Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: RFI: Cav Arms Slick TQ

  1. #1

    RFI: Cav Arms Slick TQ

    Anyone have any experience with this tourniquet? It’s extremely compact and will fit into the front pocket of jeans with no printing at all which draws my interest. That said, it looks flimsy.

    Any one want to chime in?

  2. #2
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    It's a redesign of the old strap and buckle TQs from WWII, basically by adding a windlass. I'm not going to say it's garbage......its basic design works, but...

    1) There's two loops, and if you put your arm or leg through the wrong loop it no worky. It's very easy to screw up in actual use, particularly if you're under stress or especially if you have impaired vision whether due to damage, blood in your eyes, smoke that is burning your eyes causing you to tear up, or if it's just plain dark outside.

    2) The strap is only an inch wide, IIRC. It might even be thinner. TQs have all gone to much wider straps for efficacy reasons. The SOFT-TW is objectively better than the original 1" wide SOFT-T because the wider strap is better at reliably occluding bloodflow.

    4) If you're incapacitated and your buddy reaches into your kit to use it on you, chances are they're going to have no idea how to use it. Its design is different than every other tourniquet on the market, and nobody is going to know how to use it. Everyone whos ever been trained on a TQ, even briefly, will figure out a CAT, SOFT-TW, SAM XT, RMT, etc as their design are all very similar.

    5) It's been around for the better part of a decade (maybe more). It's actually one of the few TQs that didn't make it onto CoTCCC's list of recommended TQs; that on its own should say something, as they greatly expanded that list to include TQs I would say are objectively inferior to the CAT and SOFT-TW but still functional and decently dependable. I'm not sure if they didn't put it on the list for factors I didn't mention which I can suspect but not support; i.e. excessive turns of the windless required making it hard to occlude bloodflow, materials quality, etc or if their decision to not put it on the list was limited to the reasons I already laid out.

    I think there's more cons than pros with this product, and would not rely on it.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  3. #3
    Site Supporter ST911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Warped Mindless View Post
    Anyone have any experience with this tourniquet? It’s extremely compact and will fit into the front pocket of jeans with no printing at all which draws my interest. That said, it looks flimsy. Any one want to chime in?
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    I think there's more cons than pros with this product, and would not rely on it.
    All this. I had a bunch of these in class kits for a time and did familiarization training with them. They were useful to show differences in component parts of TQs and how they might be found and resolved in the field, but that's about it. They do indeed fold flat and small, but not enough to outweigh their other issues. I don't think they're flimsy, and I don't recall breaking one.
    الدهون القاع الفتيات لك جعل العالم هزاز جولة الذهاب

  4. #4
    I have one of the Cav Arms TQs, likely about six years ago.
    Have not purchased more.

    My main reason for not buying more was the difficulty applying... Basically it was going to be difficult as described by ST911. I also did not like the feel of the plastic, which felt like it might be prone to age poorly. I have no actual evidence to support that, beyond the look/feel of the plastic. I carried it as a spare in my backpack, secondary to a CAT.

    The storage form factor is nice however. It stores very flat, but not easy to apply.

  5. #5
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    PA
    Disclaimer upfront: I am a TCCC instructor.

    Sticking with CoTCCC/TCCC approved TQs is the best way to get real deal vetted vetted devices. Buy them from an authorized distributor or trusted vendor to avoid the possibility of getting a fake device. Most, give or take a few ;-), here wouldn't trust their family's safety to a brand Z rifle or pistol with the idea that it's "just as good" as the industry standard. Why should the TQ be different???? The TQ is a life saving medical device. Buy those devices that have been pressure tested through real world use in accordance with evidence-based medical practice. This process is to claims of trauma care practice/device efficacy, what the shot timer is to claims of "I'm faster with .... gear". If the new newfangled widget is really better than what is PROVEN to work, let new device go through the same vetting process as the proven designs.

    Just my .02

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •