.61 Dyneema (CT1K.18) now at RSBTR

good news. also Quest has a new(ish) offering from Dimension-Polyant, the LS07 LiteSkin at 3.4oz, which compliments the other lightest xpac varieties (vx21rc, vx04, and tx07), focusing specifically on better abrasion resistance and less tensile strength. as a pack material seems like this is a decent alternative to the Dyneema 2.92 Hybrid and it would be interesting to get some field reports on durability etc. it looks pretty cool too. i just got a swatch from them and it’s sort of rough/dusty feeling on the front side with a normal ripstop laminate on the back side (and no “X” layer inside).

@jturner140 – I was just coming over to announce this. I remembered you asking about CT1K.18 a while back, so definitely wanted to get that one in. I’ll put some other DCF related news in another thread.

@kcbaker-2 Sorry to steal your thunder! I was excited to finally see it available so I couldn’t help but to let everyone know. Thanks for bringing this option to us! I’ll be putting in an order tomorrow for some of the .61 for a DIY packa project as well as some 1.2 robic for my next hammock. Christmas in September!

Neat! This is really intriguing. I was going to use 0.75 oz DCF for my tent project but I wasn’t sure if the extra spectra was truly needed. But extra mylar? That seems like a good idea for sure. I do love that spruce green color on the 0.75oz though!

AG, I have been prototyping the LiteSkin on some parts of our bike bags. Really neat stuff. I do think it would make a good lightweight pack fabric, although it’s possible that the lower tear strength would come into play when bushwhacking if you got a stick or rock stuck on it. They also make an LS42 LiteSkin at 6.9oz which would make a great pack bottom material with its higher tear strength.

(LiteSkin tear strength: for LS07, 5.1 lb on the warp, 5.3 on the weft – in comparison, VX21 is 16.9 on the warp and 13.5 on the weft).

The other difference with LiteSkin versus other DP fabrics is that it does not have a layer specifically for waterproofing in the middle of the fabric (like VX21 which has a 0.25 mil PET film inside). The spec sheet does give it a very high waterproof rating so I think the polyester resin coating provides good waterproofing, but that may wear off over time. No way to tell without testing it.

Thicker Mylar on .61 gives better abrasion resistance than .51? Is that the benifit of more Mylar?

That and much betterment puncture resistance. So much less worry of hail damage to your shelter a has been seen with .51 Cuben.

Interesting.

And the difference between .51 and .74 is all in the Dyneema count? They use the same Mylar laminate?

Has anyone handled this material? I’m curious to hear how it folds/stuffs/rolls with the thicker facing.

Yes to your question on the .51 vs.74. I haven’t handled it but I will soon as I’m ordering some today. :) Have you handled the 1.0 cuben? This is what is used in the floors of most cuben shelters (zpacks namely). I would imaging the .61 doesn’t feel all that different.

Good point. The floor of my old Duplex folded and rolled just fine.

It’s hard to keep track of all the variations…

yes i’m being overly nerdy, but hey this is BPL. please make clarifications/corrections and i’ll update this post accordingly. the yellow cell is still confusing to me since it appears that the same fabric is being sold in two places as two different weights.

You got it right. It is confusing but only because of listed weight. The stuff RSBTR is listing as .8 is the same as the .74 stuff from Zpacks, MLD, etc. Kyle actually made a point to show this in the description for the .8 – “*Spruce Green color listed here is the exact same as the former 0.74 oz Cuben Fiber Spruce Green.”

Thanks for posting this.  Richard Nisley’s tests  of cuben posted on BPL have long shown that the thicker .18 mylar is much more water resistant.  This is the first I’ve seen it readily available at a .61 oz/sq/yd total weight.  And I think the thicker mylar would have to have more abrasion resistance. It would be stiffer of course with the thicker mylar, but not as stiff as the one oz/sq/yd .18 material sold heretofore.

Being an avid sewer and avoider of hostile terrain, am not into using cuben for tents; but for anyone seeking an SUL bombproof tent, this might be worth considering.  Pierre Descoteaux’s thread on MYOG about building a cuben tunnel tent would be helpful for that.  Great material for ‘blow me down’ winds when guyed with tenacious stakes.

I worked with the old Cuben only (0.5 osy, 0.8 osy, 1.0 osy, 1.43 osy and 2.92osy). I loved the 0.8 the most. It had a single ”E” layer of a different material. About as puncture resistant as the double layered ”K” according to Cubic tech long ago… The single layer was much more compact than the double one which for a 3 man tunnel would have made a big difference. This new .61 osy sounds very tempting… and for smaller projects and tarps the slight bulk of the thicker layers shouldn’t be an issue and it give me peace of mind with regards to durability.

my 2 cents

Cheers

For someone new to trying to figure out the benefits of the different weights, what advantages/disadvantages does this offer over 0.8/0.74? Besides weight.

Half the dyneema but double the mylar.  Looks like it could be a lighter choice for floors where 1 oz is often used for the extra mylar thickness but extra strength isn’t needed or a slightly heavier replacement for 0.51 oz with the same strength but extra mylar for better long term waterproofness.

Gotcha. Better abrasion and puncture resistance, and more waterproof, but less tear strength?

Interesting option then. Definitely useful for floors and perhaps ponchos (as op said he would be using it for). And could be nice for folks making shelters they dont need to take into high winds.

The HMG Ultamid 2 and 4 , use 0.51 oz fir the white and 0.74 oz (for their optional green) correct?

I don’t believe they offer .51. MLD does but HMG doesn’t offer it.

so their white and green are  both .74 dyneema then?

how does the mylar content compare between the .61 and .74?

1) yes

2) The chart is above, please read the thread as it has been explained.

re mylar: this is also not entirely clear. and perhaps an industry person can explain better. but short answer is the “18” row fabrics in the chart above have a mylar that is roughly twice as thick as the fabrics in the “08” row.  

i say roughly twice because as i understand it, these are also two different *types* of mylar (not just two different thicknesses of the same type). thus if you look at the product codes you will see that the .8oz fabric uses an “E” type mylar, while the .61oz fabric has a “K” type mylar.

here’s how it was once described in another BPL thread: “The 0.18 has a doubled ‘K’ mylar layer. The ‘E’ is a different mylar layer than the ‘K’. The ‘E’ is lighter than the doubled ‘K’ layer while more resistant than a single ‘K’ layer.”

interesting… is this the only weight with multi layered mylar? is there a double E layered version

Michael, anything in the Mylar 18 row is a double K layer.