Considering body armor plates

Lead times to get armor now are measured in months, so good luck. If you order now you'd be lucky to get yours before the election. You might look around for a new set locally for sale, but expect to pay a premium.

There's endless threads on types and protection levels. Search is your friend. You have the basics down. Plate sizes need to fit in the actual carrier. Many people go with a flat rectangle back plate, and I prefer a flat one myself because it is more comfortable and covers more area than any of the shooters cut and curved plates.

All armor is a tradeoff of bulk, weight, and costs versus, well, not having protection there, type of materials, etc.

Steel lasts indefinitely and is thinner but heavier versus ceramics which are thicker and expire and are somewhat fragile, versus a lot of new polymer type materials which are as varied as there are manufacturers. If you're near water, consider body armor that floats...

As for protection levels, it requires a fortune teller. But if I were pinching pennies, I'd go for max coverage at lower level of protection versus lesser coverage at the higher level. For instance, front and sides with level III would be wiser than just front and rear level IV. But I guess it also depends on your realistic threat levels. Level III gets you all handguns, shotguns, and .308 and 7.62x39 (and presumably most common smaller caliber hunting type rifles). It doesn't stop 556. You have to jump to III+ or IV for all of that and that is a lot pricier.

IMO I'd go for defending the most common threats and more coverage. YMMV.

Many people like me have different setups for different roles.

Resist the notion to pile tons of gear on the armor. It's a good idea to keep it as slick as possible for less weight.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Considering body armor plates