Waterproofs - multi-part question :-) [Long]

David W.E. Roberts said:

Hi,

Q1)

[snip]

Quoted message said:

So has anyone good experiences of reactivating TriplePoint with an iron?

Logic suggests that you don't need the iron to be any warmer than the
innards of a tumble dryer. Dunno how hot that is, but it can't be too
extreme.

Quoted message said:

Q2) {This is the long one}

[snip]

Quoted message said:

I am currently trying to locate a supply of simple liquid soap with no
additives as an alternative to the branded products.

Lux Flakes - not liquid, but they work. Contrary to the box
instructions, I've used them in the (front-loading) washing machine
often enough with no problems. Just don't put in as much volume of Lux
as you would your regular detergent.

Quoted message said:

Q3)
Given that modern high performance waterproofs are pretty expensive
(£100-£200 for good quality) and the thing that goes first is usually the
waterproof performance under extreme conditions (which is what you pay the
money for in the first place) what do you do with waterproofs when the
performance is reduced?

Don't know - my jacket's a Paramo and I'm still waiting for the
performance to drop. :-)

Colin

David W.E. Roberts said:

Some areas are fine, but the front of the jacket has lost performance.
Washing seems to improve things, but tumble drying is supposed to reactivate
the surface coating and I don't have a tumble drier.

Do you have a local launderette that does? Or a neighbour or friend
with one?

Quoted message said:

Q2) {This is the long one}
Washing waterproof clothing is relatively expensive - you can't use normal
detergents with all those clothes cleaning and whitening agents becausethey
damage the fabric and treatments.

The basic problem isn't special whitening etc. agents, it's the way that
detergents work, which is by reducing the surface tension of water
droplets so that they can penetrate the fabric better. Obviously not
exactly what you want with a waterproof!

Quoted message said:

I am currently trying to locate a supply of simple liquid soap with no
additives as an alternative to the branded products.

I haven't seen one, but you can always use a powdered or flaked soap.

Quoted message said:

I would need to cover my costs, and need I would guess at least 100
participants to get any meaningful results.
As far as I can see the risk factor is low for trialists - alternative
advice for cleaning includes using soap flakes so pure liquid soap should be
fine - but I don't have enough garments of my own to do comprehensive
testing.

You'll have a problem in that you should have equivalent wear and usage
profiles for the results to mean much. Also, garments should be of a
similar age and have a similar surface treatment: not all are the same,
and they have been developed over time (so the DWR on the Lowe TPC
garment I usually use now is holding up clearly better than the Lowe TPC
coat it replaced (for reasons of weight and bulk rather than waterproof
performance)).

Quoted message said:

I can't see any good reason why simple soap should be costly - at one time
that was all you could get, before modern detergents.
However when I tried to get some soapflakes all I could find were 'Granny's
Original Mild & Gentle Fragrance Free Soap Flakes' which are obviously being
marketed as a specialist product.

Lux flakes, widely available , should be okay.

Quoted message said:

The instructions say 'not in front loader' but I am going to risk it inthe
cause of science.

Google about, put Chris Townsend in as author as he's reported quite a
bit on this. IIRC he hasn't destroyed his washing machine yet and it
could be you'll get your basic question answered without having to do
any big product searches or testing.

Quoted message said:

The big question is though "How often do you wash your waterproofs?"
If it is once a year, saving a couple of quid a year isn't going to be a big
incentive.

More like once every couple of years. But I don't go around in grubby
waterproofs: for the most part I don't go around in waterproofs at all,
only if it's really chucking it down. A lot of good outdoor kit will
cope quite happily with drizzle and passing showers and I'm happy to let
it cope, and quickly dry out. I only pull on the waterproofs if it's
really ghastly, and despite this being the UK I find it generally isn't.
OTOH I see a lot of folk wearing waterproofs on basically okay days,
presumably to keep the wind out, but there are lighter, less bulky, more
comfortable and more breathable ways to do that.

Quoted message said:

Q3)
Given that modern high performance waterproofs are pretty expensive
(£100-£200 for good quality) and the thing that goes first is usually the
waterproof performance under extreme conditions (which is what you pay the
money for in the first place) what do you do with waterproofs when the
performance is reduced?

The water*proof* performance is unrelated to the DWR finish you're
looking at here, with laminate and coated waterproofs relying on a
completely waterproof layer on the inside of the jacket fabric to
completely lock out water.
The point of the surface proofing is to prevent the fabric "wetting out"
as that results in a layer of liquid water over the membrane/coating
which basically stops it being able to push vapour out, or "breathing".
It's the breathability that's going down, not the waterproofness.
It's worth noting that in really disgusting weather it's quite possible
the vapour pressure pushing perspiration vapour out won't be enough for
the job anyway if it's high humidity outside, and especially if you're
fully buttoned down and still doing work you'd overcome the
breathability limits possible even under ideal conditions.

Quoted message said:

Too good to throw away, not quite good enough for serious use.

Do you keep them in the cupboard 'just in case'?
Do you give them to a charity shop?
Do you throw them away?

An old one which is pretty tatty now (seam taping come away in many
places, holes worn through in places) is left for gardening on moist
days. An older (ca. 8-10 years) but still serviceable heavy one is left
for days when I want something tough, like winter skills training, and
I'm not bothered enough about the DWR to re-plenish it with the use it
gets. My current one, I'd have a go at re-doing the proofing. "Not as
good as brand new" isn't the same as "useless", and it will still be
better than stuff I was using for "serious" a few years back even if I
didn't bother.

Modern waterproofs, even if they wet out and stop breathing, will stop
you getting cold from a soaking in rain, and that's the really important
bit. The breathability is still an asset in many other conditions, and
if you've ever tried a fully non-porous jacket you'll soon see why
they're little used now, even with the shortcomings of their replacements.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In message <[email hidden]>, Colin
MacDonald <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

David W.E. Roberts said:

Hi,
Q1)

[snip]

Quoted message said:

So has anyone good experiences of reactivating TriplePoint with an iron?

Logic suggests that you don't need the iron to be any warmer than the
innards of a tumble dryer. Dunno how hot that is, but it can't be too
extreme.

Quoted message said:

Q2) {This is the long one}

[snip]

Quoted message said:

I am currently trying to locate a supply of simple liquid soap with no
additives as an alternative to the branded products.

Lux Flakes - not liquid, but they work. Contrary to the box
instructions, I've used them in the (front-loading) washing machine
often enough with no problems. Just don't put in as much volume of Lux
as you would your regular detergent.

Lux isn't sold anymore but DriPak, who used to make it, sell the same
stuff under their own name and also as Boots Soap Flakes and Tesco's
Granny's Original soap flakes.

http://www.dri-pak.co.uk

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Q3)
Given that modern high performance waterproofs are pretty expensive
(£100-£200 for good quality) and the thing that goes first is usually the
waterproof performance under extreme conditions (which is what you pay the
money for in the first place) what do you do with waterproofs when the
performance is reduced?

Don't know - my jacket's a Paramo and I'm still waiting for the
performance to drop. :-)

Colin

Chris Townsend said:

Lux isn't sold anymore but DriPak, who used to make it, sell the same
stuff under their own name and also as Boots Soap Flakes and Tesco's
Granny's Original soap flakes.

http://www.dri-pak.co.uk

Sure enough - "Up until 2002, Dri-Pak also manufactured the popular Lux
brand of Soap Flakes". I suppose when you only use a cup or so a year a
box can go a long way...

Colin

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from David
W.E. Roberts contained the following:

Quoted message said:

Hi,

Q1)
My Lowe Alpine Triple Point Ceramic jacket is not beading moisture like it
use to.
Some areas are fine, but the front of the jacket has lost performance.
Washing seems to improve things, but tumble drying is supposed to reactivate
the surface coating and I don't have a tumble drier.

I wonder if a hair dryer would do it?

Quoted message said:

Q2)

I've used the DP flakes. Be careful of putting anything else in with
the load that you aren't going to Nikwax. The soap flakes make clothes
smell horrible IMO. Dunno what tech wash smells like, but be careful
about using simple liquid soap. Anyone remember how bad hospital liquid
soap used to be?

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

David W.E. Roberts said:

Hi,

Q1)
My Lowe Alpine Triple Point Ceramic jacket is not beading moisture like it
use to.
Some areas are fine, but the front of the jacket has lost performance.
Washing seems to improve things, but tumble drying is supposed to reactivate
the surface coating and I don't have a tumble drier.
The label shows ironing at 'one dot' or 110 degrees.
How accurate/crucial is this?
There is a long way on my iron between 'min' (which feels like a hot
radiator) and 'one dot'.
I am experimenting with the iron by ironing one side of the front of the
jacket (to compare performance with the other unironed side) but don't want
to keep increasing the heat until something gets damaged if I don't see
obvious results.
So has anyone good experiences of reactivating TriplePoint with an iron?

Yes, just follow the instructions and it works a dream. I've also
used a hairdryer as suggested by Geoff, and it does work but not as
well, probably because it's easy to miss a bit. It's also very boring
and takes longer than ironing!

Quoted message said:

Q2) {This is the long one}
Washing waterproof clothing is relatively expensive - you can't use normal
detergents with all those clothes cleaning and whitening agents because they
damage the fabric and treatments.
You can use e.g. NikWax Tech Wash at £3.50 for 300 ml (which does 2 or 3
loads depending on water hardness) but this is far more expensive than using
normal washing powders.
This gives (for hard water) £1.75 per wash.

Yes, but if you've spent a couple of hundred pounds on a good quality
waterproof, why begrudge a pound every few months to keep it in good
condition?

Quoted message said:

Q3)
Given that modern high performance waterproofs are pretty expensive
(£100-£200 for good quality) and the thing that goes first is usually the
waterproof performance under extreme conditions (which is what you pay the
money for in the first place) what do you do with waterproofs when the
performance is reduced?

My first I gave to a charity shop. My second I keep for when I need a
waterproof that I don't mind getting damaged, eg when climbing in the
rain, or when practising ice axe braking etc.

S.

--
Stop ID cards and the Database State
http://www.no2id.net/

Colin MacDonald said:

Chris Townsend said:

Lux isn't sold anymore but DriPak, who used to make it, sell the same
stuff under their own name and also as Boots Soap Flakes and Tesco's
Granny's Original soap flakes.

http://www.dri-pak.co.uk

Sure enough - "Up until 2002, Dri-Pak also manufactured the popular Lux
brand of Soap Flakes". I suppose when you only use a cup or so a year a
box can go a long way...

Colin

You don't want to use a cupful in front-loading automatic - honest!! Use
about 1/3rd cup per wash. This'll provide all the lather you need
without overwhelming your machine and compared to the Nikwax / Granger
G-wash alternatives is an absolute bargain!!

druidh

"druidh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Colin MacDonald said:

Chris Townsend said:

Lux isn't sold anymore but DriPak, who used to make it, sell the same
stuff under their own name and also as Boots Soap Flakes and Tesco's
Granny's Original soap flakes.

http://www.dri-pak.co.uk

Sure enough - "Up until 2002, Dri-Pak also manufactured the popular Lux
brand of Soap Flakes". I suppose when you only use a cup or so a year a
box can go a long way...

Colin

You don't want to use a cupful in front-loading automatic - honest!! Use
about 1/3rd cup per wash. This'll provide all the lather you need
without overwhelming your machine and compared to the Nikwax / Granger
G-wash alternatives is an absolute bargain!!

Useful information - thanks to all those 'up thread'.

So the 'Grannys' I got from Tescos is actually Lux!

I have just tried 100 gms (allegedly 2 cups) in the front loader.
Frothy, man; it looks as though 50gms would be more than enough.
The alarming amount of froth disappeared during the rinses, though.

My main concern with flakes was that they wouldn't disolve properly any you
would be left with soap residue on the garment (which would lead to frothing
out in the next rainstorm).
For 100 gms this could be a real concern.
I disolved the flakes in hot water before adding to the wash through the
soap dispenser drawer, and it still took me two jugs of hot water to disolve
all the flakes.
I think I will reduce the flakes to 50gms for the next try, and perhaps put
them in a plastic bottle with water for a while to disolve first.
This would be 'liquid soap' I suppose :-)
At 50gms per load this would give 9 washes per packet of soap flakes, which
is just about on the 50p per wash target.

The only issue now is the cleaning ability of the soap flakes.
I presume that if it is creating bubbles then there is enough in there to
shift the dirt.
We shall see :-)

If the soap flakes perform O.K. when disolved, at 50p per wash, then there
seems no point in looking for a cheaper option (which was the original point
of the exercise).

Cheers
Dave R

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

David W.E. Roberts said:

Some areas are fine, but the front of the jacket has lost performance.
Washing seems to improve things, but tumble drying is supposed to

reactivate

Quoted message said:

the surface coating and I don't have a tumble drier.

Do you have a local launderette that does? Or a neighbour or friend
with one?

** I have read in various places that commercial tumble driers run too hot
and shouldn't be used. Certainly when I worked in a laundry one summer (many
decades ago) the driers were seriously hot and the tips (pennies left in
pockets) were too hot to handle. **

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Q3)
Given that modern high performance waterproofs are pretty expensive
(£100-£200 for good quality) and the thing that goes first is usually the
waterproof performance under extreme conditions (which is what you pay the
money for in the first place) what do you do with waterproofs when the
performance is reduced?

The water*proof* performance is unrelated to the DWR finish you're
looking at here, with laminate and coated waterproofs relying on a
completely waterproof layer on the inside of the jacket fabric to
completely lock out water.
The point of the surface proofing is to prevent the fabric "wetting out"
as that results in a layer of liquid water over the membrane/coating
which basically stops it being able to push vapour out, or "breathing".
It's the breathability that's going down, not the waterproofness.
It's worth noting that in really disgusting weather it's quite possible
the vapour pressure pushing perspiration vapour out won't be enough for
the job anyway if it's high humidity outside, and especially if you're
fully buttoned down and still doing work you'd overcome the
breathability limits possible even under ideal conditions.

** Yep - I was not precise enough in my description :-)
However in my limited experience if the garment stops breathing effectively
then this is hard to differentiate this from lettting water in; you still
get wet mid layers (unless, of course, the garment is actually leaking not
just 'wetting out'😉.
I use 'outdoors' jackets for everyday use as well as 'proper' walking.
This explains why they get dirty a lot sooner than if I only used them at
weekends and on holidays.
It also makes total performance more important; wicking middle layers tend
to dry out more easily than a suit jacket.
I have noticed a tendency to dampness on the inside of the upper surfaces of
the sleeves, and the 'breast' area at the front which correspond to the
areas that 'wet out' in the rain.
I am assuming that it is the 'wetting out' that is leading to this dampness,
presumably by preventing moisture wicking away.
If the fabric is letting some water in, of course, reducing the 'wetting
out' should still have positive benefits in that more water should be shed
from the garment instead of hanging around trying to seep in.

So it isn't letting water in, just not letting water out?
But I'm still wet! {Wail}

Cheers

Dave R

<snip>

David W.E. Roberts said:

"druidh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Colin MacDonald said:

Chris Townsend wrote:

>Lux isn't sold anymore but DriPak, who used to make it, sell the same
>stuff under their own name and also as Boots Soap Flakes and Tesco's
>Granny's Original soap flakes.
>
>http://www.dri-pak.co.uk

Sure enough - "Up until 2002, Dri-Pak also manufactured the popular Lux
brand of Soap Flakes". I suppose when you only use a cup or so a year a
box can go a long way...

Colin

You don't want to use a cupful in front-loading automatic - honest!! Use
about 1/3rd cup per wash. This'll provide all the lather you need
without overwhelming your machine and compared to the Nikwax / Granger
G-wash alternatives is an absolute bargain!!

Useful information - thanks to all those 'up thread'.

So the 'Grannys' I got from Tescos is actually Lux!

I have just tried 100 gms (allegedly 2 cups) in the front loader.
Frothy, man; it looks as though 50gms would be more than enough.
The alarming amount of froth disappeared during the rinses, though.

My main concern with flakes was that they wouldn't disolve properly any you
would be left with soap residue on the garment (which would lead to frothing
out in the next rainstorm).
For 100 gms this could be a real concern.
I disolved the flakes in hot water before adding to the wash through the
soap dispenser drawer, and it still took me two jugs of hot water to disolve
all the flakes.
I think I will reduce the flakes to 50gms for the next try, and perhaps put
them in a plastic bottle with water for a while to disolve first.
This would be 'liquid soap' I suppose :-)
At 50gms per load this would give 9 washes per packet of soap flakes, which
is just about on the 50p per wash target.

The only issue now is the cleaning ability of the soap flakes.
I presume that if it is creating bubbles then there is enough in there to
shift the dirt.
We shall see :-)

If the soap flakes perform O.K. when disolved, at 50p per wash, then there
seems no point in looking for a cheaper option (which was the original point
of the exercise).

Cheers
Dave R

I'd recommend no more than 30gms. Experience to date is that this has
enough cleaning power and results in no residue in the garment. I'm
amazed you managed 100gms. My first trial was with 50gms amd I had
lather coming out of the detergent drawer!

Other question - just how clean do the garments need to be? I reckon
that as they as the waterproofing works, I can put up with a bit of
grubbiness.

druidh

"Geoff Berrow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from David
W.E. Roberts contained the following:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Q2)

I've used the DP flakes. Be careful of putting anything else in with
the load that you aren't going to Nikwax. The soap flakes make clothes
smell horrible IMO. Dunno what tech wash smells like, but be careful
about using simple liquid soap. Anyone remember how bad hospital liquid
soap used to be?

Smells O.K. to me - Lux (or Granny's now) always used to be used for hand
washing woolens etc. and wouldn't have been if it ponged!

I suspect that the hospital stuff probably had carbolic or similar added to
kill off all those nasty germs.
[I wonder if it had a strong smell so that Sister could check with her nose
that it had been used?]

Tech wash seems to be odour free as well.

Cheers
Dave R

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful person
David W.E. Roberts <[email hidden]> said
<huge snip>

Quoted message said:

So it isn't letting water in, just not letting water out?
But I'm still wet! {Wail}

Correct. And as someone pointed out here, not too long since, some of us
can get pretty sopping wet slogging up a hill with just a shirt or a
fleece (no windproof/waterproof layer at all).

If that's the case, there is nothing you can put 'on top' which is going
to reduce the amount you sweat, or increase the rate it evaporates at.
Yeah, you can wick it away, which disguises the problem for a while, but
when your whole base/mid layer is soaked you feel wet. You are wet.

In the summer you might just as well take the shirt off too and bask in
the glory of waterproof skin. Come on ladies, you know it makes sense!
8>. [Damn, Shel will be on my case again now .. ]

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
SC recommends the use of Firefox; Get smart, or get assimilated.

"Simon Caldwell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:46:55 -0000, "David W.E. Roberts"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So has anyone good experiences of reactivating TriplePoint with an iron?

Yes, just follow the instructions and it works a dream. I've also
used a hairdryer as suggested by Geoff, and it does work but not as
well, probably because it's easy to miss a bit. It's also very boring
and takes longer than ironing!

** Thanks for that - encouraging **

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This gives (for hard water) £1.75 per wash.

Yes, but if you've spent a couple of hundred pounds on a good quality
waterproof, why begrudge a pound every few months to keep it in good
condition?

** Basically because I suspect that I'm being ripped off - just because the
garment costs a lot to buy, doesn't mean that someone can automatically
charge me way over the odds for a simple cleaning product.
Very similar to charging more for a car headlamp lens if it is for an
expensive car (even though it is exactly the same part as used on a budget
car when it is sold at a lower price). **

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Q3)
Given that modern high performance waterproofs are pretty expensive
(£100-£200 for good quality) and the thing that goes first is usually the
waterproof performance under extreme conditions (which is what you pay

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

money for in the first place) what do you do with waterproofs when the
performance is reduced?

My first I gave to a charity shop. My second I keep for when I need a
waterproof that I don't mind getting damaged, eg when climbing in the
rain, or when practising ice axe braking etc.

I still have a collection of 'low performance' jackets I can't bring myself
to throw away - including a Pinnacle Snowgoose made with Trevira Finesse
and Isodry insulation which was my first introduction to 'performance'
fabrics and which was very warm, quite pretty, soft to the touch but never
seemed to keep the rain out. Cost quite a bit as well, even at the discount
store where I bought it.

I may have another go at cleaning it and reactivating the coating (even
though it is now yonks old).

I guess I was pondering on who would want a jacket once the performance
dipped - I suppose windproof and shower proof is still pretty good.

Cheers

Dave R

"druidh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
<snip>

Quoted message said:

Other question - just how clean do the garments need to be? I reckon
that as they as the waterproofing works, I can put up with a bit of
grubbiness.

As I mentioned to (I think) Peter I wear the jacket for everyday use as well
as for serious walking so it tends to get dirty quite quickly and there is
more incentive to keep it clean so as not to scare the general population.

David W.E. Roberts said:

** I have read in various places that commercial tumble driers run too hot
and shouldn't be used. Certainly when I worked in a laundry one summer (many
decades ago) the driers were seriously hot and the tips (pennies left in
pockets) were too hot to handle. **

Depends: commercial ones I used had user-variable heat settings, which I
was /most/ insistent upon as I was drying a down sleeping bag.

Quoted message said:

** Yep - I was not precise enough in my description :-)
However in my limited experience if the garment stops breathing effectively
then this is hard to differentiate this from lettting water in; you still
get wet mid layers (unless, of course, the garment is actually leaking not
just 'wetting out'😉.

It's fairly easy to differentiate, 'cause it's the difference between
warm sweat and cold rain. The ultimate safety point is to keep you
reasonably warm, with staying as dry as possible really the means to an
end rather than an end in itself. Outside of nice summer days, if you
get soaked with rain it's quite noticeably chilly if you stop for a moment.

Quoted message said:

I use 'outdoors' jackets for everyday use as well as 'proper' walking.
This explains why they get dirty a lot sooner than if I only used them at
weekends and on holidays.

Well, so do I, but waterproofs only if it happens to be raining. But on
a day by day basis it generally isn't to any significant degree. I got
snowed and hailed on on the walk to work this morning, but a Primaloft
jacket which isn't formally waterproof kept me dry and toasty. I keep
my waterproofs for serious rain, just like I keep my downie for serious
cold: that way they work better when I /need/ them.

Quoted message said:

It also makes total performance more important; wicking middle layers tend
to dry out more easily than a suit jacket.

Rohan make suits in high tech fabrics designed for fast drying and easy
care. I don't need to wear suits, so I don't, but if that's a factor
you may wish to investigate. However, more to the point is that even
the most breathable waterproofs, when brand new, are significantly
/less/ breathable than "soft shell" alternatives. If you want to give a
suit a better chance of not soaking up vapour then giving it an easier
route to the outside world rather than holding it up behind a fairly
steep vapour pressure barrier makes a lot of sense: you'll be drier with
a less waterproof waterproof unless it's throwing it down and/or you're
out in it for a long time, and most jobs that involve that don't require
suits (there are exceptions, I realise, and I don't know if you're at
one of them).

Quoted message said:

I am assuming that it is the 'wetting out' that is leading to this dampness,
presumably by preventing moisture wicking away.
If the fabric is letting some water in, of course, reducing the 'wetting
out' should still have positive benefits in that more water should be shed
from the garment instead of hanging around trying to seep in.

So it isn't letting water in, just not letting water out?
But I'm still wet! {Wail}

But you're warmer than you'd be if it was leaking, and on a day with
100% or near relative humidity, not entirely uncommon in heavy rain, you
may have some liquid sweat that won't evaporate /no matter how well the
jacket is breathing/. With the exception of Paramo stuff no waterproofs
shift liquid water, only vapour. And if it's too humid to vaporise the
sweat you're stuck with it, no matter what the state of the jacket.
The sweatiest I remember being on a walk was dressed in tracksters and a
Helly Lifa top, and nothing else, but it was a very humid day so nothing
was evaporating. If water is beading up that's better and gives the
jacket more chance to shift stuff, but there are times when you'll get
wet even with no rain and no jacket so you can't expect to be always dry
because of miracle super-duper-tex in your coat...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> wrote:
<heavily snipped>

Quoted message said:

However, more to the point is that even
the most breathable waterproofs, when brand new, are significantly
/less/ breathable than "soft shell" alternatives. If you want to give a
suit a better chance of not soaking up vapour then giving it an easier
route to the outside world rather than holding it up behind a fairly
steep vapour pressure barrier makes a lot of sense: you'll be drier with
a less waterproof waterproof unless it's throwing it down and/or you're
out in it for a long time, and most jobs that involve that don't require
suits (there are exceptions, I realise, and I don't know if you're at
one of them).

For an excellent discussion of this see:
http://www.planetfear.net/climbing/highmountainmag/equipmentnotes/july2004/july04.html

Chris said:

For an excellent discussion of this see:
http://www.planetfear.net/climbing/highmountainmag/equipmentnotes/july2004/july04.html

That's a good article, though with the author's comments about being no
use without a hood... has he never come across hats? For conditions
where a soft shell is up to dealing with the incoming I usually prefer a
hat to a hood. Not to say that no hood is better or anything like that,
but it can still be viable and useful.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Fran said:

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

In the summer you might just as well take the shirt off too and bask in
the glory of waterproof skin. Come on ladies, you know it makes sense!
8>. [Damn, Shel will be on my case again now .. ]

It's been known... ;-)

One thing I don't like it walking topless with a backpack
though - I like to have at least a thin T-shirt 'twixt the
straps and me. My idea of heaven on a hot day is to find a
stream. Off comes the T-shirt, into the stream with it to
soak it and cool it down, then back on to soak and cool me.
If it's really hot I find it's not long before I'm hunting for
another stream though, and 'really hot' for me seems to be
'nicely warm' for most other folk. I wouldn't recommend
anyone to go walking with me on a hot day if they're just
after cheap thrills though - clothing hides an awful lot of
lumps and bumps that really shouldn't be there :-)

No skinny dipping last weekend then?

druidh

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

In the summer you might just as well take the shirt off too and bask in
the glory of waterproof skin. Come on ladies, you know it makes sense!
8>. [Damn, Shel will be on my case again now .. ]

It's been known... ;-)

One thing I don't like it walking topless with a backpack
though - I like to have at least a thin T-shirt 'twixt the
straps and me. My idea of heaven on a hot day is to find a
stream. Off comes the T-shirt, into the stream with it to
soak it and cool it down, then back on to soak and cool me.
If it's really hot I find it's not long before I'm hunting for
another stream though, and 'really hot' for me seems to be
'nicely warm' for most other folk. I wouldn't recommend
anyone to go walking with me on a hot day if they're just
after cheap thrills though - clothing hides an awful lot of
lumps and bumps that really shouldn't be there :-)
--
If you can keep your head when all around are losing theirs...
then you've failed to grasp some important aspect of the
situation.