While doing some cleaning at our department, we came across this gem. I got the go ahead to share this so, here you go.



What you're seeing is an American Body Armor and Equipment, Inc Level II vest made in April of 1990.  That makes it 27 years old (I know we're a month or so shy, just roll with it.).  The vest was stored in an uncontrolled attic environment subject to Georgia summers for several years.  We have no idea when these vests were put into the attic.



For my first test with the panel, I pulled some training and defensive ammunition from my stash and shot the front of the armor first.  Specifically, the following rounds and firearms were selected with no particular factor in mind:

H&K VP9
9mm 115 grain Atlanta Arms FMJ
9mm 124 grain +P Gold Dot
9mm 147 grain Winchester Ranger T-Series

HK USP .40 Fullsize
.40 S&W 180 grain Federal FMJ Flatnose
.40 S&W 180 grain Winchester Jacketed Hollow Point

HK USP .45 Fullsize
.45 ACP 230 grain Winchester White Box FMJ
.45 ACP 230 grain Winchester Ranger T-Series

The vest was shot at a distance of about 5 yards.  5 yards was not selected for anything other than just convenience.  After the first two (9mm 147 gr) being so close, I tried to spread the shots out more on the vest.  Each shot caused significant deformation from being shot and the vest had to be repositioned after each shot.





I recovered a few of the rounds from within the vest when I cut the carrier open.





The extreme fraying was mostly contained by the carrier, I didn't notice it until I removed the panel at which point it got progressively worse as I manipulated it for photos.

Something to note here, this vest did not have an interior “pouch” for the ballistic panel.  The label says that the carrier was 100% nylon with 100% Kevlar panels.  Instructions for cleaning were to; wet and apply mild soap, rinse with fresh water, and towel dry with an additional notation to not submerge completely in water.

I still have the back panel and will run some more rounds against it next weekend.

We also found another vest. No earthly idea on manufacturer or date and it was stored in the same manner as the white vest.  I'll shoot it as well and post results, I'm sure there is a manufacturer label inside the vest but I don't want to cut it open yet.

This surprised me a little.  I thought I would have had actual penetration at some point, especially given the conditions the vest has experienced and the age of the vest, not a lot maybe a round or two.  But, it lends credence to vest longevity beyond the warranty expiration.

Thanks for posting. This just goes to show how durable armor can be, as long as it isn't abused.

Makes you wonder why Kevlar vests have the expiration date that they do. Probably makes those who have soft vests stashed away for when shtf feel better.

Cool find and testing.

Thanks for the pictures.

Most likely CYA by manufacturers - i.e. we can only guarantee durability to this date under these conditions anything after that date is on you (and perhaps some marketing shenanigans by marketers to get buyers to buy more).

Cool info, OP. Some armor is better than no armor.

insurance purposes.  and to guarantee that in 5 years the customer will be buying again

+1
Also keep in mind first armor users are mil/leo so having to check & replace armor every xyz years makes sense for the govt in order to issue the best gear to the troops/cops

It isn't that manufacturers state that they have an expiration date, it is simply that they will not warranty the vest beyond 5 years as an industry standard.  Once that warranty is up, it is on the agency/consumer if they continue fielding the vest.  Like another poster mentioned, CYA.  Should something go awry and the vest fail at the 8 year mark, the manufacturer is less on the hook.  They know their products last much longer.

Also, because of this liability concern, they know that many agencies will be knocking on their doors at the 5 year mark to replace "expired" vests.

And that is how we wind up with stockpiles of surplus vests.  Selling them is out of the question from a liability and accountability perspective, so most agencies wind up keeping them around for years.  Until some enterprising officer comes along wanting to shoot them .

Good job with the testing. Bears out what we found at my PD quite a few years ago.

Probably 20 years ago, we found a bunch of old vests in the basement of the Station. At that point, they were probably 20 years old. So old they just had nylon straps running from the square panels up over the shoulders and around the waist to another square panel on the back. No contouring, just square panels. IIRC, they didn't even have ballistic ratings on them. The basement storage conditions were reasonably temperature controlled (meaning no really wild temp swings, but warm in the summer and cool in the winter) but very humid.

We took then out, threw them over the target stands and shot them with the issued duty ammo at the time, .38+P 125gr Winchester Silvertips, 9mm 115gr Silvertips and .45 230gr Silvertips. None penetrated. We then shot them with some full power Federal 125gr .357 JHPs that one of the guys had brought when we were told that we were going to shoot some old vests. As I remember, a few penetrated but not all. Since we didn't have the vests backed with anything, just thrown over the target stands, backface deformation was impressive and the panels were all stretched out and deformed and weren't in good shape after shooting. Very impressive for an impressionable young cop. We have a few newer vests in the basement now as a result of being "outdated". I think I'm gonna ask the Chief if we can shoot a couple of them when we go do qualifications this year. I've read that bundled newspapers and magazines can make a decent backer, although it won't accurately show backface deformation. Seems like a good plan to me!

Bub75

That and one vest might get worn 8+ hours a day 6 days a week for 5 years. Another might get issues to desk worker and get hung neatly in a cool, dark, dry closet for 5 years and get worn a few times a year.