It is woven about like a thick shirt sleeve and I doubt it'd stop much more than a air rifle pellet projectile.

I do have a questions tho, are there multi hit level IV plates? Such as will stop multiple hits of AP .30-06?

As far as the Dragon Skin stuff, I went on their website to check on prices of that stuff and apparently I could only receive a military or law enforcement type quote? Don't guess they sell to the average joes.
 
Correct. It makes dandy oven mitts, cut resistant sleeves, and insulation (applications below 450 F or so). But it is not a pot or pan coating (above 700 F for frying pans), and he asserted fairly emphatically that it WAS used in pots or pans as a replacement or substitute for Teflon. I await proof of his original statement regarding its use as a replacement for Teflon on pots or pans. ;) *Popcorn*

There are multi-hit level IV plates- this is a different spec than normal level IV, and you need to make sure it is specifically mentioned, just like level III+ will stop more than just M80 ball. You can engineer plates to do amazing things, but again, never assume. They are engineered with more cohesiveness, and are generally much thicker than standard level IV. But steel plates are prohibitively heavy for level IV use (would be about 25 lbs each), and so are reserved to vehicle armoring. Remember, AP rounds are *designed* to penetrate steel.

And Dragonskin is only sold new to MIL/LEO. It does show up occasionally on forums as used armor, but still between 2-6K or so. :(
 
Last edited:
Darn it. I went and checked the panels of my vest, only one I have, "ballistic filler; Kevlar, Gold Flex, Spectra". No humidity in AZ, but heat index gets up there. Well, it's all I have for now, maybe this one, http://www.galls.com/style-BP433-ge...lank-se-body-armor-threat-level-ii---nij#-cii, is OK? No materials used listed. So what companies use just kevlar? I might be able to afford the above linked one in a few or six months.
 
If someone wants to test it i have 4 multi hit 30-06 apm2 plates for sale.
Level 3 is a multi hit rating, standard level 4 is not. If you guys want to argue with the original post read the wiki on nij ratings first. Level 4 multi hit is a non official rating. The army enhanced and improved sapi (esapi and isapi)are multi hit and not nij rated. Due to the need to dissapte so much energy most normal 4 plates will shatter massively upon one hit, while level 3 will not stop 06ap or at least is not required to; it will stay together enough to stop multiple shots of lesser threats
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top