>>64035274
Correct, they rebranded to Integris some time ago. I see you've raised some excellent points.
>Man, the SPT is so completely pointless.
The CX-104 IC meets strange Euro requirements against relatively high pistol threats. It is not applicable for the US market at all. I'd rather roll Hesco Z210s.
>The CS-804SA is almost as bad as the 1155
The CS-804 SA is multi-curve and about 0.25" thinner than the 1155. As you are well aware, the RMA 1155 loses to two .308. It's done that twice. The CS-804 SA can defeat six, or even six BZ API. While this level of multi-hit is often pointless, what this means is that it can take shots much closer together than the 1155 can. Superior crack arresting in the ceramic.
For what it's worth, the Hesco 4403 is only advertised to defeat 3x BZ API or M80. This plate is really much closer to the 7.5lb Protech 2230, but I'm not sure if it can match that 3,500ft/s M2AP v0.
>The difference between the CX-860 and CX-810 is literally 0.11 pounds.
and 0.16" in thickness! Likely a higher-end composite backer.
>The difference between the CX-860 and the CXP-800 is 0.3 pounds
which is substantial in some circles, given that's nearly the weight difference between an LTC 28595 and a VelSys H92. (GEN-5 vs GEN-5B SOCOM tac. standalone).
>Also, lmao at 1000 different all-PE Level III plates
Dude this is only a fraction of their lineup it's fricking huge. I'm not even touching their old lineups.
>It looks like the "trauma reduction backer" isn't included in their thickness specs
I think it's a cheesy way to game BFD calculations since the plate "starts" further away from the clay due to the ribs.
This is the only major armor company with no NIJ suspensions, reported failures, or product recalls. Let that sink in for a minute.
