Synthetic jackets – how do they really perform in wet conditions?

I have used a lot of Core loft products and find it dries very quick when wet.

They don't perform very well. There was even an article here in which down dried faster than the synthetic in the test condition. I'm not sure how well the test condition matches reality.

If you'll be wearing it under rain gear (edit: while hiking), or if it's quite likely to get damp, fleece is a better choice.

> to what degree they really maintain insulation when wet,
If you get them wet, you are doing something wrong.

Cheers
PS: fleece is a better idea for that anyhow.

For use a puffy stationary layer that might get damp, I think they would be good but I only have a little experience with them.

For an active layer I think fleece is better when it gets wet. Dries faster and insulates better. When Andrew Skurka did his big Alaska trek he only carried a synthetic puffy instead of fleece and once it wetted out from constant rain, he hard a hard time keeping warm.

I think that lofted insulation for an active layer that will be used often is really silly. Save the lofted insulations for when you aren't moving.

Stephen,

Have you had it damp while in use/cold – if so how did it perform?

Hi Ito,

I have used synthetic fill clothing for years in Ireland and the Uk (where it rains a lot) and have never had
Any issues with it.

Thank you.

It can be very very humid here as well, although I think in a different way as in Ireland/Scotland. Humidity can add a lot of perceived cold to the actual temperature (as well as extra heat in the summer). I like my synth puffies as well in those cases.

They don't perform very well. There was even an article here in which down dried faster than the synthetic in the test condition. I'm not sure how well the test condition matches reality.

The most fundamental properties of down and synthetic insulation were reinforced by these results.

The design of the Western Mountaineering Flash vest helps it to recover quickly after soaking. Even holding moderate moisture its warmth will be superior to a synthetic fill garment. The Flash may be a good choice if you can avoid completely saturating it in rain or if the rain may be interrupted by short drying opportunities.
Most other down-filled products will not recover from becoming wet as quickly as the Flash vest due to more down mass in relation to surface drying area.
Water absorbing trim slows the overall drying rate of a garment and will make the garment less comfortable to wear after significant moisture absorption.

and …

The Patagonia Micropuff Pullover vest is my choice on short trips where I use it as an outer layer, on warm weather trips where it serves as my primary insulation piece, and as emergency insulation on alpine climbs where violent thunderstorms are a possibility and my ability to protect myself from the elements is limited by terrain.

try these

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=5105

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=5163

synthetic will handle damp conditions and can be dried out with body heat (which you can also do more slowly with THIN down layers with the right techniques/condiitons and luck)

however for very wet conditions …fleece is king … thats all there is to it

;)

Eric, thanks for finding and including some of that article. I think it makes the point well that synthetic is so bad when wet that it's even comparable to wet down, or even worse than down on some measures mentioned in the article.

it really depends … you have to remember that they were praising the WM flash because of the distribution of the down and the "breathable" fabric were advantageous to the drying

however the MB i believe (im going off memory here as my subscription ran out) had a less air permeable fabric and took quite a bit longer to dry

its really a stretch to say that down dries faster than synthetic based on what is possibly the down jacket with the construction that helps it dry the fastest …. use less permeable (down proof) fabrics and/or thicker sleeping bags/poofays and IME this is not true

the other thing is that you have to really do these test under bad conditions … ie high humidity and rainy days … not leaving it out in the sun …

thicker down jackets and bags will not dry in the PNW in shoulder seasons if you dont have a dry sunny spell … while synthetics (and thinner down to a lesser extent) can be dried with the right techniques even when its wet and rainy … or at least get to the point where its quite a bit less damp

theres probably a reason why the brits are so fond of synth … and up in BC us as well …

however fleece is still king … just the other day i went for a walk in the woods ( we had 30-40mm+ of rain overnight) … i wore my thermal pro fleece with just a t-shirt … didnt matter one bit …

sure it got damp … but it wasnt damp next to the skin due to the the fuzzy inside … and my body heat from moving kept drying it out

fleece is heavy, safe and stupid … and stupid is often a good thing when yr cold, wet, tired …

;)

Thanks for the comments.

I'm already happy with my R2 fleece if I need something to wear while active, or to layer under a rain shell when sustained cold rain is likely.

I use a light down jacket differently – it generally stays in the dry bag while hiking, gives better warmth per weight than the fleece for cold evenings & nights – I often combine it with a thinner bag than I'd otherwise take to give me more flexibility with sleep insulation; or in summer take no bag at all.

But I rarely take both (really only in winter).

I was looking to replace the down jacket with something synthetic, so that I wouldn't be totally screwed if my only substantial insulation gets wet. But, well – it sounds like I'd still need to be really careful about keeping it dry, so maybe it's not worth it. The warmth/weight on the synthetics is quite a bit worse than down, and probably isn't a whole lot better than the R2 or R3 fleeces.

you dont need to be REALLY careful … just prudent

a thinner 60-80g/m synethetic will handle dampness just fine, and IME better than down (though i havent used the DWR down)

if you talk to and read most reviews and actual users (look for articles on BPL comparing actual use, there a few around) of synth products, they will state more or less the same thing

where it sucks is if you get your synthetic soaking wet … then youll need to wring it out and start using yr body heat and other tricks to dry it out

remember that moisture comes internally and externally … synth shines at handling moderate amounts of moisture (which is why they use synthetic overbags in very cold places), especially condensation (which builds up in your rain jacket and clothes) and

the brits may be wrong about many things (namely their taste in beer and "football"), but they arent wrong about this

as to whether itll benefit you, if you dont get your down wet and you arent living in a high humidity area, i wouldnt worry about it

;)

As with any puffy insulation, you should focus on not getting synthetic insulation wet. It will dry reasonably and will tolerate moisture but if it gets completely soaked you're gonna have a bad time.

Sounds kinda like down, eh? Down is similar, in my experience. It will tolerate a little moisture but if it is completely soaked it will clump, and it's hard to manually break up the clumps to the point where it insulates like it did fresh. (A tumble dryer works great.) And while wet synthetic is miserable to wear, wet down is downright unpleasant.

I use a mix of synthetic and down. In colder temps I prefer down as it feels like it warms up more quickly, but in wetter conditions the slightly better recovery of synthetic wins out. In the end, however, I use both a mix of synthetic and down when it's really cold out and they both work great to keep me warm.

One winter trip I tried to use a synthetic vest like I would a fleece one. It froze, inside and out, from both sweat and melting spindrift. And it was difficult to dry out. I wouldn't use a synthetic while moving unless it was cold enough to not sweat at all. Fleece on the other hand, crusted on the outside but stayed warm and dry on the inside.

Just did an experiment to shed some light on how a fleece and a fiber-fill jacket compare when wet. Both garments are no name brands. Fleece is 100% polyester. Fiber-fill is some type of polyester fiber sandwiched between an inner and outer layer of nylon.

FF=fiber fill
F=fleece

Initial Weight
FF 13.4 ounces
F 14 ounces

Weight after soaking them in a bucket of water

FF 4.6 pounds
F 5.9 pounds

Weight after 3 minutes in washer's spin cycle

FF 17 ounces
F 19.6 ounces

Weight after 1 hour hanging indoors at room temps with no wind

FF 15.6 ounces
F 17.4 ounces

Daryl

Try wearing it

The fleece will be more comfortable and feel less damp because of the fuzzy interior

And it will dry faster with body heat

Remember moisture is at its worse when close to the skin, which is why we have wicking fabrics for base layers

A simple non scientific but perfectly valid test is to soak em in the shower, wring em out then go outside in cold temps with em (dont get hypothermic)

Fleece you can get quite a bit less damp through moderate activity such as walking around

Synth takes a bit more effort

For bonus points try this in the rain

;)

If drenched, both down and synthetic fills are pretty bad performers all around. Synthetics will likely dry faster in most field conditions, but given the suffering involved it's highly recommended you never get there.

Where synthetic fills shine (both in coats and sleeping bags) is dealing with both internal and external humidity. Primaloft and Apex are both able to suck up a fair amount of moisture, either from light precip or a wet user inside, not loose warmth, and dry pretty darn fast. Down, especially in multiple days of such conditions, really suffers. And the various treated downs are IME only about 25% of the way towards closing the gap.

If you need an insulating layer for moving in cold and wet conditions, lighter plain fleece with no or very little spandex content (4% max) is the clear winner. The fancy grid fleeces are fantastic at moving moisture, but if you need something to wear between a baselayer and a hard shell in 12 hours of pouring rain 100 wt Polartec Classic is still the best answer.

Dave,

You mention that lighter plain fleece with little or no spandex content (less than 4%) is desirable. Why is this?

I have a couple of Eddie Bauer First Ascent Cloud Layer pullovers…the older one with the First Ascent logo on the chest pocket is 100% polyester. The other, newer one has the "Eddie Bauer" script logo on the chest pocket and is 88% polyester and 12% spandex.

Just wondering…thanks in advance.

Edit: Just double checked and the chest pocket has the spandex…the fleece is 100% polyester. Still wondering about the spandex/fleece combination though.

Spandex is not a bad thing. It allows fabrics to be made trimmer fitting without restricting movement. This prevents too-large air gaps.

However, the reason Mr. Chenault recommends for polyester and against spandex is that polyester fibers, by their nature, cannot absorb water. It is water proof. Spandex on the other hand, can absorb its weight in water. As does nylon, which absorbs many times its weight in water. However, no matter the water absorption properties, water can get trapped in the space between any kind of fibers.

Dave, do you have any first-hand experience using treated down? Seems like you'd be a great person to test DWR down in the real world and write a BPL article about it (hint, hint).

"polyester fibers, by their nature, cannot absorb water……..nylon…absorbs many times its weight in water."

I've heard this polyester/nylon distinction before and assume it is true. The pseudo-science wet weighing numbers I posted above, however, show that water is being held by the garments tested….both nylon and polyester.

Perhaps the structure, weave, etc. of both garments retains an amount of water that trumps the water absorbing differences between polyester and nylon?

"One winter trip I tried to use a synthetic vest like I would a fleece one. It froze, inside and out, from both sweat and melting spindrift. And it was difficult to dry out. I wouldn't use a synthetic while moving unless it was cold enough to not sweat at all. Fleece on the other hand, crusted on the outside but stayed warm and dry on the inside."

While i agree fleece is generally better in such a situation, regarding synthetic loft insulation freezing like it did on your above trip–i think there are various factors to take into account. One, the breathability of the lining and shell material. Two, the thickness of the insulation. Also, i think that something like Apex would be better than Primaloft for these kinds of conditions because it would retain it's loft better when wet.

I sent a couple of those 2.5 oz Apex vests to Dave C for testing last late winter/early spring. I don't recollect him reporting that he had issues like the above. I think this is because the shell/lining material is so breathable, because it was thinner insulation, and used Apex. He did recommend a better and more wicking liner material, which i could understand the reasoning behind. Regular nylon does not wick well.

Nylon's moisture regain typically ranges from about 2% to about 9%, with a more specific range of 4%-6% being common. There are different kinds of nylon with different levels of regain.

Generally speaking, while they are somewhat moisture absorptive, they do not absorb a lot of moisture into the material themselves and in most cases can still be considered more or less "hydrophobic", though i would label it more "semi-hydrophobic".

But yes, polyester is significantly more hydrophobic and less moisture absorptive than nylon. However, polyester does absorb a tiny amount of moisture. Only polypropylene or polyethylene could be considered fully and completely hydrophobic–which is also why garments made with them do not need DWR.

Lately, i've been toying with the notion of making a WPB material with a thin, tightly woven polypropylene, sandwiched between two layers of thin, tightly woven nylon fabrics that are treated with silicone ala an EPIC like process. The main problem would be the inner PP material possibly absorbing/accumulating oils. Wearing wool/wool blend baselayers might help a bit with this.

But essentially, it would be a much more durable, beefed up, and potentially more breathable version of Frogg Toggs, Dri Ducks, etc Potentially poor man's eVent or Neoshell.

Now to find a thin, tightly woven, non wicking Polypropylene fabric….

Rob, the numbers on moisture regain (for poly, nylon, and lycra/spandex) vary a fair bit, but there's no question that spandex absorbs more moisture than poly, and is much slower to dry. My experience suggests that when soaked up to the armpits (in a stream crossing, say) 100 weight fleece will take half the time to hike dry as a 88/12 poly/spandex garment of similar fabric weight.

Andrew thus far my dri-down experience is limited to a sleeping bag. A discussion of the newer wave of insulations (e.g. dridown and Alpha/et al) will happen eventually. The difficulty of trying to balance empiricism with practical aspects is quite the headache, which limits my enthusiasm. My main motivation would be to provide a bit of moderation to the discussion, which based on my limited experience with Alpha (not impressed) I assume to be very hyperbolic, generally.