What are quality differences between Fleece?

Breathability I bought a really cheap fleece before a combat medic course in 2017, so I could wash it a high temperature without feeling a big loss if I destroyed it. It looked great. But it was like a raincoat. It was horrible.

I have realized that I need two different fleece jacket. A decent looking for normal daily use, and one with really high breathability for serious outdoor use. For extra insulation, just another layer is one way to go. For example add a mesh layer under the normal long wool underwear.

Suggestion: Take a look at the Norrøna page for midlayers, study the difference between their products, and transfer the ideas it gives you to general use.

posted almost 6 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Ole Bjørsvik‭

11 reputation 0 5 1 0

Some (maybe not all) aspects are:

Insulation per weight ratio While your observation "the thicker the warmer" is true in general, there are fleeces that are warmer for the same weight and thickness than others. Unfortunately, there's normally no objective measure given for that feature in product descriptions.

Stretch While simple fleece fabrics are built on a base fabric that does not stretch at all, more expensive ones are woven in a way that makes them stretch. This allows the clothes to be tailored more close-fittingly while it still can follow the wearer's movements. A more body-fitting jacket provides better insulation for the same fabric and saves on fabric and hence weight.

Stability Cheap fleece fabrics are more susceptible to "pilling", i.e. the fibers tend to clump together into small spherical fuzz under repeated frictional load.

Cut and features The cut of specialized alpine gear is typically optimized for this usage. For example, alpine clothing typically does not have seams on top of the shoulders pieces since they can be irritating or lead to chafing when wearing a heavy backpack. Since this construction requires more pieces of cloth and is harder to sew, cheaper jackets might opt for simpler constructions. Also gear by more expensive and alpine-specialized brands may have nice features like pockets that are placed in a way that they are not blocked by your backpack straps, zippers that can be used with gloves and similar small advantages. It is not said, that a cheap piece of clothing won't have such features, but sometimes more by chance than by design.

Finally, you will of course also pay for the brand name on the more expensive gear.

posted almost 6 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Benedikt Bauer‭

181 reputation 4 67 21 0

When you buy Patagonia or Arcteryx you are paying, at least in part, for a status signaling label. Patagonia is sometimes derisively referred to as Patagucci. That said, I do own some Patagonia clothing and I've found it to be durable and functional. They also arguably have sourcing arrangements that reduce the environmental impact of manufacturing. Similarly, Arcteryx is sometimes referred to as the 'Cult of the Dead Bird', but all of my outdoor sports minded friends who've laid out the money for Arcteryx have been satisfied with the performance of their clothing, if not the price.

You may be able to find some general retail outdoor clothing that will be perfectly functional, but dirt cheap. However, the lower the price point, the more chance there will be that the manufacturer has cut corners in the construction somewhere. You aren't going to the top of Everest, but there is a chance you could be outside several days in snow and high winds. You don't want to worry about your clothing failing under those conditions.

If you aren't sure about being able to evaluate construction quality, but have friends who are alpinists, or at least regular hikers, you might get them to go shopping with you. Also, your trekking service may be happy to recommend specific models that they know to be fit to the purpose. However, they may not lead you to the best bargains.

posted almost 6 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Charles E. Grant‭

121 reputation 2 23 12 0