Breathable light windbreaker jacket wanted

Any recommendations for a lightweight, water-resistant yet breathable outer jacket? I have some
long-sleeve technical-type underwear for cold conditions, but need an outer layer to break the wind.

The other option would be a cool weather jersey, but that would seem less verstaile than the combo.

Thanks.

 

Donald Specker <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Any recommendations for a lightweight, water-resistant yet breathable
outer
> jacket? I have some long-sleeve technical-type underwear for cold conditions, but need an outer
> layer to break the wind.

I have a Gill Exedous which I'm very pleased with. 4 Front pockets 1 large rear. Its got reflective
strip on the seams.

It comes in Yellow / Black or a green colour what ever your bag.

You can find it for around £50.

Andrew

>
> The other option would be a cool weather jersey, but that would seem less verstaile than
> the combo.
>
> Thanks.

 

Try a Burley Rapid rider. I have been very happy with mine. They are the best vented shell I
have seen.

Alan "Donald Specker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Any recommendations for a lightweight, water-resistant yet breathable
outer
> jacket? I have some long-sleeve technical-type underwear for cold conditions, but need an outer
> layer to break the wind.
>
> The other option would be a cool weather jersey, but that would seem less verstaile than
> the combo.
>
> Thanks.

 

>From: "Donald Specker"

>Any recommendations for a lightweight, water-resistant yet breathable outer
jacket?

Pearl Izumi Zephyr 2 in Screaming Yellow.

Sig Chicago

 

RE/
>The other option would be a cool weather jersey, but that would seem less verstaile than the combo.

I'm still looking for the one I saw on a road rider a couple months ago: Some sort of windproof
stuff on the front (taffeta? GorTex?) and the entire back made out of mesh. Looked so good that I'm
on the verge of trying to make one myself only with mesh on the backs of the arms as well.
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

 

I frequently start out with a Pearl Zephyr jack with a Zephyr vest in my pocket. after it warms up
I'll stuff the jacket in my pocket and switch to the vest. Often a vest and arm warmers is
sufficient and allows adjustment on the fly. Performance has a house brand vest that has the
features that Pearl is missing; two way front zip and zip slash front pockets for $39 on sale. I'm
going to replace my Pearl vest. Bill Brannon

"Donald Specker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Any recommendations for a lightweight, water-resistant yet breathable
outer
> jacket? I have some long-sleeve technical-type underwear for cold conditions, but need an outer
> layer to break the wind.
>
> The other option would be a cool weather jersey, but that would seem less verstaile than
> the combo.
>
> Thanks.

 

"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in news:1tf3a.53217
[email protected]:
> Performance has a house brand vest that has the features that Pearl is missing; two way front zip
> and zip slash front pockets for $39 on sale. I'm going to replace my Pearl vest.

All those extra features add weight without much function. I prefer a no- frills lightweight vest.
Keeps me comfortble on those long downhills above about 50F. In the 30s and 40s, I wear a long
sleeve shell jacket. Below freezing, I wear an insulated jacket.

Ken

 

I have a goretex windstopper shell that I use for everything, and it's if anything too tight,
waterwise. I'd prefer the older goretex.

Add sheatshirts as it gets colder. Two sweatshirts serves down to about 10 degrees F.

Sleeves that are too long are handy (Tom Swifty there) to slip under the cuffs of gloves or mittens
that come with serious cuffs.
--
Ron Hardin [email protected]pring.com

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

The PacLite by Etxe-Ondo is the hot setup. Breathes well, super light weigh and totally waterproof.
Wear it with a decent fleece base layer and you can go down to 35F with no problem.

"Donald Specker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Any recommendations for a lightweight, water-resistant yet breathable
outer
> jacket? I have some long-sleeve technical-type underwear for cold conditions, but need an outer
> layer to break the wind.
>
> The other option would be a cool weather jersey, but that would seem less verstaile than
> the combo.
>
> Thanks.

 

If it's not raining, you're better off without a shell. There are *no* breathable shells despite
marketing claims to the contrary. Unless you are cycling at a very slow pace, you will experience
condensation of moisture in your clothing if you are wearing a shell. Even a thin, uncoated nylon
windbreaker won't breathe, let along one with multiple layers of mesh liner, GoreTex membrane,
etc. Every additional thing added to the shell *reduces* the ability for moisture to pass through
the fabric.

I personally find, living in Minnesota, that the "miracle fabrics" touted by the high-tech cloting
makers rarely if ever live up to their claims. They're fine for standing around or for light
activity, but that's about it.

Wearing a thin wool long-sleeve Tshirt, a wool jersey, a wool long sleeve jersey and a light
sweater, I can ride down to 25 deg F without any problem- and can ride hard for a couple of hours
without my clothes becoming damp or clammy. And best of all wool doesn't stink after an hour like
the synthetics do.

Having said all that, I find that wool doesn't work as well for tights. It lacks the abrasion
resistance to last longer than a season or so before wearing out at the crotch. So I wear Gekko Gear
tights, usually, or Pearl Izumi windfront tights if it's really cold. The latter get really clammy
by the end of the ride, though.

 

"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If it's not raining, you're better off without a shell. There are *no* breathable shells despite
> marketing claims to the contrary. Unless you are cycling at a very slow pace, you will experience
> condensation of moisture in your clothing if you are wearing a shell. Even a thin, uncoated nylon
> windbreaker won't breathe, let along one with multiple layers of mesh liner, GoreTex membrane,
> etc. Every additional thing added to the shell *reduces* the ability for moisture to pass through
> the fabric.

I've given up on shells completely for this reason, they're all just sweat traps.

> Wearing a thin wool long-sleeve Tshirt, a wool jersey, a wool long sleeve jersey and a light
> sweater, I can ride down to 25 deg F without any problem- and can ride hard for a couple of hours
> without my clothes becoming damp or clammy. And best of all wool doesn't stink after an hour like
> the synthetics do.
>
> Having said all that, I find that wool doesn't work as well for tights. It lacks the abrasion
> resistance to last longer than a season or so before wearing out at the crotch. So I wear Gekko
> Gear tights, usually, or Pearl Izumi windfront tights if it's really cold. The latter get really
> clammy by the end of the ride, though.

The fabric that Gekko Gear tights are made from is Malden Mills "Power Stretch", a "4-way"
lycra/polyester fleece, which has a permanent (silver compound) anti-microbial treatment. I wear
this for tights and jersey and socks, as I think it's about the best next-to-skin layer there is,
much better than wool (though I use Smartwool, marino wool outer socks -- better compression than
synthetic fleece).

I layer more fleece (tunic, vest) over the skin layer, it all breathes, worked OK this morning on a
2 hr windy road ride in 0 deg. F conditions. For rainwear, venting works much better than the
"breathable" hi-tech fabrics for a strenuous sport like cycling. I am planning to try some garments
made from urethane-coated fleece for cycling in cold rain, as that's about the hardest condition to
deal with. Kayak paddlers use it apparently.

 

Tim McNamara wrote:
> If it's not raining, you're better off without a shell. There are *no* breathable shells despite
> marketing claims to the contrary. Unless you are cycling at a very slow pace, you will experience
> condensation of moisture in your clothing if you are wearing a shell. Even a thin, uncoated nylon
> windbreaker won't breathe, let along one with multiple layers of mesh liner, GoreTex membrane,
> etc. Every additional thing added to the shell *reduces* the ability for moisture to pass through
> the fabric.
>
> I personally find, living in Minnesota, that the "miracle fabrics" touted by the high-tech cloting
> makers rarely if ever live up to their claims. They're fine for standing around or for light
> activity, but that's about it.

That about kills it, then. I've been told by a number of people that Goretex and its kin work
wonders, but that was NEVER my experience. I figured it was because they wore it in places colder
than I was (N.C. and Alabama). And now you say they don't work in Minnesota? Or maybe there's just
something special in California air that makes breathable fabrics work there. There's enough other
stuff in the air there...

Pat
--
Apologies to those easily confused. Address is spam-resistant. Correct email address like pdlamb
'round-about comcast point net.

 

Patrick Lamb <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> That about kills it, then. I've been told by a number of people that Goretex and its kin work
> wonders, but that was NEVER my experience.

Are any cycling jackets made from standard Goretex these days? I don't think even the Gore company
recommends the stuff for aerobic activities.

In light rain, I wear an uncoated microfiber jacket that is much more breathable (and lighter weight
and cheaper) than Goretex. It is not waterproof and rain does soak through, but it breathes well
enough that I'm drier inside than if I had been wearing Goretex.

In dry, cool weather I wear a vest that has large mesh panels to improve ventilation.

Goretex is designed for activities like hunting or downhill skiing, where you're not sweating a
whole lot.

Ken

 

Patrick Lamb wrote:
> That about kills it, then. I've been told by a number of people that Goretex and its kin work
> wonders, but that was NEVER my experience. I figured it was because they wore it in places colder
> than I was (N.C. and Alabama). And now you say they don't work in Minnesota? Or maybe there's just
> something special in California air that makes breathable fabrics work there. There's enough other
> stuff in the air there...

Goretex is an improvement over the old days. You get sweated up a little instead of a lot, and it
does cut wind. Always wear something under it with long sleeves. I guess the technical advance would
literally be more windbreaking for a given amount of sweat than before.

If it's above 50F though I just go with a sweatshirt, rain or shine.
--
Ron Hardin [email protected]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

Ken wrote:
> Are any cycling jackets made from standard Goretex these days? I don't think even the Gore company
> recommends the stuff for aerobic activities.

Mine is by Nashbar, of Gore Windstopper; replacing a very old Goretex jacket that finally wore out,
was more breatheable but soaked up water.
--
Ron Hardin [email protected]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

I use Goretex and Windstopper, and they both work fine for me. Note that having zippers where you
can regulate the ventilation helps. For cold air a fabric that blocks the wind helps, and both
Goretex and Windstopper and fabrics like them do that well.

currently in PA, but have used them in Va, NY, Maine - so moderate to very cold regions. The colder
the air the better they work for me.

-Bruce

"Ken" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Patrick Lamb <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> > That about kills it, then. I've been told by a number of people that Goretex and its kin work
> > wonders, but that was NEVER my experience.
>
> Are any cycling jackets made from standard Goretex these days? I don't
think
> even the Gore company recommends the stuff for aerobic activities.
>
> In light rain, I wear an uncoated microfiber jacket that is much more breathable (and lighter
> weight and cheaper) than Goretex. It is not waterproof and rain does soak through, but it breathes
> well enough that
I'm
> drier inside than if I had been wearing Goretex.
>
> In dry, cool weather I wear a vest that has large mesh panels to improve ventilation.
>
> Goretex is designed for activities like hunting or downhill skiing, where you're not sweating a
> whole lot.
>
> Ken

 

In article <[email protected]>, "Peter Cole" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

> > Having said all that, I find that wool doesn't work as well for tights. It lacks the abrasion
> > resistance to last longer than a season or so before wearing out at the crotch. So I wear Gekko
> > Gear tights, usually, or Pearl Izumi windfront tights if it's really cold. The latter get really
> > clammy by the end of the ride, though.
>
> The fabric that Gekko Gear tights are made from is Malden Mills "Power Stretch", a "4-way"
> lycra/polyester fleece, which has a permanent (silver compound) anti-microbial treatment. I wear
> this for tights and jersey and socks, as I think it's about the best next-to-skin layer there is,
> much better than wool (though I use Smartwool, marino wool outer socks -- better compression than
> synthetic fleece).

I have a pair of the heavier and a pair of the lighter Gekko Gear tights and they have a dramatic
range of comfort. I have a couple of their base layer zip tops from the same fabric, and find that I
don't like it as well as a thin wool T- I still get wetter and clammier. Maybe I just sweat a lot.
However, the Gekko Gear tops are more windproof and I'll wear them if it's cold and windy rather
than the wool.

> I layer more fleece (tunic, vest) over the skin layer, it all breathes, worked OK this morning on
> a 2 hr windy road ride in 0 deg. F conditions. For rainwear, venting works much better than the
> "breathable" hi-tech fabrics for a strenuous sport like cycling.

Yes, a good point- venting works *much* better. I have a Burley rain jacket which is waterproof and
a complete vapor barrier, but has multitudinous vents and I stay reasonably dry inside it.

 

Patrick Lamb wrote:

> That about kills it, then. I've been told by a number of people that Goretex and its kin work
> wonders, but that was NEVER my experience. I figured it was because they wore it in places colder
> than I was (N.C. and Alabama). And now you say they don't work in Minnesota?

Gore-Tex works, but only up to a point. If you're working hard, there is no way that a
waterproof-breathable membrane will transpire enough moisture. That's when venting comes in. As soon
as you notice sweat, you should be unzipping or taking off a layer. This is very important in winter
activities like ski touring, where you can't afford to stand around wet. Unzip when you're working,
zip up when you stop or descend.

> Or maybe there's just something special in California air that makes breathable fabrics
> work there.

Warmer air temperatures and moderate humidity make membranes work better, and California has both in
most areas.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/

 

In article <[email protected]>, Terry Morse <[email protected]> wrote:

> Patrick Lamb wrote:
>
> > Or maybe there's just something special in California air that makes breathable fabrics work
> > there.
>
> Warmer air temperatures and moderate humidity make membranes work better, and California has both
> in most areas.

From my recall of fiziks class lo those many years ago, I would expect that the fundamental process
of GoreTex's "breathing" is passive rather than active- osmosis to be precise. Presumably the
greater the difference on the two sides of a permeable membrane, the greater the effect. So I would
assume that GorTex would work best in a zero-humidity ambient setting. Is this not actually the
case, and if not- why not?

 

Tim McNamara wrote:

> Terry Morse wrote:
> >
> > Warmer air temperatures and moderate humidity make membranes work better, and California has
> > both in most areas.
>
> From my recall of fiziks class lo those many years ago, I would expect that the fundamental
> process of GoreTex's "breathing" is passive rather than active- osmosis to be precise. Presumably
> the greater the difference on the two sides of a permeable membrane, the greater the effect. So I
> would assume that GorTex would work best in a zero-humidity ambient setting. Is this not actually
> the case, and if not- why not?

You essentially got it right. It's the difference in partial pressure of water vapor that drives the
flow across the membrane.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/