posted 06-27-2003 10:40               

You commented that "...Second Chance IIRC exceeds the NIJ requirements for their vests to ensure they work. I've heard rumours that some SC Level II vests meet Level IIIA standards..."

On the MD Labs Forum, NIJ's testing standards are outlined: http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000281.html
Note that they do NOT test for:
1)effects of temperature
2)effects of visable light
3)contact hits
They do not consider these tests "applicable."

DocGKR posted the following information about NIJ on this thread: http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000295.html

"After a comprehensive 18 month investigation, the damning 1992 report by Congress's Office of Technology Assessment found many flaws with NIJ testing and called for extensive revisions....Sadly, over a decade later, NOTHING has been changed.

See:

Office of Technology Assessment: "Police Body Armor Standards and Testing, Vol I & II; OTA-ISC-534". Washington DC, U.S. Government Printing Office; August 1992. http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1992/9229_n.html http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1992/9230_n.html

Jason A: "The Body Armor Standards Controversy; OTA Study Supports Critics of NIJ". Wound Ballistics Review. 1(2):8-11; Fall 1992.

Jason A & Fackler ML: "Body Armor Standards: A Review and Analysis". Wound Ballistics Review. 1(1):14-37; Winter 1991.

Bachner T: "The 'V-50 Ballistic Limit': A Reliable Test Method for Body Armor". Wound Ballistics Review. 1(4):20-25; 1994.
***************************************************

When a federal agency questioned how a failed vest passed NIJ testing, they couldn't/wouldn't respond: http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000294.html

JUSTNET (National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center) published the following report on expantion of NIJ's testing standards to include circumstances that might effect the integrity of Kevlar, Spectra, and Zylon: http://www.nlectc.org/testing/ba_environment.html

Environment Effects Upon the Ballistic Protection of Personal Body Armor
Updated: February 19, 2003

Under sponsorship of the Combating Terrorism Technology Support Office/Technical Support Working Group (CTTSO/TSWG), an independent research study is underway to investigate the effects of naturally occurring environments on personal body armor and its component materials. The National Institute of Justice, through its Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES), is actively monitoring and providing technical support to this effort.

The first phase of this work is focused specifically upon the effects of temperature and moisture over time upon body armor ballistic protection materials. The study is investigating each of the three major ballistic materials used in current body armor technology for their ballistic performance response to these environmental effects. Aramid (Kevlar®), High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (Spectra®), and PBO (Zylon®) armor materials are being subjected to laboratory quality, highly controlled single and combined temperature and humidity environments. These environments are based on historically accepted military test methodologies and procedures, specified in the Department of Defense Military Environmental Standard, MIL-STD-810F, and upon climatic data gathered and assessed for regional averages and extremes within the continental United States. Both long and short-term environmental exposures are being conducted, to assess term-related effects. Ambient and extreme daily wear and storage scenarios and conditions, for example, car trunk storage temperatures, have been identified and included in the testing parameters.

Ballistic fiber material investigations in the open literature indicates susceptibility to hydrolytic and, to a lesser extent, high temperature induced degradation of fiber strength. This phenomena has been shown in research by commercial and government entities, using environmental testing methodologies and assessed using traditional strength and properties testing of individual fibers or yarns. It is important to note that little research has been found to date that directly investigates the effects of term-related environmental exposure upon ballistic impact performance of whole fabrics or armor material systems. Information from Toyobo, BSST, DSM, and the U. S. Army Natick concerning their investigations of PBO fiber strength degradation has been reviewed and considered in the design of the testing.

This study's test samples are being evaluated using ballistic limit (V50) testing, based on NIJ Standard-0101.04 and MIL-STD-662F methodologies and procedures, to determine if any significant reduction in ballistic penetration performance results from environmentally induced degradation to the test samples. In parallel, limited strength and properties characterizations of the materials are being conducted. The test samples consist of untreated ballistic fabrics, of both woven fiber and laminate fiber constructions, in each of the three materials. Testing is underway and is estimated for completion during the second quarter of 2003. Reporting and results are anticipated by the third quarter of 2003.

It is important to note that body armor, as a system of several material components, is generally designed to offer environmental protection to its ballistic materials; and most care and maintenance instructions, including NIJ Guide 100-01, Selection and Application Guide to Personal Body Armor, advise users about cleaning, storage, and exposure of the armor to moisture, chemicals, and direct sunlight. NIJ compliant body armor is tested while in a wet condition per the requirements of NIJ Standard-0101.04, providing a quantitative measure of the ballistic performance of the armor during a short-term extreme moisture environment. It is unclear at this time however, what effect moisture and temperature actually have upon the ballistic performance of body armor over long-term exposures. The on-going research described is expected to provide valuable insight into this question.

This page will be updated periodically, detailing the progress of this effort.
****************************************************

posted 06-27-2003 10:56               

My comment about exploiting rumor and innuendo was in reference to manufacturers. And yes I think it's still premature to villify SC on this. I don't think RD or SC needs any defending from me, I'm just seeing a shortage of complete information here. Richard has broken a lot of ground in the industry, often going against the grain, the NIJ, and the competition, willingly exposing himself to some powerful criticism in the process-- until his idea or philosphy proves to have merit. I don't say it's impossible for Second Chance to be wrong-- we've certainly seen bigger mistakes by much bigger companies, that have cost dozens of lives, and not always done with greed as the motive.

As I mentioned, I am not up on Zylon and it certainly sounds like you guys are. I'm not disputing that, and honestly I can't pretend to be qualified to delve into the veracity or relevance of any test. But as I understand it, there have been a number of saves with Zylon, not counting Davis's personal testing of an early, used Zylon vest on himself, and no known failures, unless this does turn out to be one?

RD's comments about testing in use vs/ lab tests is misconstrued.... easy enough to do when Richard is talking. I think though that his record of caring about cops first and formost is well established, and that no other exec in the business can approach the lengths he's gone to to get cops to wear vests, somebody else's if not his. Many or most of them are business men anyway, not really armorers, let alone armor patent holders. He may not be the smoothest talker, but his life's work is saving cops, not doing an evil cackle over the bottom line. What he said about a failure being bad for business is a typical RD bald-faced Simple True Statement-- it is a fact for everyone who makes armor, not a company motto. It's like a gun-rights activist saying, "Every time a storekeeper gets shot by a punk, it's bad for our cause", it doesn't mean we don't give a rip about the storekeeper, we do.

I don't have any financial interest in SC, but I do in what I'll call Big Armor. From what I've seen, and I'll be the first to admit I'm not there at either place listening to the decision-making, but from what I've seen, nobody else hold a candle to Second Chance, scruples-wise.

posted 06-27-2003 11:20               

UNTIL we were told by Davis that he was using unsuspecting police officers as test subjects for an "on-going field test."
Imagine how much Limbacher will appreciate finding out this news.

This may be the first published failure of a Zylon vest, but it is not necessarily the ONLY known failure, and those test results were not necessarily the ONLY known test results that Davis was privy to.

posted 06-27-2003 11:41               

------------------
S/F

posted 06-27-2003 11:44            

FWIW..I just got off the phone with a rep from FirstChoice Armor. I asked him if there vests use Zylon and to tell me about these failures.

He tells me that the vests that failed were constructed of "single layer laminate", and that none of the vests made by FirstCHoice are made that way. He stated that their vests are made of woven Zylon and that they have tested to remain ballisticly intact despite exposure to extreme heat. He claims that they have a vest that has been exposed to 140 degrees for the last six months that has been continously tested with no sign of failure.

I am a bit leary, though, as 140 is quite a bit less than the temps I've been seeing mentioned. Also, I wonder how much testing can occur on the vest as described. Me not knowing much about it, they certainly couldn't shoot it much or they would run out of surface area, depending on what they've done during this 6-month test.

He also stated that Miami-Dade just recently did an 11-month test of armor belonging to 21 different manufacturers, resulting in FirstChoice being the number one choice, and supposedly the ONLY armor now authorized by M-D.

Anyone know of this, before I contact M-D?

I guess something new, blue and from US Armor is in my future.....

posted 06-27-2003 11:46               

Yes.
Kevin asks that you call him at the shop.
928/772-3021

Pat,

Seems Richard Davis and Second Chance IS in a bit of legal trouble due to a horrific fireworks accident. http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000308.html

http://courtofappeals.mijud.net/documents/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20030603_C238007_6 8_238007.OPN.PDF

Thanks for the heads up.

posted 06-27-2003 11:59               

The exposure to humidity and heat has always been the issue. You sweat in the vest, and the water vapor from your body combines with heat to degrade the vest.

The SC Ultima vests are made of woven, not laminate, Zylon material. They stack layers of Zylon cloth.
Most of the other companies using Zylon are using some form of laminate, usually a Honeywell Spectra type laminate. This material (as used by Point Blank, ABA, etc) has shown numerous failures, most notably the Point Blank test failures in New York and some level IIIA raid vests that failed simple 9mm testing by a large Federal Police Agency. (BSST and DSM have also provided extensive data of this type of laminate Zylon suffering failures)

posted 06-27-2003 12:01            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mad Dog:
I strongly recommend against those vests! They have problem materials, most notably Zylon and Zylon/Spectra hybrids in them.
[b]Avoid any vest that uses Honeywell Spectra laminates, Spectra Flex, Spectra Shield, Gold Shield, Gold Flex, or any Zylon product.
There's more info about those brands on the MD Labs Forum. Do a search there.

---

whoops, let me try this again,

Honeywell states that GOLDFLEX is an aramid product produced with their "Shield" method of lamination construction. I quote:

"Shield technology was originally developed utilizing Spectra® fiber, and over the years engineers have developed Shield products using other high-performance fibers such as aramid fiber in our Gold Flex® product."

Now, is there a problem with just zylon laminates or also aramid laminates?

Thanks,
B

posted 06-27-2003 12:31               

The UHMW Spectra fiber degrades after contact with heat at or above 180F. It does not recover any strength lost when it cools down. Spectra UHMW fiber also has tremendous surface lubricity and very low surface energy, and this encourages delamination from the TPE laminate sheet after numerous flexures and temperature shifts.

The Zylon degrades once exposed to any visible light or any combination of heat and humidity. Higher humidity and heat accelerate the degradation.

Woven Kevlar and Twaron p-aramids will recover their strength once they dry.

posted 06-27-2003 12:42               

I contacted FirstChoice Armor and was faxed a copy of the Miami-Dade letter of recommendation.

It appears by this letter that the tests were according to NIJ testing standards, and that they did not include any aging tests, vapor tests, or any other tests that address Zylon's specific degradation problems.

Kevin has been on the phone with their owner, who said that he was unaware of Toyobo's published testing data. He seemed anxious to learn more about Zylon's reported degradation issues, and has offered to share their independant testing data with us.
We hope that they will.

posted 06-27-2003 13:53               

Ammo used was Magtech (CBC headstamp) 180grain FMC, exposed lead base. This ammo has a rated muzzle velocity of only 990 fps. http://www.magtechammunition.com/html/pistalbal.html
This velocity and projectile is well within the NIJ rated stopping capability of the Ultima Zylon IIA vest when new.
After only five months, it failed against this round.

posted 06-27-2003 14:42            

This article identifies it as a Monarch Summit, which is NOT a Zylon vest. Either the article is wrong, or Mad Dog wanted to see a Zylon failure so badly, he saw "Second Chance" and just took it from there on his own.

Lets wait before jumping to conclusions.

posted 06-27-2003 14:50               

I guess in your hurry to post, you didn't bother to read this thread.

I posted this earlier on this thread:

We have just received copies (17 pages faxed directly from FHPD) that include Forest Hills Police Department's original invoice for 7 "Second Chance Ultima leval IIA, nineth generation vest" dated 12/03/02, a copy of the check #030211 ($7,156.00) payable to Markl Supply Company for same, and numerous other support documents.

So much for "jumping to conclusions."
I would also suggest that you pop on over to the MD Labs Forum and read the rest of the threads about Zylon, Second Chance, and Richard Davis before commenting again.

posted 06-27-2003 22:22               

2) Class action lawsuit individually naming all of the Zylonistas and their companies as defendants.
Is there a lawyer in the house?

I prefer the biblical justice of #1, but #2 is probably more PC/doable.