Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 48

Thread: Talkback: How To Care For Your Outdoor Garments

  1. #21
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    Actually, it's a bit more complicated.

    For the best result, you should look with which kind of DWR the piece was originally treated as different chemistries don't match necessarily.

    Also, what do you mean with the word 'best'. On the ecological front, Nikwax is very good. But on the durability front, it's one of the worst.

  2. #22
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    97


    Kahti

    Almost all the money is being invested in PFC-free DWRs; unless you know something I don't. The PFC ones still have the best performance, which is why brands don't want to swap for something that is not as good

    Woubeir

    You are right in that it would be best to match chemistries, but finding out details of what brands have used is very complicated. Fortunately Nikwax does work well with most of the DWR formulations. If you heat seal Nikwax product you do increase their durability. However nothing I have come across is as durable as a factory applied DWR. I am not a fan of Graingers as they still use PFC technologies - the interesting progress is from both Nikwax & Storm IMHO

    rgds

  3. #23
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    Actually, Granger's has now an acryl-based PFC-free range.

    EDIT: and going to their website, they now have only 1 or 2 products left with PFC in it.

  4. #24
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Not surprising really is it, since they were left lagging a long way behind as a competitor by Nikwax last many years!
    Trevor DC Gamble

  5. #25
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    Again, perhaps in the UK, but not here in Belgium.

    I think the move was particurly influenced by the critique PFC's got/get.

  6. #26
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Yes, you gotta give the people what they want basically. These days people want a good but essentially greener product for protecting the environment.
    Trevor DC Gamble

  7. #27
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    The problem probably will be that the product will definitely be greener, but also that it will not perform as good as before.

  8. #28
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Probably quite so in a lot of cases with various things, but happily that has not been my experience using Nikwax products mostly over the last decade or more.
    Trevor DC Gamble

  9. #29
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    OK, what is performance for you ? Water they repel all. But I remember even a test in Trail that showed that Nikwax was clearly less durable than the PFC-products from Granger's and Storm.

  10. #30
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    It just has to work! That is, without depositing extremely persistent toxic particles into the world ecology. Bad enough all of the stuff like this that comes from the actual manufacturing processes of things like Gore Tex, Teflon etc. Without me going personally adding to it all by use of wash in or spray on products that put more of this stuff out there!
    Trevor DC Gamble

  11. #31
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    I should say too, that I thought that test result in Trail magazine you mention, would have done well to state the extremely worrying down side of using such products still for the environment.
    Trevor DC Gamble

  12. #32
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    I can always add a new reproof to something if needs be, easy peasy!
    Trevor DC Gamble

  13. #33
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    Yes, but I also remember that a study sais that the ecological impact of washing an reproofing more often is bigger.

    And most of the info about the toxic nature of PFC's came after the article was published.

  14. #34
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Greenpeace have the very good 2012 report on outdoor clothing downloadable from their website as a pdf file. Worthy of a read.
    Trevor DC Gamble

  15. #35
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    This study was from early this year.

    BTW, Greenpeace also updated their report earlier this year.

  16. #36
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Like to read that study then, if you could provide a link perhaps here? Yes, but Greenpeace still do not seem to have updated the pdf file for download sadly. Lots of newer stuff on their website all the time of course. Nikwax still claim the opposite, that it is far more environmentally friendly to use non pfc containing products to reproof garments.
    Trevor DC Gamble

  17. #37

  18. #38
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Fantastic stuff, thanks! Will enjoy reading that, as have definitely missed it for sure. Of course our OM's Jon has covered a lot of this stuff on here too to be fair, following that Guardian newspaper bit a while back ago now.
    Trevor DC Gamble

  19. #39
    Übermensch Trevor DC Gamble's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom, Tunbridge Wells area.
    Posts
    4,894
    Wow! Frightening stuff actually there, Woubeir. Cannot on first scan through see the bit in the study on usage of reproofing stuff. Is that else where at all maybe, please?
    Trevor DC Gamble

  20. #40
    Mini Goon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    93


    No, that is from another study. I have it but where can you find it online ?

    I know that PFC-C8, PFC-C6 and a PFC-free were tested and the conclusions are:

    Based on these results, the main findings of this study can be summarised as follows:[*]All DWR treatments available today come with some toxicity potential. However, in a cradle to grave perspective, the actual impact of the DWR ingredients are not the main drivers for the toxicity potential indicators.[/list][*]The results overwhelmingly point to the use phase as the most significant contributor to the jacket's toxicity potential: Using a non-fluorinated DWR treatment is the single biggest driver for the toxicity potential impact indicators. Confirming that durability of the jacket in general and of the DWR in this case are key factors to reduce the environmental footprint of outdoor apparel products.[/list][*]The conclusions of this study do not support the assumption that currently available alternative DWR treatments offer a better environmental and health profile when compared to C-6 based DWR. Namely due to their inability to meet current performance expectations. Indeed, the field study data used for this LCA indicates that among the tested and currently available DWR treatments, C-6 based DWR formula is more durable. Requiring fewer wash & care cycles and therefore having a better environmental profile for the assessed end-uses.[*]Conversely, the conclusions of this study do suggest that substituting a shortchainfluorinated treatment with a non-fluorinated DWR treatment, whose performance does not provide sufficiently long lasting water repellency in field use
    conditions, will result in increased adverse environmental and health effects[*]The jacket's production represent together more than 53% of the
    jacket's Global Warming Potential[/list]

Similar Threads

  1. Talkback: Gore-Tex Care - The Official Video
    By Charles Ross in forum Article talkback
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18-01-2014, 10:37 PM
  2. Talkback: Monday Tip - Post-Camping Kit Care
    By Peter Clinch in forum Article talkback
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-06-2012, 06:58 PM
  3. Talkback: Monday Tip - Taking Care Of Your Tent
    By Zuma in forum Article talkback
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 15-08-2011, 08:29 PM
  4. Talkback: Tuesday Tip - Footwear Care
    By Imperial Dave in forum Article talkback
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-02-2011, 03:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •