 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Could NeverWet change the market for ski clothing? What about waxing skis? Spotted this article in The Independent. Make sure you watch the video.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Remarkable! As you suggest, Rob, I could see that substantially increasing the speed of skis (and any waterborne craft etc). But they significantly make no mention of whether it blocks the expulsion of sweat from shoes and shirts etc. I suspect that GoreTex has little to worry about ... but let's see ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
xx
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Mon 25-04-16 22:07; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Nor any mention of how well it would cope with any abrasion. I suspect that the coating would be removed from skis in minutes,if not seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Re wax, that's not how it works...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
under a new name, how does it work?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think we've had the US nano-coating video stuff before. I'd be inclined to give it a go as a DWR replacement on a old jacket but I'd probably leave under arms etc unsprayed. Could be good for spaying trainers for splashing through puddles though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar, afaiu, teh wax creates a higher friction surface to promote a very thin layer of melted water between the snow and the ski, which is what get's rid of the effective friction.
Or something.
I believe that base materials tend not to wet very well anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| fatbob wrote: |
| Could be good for spaying trainers |
Seems a bit excessive, what have the ski instructors ever done to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
How would you wash your clothes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
My daughter keeps telling me that Cocona is the best thing since sliced bread! But she has got a part time job now at TOG24 who sell lots of the stuff. No doubt with her impressive discount I'll be trying some out 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It won't block anything as it's a coating on each individual fibre. Where the challenge will be is now in weaving a fabric at a density that would prevent water droplets from passing through, but allowing vapour to return.
This wouldn't need to be on a molecular level like Gore-Tex, as the fabric itself is never wetted. It would have to be woven in such a way that the gaps in the fabric are small enough to prevent droplets from passing through based on surface tension. i.e. how large a hole can you have before the smallest practical water droplet won't pass through due to the surface tension within the droplet and the repellency of the fibres.
Imagine a squash ball and chicken wire. As the droplet, at it's smallest size, isn't getting broken up, nor absorbed between the fibres, it would 'bounce' off the fabric.
I know what I mean, but I'm not sure I'm putting it into words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| feef wrote: |
| It won't block anything as it's a coating on each individual fibre. Where the challenge will be is now in weaving a fabric at a density that would prevent water droplets from passing through, but allowing vapour to return.. |
So how does the work gloves example above work? AIUI these are typically a low grade split leather so certainly absorb water?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I bought a pack of NeverWet to test out when I was in the States, and used it on a pair of brand new, white running shoes. It's easy to apply, but it does leave an unpleasant chalky/tacky finish - it's OK on the white shoes, but it definitely wouldn't be suitable for clothing. Their FAQs also say not suitable for any surface subject to abrasion, so not a substitute for ski wax! Might be good for ski upper surface (though will affect cosmetic appearance), ski boot clips or bindings. I might be tempted to try it on my touring bindings, where they get jammed up with ice.
I tested the shoes out today in muddy fields - really deep, squelchy muddy puddles. My feet got wet, and the white fabric of the shoes is now a patchy light shade of grey. However, the mud didn't stick at all, the soles stayed completely clear, and in normal use I think that the shoes would shrug off most dirt and moisture.
If I'd been able to bring the pack back (airline regulations forbid, and shipping proved impossible), I'd have used it selectively on my Laser dinghy sail, and maybe the deck of the boat too. Would be good for an MTB, if cosmetic appearance isn't top priority. Wellies or walking boots could be a good application too. Currently not available in the UK but maybe somebody will import it before long
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
i got some as well in the states and trying to come up with some things to use it on, bindings and ski uppers sound a good idea
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
mr brain cheat, Thanks for the info - but why couldnt you bring it back ? Put it in hold luggage and surely it would be fine ? As I suspect thats whatskimottaret, did.
Thinking of getting some to bring back, when we go over. Just have to find a use for it then 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Bones wrote: |
| mr brain cheat, Thanks for the info - but why couldnt you bring it back ? Put it in hold luggage and surely it would be fine ? As I suspect thats whatskimottaret, did. |
Lots of inflammables in the canisters, so really didn't want to risk it. Also Mrs Brain Cheat is a nervous flyer at the best of times, so even less chance of sneaking them past her than airport security 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
