Modern waterproofs

John Myers said:

Hi folks
Just got back from doing a section of the Pennine Way Horton to
Alston.
The weather had been changeable all last week, from sunny periods to
torrential rain to driving hail on Shunner Fell.
I had bought a modern Lowe Triple point jacket, a couple of months
earlier. Ideal i thought for anything the Pennines could muster.

I have to tell you that i am becoming increasingly frustrated with so
called modern jackets from reputable companies like Lowe, and in my
time i have tried most well known makes.
They just are not waterproof!
It seems to me these days you just have to accept that in any
reasonable downpour you ARE going to get very wet.
Im beginning to think we aren't any better off than when we used to
wear simple nylon water proofs before the advent of Gortex and many
other so called techy materials.

If its as bad as you say, bought "a couple of months earlier", then I would
be returning it to the retailer demanding a full refund. The jacket is not
fit for purpose.

Decent breathable waterproofs work; I have a Slioch Goretex jacket which
keeps me dry in almost anything, still going strong after more than 8 years.
Ditto some new Berghaus Paclite ultra light weight stuff.
They keep me dry, in either sudden deluges on the continent (incredible
amounts of water in half an hour) or long persistant rain for a number of
hours in the UK. There is always some internal dampness, but its either
sweat, or capillary action near to arm and head holes.

- Nigel

--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/
Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

In article <[email hidden]>, NC

URL: said:

John Myers said:

Hi folks
Just got back from doing a section of the Pennine Way Horton to
Alston.
The weather had been changeable all last week, from sunny periods to
torrential rain to driving hail on Shunner Fell.
I had bought a modern Lowe Triple point jacket, a couple of months
earlier. Ideal i thought for anything the Pennines could muster.

I have to tell you that i am becoming increasingly frustrated with so
called modern jackets from reputable companies like Lowe, and in my
time i have tried most well known makes.
They just are not waterproof!
It seems to me these days you just have to accept that in any
reasonable downpour you ARE going to get very wet.
Im beginning to think we aren't any better off than when we used to
wear simple nylon water proofs before the advent of Gortex and many
other so called techy materials.

If its as bad as you say, bought "a couple of months earlier", then I
would be returning it to the retailer demanding a full refund. The
jacket is not fit for purpose.

Decent breathable waterproofs work; I have a Slioch Goretex jacket which
keeps me dry in almost anything, still going strong after more than 8 years.
Ditto some new Berghaus Paclite ultra light weight stuff.
They keep me dry, in either sudden deluges on the continent (incredible
amounts of water in half an hour) or long persistant rain for a number of
hours in the UK. There is always some internal dampness, but its either
sweat, or capillary action near to arm and head holes.

I have relatively new Mountain Technology XCR (less than 2 year old) and
Paclite (less than 1 year old) waterproofs which I have used in all
types of weather condition and they keep out the rain except for some
inevitable slight leakage around the face and cuffs when the rain is
very intense and windblown

Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"

--
"NC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

John Myers said:

Hi folks
Just got back from doing a section of the Pennine Way Horton to
Alston.
The weather had been changeable all last week, from sunny periods to
torrential rain to driving hail on Shunner Fell.
I had bought a modern Lowe Triple point jacket, a couple of months
earlier. Ideal i thought for anything the Pennines could muster.

I have to tell you that i am becoming increasingly frustrated with so
called modern jackets from reputable companies like Lowe, and in my
time i have tried most well known makes.
They just are not waterproof!
It seems to me these days you just have to accept that in any
reasonable downpour you ARE going to get very wet.
Im beginning to think we aren't any better off than when we used to
wear simple nylon water proofs before the advent of Gortex and many
other so called techy materials.

If its as bad as you say, bought "a couple of months earlier", then I

would

Quoted message said:

be returning it to the retailer demanding a full refund. The jacket is

not

Quoted message said:

fit for purpose.

I have as mentioned tried various makes from Sprayway Karrimor and others
and never been satisfied.
I dont think this jacket is any better or worse than many others of kind. I
now just dont believe these high tech jackets do what they are supposed to.

Quoted message said:

Decent breathable waterproofs work; I have a Slioch Goretex jacket which
keeps me dry in almost anything, still going strong after more than 8

years.

Quoted message said:

Ditto some new Berghaus Paclite ultra light weight stuff.
They keep me dry, in either sudden deluges on the continent (incredible
amounts of water in half an hour) or long persistant rain for a number of
hours in the UK. There is always some internal dampness, but its either
sweat, or capillary action near to arm and head holes.

When i set off from Hawes in the rain i had only had the jacket on for 10
minutes and was wet underneath, and by the way my walking companion had a
North face jacket on and had the same experience.
Maybe i expect too much from a coat i paid £200 for.

John

Quoted message said:

- Nigel

--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/
Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting the jacket
out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's as water proof as it
could be, but about as breathable as a bin liner. Different people sweat at
different rates. If I stand still with a water proof on I stay dry, but if
I'm walking with a pack, I get a bit damp.

To see if this is the case, put your waterproofs on and take a cold shower.
You'll feel like a wally, but it will tell you if they are waterproof or
not!

I own a Lowe TPC Foraker. I've had it for 5 years, and its never let me
down - and I've been out on the fells in some pretty foul weather . . . .

If I'm slogging uphill in rain I do tend to get a damp back and shoulders
( where my rucksack is in contact with my body ) due to my own sweat
condensing, but I can live with that - I'd be a whole lot wetter without the
jacket on !

I can still remember vividly the blue Kaghouls we were issued on school
walking holidays in the Lake District in the 70's - bowfell on a very rainy
August day was a nightmare in one of those - we've come a long way since
then . . . .

--
Steve Wilcox

"If Whisky Don't Kill Me I'll Live 'Til I Die"

[email hidden]

--
Does living in Lincs make me a flatlander :-( ??

Remove the flatlands to reply by email.

[email hidden]
"Lewis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting the

jacket

Quoted message said:

out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's as water proof as

it

Quoted message said:

could be, but about as breathable as a bin liner. Different people sweat

at

Quoted message said:

different rates. If I stand still with a water proof on I stay dry, but if
I'm walking with a pack, I get a bit damp.

Lewis
I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet after 10
minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned cash
to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from inside is
irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does any other jacket i
have had.

John

Quoted message said:

To see if this is the case, put your waterproofs on and take a cold

shower.

Quoted message said:

You'll feel like a wally, but it will tell you if they are waterproof or
not!

"John Myers" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi folks
Just got back from doing a section of the Pennine Way Horton to Alston.
The weather had been changeable all last week, from sunny periods to
torrential rain to driving hail on Shunner Fell.
I had bought a modern Lowe Triple point jacket, a couple of months

earlier.

Quoted message said:

Ideal i thought for anything the Pennines could muster.

I have to tell you that i am becoming increasingly frustrated with so

called

Quoted message said:

modern jackets from reputable companies like Lowe, and in my time i have
tried most well known makes.
They just are not waterproof!
It seems to me these days you just have to accept that in any reasonable
downpour you ARE going to get very wet.
Im beginning to think we aren't any better off than when we used to wear
simple nylon water proofs before the advent of Gortex and many other so
called techy materials.

John

I have tried a number of brand names over the years, some good some not so
good I swear by my Paramo Cascade system. It has served me well in Highland
blizzards, and horizontal rain on the N.Y. Moors.

John Myers said:

[email hidden]
"Lewis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting
the jacket out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's
as water proof as it could be, but about as breathable as a bin
liner. Different people sweat at different rates. If I stand still
with a water proof on I stay dry, but if I'm walking with a pack, I
get a bit damp.

Lewis
I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet
after 10 minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned
cash to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently
is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from
inside is irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does
any other jacket i have had.

I repeat what I wrote earlier. If the jacket doesn't keep the water out, and
is only a couple of months old, its clearly not fit for purpose. Therefore,
return it to the retailer for a full refund.

If the retailer will not cooperate, and you bought it with a credit card,
ask your credit card company for the refund under the terms of the Consumer
Credit Act. The credit card company will then get their money back from the
retailer.

The experience of many others is that waterproof breathable jackets do work,
though have their limits as to breathability (most people sweat more than
the jacket will shift through the breathable layer), and there are some
fabric care issues which alter the life-expectancy of the jacket.

- Nigel

--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/
Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

NC said:

John Myers said:

[email hidden]
"Lewis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting
the jacket out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's
as water proof as it could be, but about as breathable as a bin
liner. Different people sweat at different rates. If I stand still
with a water proof on I stay dry, but if I'm walking with a pack, I
get a bit damp.

Lewis
I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet
after 10 minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned
cash to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently
is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from
inside is irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does
any other jacket i have had.

Quoted message said:

I repeat what I wrote earlier. If the jacket doesn't keep the water out, and
is only a couple of months old, its clearly not fit for purpose. Therefore,
return it to the retailer for a full refund.

Except the jacket probably *does* keep the water out. The problem is
that it's probably not letting it *out* fast enough for this
particular wearer. Since the wearer applies the same complaint to
other breathable rainwear it probably means he out-sweats them all.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

I have a Lowe Alpine Triple-point ceramic jacket, and I have to say
I've been *very* impressed with it's ability to keep me dry.

Earlier this year my father and I did a bit of an epic 7-day 130-mile
trek around the mountains of the Lake District, and the Lowe jacket
kept me dry in some absolutely *horrendous* rain. My cheap waterproof
trousers were a bit [censored], and my lower legs and socks got drenched.
That wasn't comfortable.

But, from the mid-thighs up I was as dry as a nun's... well, let's
just say I was dry.

Unless it is actually condensation, maybe you've just been unlucky,
but from my experience I'd recommend the triple-point ceramic jackets.
But that probably doesn't make you feel any better.

Sorry :-(

Michael S

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting the

jacket

Quoted message said:

out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's as water proof as

it

Quoted message said:

could be, but about as breathable as a bin liner. Different people sweat

at

Quoted message said:

different rates. If I stand still with a water proof on I stay dry, butif
I'm walking with a pack, I get a bit damp.

Lewis
I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet after 10
minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned cash
to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from insideis
irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does any other jacket i
have had.

I generally sweat like a pig (as everyone in my gym will confirm) but I
have had no problems with my old ME paclite and my new Matrix *if* I'm
using wicking layers with it - keeps the rain out and lets my moisture
out very effectively. the one time I wore it with a non-wicking top, I
got more than a little damp on the inside. Don't know if this is
relevant for you or not, but overall I believe the £200 for the matrix
was money very well spent.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

To see if this is the case, put your waterproofs on and take a cold

shower.

Quoted message said:

You'll feel like a wally, but it will tell you if they are waterproof or
not!

almost worth trying for the laugh!

--
Darren

John, I tend to agree with you, I've had several Gortex jackets and they all
leaked after a time. I now use a Berhaus jacket which is make of aquafoil
and rolls up very small during summer months and a cheap army Gortex in
colder weather, mainly because of the pocket space it has.

For everyday wear I use a 25+year old Barbour jacket,,,,,, its still totaly
waterproof.

Rik
"John Myers" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi folks
Just got back from doing a section of the Pennine Way Horton to Alston.
The weather had been changeable all last week, from sunny periods to
torrential rain to driving hail on Shunner Fell.
I had bought a modern Lowe Triple point jacket, a couple of months
earlier.
Ideal i thought for anything the Pennines could muster.

I have to tell you that i am becoming increasingly frustrated with so
called
modern jackets from reputable companies like Lowe, and in my time i have
tried most well known makes.
They just are not waterproof!
It seems to me these days you just have to accept that in any reasonable
downpour you ARE going to get very wet.
Im beginning to think we aren't any better off than when we used to wear
simple nylon water proofs before the advent of Gortex and many other so
called techy materials.

John

NC said:

John Myers wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet
after 10 minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned
cash to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently
is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from
inside is irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does
any other jacket i have had.

Quoted message said:

I repeat what I wrote earlier. If the jacket doesn't keep the water out, and
is only a couple of months old, its clearly not fit for purpose. Therefore,
return it to the retailer for a full refund.

Wot Nigel says. And it's reasonably easy to test it to see if it does
let water in.

But as for if you get wet from rain or sweat, it does make a very big
difference. One is fairly warm, one is cold. The main point of a
jacket is primarily to keep you reasonably comfortable as well as
possible, not to keep you bone dry. Keeping dry is nice, but it's only
ever really a fringe benefit. If you try a walk in a Cagjac ca. 1980
then you'll know how much /more/ comfortable modern fabrics allow you to
be. Also check out the neck and wrist seals on paddling cags if you
want to see what is really required to keep water genuinely and
completely /out/: they are simply not practical for walking due to
comfort considerations: any water that does get in through the seals on
a walking jacket would have less comfort impact than just wearing a
jacket with formal dry seals.

Quoted message said:

The experience of many others is that waterproof breathable jackets do work,
though have their limits as to breathability (most people sweat more than
the jacket will shift through the breathable layer)

And they have limits on the quality of the neck, hem and wrist seals for
very good reasons too. Rain is hard to keep out of a flexible, moving
structure that needs holes and must be light. Marketing that suggests
otherwise is partly to blame, but if getting at all wet is "not
acceptable" then you have one real option, and that is not to go out in
heavy rain, especially if it's wind blown.

For your £200 or whatever you get the best compromise for the jobs you
need to do that anyone can build for the money. Considering the job
they have to do, they make a pretty good effort IME, especially if you
compare them to what was available 25 years ago. If it isn't good
enough then you need to live somewhere drier!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Phil Cook said:

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:31:46 +0100, NC wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

John Myers wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden]
"Lewis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting
> the jacket out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's
> as water proof as it could be, but about as breathable as a bin
> liner. Different people sweat at different rates. If I stand still
> with a water proof on I stay dry, but if I'm walking with a pack, I
> get a bit damp.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet
after 10 minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid #200 of your hard earned
cash to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently
is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from
inside is irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does
any other jacket i have had.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I repeat what I wrote earlier. If the jacket doesn't keep the water out, and
is only a couple of months old, its clearly not fit for purpose. Therefore,
return it to the retailer for a full refund.

Quoted message said:

Except the jacket probably *does* keep the water out. The problem is
that it's probably not letting it *out* fast enough for this
particular wearer. Since the wearer applies the same complaint to
other breathable rainwear it probably means he out-sweats them all.

I have a Helly Hansen breathable waterproof coat, much more breathable
than my previous Goretex rubbish, but even so, on one wet day carrying
a very heavy pack up a hill I sweated so much inside that my mobile
phone in an interior pocket got totally soaked through -- and
destroyed. My clothes under the coat were dripping wet.

However, the jacket *is* completely waterproof. All the water inside
was my sweat, part direct emission, part condensed (the waterchilled
exterior provides a condensing surface). I was amazed at how much I
much have produced. I wouldn't have been surprised if wringing
everything out had produced a litre.

It was that experience that convinced me that wearing a waterproof in
the rain if you're going to sweat a lot is a waste of time.

OTOH, when I'm *not* sweating too much (for me, walking uphill with a
light pack), then the HH is a great garment, and a great improvement
on the previous Goretex thing which couldn't even handle the sweat of
me walking briskly along the flat in the rain with no pack.

You can reduce the amount you sweat in the rain by arranging a greater
rate of heat loss, such as opening side vents, wearing shorts (zipping
off trouser bottoms), opening neck, etc..

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful person
Chris Malcolm <[email hidden]> said
<snip>

Quoted message said:

However, the jacket *is* completely waterproof. All the water inside
was my sweat, part direct emission, part condensed (the waterchilled
exterior provides a condensing surface). I was amazed at how much I
much have produced. I wouldn't have been surprised if wringing
everything out had produced a litre.

IIRC when you are working hard, you can perspire/exhale something in the
region of 1Ltr PER HOUR .. weigh your self 'before/after' that long hard
walk and see how much weight you (very temporarily) shed!

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Outgoing Msgs are Turing Tested,and indistinguishable from human typing.

--
Does living in Lincs make me a flatlander :-( ??

Remove the flatlands to reply by email.

[email hidden]
"Phil Cook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

NC said:

John Myers said:

[email hidden]
"Lewis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Are you sure it was the rain getting in? Usually it's YOU wetting
> the jacket out from the inside. I have a triple point hat and it's
> as water proof as it could be, but about as breathable as a bin
> liner. Different people sweat at different rates. If I stand still
> with a water proof on I stay dry, but if I'm walking with a pack, I
> get a bit damp.

Lewis
I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet
after 10 minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned
cash to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently
is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from
inside is irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does
any other jacket i have had.

Quoted message said:

I repeat what I wrote earlier. If the jacket doesn't keep the water out,

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is only a couple of months old, its clearly not fit for purpose.

Therefore,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

return it to the retailer for a full refund.

Except the jacket probably *does* keep the water out. The problem is
that it's probably not letting it *out* fast enough for this
particular wearer. Since the wearer applies the same complaint to
other breathable rainwear it probably means he out-sweats them all.

I agree with your comment but shouldn't the emphasis be on the makers to
produce something which actually does work, and stop kidding us with
unrealistic claims, and techy bumf which means nothing.
I cant remember seeing a Jacket in a shop which tells me if i sweat
profusely i wont keep dry.
What value is there in the word "breathable" if you still get wet.

John

Quoted message said:

--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Hi John

You're basically describing the effect I get inside a Goretex Paclite, I use
Paramo now, but their system throws up a few more problems.

If the jacket was described as "breathable" when you bought it I think you
would be quite within your rights to return it as not fit for purpose.

You will still need a jacket, though, and if you're looking for something
that does the job 100% I fear there is no such product, at least not one
that works for everyone.

If you decide to return it contact your local Trading Standards office and
they will give you some advice.

Good luck and let us know how you get on.

Lewis

John Myers said:

I agree with your comment but shouldn't the emphasis be on the makers
to produce something which actually does work, and stop kidding us
with unrealistic claims, and techy bumf which means nothing.

Unrealistic claims and techy bumf is the province of marketing. c.f.
cars, washing powders, perfumes, drinks or basically just about anything
you can buy on the high street.
The technical folk are trying to do as well as they can with their
design briefs, but how this is sold isn't up to them. Since every
marketing department is basically out doing creative lying you've just
got to realise that, divorce it from your expectations which should be
based on actual reality, and get on with it.

Quoted message said:

I cant remember seeing a Jacket in a shop which tells me if i sweat
profusely i wont keep dry.

Because it won't sell it. Marketing is about selling things. OTOH I
know I'll sweat a fair bit walking up a hill in a wicking top and
nothing else, so add in a windproof coat and 100% humidity and it's
pretty obvious I'm not going to be dry. If I think I will then that's
just unrealistic.

Quoted message said:

What value is there in the word "breathable" if you still get wet.

That's a very easy experiment to do, simply by doing a compare and
contrast with something that is completely non-porous. For those of us
who were walking when PU coated nylon was the de-facto standard for most
it is very, very easy to recall why we were so pleased with even the
first breathable jackets, which are decidedly inferior to today's. Your
comment implies that if you can't have 100% then there's no point in
having anything, but in practice /any/ significant improvement over 0%
is worth having.

It isn't about staying totally dry, it's about staying as comfortable as
reasonably possible. That's very hard in a completely non-porous
jacket, as anyone who's been there and done that will know.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

--
Does living in Lincs make me a flatlander :-( ??

Remove the flatlands to reply by email.

[email hidden]
"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

NC said:

John Myers wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I do sweat as most other people do, but i dont expect to be wet
after 10 minutes in the rain.
It is just not acceptable when you have paid £200 of your hard earned
cash to say a jacket is water proof and breathable when it patently
is not.
The point is i get wet, whether the rain comes in, or i sweat from
inside is irrelevant, the jacket does not keep my dry, neither does
any other jacket i have had.

Quoted message said:

I repeat what I wrote earlier. If the jacket doesn't keep the water out,

and

Quoted message said:

is only a couple of months old, its clearly not fit for purpose.

Therefore,

Quoted message said:

return it to the retailer for a full refund.

Wot Nigel says. And it's reasonably easy to test it to see if it does
let water in.

But as for if you get wet from rain or sweat, it does make a very big
difference. One is fairly warm, one is cold. The main point of a
jacket is primarily to keep you reasonably comfortable as well as
possible, not to keep you bone dry. Keeping dry is nice, but it's only
ever really a fringe benefit. If you try a walk in a Cagjac ca. 1980
then you'll know how much /more/ comfortable modern fabrics allow you to
be. Also check out the neck and wrist seals on paddling cags if you
want to see what is really required to keep water genuinely and
completely /out/: they are simply not practical for walking due to
comfort considerations: any water that does get in through the seals on
a walking jacket would have less comfort impact than just wearing a
jacket with formal dry seals.

Quoted message said:

The experience of many others is that waterproof breathable jackets do

work,

Quoted message said:

though have their limits as to breathability (most people sweat more than
the jacket will shift through the breathable layer)

And they have limits on the quality of the neck, hem and wrist seals for
very good reasons too. Rain is hard to keep out of a flexible, moving
structure that needs holes and must be light. Marketing that suggests
otherwise is partly to blame, but if getting at all wet is "not
acceptable" then you have one real option, and that is not to go out in
heavy rain, especially if it's wind blown.

For your £200 or whatever you get the best compromise for the jobs you
need to do that anyone can build for the money. Considering the job
they have to do, they make a pretty good effort IME, especially if you
compare them to what was available 25 years ago. If it isn't good
enough then you need to live somewhere drier!

Oh well we better acccept second best then,
My real complaint is with the manufacturers who claim breathability which in
actual fact means not much!
Breathability is supposedly meant to keep you dry excess moisture is
supposed to be wicked away, but as we all know too well if your jacket is
wet through on the outside then breathability is vitually none existent.
Cant understand anybody defending this situation we as users should be
discerning and demand more anyway.

By the way U on the payroll at Lowe!

John

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/