required clothing

Skiing in Vt this winter. Have only been to Co a few times and always in
spring.
The local shops here tell me that We'll be fine with our shell type jackets
/ pants with lt wt chilis and fleece. Is this correct?

Ibk" wrote in message
...
Skiing in Vt this winter. Have only been to Co a few times and always in
spring.
The local shops here tell me that We'll be fine with our shell type
jackets / pants with lt wt chilis and fleece. Is this correct?

If you have shells, you can always layer up or down with
clothes underneath the shell.

I have several shells, mostly all I use is shells. It's nice to
change the look now and then you know.

But you *need* waterproof/breathable *membranes*
in the pants and windshell, like gore tex, helly tech, etc.
Columbia, North Face, etc, all make clothes that use
the gore tex type membrane. It will pass water as a vapor,
but not as a liquid. Good stuff.

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.

If your shells don't have the membrane, you might just get wet
and miserable.

You should be able to pay retail sixty to eighty bucks for pants,
only nylon and membrane, no insulation, about the same for the
jacket. Since these are usually spring items, you could maybe
even save money this time of year.


"

foot2foot wrote:

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.

If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.

"Mary Malmros" wrote in message
news:TqXkf.3660$Yh2.1288@trndny01...


foot2foot wrote:

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.

If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.




I'm not wrong.

From "REI expert advice".


Water-Repellent Coatings

To maximize water-resistance and breathability, Gore-Tex outerwear comes
with a DWR (durable water repellent) treatment on its outer surface. This
DWR causes water to bead up and roll off the garment, which keeps the fabric
surface clear so that sweat and body heat can pass through from the inside.
DWR treatments also keep the fabric surface drier, which cuts down on
evaporative heat loss and keeps your outerwear light and comfortable.

Over time, with regular laundering and exposure to the elements, DWR
treatments can wear off. When this occurs, water may no longer bead on the
surface of the outerwear fabric, and the fabric may absorb some water (NOTE:
the Gore-Tex barrier beneath the outer fabric will still stop this moisture
from getting to your skin). The best way to renew your DWR is to launder
your Gore-Tex outerwear according to the care instructions and iron it using
a warm steam setting. This will restore the water beading on the outer
surface of the fabric as long as the original water-repellent treatment is
present.

Unfortunately, there is no permanent water-repellent treatment available.
Eventually, after extended wear and/or many washings, the original repellent
finish will be depleted and you'll need to use a spray-on or wash-in
water-repellency treatment to treat the outer surface of the fabric. You may
repeat this process as many times as needed.


If all you have on an item of clothing is a sprayed on coating
and no membrane and they *claim* it's waterproof
breathable, basically what you have is nothing at all, and
they're lying.

foot2foot wrote:



"Mary Malmros" wrote in message
news:TqXkf.3660$Yh2.1288@trndny01...


foot2foot wrote:


Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.

If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.





I'm not wrong.

From "REI expert advice".

The "expert advice" explains in detail the usefulness of the DWR
coating. So, I repeat: if you're calling the DWR coating useless,
you're wrong.

I've got a lot of experience with DWR-coated clothing, using it not only
for skiing but also for whitewater kayaking, where you _really_ notice
the difference (the evaporative cooling that the REI "expert advice"
speaks of). Water doesn't seep through a drytop with the DWR coating
worn off, but you definitely notice a difference in heat loss.

"Mary Malmros" wrote in message
news:SVXkf.4679$6Z5.2616@trndny02...


foot2foot wrote:

"Mary Malmros" wrote in message
news:TqXkf.3660$Yh2.1288@trndny01...


foot2foot wrote:


Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.

If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.





I'm not wrong.

From "REI expert advice".

The "expert advice" explains in detail the usefulness of the DWR coating.
So, I repeat: if you're calling the DWR coating useless, you're wrong.

I've got a lot of experience with DWR-coated clothing, using it not only
for skiing but also for whitewater kayaking, where you _really_ notice the
difference (the evaporative cooling that the REI "expert advice" speaks
of). Water doesn't seep through a drytop with the DWR coating worn off,
but you definitely notice a difference in heat loss.


Glad to see you're awake. The actual point of the discussion was, can a
coating alone do the same job that a waterproof breathable membrane can do,
coating added or not. The answer is no. You've missed the context and point
of the whole discussion.

If you want to stay dry, you need a gore tex style membrane, not just a
coating the makers claim is water proof /breathable. It's not.

Mary Malmros wrote:


foot2foot wrote:

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.


If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.


DWR means Durable Water Repellent and it's function
is to make water bead up on the surface as PART of
the total function of a Gore-tex garment. It's not
intended to be water-PROOF.

A coating like the urethane on the inside of my
motorcycle rain suit will become a sauna suit on
a warm drizzly day for a vigorous activity like
skiing. I only haul mine out if the
conditions border on frog-choking RAIN.

VtSkier wrote:

Mary Malmros wrote:



foot2foot wrote:

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.



If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.


DWR means Durable Water Repellent and it's function
is to make water bead up on the surface as PART of
the total function of a Gore-tex garment. It's not
intended to be water-PROOF.

And yet it's what a lot of people are referring to when they talk about
a "waterproof breathable coating". Note that I used ample explication
to make it quite clear what I was talking about, so you're picking at
nonexistent nits.

Mary Malmros wrote:


VtSkier wrote:

Mary Malmros wrote:



foot2foot wrote:

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.




If you're talking about the DWR coating that's placed on Gore-tex
outerwear, you're wrong.


DWR means Durable Water Repellent and it's function
is to make water bead up on the surface as PART of
the total function of a Gore-tex garment. It's not
intended to be water-PROOF.


And yet it's what a lot of people are referring to when they talk about
a "waterproof breathable coating". Note that I used ample explication
to make it quite clear what I was talking about, so you're picking at
nonexistent nits.

And I thought I was expanding on your explication about
DWR sprays. I didn't think I was picking nits at all.
And actually I don't think that too many people
actually believe that user applied sprays actually
make a garment waterproof (and breathable to boot).
Spraying Scotch Guard on jeans is just too old a
trick. It worked, for about half a day, then you
went home soaked.

Interestingly, and I've done this, spraying Textron or
NickWax DWR spray on your non-Gore-tex garment WILL
make the water bead up on it but it WON'T make it
waterproof.

foot2foot wrote:

Ibk" wrote in message
...

Skiing in Vt this winter. Have only been to Co a few times and always in
spring.
The local shops here tell me that We'll be fine with our shell type
jackets / pants with lt wt chilis and fleece. Is this correct?


If you have shells, you can always layer up or down with
clothes underneath the shell.

I kind of said this by posting my clothing list to
this poster.

I have several shells, mostly all I use is shells. It's nice to
change the look now and then you know.

Indeed. A friend of mine's wife is getting into skiing
now that she understands the fashion aspect.

But you *need* waterproof/breathable *membranes*
in the pants and windshell, like gore tex, helly tech, etc.
Columbia, North Face, etc, all make clothes that use
the gore tex type membrane. It will pass water as a vapor,
but not as a liquid. Good stuff.

Waterproof/breathable is NOT necessary for ReallyCold(tm)
weather. My W/B stuff is my lightest clothing. I have
a single layer shell (Gore packlight) and single layer
pants for warm weather. Here in New England even a warm
rainy day can be fun as long as you stay dry. I've
skied in a full on rainstorm wearing my motorcycle
rain suit and waterproof chemical handling rubber gloves.

The snow, as long as there is enough of it, is usually
really good to ski on in the rain.

Waterproof breathable "coatings" are useless.

Strongly agree.

If your shells don't have the membrane, you might just get wet
and miserable.

I don't agree with this. If it's cold it's likely
not wet. See above. Until recently I only had my rain
shell (see above) in a waterproof fabric. Then a
ski shop I had done some work for gifted me with a
beautiful Scholler Goretex full parka worth more than
$400 retail. My main jacket all winter long nowadays
when not working.

You should be able to pay retail sixty to eighty bucks for pants,
only nylon and membrane, no insulation, about the same for the
jacket. Since these are usually spring items, you could maybe
even save money this time of year.

Yes, check ebay also and don't buy from anyone with
less than stellar feedback. My most recent rain shell
came from there for about $50. EMS Gore Packlite.