TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqspw6MHcrA

The above link is a video which is about 7 minutes, 18 seconds long.

In the first part of the video, a man with a bulletproof vest on is shot at close range, repeatedly, with an AK-47.

In the latter part of the video, a different man is shot at close range, repeatedly, with a 9MM pistol (Beretta? Since it's Italy?)

These vests really work. Notice that the men, when shot, do not do any dramatic backwards falling, like in the movies.
Keep in mind that if any bullet could knock down the person shot just with the forward energy, that the shooter would also
have to fall down due to the recoil.

Who wants to sign up to be on their testing team?

Anyone?

<Crickets>

SIA

The guy shot a 10 inch group from 3 feet away. No. I don't want to be part of that testing team. Sooner or later one of those AK rounds is going to wander off of the trauma plate, and then all bets are off.

...Notice that the men, when shot, do not do any dramatic backwards falling, like in the movies...

Some would say that is because they didn't utilize the almighty .45 ACP, hehe.

The Annoyed Man wrote:The guy shot a 10 inch group from 3 feet away. No. I don't want to be part of that testing team. Sooner or later one of those AK rounds is going to wander off of the trauma plate, and then all bets are off.

I complete guess based by some personal experiences and some fact.. Id guess his intent was to shoot each shot at a different part of the plate., having no two rounds strike the same point.

The ceramic strike plate is damaged when hit.. this I know for sure.. Subsequent hits in the same spot would likely penetrate....

bronco78 wrote:The ceramic strike plate is damaged when hit.. this I know for sure.. Subsequent hits in the same spot would likely penetrate....

Excellent point!

OH HECK NO!!!!
You couldn't pay me enough to be that product tester!

Sometimes Darwin doesn't get the job done.

bronco78 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:The guy shot a 10 inch group from 3 feet away. No. I don't want to be part of that testing team. Sooner or later one of those AK rounds is going to wander off of the trauma plate, and then all bets are off.

I complete guess based by some personal experiences and some fact.. Id guess his intent was to shoot each shot at a different part of the plate., having no two rounds strike the same point.

The ceramic strike plate is damaged when hit.. this I know for sure.. Subsequent hits in the same spot would likely penetrate....

Still seems like some pretty good stuff. Wonder what brand it was, or are all of them as good as that?

Heartland Patriot wrote:

bronco78 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:The guy shot a 10 inch group from 3 feet away. No. I don't want to be part of that testing team. Sooner or later one of those AK rounds is going to wander off of the trauma plate, and then all bets are off.

I complete guess based by some personal experiences and some fact.. Id guess his intent was to shoot each shot at a different part of the plate., having no two rounds strike the same point.

The ceramic strike plate is damaged when hit.. this I know for sure.. Subsequent hits in the same spot would likely penetrate....

Still seems like some pretty good stuff. Wonder what brand it was, or are all of them as good as that?

No idea if they are all that good...can say, the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert (ESAPI) works.. Ms Bronco78 can attest to it.

bronco78 wrote:

Heartland Patriot wrote:

bronco78 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:The guy shot a 10 inch group from 3 feet away. No. I don't want to be part of that testing team. Sooner or later one of those AK rounds is going to wander off of the trauma plate, and then all bets are off.

I complete guess based by some personal experiences and some fact.. Id guess his intent was to shoot each shot at a different part of the plate., having no two rounds strike the same point.

The ceramic strike plate is damaged when hit.. this I know for sure.. Subsequent hits in the same spot would likely penetrate....

Still seems like some pretty good stuff. Wonder what brand it was, or are all of them as good as that?

No idea if they are all that good...can say, the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert (ESAPI) works.. Ms Bronco78 can attest to it.

Well, of course, I'm glad it worked for you, but I'm curious if it hurt? I did some more research into this guy and his product and the biggest claim about it isn't simply that it stops the rounds, but that there is no trauma from the hits. I found an article written in Italian and did the Google translate thing (and then mentally turned that into English ). Its an interesting read. I'll post the link to the original article in Italian, and you can do the other part if you want to read it. The coolest part to me is that its a couple who weren't even in that line of work to begin with...good for them.

http://qn.quotidiano.net/cronaca/2011/0 ... turo.shtml

those guys have some meatballs

failure drill? are those militarry ammo? Russians have a new rd that it body armor defeater by default.

By the way, in the video you can hear someone repeatedly saying "Fuoco".

"Fuoco" is the Italian word for "fire", and just as in English, "fuoco" can mean "flames" or "fire a weapon."

SIA

The one round they didn't fire into that vest (and I wouldn't want them to wear it and try) is the NATO standard M855. As I have read and understand it, it was designed to increase penetration because NATO feared body-armor wearing Soviet shock troops coming through the famous Fulda Gap...and, at the time, that seemed more necessary to defeat than a bunch of thin folks in the Middle East/Central Asia. So, any guesses if M855 would make it through that stuff?

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:By the way, in the video you can hear someone repeatedly saying "Fuoco".

"Fuoco" is the Italian word for "fire", and just as in English, "fuoco" can mean "flames" or "fire a weapon."

SIA

Yep, most of the time, they say "pronto" (ready), then "fuoco" (fire)...I guess its just understood that they will "mirare" (aim).