Id say its pretty disappointing even for "high speed low drag" considering theres plates out there that are basically just as light, cheaper, and just as good, even a pound more of weight would offer so much better protection, i doubt a pound more and .5inch thicker is gunna be the cause of operation failure, an operators worth in training and skill needs way better protection, considering all the equipment left in Afghanistan m855a1 should be considered extreamly possible to face. This plate makes more sense for law enforcment, but Safe Life FRAS is better in both rolls imo
I dare say that BFD for m80 is unacceptable, even if only aiming for the new rf2 standard of three hits, The product is mostly marketed to police officers, so maybe they assume it will be used ICW, even if they aren't marking it as such. good strike face retention go, on par with high end consumer plates. Im curious what caused the discrepancy in their own lab tests, I'm pretty sure they had m80 at a much lesser bfd. with the adept thunder now on the market, I see little reason to go with a plate like this, which is clearly lacking any margin of safety. I do find the ballistic gel tests interesting, Im curious if a soft vest would have any bearing on whether an m193 projectile fragments properly.
If I recall correctly soft armor can be expected to shave off a couple hundred fps from even a rifle projie, so maybe the projectile would fall under fragmentation threshold if it came out at like, 2700 fps don't ask me where I heard that from though, I can't find it
@BuffRANGE if the gen 2 doesn't come with an up armour plate, I'll send you the money for a hard head veteran's one when you get the helmet, just make sure to let us know about it first!
I’d be interested to see how their ICW plates do. They’re markets for LEO .38” thick and 1.3lbs for a medium sapi. They seem to be addressing a gap in the market as a lot of LEO is looking for slim daily wear intermediate threat armor.
@@BuffRANGE When I contacted Dayton about if they were going to certify their ICW plate they referred me to Slate Solutions. Makes me wonder if Dayton is just rebranded Slate.
@@Riname-K I doubt it. This is their RF2 otherwise it wouldn’t have a ceramic strike fade. Ultimately with current tech (exclude US Armor Forge) there’s a point at which going too light costs performance and this is the bleeding edge.
I'm ecstatic that you're testing Dayton Armor! Theres hardly any testing vids on them out there... Any chance you'll test their RF3 plates in the future?
Are those plates recent? They look nothing like mine in terms of the side view. Mine are the rf2 and they are like half the thickness of those plates. What the heck? Mine is all polyethylene, no ceramic.
Are you sure you bought RF2? These were purchased back in May of 2024, and the specs on these plates haven't changed for quite some time. The RF1 isn't rated for M855 and would then not included a ceramic strike face..
Are you sure you bought RF2? These were purchased back in May of 2024, and the specs on these plates haven't changed for quite some time. The RF1 isn't rated for M855 and would then not included a ceramic strike face.. (sorry if this reply is a dup)
@@BuffRANGE Dyneema is subject to pass throughs in soft armor.. I'd look for something that uses Spectra Shield as a backing...That back face looks like it could be terminal...
What a sketchy result for this test. A plate that weighs 3.6lb and is .82 thick with almost half of that plate being foam? What is Dayton Armor trying to pull? That BFD on M80 on COLD clay is unacceptable. If price for a pair is ~700 bucks, it's a straight ripoff. The Hesco M210s may weight 1.4lbs more, but they're .21in thinner, and actually stopped the threats more consistently without showing catastrophic delamination or back face deformation. And they cost the same for pair.
Finally Dayton Armor. I saw one of their plate stopping 50 cal and always wondering how their plates will do against... well... you
Just bear in mind that level IV plate was a custom one for Karl, and Karl used a 19" 50 BMG which at the muzzle is effectively the 29" at 200 yards.
@@BuffRANGE Thanks for giving more context! Really appreciate it
Thanks Deacon!
Indeed he's a big help
Long barrel 7N6M might be an unrealistic threat for American civilians, but with Russia using the 23" RPK74, it isn't unrealistic in combat.
I forgot about RPK over there
7n6 is used all over Ukraine including rpk 74
@@JJUkraine 7N6 or the 7N6(M). Standard 7N6 threat is covered by typical III PE plates.
Great work, truly enjoyed!
Thank you!
Id say its pretty disappointing even for "high speed low drag" considering theres plates out there that are basically just as light, cheaper, and just as good, even a pound more of weight would offer so much better protection, i doubt a pound more and .5inch thicker is gunna be the cause of operation failure, an operators worth in training and skill needs way better protection, considering all the equipment left in Afghanistan m855a1 should be considered extreamly possible to face. This plate makes more sense for law enforcment, but Safe Life FRAS is better in both rolls imo
Very disappointing.
Which plates are cheaper and better? I agree these results are disappointing.
And this plate is 0.55" thick, 0.5" thicker is almost double.
I dare say that BFD for m80 is unacceptable, even if only aiming for the new rf2 standard of three hits, The product is mostly marketed to police officers, so maybe they assume it will be used ICW, even if they aren't marking it as such. good strike face retention go, on par with high end consumer plates. Im curious what caused the discrepancy in their own lab tests, I'm pretty sure they had m80 at a much lesser bfd. with the adept thunder now on the market, I see little reason to go with a plate like this, which is clearly lacking any margin of safety.
I do find the ballistic gel tests interesting, Im curious if a soft vest would have any bearing on whether an m193 projectile fragments properly.
If I recall correctly soft armor can be expected to shave off a couple hundred fps from even a rifle projie, so maybe the projectile would fall under fragmentation threshold if it came out at like, 2700 fps
don't ask me where I heard that from though, I can't find it
Tungsten subsonic! That's soooo awesome
9x39 style
Please test an Adept Armor nova steel helmet!
I've asked Adept and they said they would send a sample when they release Gen 2
@BuffRANGE if the gen 2 doesn't come with an up armour plate, I'll send you the money for a hard head veteran's one when you get the helmet, just make sure to let us know about it first!
Rough day for the plates.
Rough Day indeed.
My buddy just got MIRA level 4 plates ( I didn't know they even made plates). Any thoughts on them? I got Adept based on your review. Happy with them.
mira plates are now Hesco. They are good but Adept threat coverage is better
I’d be interested to see how their ICW plates do. They’re markets for LEO .38” thick and 1.3lbs for a medium sapi.
They seem to be addressing a gap in the market as a lot of LEO is looking for slim daily wear intermediate threat armor.
I wouldn't say no to testing them, but this ate up an entire year of my available funds to make happen.
@@BuffRANGE When I contacted Dayton about if they were going to certify their ICW plate they referred me to Slate Solutions. Makes me wonder if Dayton is just rebranded Slate.
I’m inclined to believe this **is** their ICW plate (maybe even mislabeled) based on how poorly it performed with backface deformaiton lmao
@@Riname-K I doubt it. This is their RF2 otherwise it wouldn’t have a ceramic strike fade. Ultimately with current tech (exclude US Armor Forge) there’s a point at which going too light costs performance and this is the bleeding edge.
@@BuffRANGE like it performed so iffy that the addition of a 3A backer might’ve sounded reasonable.
12:17 nice gel test! That was devastating still after going through the plate.
Indeed!
I'm ecstatic that you're testing Dayton Armor! Theres hardly any testing vids on them out there... Any chance you'll test their RF3 plates in the future?
Unless someone donates the funds I doubt it.
Are those plates recent? They look nothing like mine in terms of the side view. Mine are the rf2 and they are like half the thickness of those plates. What the heck? Mine is all polyethylene, no ceramic.
Are you sure you bought RF2? These were purchased back in May of 2024, and the specs on these plates haven't changed for quite some time. The RF1 isn't rated for M855 and would then not included a ceramic strike face..
Are you sure you bought RF2? These were purchased back in May of 2024, and the specs on these plates haven't changed for quite some time. The RF1 isn't rated for M855 and would then not included a ceramic strike face.. (sorry if this reply is a dup)
whats the pricing on these ? The link wants me to sign up to even view their pricing.
$695.00, they say its normally 1,124 tho
$695 or thereabouts. Yeah you have to register to see pricing :|
*17:05** You have that in a sharable spreadsheet?*
I have it in my campsite. Let me update that sheet if I haven't yet.
Is a USGI black SAPI is the pipeline?
I have a few of them to mess with yes. The better question is given their age, I would hope no one is actively using those plates
Hesco 3611C pretty please!
Just need to edit the video. It’s done
So much for the NIJ....Kinda lame I can't see what the price is on their website without a login...
Yeah they want you to log in.
@@BuffRANGE Dyneema is subject to pass throughs in soft armor.. I'd look for something that uses Spectra Shield as a backing...That back face looks like it could be terminal...
@@BuffRANGE Oh and thanks for all your hard work bring us all these great videos..
@@John-y2b4m You're very welcome!
What a sketchy result for this test.
A plate that weighs 3.6lb and is .82 thick with almost half of that plate being foam?
What is Dayton Armor trying to pull?
That BFD on M80 on COLD clay is unacceptable.
If price for a pair is ~700 bucks, it's a straight ripoff.
The Hesco M210s may weight 1.4lbs more, but they're .21in thinner, and actually stopped the threats more consistently without showing catastrophic delamination or back face deformation.
And they cost the same for pair.
@@StriderCZ the price is $700 per Plate. PER when it’s on sale. :0
$$$
Pretty much all my money
Wow. Probably OK for 38 Special and 9mm pistol, but that’s about it for me.
PizzA
8.5"X11" White Paper
@BuffRANGE yeah!
If you can’t stop m855a1 it’s not even worth buying.
How many People are actually running A1 tho?
I get what you’re saying but the market is mostly flooded with m193 and m855
Don't spoil it
Ehh not really a requirement at all.
I mean one of the places I get it form is always selling out. It's becoming more and more commonplace.
@@BuffRANGE yea and expensive AF
I wish I could afford it in bulk