Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

cyclingnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 397 posts

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#171

Post by paulcole »

stygiansonic wrote: post #148
paulcole wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what makes ShakeDry so revolutionary. The nonsense brands have been saying about waterproof and breathable is actually real. I’ve done 30 mile runs in the pouring rain w/ my ShakeDry jacket and come out “dry” at the end. The material never wets through. The only downside for me is that it does wear “warm” so I mostly wear it in under 45F degree weather — which coincides nicely with Portland’s rainiest weather…

So your sweat is able to evaporate through the membrane leaving you dry? This is the biggest issue I’ve had with so called “breathable” membranes. (I assume you still sweat in < 45F weather because I still sweat even in freezing temperatures when running, depending on other conditions, etc)

I wear a Patagonia capilene baselayer and am often surprised by how dry everything (both myself and the baselayer) are beneath the ShakeDry jacket. There’s exceptions for sure: harder efforts, slightly warmer temperatures, times when the wrists off of my shirt “wick” water up into the body of the shirt/jacket, etc.

Overall though for cold (32-45F) and rainy weather like we get a lot in the PNW, it’s an amazing fabric.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#172

Post by nwah1 »

akiselev wrote: post #142
elric wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember reading something about the trillions of chiken bones we discard annually are something of a problem. "The dose makes the poison" seems to apply to the environment as much as it does to the individual.

That doesn’t make much sense. Every atom of calcium in a chicken bone came from a field somewhere that now has to be augmented with more calcium. The easiest way to supply that calcium is to grind up the chicken bones and sprinkle them on the fields - if you go to a garden center you’ll find tons of products that list “bonemeal” as an ingredient. Since chickens require 3-5x their biomass in food and calcium in their…

Matter is neither created nor destroyed. The atomes in the landfill are also still available to be reclaimed.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#173

Post by irrational »

1MachineElf wrote: post #158
keitmo wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For years I've said "any clothing manufacturer that promises something is both 'waterproof' and 'breathable' is lying to you". Shakedry actually delivers on this promise. FWIW I do endurance cycling in the Seattle area, a.k.a. "The Pacific NorthWET". We tend to stress the hell out of waterproof clothing.

In Florida, living between the coast and the everglades, rain is a daily occurrence. Having grown up there for 20 years, I feel that rain doesn't phase me at all. I have questioned the averseness northerners have towards getting wet. Living in Maryland now, so many I've interacted with will just not go outside all day if there is rain. They've been raised by parents who've trained them to wait for the rain to stop, t…

When I lived in south Florida, it would rarely rain 24/7. I now live in the PNW where it does rain 24/7 for about 9 months of the year. And it is cold.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#174

Post by paulcole »

flybrand wrote: post #117
paulcole wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ShakeDry is much better than eVent in my experience running in very wet weather. eVent is fine for shoes (I’m pretty sure it’s what Altra uses in the weatherproof Lone Peaks) but for both weight and performance, ShakeDry is the better jacket material. I’ve spent way too much money on running gear over the years and ShakeDry laps the field in waterproof + breathable. To be honest, I don’t particularly care what perfor…

Did you work with POLARTEC Neoshell or the North Face Futurelight? There were some bike garments made of similar materials.

I’ve had Neoshell shoes and they were fine as well. But never worn anything w/ that fabric or Futurelight. But from the branding that is very alpine/mountaineering focused, I’d guess that Futurelight is going to be too warm/heavy to be practical for running.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#175

Post by hedora »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #116
blindriver wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ditched them a while ago as well. I only use cast iron or stainless steel and it makes me wonder why I ever bothered with non-stick before.

> I only use cast iron or stainless steel and it makes me wonder why I ever bothered with non-stick before. Because they are incredibly useful when it comes to certain kinds of food, especially eggs and fish. I find all the "self-congratulatory" posts on the topic of non-stick pans, and demonization of people that use them, of the "thou doth protest too much" quality. Tons of renowned chefs, like Jacques Pepin, have…

We do crepes and eggs on some old lodge ware cast iron skillet.

Behold my l33t level 10 cookware maintenance skillz:

We got it on sale for like $20, new, but then I accidentally left outside for a few years, which created some rust spots.

I fixed it by hitting it with a stainless steel pot scrubber and dawn for about 120 seconds, then put it in the oven at 350F with some canola oil on it for about an hour.

These days, I scrub it with a nylon brush (no soap) or wipe it out with a paper towel.

I've never been able to do a decent crepe or egg in non stick, due to uneven heating.

shrug

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#176

Post by JadeNB »

TrispusAttucks wrote: post #2

I am not optimistic about the future of sustainable specialized materials. It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.

> It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.

This certainly seems plausible, but on what basis do you find it likely?

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#177

Post by [deleted] »

Spooky23 wrote: post #115
wyre wrote: post #13

For anyone not familiar with what makes Shakedry so revolutionary is its ability to be waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight. Its weight and breathability make it incredible for active sports like cycling or running. These jackets weigh around 100-150g depending on features and size and can pack into the pocket of a cycling Jersey, all while being waterproof and preventing the athlete from overhea…

You stay dry, and increase risk of a host of nasty cancers and environmental devastation.

[deleted]

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#178

Post by takeda »

wernercd wrote: post #145
siftrics wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The only downside for me Not to mention the main downside of getting cancer

[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfluorooctanoic_acid#Health_...

Why do you think they are discontinuing it if it is so amazing in what it does?

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#179

Post by wyre »

flybrand wrote: post #117
paulcole wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ShakeDry is much better than eVent in my experience running in very wet weather. eVent is fine for shoes (I’m pretty sure it’s what Altra uses in the weatherproof Lone Peaks) but for both weight and performance, ShakeDry is the better jacket material. I’ve spent way too much money on running gear over the years and ShakeDry laps the field in waterproof + breathable. To be honest, I don’t particularly care what perfor…

Did you work with POLARTEC Neoshell or the North Face Futurelight? There were some bike garments made of similar materials.

Neoshell and Futurelight are 3L fabrics so are going to be more similar to eVent than shakedry.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#180

Post by nwah1 »

acdha wrote: post #32
BurningFrog wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Natural" materials can be just as toxic as manufactures ones.

Yes, but it’s less common to have completely unknown effects and from the perspective of pollution they have the desirable property of being broken down quickly when discarded or if bits flake off during normal use. That still doesn’t mean you can’t overload the ecosystem but it does mean that problems can self-correct more.

The natural/synthetic distinction is arbitrary, but you are both right.

The correct approach would be to get more granular and specify that we only want to elininate chemicals, whether natural or synthetic, that do not break down or are toxic.

If you find a natural source of PFAS ("forever chemicals") then it isn't any better.

Post reply on HN