Search Results
6/22/2025, 5:58:23 PM
>>63879362
Making a part 2 to this post. Now I'll switch to arguing partly in favor of Adept so you get a fair assessment. Pic related is a test report they don't list on their site for some reason for the Adept Colossus. This shows defeating 3x 7.62x51 Swiss P AP, the VPAM PM-12 threat above M993 (XSAPI), with a plate that is demonstrably an original white+black Colossus. Note that this version is no longer sold, the current model is purple+black covered.
However, important bit, right at the bottom of this test report is the language that this only applies to the samples tested, and is not an endorsement of continuing performance. Why is this important?
The current test report on Adept's site only lists one hit of 7.62x51mm M993 for the Colossus. This is a far, far easier threat. Why the downgrade?
As I mentioned earlier, the salient issue with Adept is whether they can produce products that perform consistently. Their lack of NIJ certifications, relatively low prices (the Colossus is Militech-level value for what it does), and apparent downgrade on the Colossus' test report from 2/8/22 (ten days before CN111348920B was granted to a Chinese company) to 8/5/22 - current and ONLY one listed on their site - pic related, suggests a lack of consistency. Can we get a test report that isn't nearly three years old, please?
Notably, as to the youtubers, Buffman's plate withstood an incredible amount of ammunition. He has credibility issues stemming from recent Highcom, RMA, and American Blast Systems situations. He has affiliate links with a lot of people. Another guy's, Oxide's, did not. It lost to a singular M993 after being struck by M948 SLAP. There is a third test report out there showing the Colossus stopping one M948 and losing to a second, but this too is not on Adept's site. Why?
To call their Colossus "future-proofed" when it loses to WW2-era 7.92 SmKH (Buff) and has no defeats, at its best, against anything newer than 27-year old Swiss P AP is misleading.
Making a part 2 to this post. Now I'll switch to arguing partly in favor of Adept so you get a fair assessment. Pic related is a test report they don't list on their site for some reason for the Adept Colossus. This shows defeating 3x 7.62x51 Swiss P AP, the VPAM PM-12 threat above M993 (XSAPI), with a plate that is demonstrably an original white+black Colossus. Note that this version is no longer sold, the current model is purple+black covered.
However, important bit, right at the bottom of this test report is the language that this only applies to the samples tested, and is not an endorsement of continuing performance. Why is this important?
The current test report on Adept's site only lists one hit of 7.62x51mm M993 for the Colossus. This is a far, far easier threat. Why the downgrade?
As I mentioned earlier, the salient issue with Adept is whether they can produce products that perform consistently. Their lack of NIJ certifications, relatively low prices (the Colossus is Militech-level value for what it does), and apparent downgrade on the Colossus' test report from 2/8/22 (ten days before CN111348920B was granted to a Chinese company) to 8/5/22 - current and ONLY one listed on their site - pic related, suggests a lack of consistency. Can we get a test report that isn't nearly three years old, please?
Notably, as to the youtubers, Buffman's plate withstood an incredible amount of ammunition. He has credibility issues stemming from recent Highcom, RMA, and American Blast Systems situations. He has affiliate links with a lot of people. Another guy's, Oxide's, did not. It lost to a singular M993 after being struck by M948 SLAP. There is a third test report out there showing the Colossus stopping one M948 and losing to a second, but this too is not on Adept's site. Why?
To call their Colossus "future-proofed" when it loses to WW2-era 7.92 SmKH (Buff) and has no defeats, at its best, against anything newer than 27-year old Swiss P AP is misleading.
Page 1