Gore-Tex XCR vs. Gore-Tex Soft Shell

[vinnay]

thanks for the documents, very helpful, love the pat one, although i wish it was updated for this years garments - i might try and contact them about it.

basically came away thinking everyone should have a good hardshell and a good softshell.

[Tony]

basically came away thinking everyone should have a good hardshell and a good softshell.

I think you got the idea.

And even Patagonia acknowledges the virtues of the Goretex XCR when used for its intended design (from the Patti doc):

"The (ice) climber, for instance, needs the stretch, high compressibility, low weight, extended DWR performance and breathability that H2No® Stretch HB fabric lends the (Patagucci) Stretch Element Jacket. But many of those characteristics are overkill for even the most committed alpine skier or patroller, for whom the Primo Jacket offers more sport-specific features and an excellent, more downhill-appropriate fabric: in this case, Gore® XCR®."

For their use of the words "alpine skier" and "patroller" in the above statement, I understand that they believe Goretex XCR is great for on-piste descent-oriented clothing for its high standards of waterproofness. When breathabilty comes to play (climbing, AT and off piste) they advocate for their proprietary H2No® Stretch HB fabric.

Nevertheless is seems to be a higher standard deviation of "percent of naked" in the softshells than in the hardshells. These last seem to be stacked in a 25-45% range against 35-95% range for softshells.



I know, I know: nerdy stuff should be posted in gapic website...

[vinnay]

no i think its pretty interesting. also re: their thoughts on gore xcr, marshal explained to me in a PM that pats 3 layer h2no, ie the chute to thrill jacket/pants this year, is very similar to xcr.

i'll quote part of the PM so he doesn't have to restate:

"well, patagonia has been making 3layer stuff since the late eighties, and really has it dialed. h2no is really basically the same as XCR. the use the same PTFE compound, and the 3rd lam. layer is basically the same. i really think it basically works the same. i do not think that of membrain and conduit etc..." - marshalolson.

[Treepinner]

Err, not. Patagucci is not using a PTFE laminate in any of their proprietary fabrics. They change the formula a lot but H2No is primarily a microporous polyurethane coating with an inner laminate. eVent is essentially first generation Goretex, which means it works well but has the same problems with contamination from oils, etc. It also isn't true to say the laminate is the same in XCR and Windstopper; they both use PTFE but there are differences in thickness and porosity. Next year, Gore ups the ante with Goretex Pro which replaces XCR.

[Tony]

That's the way I understand it too: H2No is a coating (like precip and conduit)not a membrane. But because it is a very efficient coating, it's as breathable and waterproof as XCR and, more importantly, at a lower weight. I base this on personal experience, not some chart published on the Internet.



On the Goretex PRO note:

Goretex Classic (v. 1.0) = More Breathability - Less Waterproof
Goretex v. 2.0 = More Waterproof - Less Breathability
Goretex XCR = More Breathability - Less Waterproof

Let me guess....Goretex PRO = More Waterproof - Less Breathability???

[Treepinner]

Not really. Waterproofness has always been fairly similar (until 1st gen leaked or delamed) and better than most coatings until recently. The chart would be more like:

Goretex 1.0/eVent = waterproof - most breathable - short lived
Goretex 2.0 - 15.0/Classic = waterproof - less breathable - long life
Goretex Paclite = waterproof - more breathable - moderate life - lightest
Goretex XCR = waterproof - highly breathable - long life
Goretex Pro = waterproof - highly breathable - longest life - lighter

But there are so many permutations of face fabrics, linings, DWRs, and membrane generations that it's difficult to compare without getting specific.

BTW Patagucci is every bit as guilty of marketing-speak in that blurb as any of the other brands. Beware their misinformation too.

[Tony]

So GTX PRO will be as breathable and waterproof as XCR, more durable and (almost?) as light as Paclite? Sounds promising. I wonder how they would achieve a longer life than XCR at +or- Paclite weight. Most of the weight is on the outer shell fabric, so maybe a lighter shell fabric? But that wouldn't be as durable, would it?.....just thinking out loud, back to the goomah....

I agree with you at some extent. Patagonia also has a need to push its product against the 800 pound gorilla of the hard shell segment, but the difference with Gore is that:

1) They never try to sell something for what is's not: in this case, Goretex Soft Shell (a PTFE membrane with and inner fleece) as a soft shell.

2) They push their brand equity, not a de-facto industry standard. And they do this by striving to design, manufacture and sell products with appropriate fabrics for their intended use, eg. Goretex XCR 2-layer in Primo descent oriented hardshells (long life, waterproof) or Epic on (1st gen.) Dimension ascent-oriented soft shell jacket (very breathable, highly water-resistant).

Disclaimer: I don't own stock in Patagonia or have any business related interest on the company.

[vinnay]

im out of my league here so, paging marshal on what he said re: pat.

one thing though, if there is no membrane in any of pats stuff, why would it ever be 3 layer? if its just a coating it seems to me it should always be 2 layer.

also, regardless, if h2no is just as waterproof and more breathable are you saying its better?

[Spats]

I notice their H2NO stretch is a whopping 5% more breathable than XCR -- according to Patagonia's own tests. Methinks it's a $ issue.

Also remember that these tests are on clean fabric. When the laminate itself gets dirty, it passes no water vapor. When the shell fabric gets dirty, it spoils the DWR, which passes no water vapor -- and the fabric wets out.

I'm pretty much done with "breathable" fabrics as shells, because the DWR never lasts very long under real-world use, and that's the limiting factor. Then you have a jacket which is technically waterproof, but wets out and chills you anyway.

My exception: RainShield jackets and pants, which are a simple plastic membrane with no DWR to get dirty or wash off. They rule, but are way too flimsy for regular use.

[vinnay]

I'm pretty much done with "breathable" fabrics as shells, because the DWR never lasts very long under real-world use, and that's the limiting factor. Then you have a jacket which is technically waterproof, but wets out and chills you anyway.

then what do you recommend? besides a pure hardshell which you said is too flimsy.

good point about the clean materials for testing though.

[Tony]

I notice their H2NO stretch is a whopping 5% more breathable than XCR -- according to Patagonia's own tests. Methinks it's a $ issue.

I personally don't believe H2No Stretch is more breathable than XCR (I own both fabrics) and 5% could be a statistical error given the subjective nature of a "percent of naked" test.

BUT I do believe is better a product as a whole for 3 simple reasons:
1) As breathable/waterproof as XCR.
2) Cheaper than XCR.
3) Lighter than XCR.

Vinnay: on the 3-layer HBNo jackets the coating is between the outer fabric and the inner scrim that protects the coating. On 2.5-layer there are some raised printed graphics on the inside that protect the coating.

[vinnay]

then i guess im not sure i understand the difference between the h2no coating layer and the ptfe gore tex membrane layer.

ie the functional layers, what are the differences in the way they breathe/keep water out?

[Spats]

then what do you recommend? besides a pure hardshell which you said is too flimsy.

good point about the clean materials for testing though.

I don't know.

I've been searching for a durable, 100% waterproof rain jacket with pit zips for some time. (By 100% waterproof I mean "the inside stays dry no matter how dirty it is or how long you soak it with a hose, like the PVC coating on real rain slickers.) I think I've finally found one...I've ordered it, and will give a report once it arrives and I've had time to test it.

The ideal would be a breathable fabric that doesn't depend on a DWR coating to not absorb water -- but I don't know of anything like that. Even softshells are dependent on DWR to stay dry AFAIK.

[Spats]

Laminates are all the same: something waterproof/breathable (but flimsy) bonded to something tough (but not waterproof/breathable), with a DWR coating applied to the tough layer to keep it from absorbing water, and a less tough layer on the inside to protect the waterproof-breathable layer from friction, body oils, and salt.

The laminate is never exposed, because it is easily damaged or stained. (Except in some uber-lightweight stuff that isn't designed to last very long.) In a "2-layer" jacket, the waterproof/breathable layer is protected by a liner that hangs freely inside the jacket -- you can feel two separate layers of fabric. In a "3-layer" jacket, a light fabric is bonded to the inside of the membrane as well as the outside, and you can only feel one layer of fabric. A "2.5 layer" jacket is a marketing term for a 3-layer jacket where the inner layer is not fabric -- it's thick printed ink or something similar.

The weakest link in any laminate is the DWR coating, which wears off -- especially if you wear a backpack. Dirt or skin oils also render it ineffective. You'll notice that your brand new jacket is a perfect raincoat, but after you've worn it a couple weeks it starts to wet out. This is because the DWR is wearing off and getting dirty. Nikwax or Tech Wash help a little, but they don't work as well as the original.

Once the outer layer wets out, it chills you in two ways:
1) Wet fabric is no longer breathable.
2) Most importantly, the water absorbed by the fabric chills you as it evaporates.
This is why Gore-Tex feels cold and clammy when it wets out, even if the water doesn't come through to the inside.

[Tony]

When I thought I had this thing wired, I just discover that there is also...GORE WINDSTOPPER SOFT SHELL!?!?!?!

Guess this is different in some form from Gore Windsotpper and N2S?? Anyway, it might involve some sort of membrane.....

[vinnay]

Spats thats a great explanation for how the shell works, good to know.

My question remains though, re: treepinners statement

Err, not. Patagucci is not using a PTFE laminate in any of their proprietary fabrics.

what is a ptfe laminate and how is it different from the laminate patagonia apparently uses?

i know this convo has gone very techy but i think its useful info.

[marshalolson]

PTFE = polytetrafluoroethylene

PTFE is really what goretex means, and what is copy writed by GORE.

the polyurethane that patagonia uses is as similar as you can get to Goretex without infringing on the patent. I just refered to it short hand as PTFE (like kleenex vs. tissue paper). conduit and membrain are for sure significantly different from h2no and gtex.

conduit is more "crinkly" and less porous, and membrain relys more on the DWR and is more porous.

[Treepinner]

Once the outer layer wets out, it chills you in two ways:
1) Wet fabric is no longer breathable.
2) Most importantly, the water absorbed by the fabric chills you as it evaporates.
This is why Gore-Tex feels cold and clammy when it wets out, even if the water doesn't come through to the inside.

Not quite. Goretex is still breathable when the face fabric is saturated, which is why it's used in highend drysuits and waders. The DWR helps water bead and roll off and that does minimize evaporation but, more importantly, prevents condensation on the inside the shell (often mistaken for leaks). Part of the problem is that people wear too much insulation under their shell. If there is no temperature difference at the membrane, there is almost no driving effect to push moisture to the outside. So warm moisture moves outward past the insulation, hits the cold membrane and condenses. The fabric still functions so it's more of a user-error issue. Another part of the problem is people fail to restore the DWR by putting their shells in the dryer -- a very important step -- after cleaning.

Patagucci uses a coating which is applied like paint and has to dry (environmentally worse than gluing a membrane btw). Their PU is similar to that used by numerous other brands, including some versions of Conduit and Triple Point. PTFE is known as Teflon when applied to cookware but for fabrics it's been expanded to make the holes for vapor. Gore does not have a patent on the ePTFE, which is why eVent exists, but has other trade secrets. The PU coatings do work differently than the PTFE membranes and used to suck but have gotten better.

Tony, H2no isn't any lighter than XCR but some companies spec a heavier face fabric to make burlier shells. It is cheaper, which is the main advantage. They do make stretch Goretex but not many companies use it due to cost, plus stretch isn't needed if the shell is cut well. In general, stretch fabrics of any type are less durable than non-stretch.

The only way to claim Gore Soft Shell (it's just under the Windstopper umbrella but is closer to Goretex Classic) isn't a "true" softshell is to make up an arbitrary definition for a concept that has been around for decades -- just marketing warz, nothing more. I've been using "softshells" of every type for 20+ years and the term is really meaningless since it's so broad. Hell, there are softshell hiking shoes now. Some shells are better in certain climates than others but many companies do a piss-poor job of explaining it all, hence all the confusion.

Note: I don't work for Gore and have no brand affiliations.

[Spats]

The original Gore-Tex patent has run out, which is why there has been an explosion of laminate fabrics during the past few years.

All the waterproof/breathable membranes I know of are different types of plastic (PTFE, polypropylene, etc.) They are generally white, very thin, and about as strong as Kleenex -- which is why they are breathable at all, and which is why they must be laminated to other fabrics.

This is why 3-layer laminates are generally considered superior to 2-layer laminates: in a 2-layer garment, the liner hangs free, and can rub against the membrane, destroying it. In a 3-layer garment, you must wear through the liner to do damage because it's bonded to the waterproof/breathable membrane. If you wear a backpack, 3-layer is strongly recommended.

Also, the liners in many 2-layer garments are not breathable at all, completely defeating the purpose. You can test this by putting a section of liner against your mouth and trying to breathe through it...with many garments, the nylon liner is totally impermeable to air!

[Tony]

Patagucci uses a coating which is applied like paint and has to dry (environmentally worse than gluing a membrane btw).

What he said: H2No is not a membrane (as GTX) but a great coating with similar perfomance to XCR but cheaper and lighter.

Tony, H2no isn't any lighter than XCR but some companies spec a heavier face fabric to make burlier shells. It is cheaper, which is the main advantage. They do make stretch Goretex but not many companies use it due to cost, plus stretch isn't needed if the shell is cut well. In general, stretch fabrics of any type are less durable than non-stretch.

Well, that's a dead end argument then 'cause: as Gore doesn't sell jackets but a membrane coupled with a (heavier denier) fabric according to some manufacturer spec and Patagucci sells jackets (not fabric) with the outer (lighter) fabric of their choice, my statement stands: H2No Jackets are LIGHTER and as waterproof/breathable as XCR jackets. Regarding stretchiness, I cry BS. MAYBE it is not needed for a ski parka but it's definetly useful in alpine climbing. Durability is another issue.

The only way to claim Gore Soft Shell (it's just under the Windstopper umbrella but is closer to Goretex Classic) isn't a "true" softshell is to make up an arbitrary definition for a concept that has been around for decades -- just marketing warz, nothing more.

The soft shell concept was invented many years ago by the constant frustration of scottish climbers with vey waterproof but not breathable fabrics in the humid environment of Ben Nevis. So remember: this was born from the necessities of the climbing community, not the ski industry.

The first soft shell was produced by Buffalo, a british company that manufactured clothing with nylon outer fabric lined with pile.

Patagucci copied this and created the first soft shell jacket in the US: the Infurno.

Marmot copied the concept in a lighter and more versatile piece: the excellent DriClime Windshirt.

I agree with Andy Kirkpatrick, a very respected climber with impressive climbs in the Alps, Himalayas and Patagonia, that a soft shell is something that provides:

1) Maximum performance from a minimum of layers, often with one layer replacing two or more other layers (base, mid and shell).
2) Weather protection that is robust and achievable even though breathability takes PRIORITY over waterproofness.
3) Clothing that is comfortable in a wide range of temperatures and conditions, does not restrict the user and is tough.

Goretex Soft Shell and Windtopper fully comply with 1 and 3, but fail miserably with 2, Hence, in my book they are not soft shell.

You can check great discussion about this in: http://www.psychovertical.com/?cuthecrap

[Treepinner]

my statement stands: H2No Jackets are LIGHTER and as waterproof/breathable as XCR jackets. Regarding stretchiness, I cry BS. MAYBE it is not needed for a ski parka but it's definetly useful in alpine climbing. Durability is another issue.

Only if you state that SOME H2No jackets are lighter than SOME XCR jackets, there are certainly exceptions. As an ice climber, I'll stand by my statement that stretch isn't needed if you have gear that is cut well. It's actually worse if you're wearing stretch layers underneath too -- kinda like being wrapped in an Ace bandage, where you're fighting the clothes.

The soft shell concept was invented many years ago by the constant frustration of scottish climbers with vey waterproof but not breathable fabrics in the humid environment of Ben Nevis. So remember: this was born from the necessities of the climbing community, not the ski industry.

The first soft shell was produced by Buffalo, a british company that manufactured clothing with nylon outer fabric lined with pile.

Patagucci copied this and created the first soft shell jacket in the US: the Infurno.

Marmot copied the concept in a lighter and more versatile piece: the excellent DriClime Windshirt.

This is all BS. The Marmot predated the Infurno (have one) by almost 10 years and they only started calling it a "softshell" recently to keep up with marketing; at the time Buffalo had nothing like Driclime. Buffalo was barely more than an upgraded 60/40 jacket with a wool lining. I wouldn't call any of these a softshell in the first place since they are just insulation and non-stretch windshell sewn together.

Most people would consider softshell a stretchy single layer of fabric with moderate insulation; blocks the wind better than fleece and breathes better than a rainshell. The first for climbing was probably made my Latok in the mid-80s but Cloudveil and Arcteryx popularized the concept in the 90s. Schoeller was the earliest to develop these fabrics, followed by Polartec then Gore and now countless no-brands.

Spats, you are confusing breathability and air permeability; not the same thing. But yeah, most 2-layers are crappy for serious use.

[vinnay]

treepinner - i dont climb but i agree i'm not wild about stretchiness, it just feels weird. a little bit of stretch is nice though.

so takeaway in xcr v. pats 3 layer is that gore uses an actual membrane as the middle layer while pat uses a coating. good to know.

treepinner, do you consider pats 3 layer to really not be any different from conduit or triple point? most others think its more on par w xcr.
further, you seem to think xcr is inherently better than pat's coating, why?

[comish]

But yeah, most 2-layers are crappy for serious use.

Interesting thread. The above reason is just another why I'm bummed at Marmot's direction. They hardly have any 3L GoreTex garments. I have always found 3L to last the longest by a fair amount..

[Tony]

Only if you state that SOME H2No jackets are lighter than SOME XCR jackets, there are certainly exceptions. As an ice climber, I'll stand by my statement that stretch isn't needed if you have gear that is cut well.

We're getting into a game of semantics here. MOST if not ALL Patagonia H2No uninsulated hard shells are less than a pound. MOST Goretex XCR jackets (from many many manufacturers) are above a pound, but the few lightest are close to a pound. I never said that as a climber stretch is NEEDED, if you properly read my post I said VERY USEFUL. And if you are a climber and don't have stretch jackets, you are missing it. Sorry.

This is all BS. The Marmot predated the Infurno (have one) by almost 10 years and they only started calling it a "softshell" recently to keep up with marketing; at the time Buffalo had nothing like Driclime. Buffalo was barely more than an upgraded 60/40 jacket with a wool lining. I wouldn't call any of these a softshell in the first place since they are just insulation and non-stretch windshell sewn together.

No, you stating GTX Soft Shell and Windstopper as soft shell is bullshit.

I never said that the Infurno was launched before the Driclime. You don't seem to properly read the posts. The point I was trying to make by mentioning these two well-known "early" soft shell jackets is how the whole soft shell concept was born: climbers willing to sacrifice complete waterproofness for better breathability. That was the big bang of the soft shell concept. Not stretchiness; stretch fabrics were light years ahead.

Buffalo was, is and will always be bulkier than Driclime because conditions in Northern Scotland are a little more harsh than the sunny Sierras were the Marmot Driclime was developed. BUT THE CONCEPT IS THE SAME: Nylon lined with Pile. And I indeed would call this two soft shells because a) they replace two or more other layers and b) they prioritize breathability, not waterproofness. And who cares if they don't stretch?? You just wrote like 1000 words already in this thread stating that stretchiness is not important, "is the jacket's cut" that counts.

Most people would consider softshell a stretchy single layer of fabric with moderate insulation; blocks the wind better than fleece and breathes better than a rainshell

WRONG, stretch fabrics were light years ahead when the "soft shell" concept was already created (Buffalo, Infurno, Driclime). And in this sentence you exactly portray how these Gore marketing gurus think: "let's make a stretchy layer of fabric bonded with moderate insulation that block the wind better than fleece and call it soft shell. It doesn't matter that it breathes like shit". And most people, as you said above, think of "breathability before waterproofness" as the highest single quality of a soft shell. Then in a second place comes stretchiness.

Cloudveil and Arcteryx popularized the concept in the 90s. Schoeller was the earliest to develop these fabrics, followed by Polartec then Gore and now countless no-brands.

None of these companies even existed when Buffalo gave birth to the soft shell concept. And again, Gore doesn't make a single fabric that can be considered soft shell, as none of its products breathe as well as stretch woven, nylon lined with pile or encapsulated polyester, the only true soft shells in its multiple iterations and evolutions.

[Pierre LeCouloir]

So you're all saying that I should stick with my garbage bag?