This is the latest presser from Armour Wear.
Aug, 11th 2015: Armour Wear, the leader in protective armor innovation has officially announced its newest revolutionary product; The Special Purpose/ Application Releasable Carrier (SPARC). The SPARC plate carrier is a fully adjustable and releasable, hard use carrier that will accommodate standard 10in X 12in hard plates, along with soft armor liners. This unique plate carrier uses a proprietary Quick Release Buckle (QRB) system which allows the user to doff the carrier in less than one second. This is essential for users in maritime operations, or in the field that have been injured and require immediate emergency attention. The SPARC comes apart into two separate pieces when the QRB latch is activated, when you are ready to put the carrier together just snap the buckles into each other. “It’s as easy as snapping a duty belt in together” says Robert Scott (Owner-Armour Wear).
The SPARC was created in cooperation with the U.S. military and their recent directive for a new weight distribution plate carrier system. This plate carriers intended purpose was perfect balance, and weight distribution for the ground operator. Armour Wear will be the first to offer this technology to the industry, they will be offering this system to the Military, Law Enforcement, and Civilian markets. This system has three main components; the spinal support brace, battle belt system, and plate carrier. The battle belt and support brace are still under development, but the carrier is ready to go. Armour Wear saw the need to bring this product out first. With the addition of the QRB, an operator can click the buckles back together in a snap, and have a working carrier in seconds. Armour Wear also saw the opportunity to delete the use of any Velcro on the main access points of the carrier, instead the QRB doubles as the carriers retention buckles. Always having the consumer in mind, Armour Wear has the SPARC rated at a $295.95 MSRP.
Learn more at: www.armour-wear.com
Tags: Armour Wear
t3 much….
Actually, no. That National Molding release system was designed for the military (forget which project and branch) YEARS ago. T3 was NOT the first to market with a plate carrier using that system. I believe it was so tech in 2012 late 2011.
Integrated into IOTV and now SPS TEP.
They even copy the so tech way to attach cummerbund with molle stix. “revolutionary” come on guys! wtf!
Also please pardon my passion, I’m French!
Pierre I can’t help but notice your negative comments at every turn. I just visited the site that you said we copied. I couldn’t see anything near the SPARC in innovation and technology. We welcome all kinds of criticism but wow you nothing but bad things to say.
Looks like a well thought out plate carrier… similar in size to T3 Geronimo… and they a similar release system… but all in a pretty slick set up!
The release system is similar to so tech and t3 because it’s the same manufacturer National Molding. Anyone can buy the buckle system. There has been stories about it on soldier systems:
https://soldiersystems.net/2015/01/09/three-new-products-national-molding/
Sir, as the designer and developer of that system I would be happy top give you a brief history on its development and the various companies that have used it… but this is not the place for that… Amor Wear has taken some key features from various systems and combined them to make a very nice carrier… I have personally worn it and it is a very well thought out plate carrier. They are using the NEW X Trigger that is now also part of the SPS MSV… with a 20% reduction in weight and the NEW Male buckle which along with the trigger has been redesigned to remove ALL of the metal hardware (screws and rivets) while increasing the over all brake strength by approximately 30 pounds!
Outside of the US Army they are the very first to use this NEW and system.
Also who is armour wear, I did a google street view search and they are next door to tac pro gear, same company?
Pierre, They are our neighbors. Good people!
TacProGear in NO longer has that facility… That is a privately held Cut and Sew run by Alex Cejas… who is a veteran in the business and their shop is set up really nicely for small to medium size tactical cut and sew programs (also houses a very nice test range)
TacProGear will still be using them for some of their domestic work
Alex Cejas is GOOD PEOPLE!!
It’s going to be exciting to see how industry adopts the National Molding cable buckles into all kinds of gear. We’re just seeing the start.
Soooo how much “combat use” has that buckle seen?
Zeee fucking row. (No the female IOTV DOESN’T COUNT)
Why was it adopted by the Army? I mean after all the cable loop type release which has been used for years in the SOF community and we don’t have an issue with it. In fact, the RBAV and original IOTV are almost exact in assembly.
What’s that you say? It’s to difficult for your average 19 year old to grasp. Hmmm 19 year old soldiers who wear the RBAV don’t seem to have an issue with it.
That’s what we call a training and leadership deficiency.
So, let’s slap a craptastic release system on a vest so you can quickly reassemble it after you’ve emergency doffed it. Makes sense (muffled chuckle).
And let’s make it out of plastic that breaks and can’t be replaced in the field. NO IT CAN’T SO DON’T GO THERE. If a loop breaks on my RBAV, all I need is 550 cord and a buddy who can tie a knot. Replacing this thing is a marathon.
And let’s talk about cable slack and stretch. Yes this happens. If you went to MFF you’d know about slack checking.
And let’s talk about cable PMCS. Yep, same cables that are on your bike which you guess what? Lubricate.
And let’s talk about how it won’t integrate with load bearing items.
I could go on but you’re obviously having a POG gear crush on this POS.
POGs should be banned from having any input into kit.
It has its applications, just not in a vest.
Mr. Arrow,
while the RBAV is a solid carrier system and certainly a simple solution. as of the number of units that has seen combat… more than 500 thousand units have been out in the field… perhaps not in your happy world but they have in fact seen combat. As for reparability… all of the components are designed to be field replaceable… perhaps even by you but that can not be confirmed. as far as lubrication and the cables on your bike… please use WD 40 on your bike but the cables on the release system do NOT require and lube… and have been cycled under load hundreds of thousands of times with out a single failure! Do you lubricate the ones on your car door… ? no I did not think so. Cable slack is not even a concern as the terminated ends of the system can NOT be adjusted nor do they need adjustment. As for integration… these carries work with most if not all MOLLE components… if they do not please bring it to our attention.
One thing that your excellency failed to point out… what about the coms cables hydration and other stuff routed from front to back on your carrier… what happens when it is released?
Wow, that is a good question… most often the cable on your soft side shoulder is disconnected from the system and that would be the side that you would route that sort of kit… presto! the release system blows out the side plate carries and you right shoulder… cables and such stay intact and your carrier is also just one bit of kit to pick up not four like your beloved RBAV…
Not certain what a POG is… other than the externally worn protective under garment… PUG/POG
So my guess is that you may have only seen pretty pictures of these new carriers?
But thanks always for your input.. noted and filed!
Forgot to mention the single most important feature of the Craptaticness…
it requires less than 2 pounds of strength and about 3/4″ of pull to release it…
IOTV and RBVA and MTV ALL require more than 12″ of pull at up to 7 pounds… if assembled correctly and among units turned in more than 20% were NOT assembled correctly and would not release if needed!
I know that your strength far exceeds the requirement but in a high stress disorienting environment after and IED blast simplicity is KING
Go home James, you and your PEO buddy are drunk.
Of course as the supplier of this craptastic POS you would feel obligated to defend it. Inasmuch you can’t provide an unbiased opinion. Just like the PEO defended the decision to procure the SPCS vs. the MBAV by stating: “We can’t just go with MBAV because it’s out there and battle-proven,”
But thank you for confirming that the adoption of this craptastic POS was indeed driven by a “Training & Leadership Deficiency” in regards to the IOTV by stating
“…more than 20% were NOT assembled correctly and would not release if needed!”
I invite you to go down to Ranger Batt and see how many RBAVs worn by 19 year old Rangers are not assembled correctly. Yeah zero. But I wouldn’t expect you and the POGs at PEO who are gushing over this craptastic POS to understand what effective leadership is.
Yes, simplicity is key, how many moving parts does this craptastic POS have? How quickly can you fix it in the field with common items and still maintain TOTAL functionality?
So, you’re saying that 7 pounds is too heavy in regards to the RBAV’s release? Wow, the conventional side must be made of heat treated cream of wheat.
And I don’t have to name what piece of MOLLE Kit won’t work with this because you and the PEO KNOW what piece of kit (singular) it is.
Now, if you really want to continue with this, shall we talk about some other things? Maybe drag out some known deficiencies? You know, the ones nobody wants to talk about?
I don’t personally care because I don’t have to wear this craptastic POS because my kit configuration is determined by end users. Not a group of POGs who wouldn’t know a capability gap if it bit them in the 4th Point of Contact and determine that kit is good to go after strapping it on some split tail deployment queen.
Oh, and I forgot to mention, that stinging sensation you’re feeling, that’s my pimp hand, just the palm. If you want to push it, I can break out the baby powder and give ya both sides.
Clearly you know all…
I never claimed to know everything, but I’m pretty sure this craptastic POS isn’t in 500k vests. That’s more than the AC current strength lol.
Yeah, I’ll stick to the RBAV with its one moving part and ease of field repairability if I need a releasable vest.
Plus, the RBAV has a higher probability of staying intact (read: “remaining on my body”) if I’m subjected to a blast than this craptastic POS.
Tepid Arrow Kicker Your love for the RBAV is apparent, You keep talking about how many units were deployed when the right sort of talk should be how many will be deployed IN THE FUTURE????? Z FREAKING ROW! lol Holding on to an ancient vest is like saying your a Rock A Billy!!!! Just let it go brother!!! There will be better vests in the future that will always make the current stuff obsolete. Also just because the military went with it and not another is a crap shoot. Nobody ever knows why the Gov. does what it does and when. I love debates in products but name calling, saying something is a POS, really bottom of the barrel. I respect the designs of other people and what they create but to knock it in a slandering manner is childish. You have had not one thing good to say about anything this vest offers only pointing to one side YOURS! Thats it… my rant is done!
agreed
Mr. Arrow… The Quad Release System has been assembled into more than 850,000 units for the US Military in the past 3+ years. Those systems include the IOTV Gen III , IOTV Gen IV, SPCS and the FIOTV. That my friend is FACT! The protection provided in an IED blast has NEVER been an issue due to plastic components or the release system… but since I am out of powder I declare YOU the winner!
AW, I never made any denigrating remarks about your PC. I was addressing the craptastic POS release that you don’t make. In all honesty, it looks like any other PC because let’s face it, you’re using SPEAR/SAPI cut plates.
James,
850K really? That’s more than the current end strength of the U.S. Army (active, guard & reserves). Now, subtract those who use SPEAR and that number drops considerably. But with such a saturation you’d think it would be on our support personnel and it isn’t.
Like I said, it has applications, just not in a vest. Heck, it would probably be great on dive gear when you’re using gloves or as a single point release for certain load carriage items.
Right now this release system is the new hotness in the conventional arena. But let’s just agree to disagree and see how it pans out.
Agreed
I’m just gonna say that the mid PALS row on the side view is raw cut and fraying in the photo…
Lasse, Wow you must have been a Marine DI!!! I didn’t know that there were commenters with white gloves on!! lol I would have burned em all off before the inspection!
Not a DI or a Marine, but I do know my seams and can spot stuff like that from a mile away. So maybe I’m the online version of a gear-DI?
hahahaha In my defense it was the first prototype that went thru some human factors eval. Production is buttoned up pretty good. Cheers
I guess we can anticipate Jimmy Yeager promoting this soon!
“proprietary “=Not compatible with anything else on the market.
So IF something breaks or needs replaced AFTER the warranty runs out,IF you can find another,because it is “proprietary ” technology, you will pay 5x as much for the part.
There are almost 1 million system that have been built for the US Army in the ITOV Gen III, Gen IV , FIOTV and the SPCS. The trigger assembly is easily field replaceable as are the buckles. The cost is more than reasonable for the over all package.
I hate auto correct IOTV… sorry
Although Flippin IOTV works too haha