From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Gore-Tex rain gear
Date: 18 May 2000 21:51:19 GMT

anonymous writes:

> Okay, let's say it's raining out and it's in the range of 48-70 (F)
> degrees.  My complaint with the nylon/plastic rain gear is that it
> isn't breathable.

If you ride moderately hard, breathability makes no difference in my
experience.  Without wind blowing over your jersey, it and the inside
of the jacket become sopping wet.  My Gore-Tex jacket gets me and its
insides just as wet as my waterproof nylon jacket.  Whenever possible,
like when climbing hills, I ride with the jacket open.  Meanwhile my
arms get soaked from lack of evaporation.

> I've seen Performance & Nashbar both offer their own Gore-Tex rain
> jackets - question is, what are some other good ones from other
> makers?  This is for road riding, and I'm willing to pay good money.

I think you will be disappointed regardless of how much money you spend.

> Again, this is for those rides that you know it will be raining the
> entire time, not just a "just in case" jacket that you can fold into
> a small space and tuck in your jersey.

The colder it gets the more a jacket condenses water on the inside and
Gore-Tex isn't up to passing the rate of moisture produced.  Once wet
on the inside, the whole breahtability concept is dead anyway.  The
most important features I look for in such a jacket is that it has a
good attached hood, that it has a liner to prevents direct contat
between arms and outer shell, that it fits as closely as possible and
that it can be partially opened in the front without releasing the
collar closure.  I use my jacket primarily for mountain bicycling
where high altitude can bring snow any time of year.  When it's cold,
a hood is essential.

A loosely fitting jacket flutters when descending and its flapping
causes forced convection inside that is almost as cold but more humid
than the air outside.  This becomes especially apparent by how much
warmer one gets immediately when changing riding position to stop the
flapping.

I get the impression that makers of bicycling jackets don't ride
bicycles or they wouldn't offer the designs that they do.  Most are
not rain jackets but so called wind protection, and they are so full
of vents and loose fit that they don't even protect from cold wind,
let alone rain and snow because most have no hoods... besides not
being waterproof.

The trouble seems to begin because the usual rules for foul weather
gear do not apply to bicycle jackets but that manufacturers, not being
bikies, don't know this.  I have talked to such people at bicycle
trade shows and none seem to ride bicycles in weather that requires
their product, or at least not with a critical eye to function.  The
thermodynamic concept of the jacket flapping in the wind as a heat
pump completely escapes them.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 15 Dec 2000 15:14:58 GMT

Mike Jacoubowsky writes:

>> I mention that to underscore that it takes DEAD air to insulate.
>> Just wearing a jacket or plastic covering alone does not help much.
>> Most windbreakers are too loose a fit to prevent flapping and also
>> do not have a liner that traps dead air.

>> This state of affairs shows that the concept of cold weather gear
>> is not well understood in the bicycle business.  For instance, most
>> bicycle windbreakers spend an inordinate time putting vents and
>> openings in their jackets while ignoring waterproofness, close fit,
>> and a hood that is essential for descending in snow or just plain
>> cold air.

> The "close fit" issue is typically one with the customer, not the
> garment.  People just don't like to wear snug-fitting outer
> garments, no matter how much you explain that you don't want it
> flapping in the wind.

What you are saying is that "people" like what you have to offer in
your bicycle shop.  I've spent time looking for close fitting jackets
at InterBike where manufacturers display their clothing and found
none.  Not only that, but these folks don't seem to know about the use
of their garments when discussing the subject.

> As for vents...I find jackets far more comfortable with them than
> without.  Ventless jackets, at least for me, create a "sauna" effect
> that isn't terribly comfortable.  You end up as drenched as if you
> had ridden without the jacket at all (at least while climbing).

If I have to wear a jacket while climbing (rain), I open the zipper
3/4 of the way down.  That's a better vent than you can find otherwise
while not compromising the descent.  The lack of a hood on most
bicycle jackets makes cold descending nearly impossible.  This is one
of the features that gave Andy Hampsten the Giro d'Italia on the Gavia
pass.  He had dry clothes and a hooded jacket.  Others had to abort
the descent as they froze their face and neck.  I've been there often.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 15 Dec 2000 21:15:17 GMT

Chuck Anderson writes:

>>> As for vents...I find jackets far more comfortable with them than
>>> without.  Ventless jackets, at least for me, create a "sauna" effect
>>> that isn't terribly comfortable.  You end up as drenched as if you
>>> had ridden without the jacket at all (at least while climbing).

>> If I have to wear a jacket while climbing (rain), I open the zipper
>> 3/4 of the way down.  That's a better vent than you can find otherwise
>> while not compromising the descent.  The lack of a hood on most
>> bicycle jackets makes cold descending nearly impossible.  This is one
>> of the features that gave Andy Hampsten the Giro d'Italia on the Gavia
>> pass.  He had dry clothes and a hooded jacket.  Others had to abort
>> the descent as they froze their face and neck.  I've been there often.

> I bought a hooded coated nylon jacket from Performance about 10
> years ago, and after it wore out I had the darndest time finding
> another hooded jacket.  I finally found one (which I still don't
> really like) sold as a hiker's rain jacket at EMS.  Hooded jackets
> became scarce at the same time another cycling accessory became
> prevalent and people didn't need hoods anymore.  It was at least
> coincidental.

That's too bad because a hood pulled tight around the face descends
comfortably in freezing weather and snow, protecting the neck and
ears.  This can be done with a helmet worn over the hood, otherwise I
guess you just bail out and hail a cab.  I recall arriving at the top
of the Iseran pass in France in driving snow.  At the summit I changed
to a dry jersey, putting the sweaty one in a plastic produce bag in my
saddle bag, and descending toasty comfortable to Val d'Isere 1000m
below and on down to the base of the Petite St Bernard in Seez.  I've
had similar experiences on the Gavia and Stelvio, not to mention Mt.
Evans in Colorado.

> I believe Performance again has a nylon hooded jacket, and before my
> next tour I'll be getting one.  I use a ball cap under the hood to
> keep it from sliding down over my eyes.  It also provides great eye
> and face protection from whatever precipitation there is.

Another device that seems to have gotten lost in the helmet wars is
the bicycle cap that can be worn under a hood with the bill turned up.
Fortunately I cleaned out the collection of such caps in a Swiss bike
shop before they tossed them out.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 14 Dec 2000 00:07:34 GMT

Tom Ruta writes:

Peter who? wrote:

>> ...stick a brown paper bag under their top layer to protect their
>> chests against icy wind on rides?  I started doing this back in the
>> 1970s and am curious is to whether this is still done. Or am I just
>> a dinosaur?

Newspaper is what bike racers have used under the outer layer for eons
because it is relatively wind proof but wicks well and weighs little.

> But I still use plastic bags in shoes!

Well that defies thermodynamics.  A thin layer of material, regardless
of whether it is insulator or not, does not insulate but can keep air
from passing.  Therefore, covering a mesh bicycle shoe with plastic
helps, but inside you don't get much unless the socks are extra thick.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 14 Dec 2000 03:31:30 GMT

David Cásseres writes:

> I think you've misunderstood, Jobst.  The plastic bag is worn over
> the sock, not next to the skin.  Even if the sock is fairly thin,
> enough dead air space is created to provide significant insulation.
> At the end of the ride, the feet are soggy but not cold.  I first
> did this on a chilly Tierra Bella century years ago, and my
> experience is that it works.

That's OK but as soon as the sox are soaked, they become thermal
conductors.  That's why the newspaper under the outer garment helps.
It passes moisture and lets it evaporate.  I'm sure it is some help
but not much.  Put the cover over the shoes.  Every bit of dead air
helps and there's lots of it when the shoes are covered.

In that light, flapping plastic doesn't help much even on the outside
because it pumps air rapidly about the body, thereby being no barrier
to wind.  Flapping jackets are not much better than no jacket.  Next
time you have a chance, try to stop the sleeves and boy of a
windbreaker from flapping on descents and you'll be amazed how much
warmer they are.  A rubber band around the sleeve helps.  Also,
crouching so that the arms are against the bode can stop the flapping.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 14 Dec 2000 18:03:40 GMT

Chuck Anderson writes:

> Wool does not lose it's insulating ability when it becomes wet.

Not so.  Water conducts and if the wool is saturated, which it easily
becomes in most socks, it becomes non insulating.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 14 Dec 2000 21:33:11 GMT

Chuck Anderson writes:

>>> Wool does not lose it's insulating ability when it becomes wet.

>> Not so.  Water conducts and if the wool is saturated, which it easily
>> becomes in most socks, it becomes non insulating.

> That is contrary to everything else I have ever heard.  Wool has the
> advantage of not losing "all" it's insulating value when wet.  Ask a
> sheep.

Mixed metaphors or misapplication of a rule.  If you had fur as deep
as a sheep I think it is apparent that water will drain off or not
even penetrate, having lanolin on the fur.  Merino wool sox, on the
other hand, are thin enough and dense enough to become completely
water logged on a sweaty foot in a plastic bag.  Polypropylene is good
in the wet because it does not hold water for lack of wetable
capillary gaps that hold water.  I'm sure you must have noticed that a
spin-dry Polypropylene garment feels dry while cotton is still heavy
and wet with its finer filaments.  It is coarse wool that has the wet
insulating capability and mainly in contrast to cotton.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.rides
Subject: Re: How many oldtimers here who still...
Date: 3 Jan 2001 01:11:17 GMT

Jeffrey L. Bell writes:

>>> Wool drops to about 45% of it's original insulating value,
>>> and cotton to about 10%.

>> Oh!  Please explain.  On what do you base this without even saying
>> what kind of wool and how wet it is.  It's this kind of information
>> that makes the newsgroup a font of myth and lore.

> The 45% figure was from a lecture given by Dr. Murray Hamlet from the
> U.S. Army Research Institute for Environmental Medicine to the MIT
> Outing Club as part of their winter camping program.  He did not
> specify the kind of wool, nor how wet it was, but I assume from the
> context that this was a typical value for saturated wool, ignoring
> evaporation.  He went on to say that synthetic fibers do a better job
> than wool.

I think you jump to conclusions and if Dr. Hamlet didn't state the
circumstances, he was misleading the audience.  Insulation with
fabrics is achieved by imobilizing air.  In contrast, water conducts,
so that if the air space in the fabric is filled with water and water
that can move as it does with gravity and replenishment by rain, the
insulation is greatly compromised.

> If anyone has more specific figures, I would love to see a source,
> but until I do, it appears that this is another one of those
> "Is not!", "Is too!" debates that makes usenet what it is.

It takes more than citing a lecture by a PhD to establish how good
wool insulates.  In contrast I gave you reasons why it matters not
what the material is if it is saturated.  Polypropylene is better than
wool because it drains water so well that it feels dry when unloaded
from the spin cycle of a common washing machine.  In wet conditions it
performs better than wool.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing
Subject: Re: Cipo at the Gavia
Date: 31 May 2000 00:46:54 GMT

Benjamin Maso writes:

> A joke? No, it was in 1988. One of the most dramatic stages of the Giro
> ever. It was snowing and freezing at the top of the Gavia. The road wasn't
> yet aspahlted. Breukink's and Hampsten's finest hour, but every rider who
> finished this gruesome race was a hero. One of them was Cipollini. A
> journalist of the Gazetta dello Sport saw him coming at the top:

> "And there's a bicycle on the ground. A car stops. It's Cipollini, fallen
> down. His teeth chattering. Standing around him we encourage him with
> sympathy: come on, only ten kilometer, then it's over. Cipollini answers
> plaintively: "You want to kill me?" Later, much later, he arrives at the
> finish. Cipollini and many others lost, but won their battle. Their Beresina
> was splendid. They caputitulated, but with honour."

>    Cipollini arrived more than an hour after Breukink and Hampsten and was
> taken out of the race. Can you blame him being allergic to mountains?

The tragedy of this is that the team support was ignorant and
unprepared.  The first time I saw this happen was on the Stelvio in
1963 when there was no team support at the summit.  Riders were
begging for help.  KOM, Charley Gaul, stopped before a silent
disappointed crowd, pulled out his jacket and gloves and disappeared
into the fog and snow to Bormio.  Others were less fortunate.

I know these conditions and know that without aid, one cannot descend
in such weather.  What Hampsten and few others got at the summit was a
change of clothes, dry descending gear and probably a hot soup before
shoving off down to Bormio.  I know this because I've done it on tours
where I arrived at the summit chilled in a jersey of cold sweat with
freezing wind blowing.  A change into dry clothes, gloves and a WATER
PROOF jacket with hood closed to the eyeballs made the descent like
warm toast.  Without, the hands can no longer even feel the brake
levers much less operate them.  I've done it on the Iseran, Stelvio
and Gavia.

Praise goes to Andy and his crew.

Jobst Brandt      <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>