By David Crane david (at) defensereview (dot) com March 30, 2022 A company called Adept Armor’s making an interesting Level IV+ multi-curve anti-rifle tactical armor plate with a SiC-TiB2 (Silicon Carbide – Titanium Diboride) ceramic composite strike-face designed specifically to defeat tungsten-cored AP (Armor Penetrating/Armor-Piercing) small arms threats. It’s called the Adept Armor Colossus – Beyond RF3 / Level IV+ …

By David Crane david (at) defensereview (dot) com October 14, 2020 Last updated on 10/15/20. DefenseReview’s (DR) been covering S&S Precision products for quite awhile now, and for good reason. They exhibit excellent minimalist design and quality, and they work. So, we certainly weren’t surprised to see something like the new S&S Precision Chest Rig-Modular (CR-M) tactical armor plate carrier/Rhodesian …

by David Crane david@defensereview.com On September 15 (2006), DefenseReview reported on Pinnacle Armor’s SOV-2000 Dragon Skin panels passing all NIJ Level III test protocols and requirements for flexible armor systems (anti-rifle body armor). Well, SOV-2000 Dragon Skin has just passed another fairly tough ballistic test, this one performed by Dr. Gary Roberts, who has been following the Dragon Skin vs. …

by David Crane david@defensereview.com This just in: Pinnacle Armor, Inc.’s SOV-2000 Dragon Skin has just passed all NIJ Level III ballistic testing/requirements at USTL (United States Test Laboratory). Official NIJ Level III certification should come in approx. 3-4 weeks, but it will come. Pinnacle Armor company officials have told us that it’s a done deal. This is BIG news for …

by David Crane david@defensereview.com SFTT/DefenseWatch has published a Pinnacle Armor press release regarding the recent partial/unfinished testing of Dragon Skin scalar flexible hard armor system (body armor) that was conducted by U.S. Army Project Manager Soldier Equipment (PM SEQ). Karl Masters and James Zheng, both out of U.S. Army Natick Soldier Center/Natick Soldier Systems Center/PEO Soldier (Program Executive Office Soldier), …

by David Crane david at defensereview.com For the last few months, DefenseReview has been writing about the Pinnacle Armor SOV/Dragon Skin vs. Interceptor Body Armor fight. We consider this situation to be one of the most important developing news stories in the country, as it directly impacts the lives/survivability of our infantry warfighters. As the situtation has progressed, DefenseReview (DefRev) …

by David Crane david at defensereview.com   Defense Review has confirmed it.  Just as we expected, Pinnacle Armor SOV-2000 (Level III/III+) and SOV-3000 (Level IV) Dragon Skin body armor appears to be significantly superior in every combat-relavant way to U.S. Army PEO Soldier’s and U.S. Army Natick Soldier Center (NSC)/Soldier Systems Center’s Interceptor Body Armor, which is comprised of the following components: …

by David Crane defrev at gmail.com On April 5, 2006, DefenseReview published the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense news transcript (Unclassified) of Major General Jeffrey Sorenson’s News Briefing on Pinnacle Armor Dragon Skin body Armor and the Safety of Use Message (SOUM) relating to it. In his news briefing Mr. Sorenson made a …

by David Crane defrev@gmail.com The following article contains links to video clips of Pinnacle Armor Dragon Skin/SOV body armor being live-fire tested against 7.62x39mm military ball ammo (FMJ) and 9mm military ball ammo (9x19mm FMJ) at short distances. As our readers know, DefenseReview has been reporting on the Pinnacle Armor SOV/Dragon Skin body armor vs. Interceptor Body Armor for a …

by David Crane david@defensereview.com DefenseReview has confirmed a report that Pinnacle Armor met with General James R. Moran, Commanding General, U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Center and Program Executive Officer Soldier (PEO Soldier), on January 17, 2006 in order to give him the opportunity to see the official DoD/military protocol test data on Pinnacle’s SOV/Dragon Skin body armor. Upon viewing …