I do not understand why the 7.62x54R and M80 had incomplete testing on the linked spec sheet. (BA- 2000SSX01, BA- 2000SMR01)

 

I would get a clear answer on that if heavy .30 caliber threats are a consideration. 

 

I also missed seeing M193 as a tested threat.

 

Outside of those details, these could be viable, particularly if they are available in SAPI sizing.

Here's a link to where I got my set. The listed threats are what was listed on the included paperwork with the plates

 

http://www.leedway.com/product-p/x-cal-lp.htm

 

Both of my plates are just a shade over 0.4" thick and right at 5# a piece. I wear mine in my duty Mayflower LPAAC with Velocity soft armor and they seem to be a good fit so far.

 

 

Found part of the answer.  Not rated to stop M193, which, IMO, makes it a no-go. 

 

From Safariland's web site:

H  T  T  P  S  ://www.safariland.com/body-armor/x-cal-lp-special-threat-rifle-plate-1166518.html

5.56x45mm 62 gr. FMJ

  • 7.62x39mm 123 gr. MSC
  • 7.62x39mm 119 gr. API BZ
  • 7.62x54Rmm 150 gr. LPS FMJ
  • 7.62x51mm 148 gr.
TXLEO posted:
fireguy275 posted:

SFF, it stopped M193 at a local test conducted last year by some sweat teams. I'll see if I can get the pics and videos.

Semi necro bump. @fireguy275 did you ever get those results? Or anyone else? I'm pretty interested in these for a ferro slickster plain clothes rig 

And 168 grain .308 BTHP.

If it stops M193, M855, and 168 gr BTHP then they would be the cat's ass in the area I work.  If end users have stopped M193 in private testing, then why hasn't Safariland proven it and subsequently listed it?

Is it weird that the price being so low scares me?  Too good to be true?  It'd love to be able to recommend these to the guys. 

-----------------------------------

What is left when honor is lost?

The plates stopped greentip and M193 in the tests I mentioned. I saw the photos, vids, and written report.

I will check and see what .308 rounds were fired (if any). I wasn't able to get a copy of the results then, but I'll see if they will give them to me now.

Safariland has proven the ability of these plates to stop the M193 it in the past and the information on the specs obviously need to be updated.  They can't even come close to keeping these in stock (I've been to the factory several times recently). I'm not making excuses for them but the demand for these has skyrocketed. FWIW- distributor wait time is about 3-4 months minimum now if out-of-stock (most are). 

I would not have bothered with the XCal-LP plates at all if they were not able to contain M193.  That being said, I set up about 15 officers with these plates within my agency. I have not found a better plate considering the weight, thickness, protection, and price. My BAE Low Vis plates are lighter, thinner, and stop more, but also cost 3x as much. 

Joined: November 19, 2002          Location: Jacksonville, FL

We had mixed experiences during tests in Sept 2016.

 

The first X-CAL we shot with the following results:

10x12 ICW X-Cal plate shot on SM02 vest
shot #1 - center of plate; 5.56mm M855; stopped; 10.57mm BFS

shot #2 - inline 2" above shot #1; 7.62x39 123 FMJ mild steel core; penetration

shot #3 - 3" low left of shot #1; 7.62x51 MKE ZQI 147 NATO FMJ; penetration

 

We then shot a second X-CAL with the following results:

10x12 ICW X-Cal plate shot on SX02 vest
Shot #1 - center hit; 7.52x51 MKE ZQI 147 NATO FMJ; stopped; 21.67mm BFS

Shot #2 - 3" top left of shot #1; 5.56 M855; stopped; unable to accurately measure BFS due to shot #1's BFS

Shot #3 - 3" low right of shot #1; 7.62x39 123 FMJ mild steel core; stopped; unable to accurately measure BFS due to shot #1's BFS

I don't have pics of this plate as someone else took it with them.

 

______________________________________________________

"Somewhere out there, right now, someone is preparing for the day you both shall meet. How prepared will you be?"

Kango posted:

Well thats disconcerting.

Yes, yes it was. Pretty much turned us off to the X-CAL.

This was actual manufacturer reps testing/demo too... not off the cuff 'Joe Rangemaster' stuff.

______________________________________________________

"Somewhere out there, right now, someone is preparing for the day you both shall meet. How prepared will you be?"

SMP44,

Can you elaborate on exactly how theses plates were tested? I'm curious due to this being the first failures of these plates I've seen.  I am aware of multi hit (1" spacing) testing on these with the M855 and MSC with no penetration.

PM sent

Joined: November 19, 2002          Location: Jacksonville, FL

Shadow45 posted:

SMP44,

Can you elaborate on exactly how theses plates were tested? I'm curious due to this being the first failures of these plates I've seen.  I am aware of multi hit (1" spacing) testing on these with the M855 and MSC with no penetration.

PM sent

They were tested as I've seen SF do their armor test/demos every time. Strapped on top of a couple different soft panels (SX02 and SM02, in this case) and all strapped onto their dummy with the clay filled torso.

The armor, setup, and ammo fired was provided by SF's Senior Tech Specialist-Armor. He is the same guy that has led the last three armor shoots that we have held (2009, 2013, 2016). We provided the AR, AK, and Rem 700.

I am not sure what your guy's name is but the shoot report (I'm looking at right now) was CC'd to at least six SF folks/employees.

______________________________________________________

"Somewhere out there, right now, someone is preparing for the day you both shall meet. How prepared will you be?"

Kango posted:

What was the reps response after the plates failed?

He said that he thought that might happen. He said that they will generally stop multi-hits but that they're not technically multi-hit rated.

Which is what we saw.

The pictured plate (plate #1) was cracked pretty good by the M855 (first shot; itstopped it) but then the 7.62x51 and x39 both penetrated. You can look close and see the fractured/spiderwebbed ceramic under the coating on the unshot parts of the plate.

Plate #2 did stop all three rounds (shot in a different order). The tech spec sheet doesn't say anything about multi-hit capability and the current posted one (Jan 2017; after our tests/demo) actually specifically says "The following package configurations defeat 1 impact of the rounds specified below"

 https://www.safariland.com/on/...ecification_2017.pdf

I don't think they're trying to hide anything or make any erroneous claims. I'm not even sure that you could technically call those penetrations we experienced a "failure".

______________________________________________________

"Somewhere out there, right now, someone is preparing for the day you both shall meet. How prepared will you be?"

Add Reply

Likes (3)
MOJONIXONGLOCK10MMGrumpyGrizz
Post
Copyright Lightfighter Tactical Forum 2002-2019
×
×
×
×
×