new waterproof product from Gore with permanent water repellancy coming

deleted

Yes, but as this comes after C-knit …

Very interesting….but they are only going to market it to runners and bike riders? Perhaps there isn't much abrasion resistance?

Hum – looks like conventional 2-layer Goretex fabric turned inside out. Ok, that repels the water. I note they are promoting it for situations where the surface will NOT get abraded by scrub. Cheers

That would be my guess. It sounds like regular GT with no face fabric to me and my shell wouldn't last long turned inside out. I hope it is a revolution though as we need help on the wp/b front as let's be honest even the best membranes are lacking and that's when the dwr is fresh. After some use performance is even worse in the real world.

True, although I can't imagine that they just would expose a regular GTX-membrane to the outside world without having it some sort of protective layer. And yes, initially they target runners and bikers but 1) even some jackets with this could be usefull to people here from the start. 2) and while targeted it now to runners and bikers, who knows they can up the abrasionresistance enough so that it can be used with hikers with backpacks. But, like I said in my first post, wait and see.

Sigh…or they could use a face fabric encapsulated with silicone, or use woven polypropylene fabric with UV enhancers. Either would provide both permanent water repellency, as well as be durable in general.

True, but (of course their's a but) 1) how good are EPIC-style coatings after soiling and sweataccumulation ? After all, that still uses Sil which surface energy is low enough to be hydrophobic but not oleophobic. That from FC's like PTFE is low enough to be not only hydrophobic but also oleophobic. 2) how durable is woven PP ? And no this is not to ridicule the post above but these are genuine questions.

Everything material seems to involve give and take. I would gladly put up with having to rinse a material more often, for significantly increased durability. (i'm thinking of doing a 45 day hike in about a half year, so this subject is definitely a focus). "how durable is woven PP ?" Plenty enough for this application. Similar tenacity and abrasion resistance as the more common, cheaper forms of polyester (slightly less, but stronger and more durable than some other synthetics like acrylic). It is used extensively in the rug and carpet industries, though of course, they use much higher denier fibers. But as compared to nylon, polyester, and wool for these same uses, it's considered moderately durable with fair to good abrasion resistance (nylon is considered the most durable and long lasting). Main problem is UV degradation, but as mentioned, this can be remedied. I think many of us tend to have this misconception of polypropylene based on Frog Toggs, Dri Ducks, etc NON-woven forms of PP. Any non woven form of a polymer is significantly weaker and less durable than the woven forms. There is a well known British company that sells a "windjacket" made solely out of woven polypropylene. I had it briefly until i realized they had altered it to make it wick very well. I bought it for the opposite purpose, and so returned it. I have some Terramar brand, relatively thin, lightweight, woven PP baselayers which seem plenty durable to me. But yes, i agree, the ideal would be to have a material that is not just hydrophobic, but also oleophobic (and i would add, durable at the same time).

I would also tentatively suggest that oil itself is not the problem directly in and of itself. Pretty much most oils are innately hydrophobic themselves. The problem with oil accumulation on or in clothing is that it tends to hold dirt, salts, and other things which do actually decrease the hydrophobic properties (thankfully, these can be washed or rinsed off much easier than the oils, which tend to saturate synthetics).

Woubier, You correctly stated that silicone doesn't have good oleophobic properties. Neither does the C6 DWR which is now the best available. Its hydrophobic properties are close to the old C9 but it is not oleophobic.

Richard, you mean C8, not C9. Interesting you say that C6 DWR is not oleophobic as I have a presentation that says it is as the oleophobic character comes from the CF-part. So you don't happen to have (a)sources for it that you can share ? Looking at some surface tension values (dynes/cm at 20°C) water 72 nylon 46 polyester 43 hydrocarbons 20+ silicone ±30 (I think I remember) C-F2 17 C-F3 6

Woubeir, Correct; I meant C8 rather than C9 Incorrect; C6 oleopphobic properties I am on an adventure trip until 12/1, in the bush, with only occasional cell phone coverage. The scientific study reference will be sent when I return.

OK "Incorrect; C3 oleopphobic properties" But this I don't understand.

I did some searching and found this (but untill Gore confirms at least some of this, it remains speculative in nature): it looks in structure like the new Pro and uses a 100% PTFE- membrane, built from multiple asymmetric ePTFE-layers. That way, it’s also air-permeable with an estimated CFM of between 0,15 and 0,5. As there is no face fabric, the outer is a PTFE-layer which makes it waterrepellent. The different PTFE-layers are attached to eachother  by heat.

I wonder how it will compare to OutDry Extreme  products from Columbia/Mountain Hardwear in 2016.

Yes, particularly also on the durability front of both laminates beneath backpackstraps.

Woubeir,

I returned home last night, after a month in the bush, and looked at the report on my desk to discover you were correct regarding C6 having good oil repellency. I had confused C6 with other non-silicone C8 alternatives such as those that were dendrimer-based or PU based.

see: http://www2.mst.dk/Udgiv/publications/2015/05/978-87-93352-16-2.pdf

The first Gore Active without an outer fabric layer looks like it’ll be available later this month. Looking forward to seeing how it tests out in the field.

http://adventure-journal.com/2015/12/north-face-early-adopter-of-new-gore-tex-fabric/

@Richard Nisley

funny maybe but I have the same presentation

@SteveK

indeed

BTW, http://www.snewsnet.com/press-release/run-dry-shed-water-shed-weight-with-the-lightest-gore-tex-jacket-ever-built/

I am very interested to see how this pans out.  The North Face jacket is “only” $250 and the Arcteryx is “only” $299 but that’s cheaper than I thought they would be…..and the weight….4.05oz for a Men’s M….fantastic!!!!

I wonder how the breath ability of this “most breathable GT ever” compares to eVent or NeoShell?

Of course my worry is that it won’t be durable enough for backpacking use, especially off trail.  I wore the DWR off my Haglofs shell during 11 days of hiking through Willow, dwarf birch, and alder, but the integrity of the shell and membrane were intact.  I would love a lighter more breathable shell with no dwr to wear off.

4oz!!!  Well that got me interested.   Going to be hitting refresh on the arcteryx site for the next several weeks…

@Christopher Smead

at arcteryx spring starts usually only in march :-)