My pad leaks have typically (Alas!) been teensy slow leaks at locations where the surface fabric, whatever the denier, has no signs of localized damage, even using a handheld magnifying glass.
Thus, I wonder if quoting denier is just a ruse, a red herring, to avoid discussion of the ACTUAL AIR IMPERMEABLE LAYER, the polymer lamination on the inside of the fabric.
Yes, the fabric provides structure, some abrasion protection and minimal puncture resistance; but the more important facts are perhaps the composition of the air barrier polymer coating, its thickness, and its uniformity and testing.
I’m wondering about something like hydrostatic head rating and testing on tent fabrics, except using air pressure to strain the fabric and coating.
Furthermore, denier alone defines the fiber diameter and does not define number of fibers per unit area (tight weave or loose).
Charitably, perhaps manufacturers use denier as a proxy for how robust they are making the weave and – especially – the air impermeable coating. Or maybe denier is marketing prose.
One of my air pads developed 4 pinhole leaks within first year of use despite using a GG thin foam pad underneath. Exasperated, I retired it to trash (vendor said not covered for user abuse and did not want it back for analysis), and the frequent failures stopped after switching pads.
My other pads have lasted for years, including some from same company; but once they develop a 2nd or 3rd pinhole, they get retired. Lesson learned.
