Challenge Ultra new variations (UltraX, UltraTX)

70tx is discontinued and being replaced with 50tx.

https://www.challenge-outdoor.com/tx-ultra

No mention of TX200/400/etc..

The Challenge page suggests that the TX line is a 50d triple ripstop face with an “Ultra” 45* cross grid and then a .25 PET film on the backside.

This is different than what you described in the original post. Are we talking about the same materials? But yeah, still no mention of anything other than the 50d TX

Different, form what I gather 200tx and 400tx are options too.

I see now.

Although like Filip says, I think “EPX200Ultra” is more appropriate! haha

I am personally still very interested in the tx50 listed here: https://www.challenge-outdoor.com/tx-ultra and now available at rockylwoods: https://www.rockywoods.com/50d-Triple-Ripstop-w-Ultra-CrossPly-Sail-White

Edit: on website but ‘out of stock’

Eric: I have a roll of Ultra 200 TX with the 70d backer and x grid, and a sample of the same with 50d backer.

While I see long term durability shortcomings to the unlined Ultra I can sort of get behind this fabric for high wear areas that does not see a lot of constant rolling/wrinkling. Seams will be approaching the strength of regular fabrics, and the fragile PET film is sandwiched between protective layers.

Anecdotally, with the the TX fabrics I can with very little effort rip the 70d/50d liner off of the Ultra component – again showing how the bonding of anything to Dyneema fibers is a riddle yet to be solved. This sort of deliberate destruction is near impossible with Xpac VX type.

When buying the 200 TX roll I had the choice of 70d backer (now discontinued) and 50d backer (current product). I choose the higher denier reasoning the added strength of the backer is not a disadvantage for a material notorious for loose slippery weave.

2023 Challenge materials guide pdf (missing UltraX):

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/62018e9b29f2cd0fc23c3a0c/t/63d8117224b90b2859f159a4/1675104626522/2023_EcoPak-Guide_v3.pdf

The ultra TX series seems very similar to the previous xpac DX series. In my experience of xpac DX40, the seam strength might not be better than VX21. Especially, it’s quite weak after being bartacked. It might be because the high temperature of the lamination process has weakened the strength of Dyneema.

I think both ultra100 and ultra 200 are already abrasion-resistant enough for regular ul backpacking, but their weakness is the seam strength and delamination. Besides, I think 50d backing is not strong enough for the seam. Thus, I think ultra100tx with 100d polyester backing would make more sense.

Especially, it’s quite weak after being bartacked.
In my experience, bartacking works quite well with webbing, where the fibres are quite robust, but it does not work well with light-weight fabrics and especially those relying on a membrane. The high density of needle holes seems to destroy the membrane and damage the fine fibres as well. I use different techniques with UL fabrics.

Cheers

Ultra X should be even better at resisting any delamination vs the 1st gen Ultra.  Ultra X uses more reinforcement to limit diagonal stretch + a different and thicker laminate  with a different glue bond ( even more eco friendly too!).  Yes, after more than a.year out on the trails there have been some delam in the regular Ultra packs, but not what I would call widespread and no packs I know of failed in structure or ability to carry the load. Manufacturers are also adding the Ultra TNT tape reinforcing at key areas learned  from feedback gained in the first 12-24 months of the Ultra use to also improve laminate longevity.    One other result from the first year+ of trail feedback is the abrasion resistance has far surpassed use estimates and so now MLD and many other have moved toward the 100 and 200 and away from the 400 as it was not needed.   Like the early days of DCF use in shelters, it’s getting even better very quickly.

(Bartacking machines can be set to have more or less number of needle holes /stitches in the tack depending on materials and design.)

I agree that bartack is not that good for lightweight fabric. Actually, I thought DX40 is much stronger than conventional 500d or 300d cordura which can withstand bartack. After some experience, I just want to say that UHMWPE laminated fabric is not as good as I thought. It’s indeed abrasion resistant, but its seam strength might not be as strong as vx21. It might be because of the loose weave and the heat during the lamination.

I’ve been making packs with laminated xpac fabric for more than ten years. Except for the weaker seam strength of ultra, another reason I haven’t changed to using ultra is that I’m not confident with fragile film exposed. I’ve been making some products with xpac x33 and x50 and found the delamination is too much more serious than the vx21, vx07. And I would say that the lamination of ultra might be even weaker because of the characteristics of UHMWPE.

Ultra has superior abrasion resistance than nylon face fabric. But I think the seam strength is also important for a robust and lightweight backpack. So I really think ultra TXseries is a good option though I think 50d backing is not strong enough. As a compromise, the weight of ultra200tx with 50d backing is already very close to vx21. So I think ultra100tx would make more sense.

Besides, for regular UL hiking, I think VX21 is pretty abrasion resistant enough. If you take some care of your pack, 100d nylon fabric is also strong enough. Thus, I think the ultraTX series might be more suitable for activities like alpine climbing and river tracing, which require more abrasion resistance.