is it EPIC? how can I tell?

Could you put up a photo of the hang tag?

Hi Mark,

Does it specify spandex content?

No. “100% nylon, exclusive of trim.”

Mark

Mark H,

Epic is not a fabric, it is a fabric treatment, and many different fabrics were marketed using this treatment.  The most common was the treatment of “Epic Malibu” by Black Diamond on its single wall tents,   The fabric was a pale yellow polyester.  It was replaced by Black Diamond  some years ago for its single wall tents.  In more recent years some manufacturers advertised sleeping bags and garments treated with Epic.  But haven’t seen it advertised lately.  My experiences with it were not good.

There is a thread about sources of Epic treated garments on BPL  that you might search for.

I don’t know that one. But Patagonia has been very helpful when myself and others here have asked about specific tag numbers:)

BTW, the military Epics that I have all perform higher in dynamic (shower/hose/rain) testing than in static (2 cup/Suter test). I don’t know why.

Yeah, to add to what Sam said, Roger Caffin’s pointed out that Siliconw, being hydro-, bout not oleo-, phobic is vulnerable to soiling by body and plant oils and then loses its repwllancy. Unlike conventional DWR it can be field washed with powdered detergent.

Sam, I’ve read everything I could find about EPIC, on BPL and elsewhere. The negatives don’t seem fundamental to me: apparent difficulty of manufacturing consistently to a high CFM spec, vulnerability to the fouling that Stumphges described, failure to meet (unrealistic?) expectations about leakage and wet-out. Have your bad experiences involved problems other than those?

The technology seems fundamentally sound, the military seems to like it, and I had a good experience long ago with a Wild Things EPIC-PrimaLoft jacket, except for the PrimaLoft. (Come to think of it, I might already have an EPIC wind shell. I should dig up that WT jacket and see what it has become while I wasn’t looking!)

Stumphges, I will ask Patagonia about the style number. Do you just call their customer service number and start asking technical questions, or is there a process for finding someone who knows the history and the technology?

Why cover up the Patagonia label? Concerned about infringement clause?

Yeah, just call them and ask what the fabric is – give em all the info on the tag and they will prob call u back after speaking with design team. Actually, I think I’ve always emailed.

Epic treated cotton burns like waxed paper. Maybe why not as much use if being made of the tech.

The Epic Malibu I bought for bivys was inconsistent in the coatings. Some came waxy/sticky, some not. Kind of like the early Cuben Fiber it was an expensive crap shoot.

The epic praetorian I have experience with is all consist, maybe cuz it was mil spec.70 d, not sticky in the slightest. I have fabric or garments in six colors.

SIMULACRA: I don’t know what you mean by “infringement clause.” Regardless, I wasn’t trying to “cover up” the Patagonia label. I would have done a much better job than that! Also note that I identified the garment as Patagonia in my initial post. Rather, I was using the pen to hold down the smallest white tag, which wanted to curl up.

Stumphges, Patagonia Customer Service referred me to the Lost Arrow Project, their military contracting arm, and LAP declined to help me because such windshirts are “not sold commercially so we are unable to validate products you are requesting information on.” I am going to go on the assumption that the garment is EPIC-treated.

owareusa.com, thank you for that information about fire hazard and inconsistency of product. By referring to cotton specifically, do you imply that other EPIC-treated fabrics do not pose a fire hazard?

I tired burning about a dozen samples of swatches they sent me. The ones with cotton burned continuously when ignited with a flame. The others melted, but didn’t continue to burn and went out. That doesn’t mean there is no fire hazard or that the synthetic versions are flame retardant. I don’t know.

@ Mark H,

I got that you stated this, which is why I asked the question, to what appeared to be an attempt to cover up the label. I stand corrected, thank you.

I have examined 5 of these things.  A good way to tell is under a microscope.  They tended to do a  sloppy  application of silicone.  So, you will see areas with blobs and areas of minimal coverage.  Just so you know what you might be getting, air perm ranged from .43 to 1.2; HH ranged from 245 to 1083; MVTR ranged from 1080 to 2700.  The one with the highest HH, as a result, also had the lowest MVTR, so, you are going to get wet in that one, one way or another.  So, for a windshirt, mediocre MVTR and generally, HH no better than any other windshirt.  I am not sure why the silicone is so important because if you are in serious rain, you are going to get wet and cold anyway.  If you really want Epic, I have an L3a Polartec Large Regular that I would like to get rid of.  PM if you are interested.  It is good as new and I have never worn it.

As I mentioned upthread, all of the Epic garments I have demonstrate better water-resistance in dynamic situations than in static tests. As Stephen mentions, Epic Praetorian tests pretty similar to Some conventional windhshirts, like the current Patagonia Houdini, with low (<2 CFM) air permeability, and pretty high (>300 mm) hydrostatic head.

But I have a Gen II Level 4 jacket made with Epic Praetorian and it is significantly more water-resistant than a Houdini in shower testing, in rain, and when blasted with pressurized water from the kitchen sink. That last informal test was quite unusual, as it was the most resistant of any of around a dozen fabrics I tested at that time, some of which I later found out performed better than Praetorian in a Suter test.

The Epic Innsbruck of the Gen II Level 5 is less water-resistant, but also quite impressive in this regard.

I have no idea if the Epic silicone encapsulation is responsible for this improved water-resistance as compared to the conventional windshirts I have, and I rather doubt it, but there it is. If I were taking a week-long bushwhacking trip I would strongly consider taking the Gen II Level 4. It is tough, its water-repellancy is excellent and relatively permanent (and can be restored if soiled with field washing), its water-resistance is better than any other windshirt I have, and it breaths well enough that I could wear it comfortably below 50 deg if I kept my output below around 6 METS. The Level 5 would work as well or better, I think, but is very heavy. The only other garment I have that might do as well against sustained abrasion and rain would be the Columbia Outdry EX Featherweight, and that is not even close to as durable as 70 denier Epic.