Are side plates worth the hassle? Seems to me that a 6x6 plate isn't going to cover much.

No.

They are uncomfortable as can be and not really functional.


I know, I know, “What if a ninja shoots you in the side”. I have soft armor there and what I gain in mobility is a fair trade off for a loss of protection to me.

Soft armor makes more sense to me. Especially if you already have a cummerbund. You might as well stick soft armor in there.

I'm probably over thinking all this. I only bought the body armor for a shtf scenario.

No. They add weight, and make it harder to move.

If you are dead set on them, I have some steel ones I bought and looked at once, and never used them. Have to find them, but if i can, you can have them.

I appreciate the offer but you guys have confirmed what I was already thinking.

If you really have to have side protection and you’re comfortable with the expectation you won’t encounter battle rifle rounds as opposed to assault rifle round threats like 5.56, 7.62x39, 300 blackout etc, these look pretty good. A few vids on the u-tube are pretty impressive.

https://safelifedefense.com/pr...le-rifle-armor-fras/

Vid showing performance
https://youtu.be/PeMzY7WEQkM

The use of chest plates is based on a different tactic than in the past. What I was taught in the Infantry School in the 80's is no longer the method preferred.

Instead of hitting the ground behind cover to return fire, you now see soldiers "squaring up" to have the plate 90 degrees from the direction of fire to get the most protection, and remaining upright to immediately fire for effect as they manuever to cover. This also puts the rifle directly 90 degrees out in front, with the additional affect of needing a more upright hand grip. The original M16 grip - like the FNFAL- had a lot more slant because it was used prone and almost across the body pointing to the extended off hand. And you were closer to ground then - the practice was to push mag carriers etc far to the sides and not lay on them.

Now belts are jammed with pouches and with armor you are raised off the ground 5-8 inches. The old problem of the 30 round mag making the weapon stick up too far doesn't happen.

Things to keep in mind if shopping for armor. How you intend to fight makes a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
"squaring up" to have the plate 90 degrees from the direction of fire to get the most protection, and remaining upright to immediately fire for effect as they manuever to cover

The first point is what’s usually taught to law enforcement officers: to avoid “blading” to the target à la the old “Weaver” stance and exposing one’s side to the incoming fire. Even with wrap-around soft armor the armpit area is exposed that way.

The second is something I alluded to in the discussion about shooting an MSR from one’s nondominant shoulder: is it better to seek maximum protection from position and cover, or do we want our defensive fire to be as accurate and effective as it can be? What you mention isn’t for the same reason, but the principle is the same.

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
No. They add weight, and make it harder to move.

mobility / speed vs. protection

it's the debate which will never end.

of course one needs to do the threat assessment / mission parameters and go from there

long hike to objective requiring stealth, traversing numerous obstacles while carrying other mission gear vs manning a checkpoint with little movement but high percentage exposure to attack -- etc

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

As many have stated, side plates can hinder movement.

I do not care for side plates and quietly avoided putting them in.

Plus... When I am driving an MRAP they dig into my side and make me have to pee.

Only one time I got admonished for not wearing side plates by a SGT not assigned to my unit. I quietly explained to him the reasons and in answer to one of his questions, I told him I am not worried about my sides when the blast will come up through the floor. Now if he asked or worried about my male particulars I would have conceded.

Plus.. I have found they hinder movement both in movement and also trying to obtain/use gear such as lights, magazines etc..

As I get older, I am not as fluid and agile as I used to be, so I don't need any help slowing down. (To caveat this.. I was not all that fluid, agile or a speed demon when I was younger. Hence the reason I was a lineman not a tailback)

We in the Army HATE them. Bulky, uncomfortable and further limits mobility. Not to mention the additional weight to the 45 lbs+ we already cary/wear. Already miserable ingress/egress from a vehicle gets with the IOTV and kit gets even worse adding the side plates. EVERYONE wants to remove them as soon as possible. The only benefit I have seen/experienced/liked is when up in the gunners turret or maybe wearing one on the outboard side during a deliberate vehicle convoy where IEDs/EFPs are a threat.

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
The use of chest plates is based on a different tactic than in the past. What I was taught in the Infantry School in the 80's is no longer the method preferred.

This is the biggest point. Tactics have changed and the equipment has evolved to keep up.

What's filtered down to the open-market is a lot of left-overs from a former era of combat. It took about a decade for the ground combat branches to recognize what over-armoring its troops were doing and the impracticalities of the equipment.