REVIEW: Mountain Equipment Superflux Jacket

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 UKC/UKH Gear 31 Oct 2017
Ideal for a chilly day on Skye, 3 kbME's first foray into synthetic down insulation, the Superflux has the softness, loft and warmth-to-weight you'd normally associate with feathers, says Dan Bailey.

Read more
Removed User 31 Oct 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Gear:

Two things I'd like to know:

1) Why do UKC product reviewers extraordinaire Bailey and Archer always look so damn miserable in review photos?

2) Is there a clumping effect with synthetic down when it gets damp? If so does this impair performance over a traditional synthetic insulation? Finally how does it compare with hydrophobic down.

 olddirtydoggy 31 Oct 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Gear:

What would the product be like if they stuffed it in a Fitzroy?
 TobyA 01 Nov 2017
In reply to Removed User:

Dan is smiling in one of the photos! And for my part, particularly when i set up a photo using self timer I feel a complete tit then grinning at the camera!
 Mr Fuller 01 Nov 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Gear:
Blown fills like Polarloft Featherless do indeed change the parameters when it comes to designing a garment. When it comes to traditional synthetic wadding like Primaloft etc. it is simply sewn into a garment like a fabric. With Featherless, however, just like down it has to be kept in baffles to avoid shifting around inside the jacket. One difference versus down, though, is that our research has shown that with synthetic featherless those baffles need to be relatively small (even smaller than if you were using down). This clearly presents design limitations.

We agree with Dan regarding use of the jacket: the stitch lines on the Superflux means that in really difficult conditions (damp, freezing, riming) this type of product will not offer such good protection, or function as well as an overlayer such as our practically waterproof Prophet jacket or as our highly water resistant Fitzroy and Citadel jackets. On the plus side it is infinitely softer and more comfortable to wear especially as a mid-layer, meaning that in all but the most testing of conditions it is probably a better all-round option.

We could certainly make an all-out ‘belay jacket’ with Polarloft Featherless. Basically we’d continue the construction method used on the shoulder yoke to the rest of the jacket, and beef up a few of the other features. It’s something we’ve looked at doing but whether the advantages of this construction would really count in the world of a belay jacket is open to argument in our view.

Addressing the forum’s questions…

1) Clumping of blown synthetic fills doesn’t happen as it might with down. In normal use you’re unlikely to make it turn to those hard little balls that down eventually forms once completely drenched, but it might with the cheapest blown synthetics just because the fibres and interactions between them are so weak. We tested a lot of options before coming out with Polarloft Featherless and were unimpressed by many of them. Some clumped readily, some were almost impossible to put into a garment evenly, some just weren’t very warm, and some were great for a while but then disintegrated after about ten cycles through the washing machine. Some were ruined after less than 5 wash cycles. So, yes some blown synthetics can clump but this one certainly shouldn’t.

2) Hydrophobic down differs quite a bit to blown synthetics. Down remains the be-all and end-all when it comes to warmth to weight ratio, and we may never match it, for reasons discussed here: https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=8322 However down, whether coated with a hydrophobic treatment or not, is inferior in really wet conditions to synthetic insulations. We at ME use hydrophobic down in a few of our products, generally relatively lightweight jackets which have shell fabrics with no water resistant coating. We use it there because the jackets are likely to be used in mixed conditions, often above freezing where rain might be encountered, and because it gives them half a chance of fighting off a short sharp shower. However, hydrophobic down isn’t fundamentally different to down in that once that repellent coating has been penetrated it will still get very wet and will still clump together in the way that synthetics shouldn’t. We don’t use hydrophobic down in our other products (warmer jackets, sleeping bags) for various reasons. Firstly the coating has a relatively low lifespan (it’s effectively DWR for feathers; we know how quickly DWRs become less effective). Also, hydrophobic down doesn’t fundamentally change the way a down product can be used: it’s still no use in prolonged wet conditions, and if you’re going out in the pouring rain then down probably isn’t the best option!. Hydrophobic down is also less effective at dealing with moisture than using a shell fabric with a water repellent coating which will last the lifetime of the product, and there are various other design things you can do to massively increase the water repellence of down without using a coating. Finally, we aren’t a big fan of taking a natural product like down, removing the natural repellence of the feathers so they don’t smell and clump together, and then sticking on man-made repellents which we as an industry are trying to move away from. So in short, blown synthetics like Polarloft Featherless are better in wet weather than down but don’t provide as much insulation for their weight. They’re less durable over very long term use, but they’re easier to care for than down and a bit more tolerating of rough use.

3) We could make a Fitzroy using Polarloft Featherless and could make it look outwardly the same. However, ‘under the bonnet’ for reasons discussed above, it would be very different. It’d be pretty difficult to construct but we like a challenge! In terms of performance we’d expect similar weight and warmth with marginally improved breathability, but greater softness and wearability. It might cost a fair bit but we wouldn’t be sure until we do further design work.

Sorry for the monster post.

Dr Matthew Fuller, Product Engineer at Mountain Equipment
Post edited at 14:59
In reply to Removed User:

That's not misery - it's just my default farting-around-with-camera-timers-and-remote-triggers face. Inside I'm smiling. Plus, like Toby says, if I try to force a grin I feel like an eedjit and it ends up looking more like a grimace anyway.

As for the important questions, Dr Matt has covered them better than I could...
Removed User 02 Nov 2017
In reply to Mr Fuller:

A most excellent and informative response. Cheers.

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...