Dragon Skin

Not sure, ive been looking for a while, ever since i saw a show about on t.v. That stuff took a beating and not a single round or grenade shrapnel penetrated it.
 
That was insane 40rds of 7.62x39 and 100rds of 9mm. If I were a cop or military I would definitely want that.
 
It has been withdrawn from the NIJ for not meeting NIJ standards for what it was supposed to be rated. Disks slipped out of position (bad adhesive) and disks failed. That is why the military rejected it.
 
Actually, there've been some problems reported with Dragon Skin failing certain ballistics tests. It's also said to be excessively heavy. I don't have the links handy, but if you do a search on 10-8 Forums there's some discussion of it.

I consider it a good thing that such armor isn't yet ready for prime time, since the moment the police and military have it and ordinary citizens can't get it, the Second Amendment will be largely moot. We're heading rapidly in that direction, though most gun owners sadly think the Second Amendment is only about hunting, target shooting, and defense against common criminals.
 
It has been withdrawn from the NIJ for not meeting NIJ standards for what it was supposed to be rated. Disks slipped out of position (bad adhesive) and disks failed. That is why the military rejected it.
Click to expand...

The official stement from NIJ on Dragon Skin.

NIJ, OJP's research, development, and evaluation component, has reviewed evidence provided by the body armor manufacturer and has determined that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the body armor model will maintain its ballistic performance over its six-year declared warranty period.

Notwithstanding NIJ's determination, DOJ encourages public safety officers to wear their Pinnacle Body Armor, Inc. body armor, model SOV 2000.1/MIL3AF01 until replacement because research has shown that officers are more likely to suffer a fatal injury when not wearing body armor.

In addition, DOJ strongly recommends that public safety agencies and officers who purchase new bullet-resistant body armor verify, prior to purchase, that the body armor model appears on NIJ's list of models that comply with its most current requirements, the 2005 Interim Requirements for Bullet-Resistant Body Armor. A list of these models is available at www.justnet.org. DOJ also encourages public safety officers to follow body armor manufacturer "wear and care" instructions, and not to store armor in the trunk of their vehicle or other environments in which armor might be exposed to extreme heat or cold.
Click to expand...

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/newsroom/2007/NIJ07057.htm
 
Thank you Eghad for nabbing the specifics.

It's also said to be excessively heavy. I don't have the links handy, but if you do a search on 10-8 Forums there's some discussion of it.
Click to expand...

Interesting given it is supposed to be lighter than the military's Interceptor vest with only plates in the front and back.
 
Pinnacle Armor

Here is the link for Dragon Skin info. http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/body-armor/dragon-skin.php

I have read the Army's statements regarding Dragon skin and find it interesting that the Army rejects it while in passed the Navy's tests and the Marine Corps is re-evaluating it. I really would like for it to be as good as pinnacle says it is. I would buy some for my son (USMC) immediately, even if it does cost as much as a used car. A threat level 4 full wraparound vest is around $6,000.00
 
I am sure any product has problems. We all know that from the forums. I think the Dragon skin Ruckus is significant because it means that there will be more tests to ensure that our folks on the front lines have the best.
 
I thought i read, that they were also looking into a liquid or gel type material that hardened upon the bullets impact...or something along that line:confused: did anyone hear or have more info on a product of that nature?
 
I have seen some sort of foam-like 'hard' plates for body armor. I know I still have the magazine with that evaluation in it around here someplace. Oh darn! Now I'll have to read firearms related publications until I find the right one. :D
 
I have read the Army's statements regarding Dragon skin and find it interesting that the Army rejects it while in passed the Navy's tests and the Marine Corps is re-evaluating it.
Click to expand...

Each service has different testing protocols and requirements. For example a vest that strips very easily is very important to the Navy, and the Corps to a limited extent.

Anyways the Army reported the same problems with their Level 4 vest as the NIJ is reporting at the level 3 vests. It's nearly twice as expensive as the level 4 interceptor, and it weighs 20lbs more.
 
I have read the Army's statements regarding Dragon skin and find it interesting that the Army rejects it while in passed the Navy's tests and the Marine Corps is re-evaluating it. I really would like for it to be as good as pinnacle says it is. I would buy some for my son (USMC) immediately, even if it does cost as much as a used car. A threat level 4 full wraparound vest is around $6,000.00
Click to expand...

The Marine Corps specifically prohibits its wear. I think it is an item that needs more work prior to being fielded.
 
Right. So the Army rejected it and the Marines are re-evaluating it which means it did not do well the first time through for them either. So out of three branches of the military, the vest was not accepted the first time through in 2/3 of them. That sounds significant to me.

The concept sounds like a very good one. The problem is that the armor simply isn't holding together properly. It sounds like something they could work out with a bit more R&D.

I was bothered by Pinnacle's response that the Army didn't know how to test their vest. Geez, you gotta hate folks that raise the bar and demand performance.:rolleyes:

That was insane 40rds of 7.62x39 and 100rds of 9mm. If I were a cop or military I would definitely want that.
Click to expand...

I saw this on Future Weapons as well. While I was impressed that it stopped the 7.62x39, I was not impressed that it stopped the 9mm. The shot order bothered me. They hit it with the big stuff first. I would have been a lot more impressed to see if the vest stopped the 7.62x39 AFTER being pelted by the 9mm.
 
So out of three branches of the military, the vest was not accepted the first time through in 2/3 of them. That sounds significant to me.
Click to expand...
I'm not too sure about that. The 1911 and the Garand were both rejected for further development their first times out, too IIRC.
 
I'm not too sure about that. The 1911 and the Garand were both rejected for further development their first times out, too IIRC.
Click to expand...

So was the AR, what it shows that it needs work. Perhaps when they fix the issues they will get accepted by the military.
 
I think you may be mistaken on the 1911. It was not rejected for further development. It was selected after an extensive review process where it was found superior to its competitors. There were changes/additions made after the selection and before the gun went into production, but no rejection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top