SIGforum
Discarding sabots - ever used on small arms?

This topic can be found at:
https://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/9980079764

March 31, 2020, 10:21 AM
joel9507
Discarding sabots - ever used on small arms?
Thanks for the info, all. Smile

Looks like an idea that has been tried, but with practical issues in execution; the devil is in the details.

Very interesting.
March 31, 2020, 10:43 AM
Oat_Action_Man
To echo what Sigfreund said, that's more or less the experience from the InRangeTV video I referenced (sample size of only 2 rounds, though). The one round keyhole, likely because the sabot broke up.

Seems that sabots work well for tanks, but not so well for small arms.


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

Chuck Norris put the laughter in "manslaughter"

Educating the youth of America, one declension at a time.
March 31, 2020, 12:23 PM
jljones
quote:
Originally posted by maladat:


These days, they'd probably be worried about the armor piercing potential, too.

My understanding is that ceramic plates work by being harder than the bullet, so the bullet shatters on impact, but the also-common polymer plates work by "catching" the bullets and performance is velocity-dependent.

I suspect a 55 grain bullet going 4000+ fps out of a 30-06 would zip right through a polymer plate.

Of course, there are plenty of other ways to get a bullet going really fast.


And you would be incorrect. Steel plates were prone to failure at higher velocities. Higher velocity rounds were a reason that ceramic plates were invented. That and weight. Even if you took a hit from one of these rounds up close, it is highly doubtful that a quality ceramic plate would give. Adding any distance and you loose a ton of stability on these types of rounds.




www.opspectraining.com

"It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for them"



March 31, 2020, 01:20 PM
maladat
quote:
Originally posted by jljones:
quote:
Originally posted by maladat:


These days, they'd probably be worried about the armor piercing potential, too.

My understanding is that ceramic plates work by being harder than the bullet, so the bullet shatters on impact, but the also-common polymer plates work by "catching" the bullets and performance is velocity-dependent.

I suspect a 55 grain bullet going 4000+ fps out of a 30-06 would zip right through a polymer plate.

Of course, there are plenty of other ways to get a bullet going really fast.


And you would be incorrect. Steel plates were prone to failure at higher velocities. Higher velocity rounds were a reason that ceramic plates were invented. That and weight. Even if you took a hit from one of these rounds up close, it is highly doubtful that a quality ceramic plate would give. Adding any distance and you loose a ton of stability on these types of rounds.


Read again - I was saying that I didn't think it would matter as much for ceramic plates, but that it might with polymer plates.

There are a lot of polymer plates with ceramic strike faces, but there are also plates that are just a solid block of UHMWPE.
March 31, 2020, 01:40 PM
jljones
My reading is just fine. It is your post that is incorrect.




www.opspectraining.com

"It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for them"



March 31, 2020, 01:44 PM
maladat
Can you provide a reference for UHMWPE plates reliably stopping MUCH faster projectiles than the NIJ standards test for?

Velocity certainly seems to matter since military body armor standards test for "V50," the velocity at which 50% of the projectiles penetrate the armor.

If nothing else, any piece of armor is limited by the amount of energy it can absorb, and higher velocity means more energy.