You are currently viewing all posts tagged with review.

2012-12-30

Defeet Wool Duragloves

I first heard of the Defeet Duragloves when Andrew Skurka included the wool gloves in his gear list for the Alaska-Yukon Expedition back in 2010. I was impressed that he chose to carry only one pair of seemingly thin gloves for all but the coldest portions of the trip. At the time I had an old pair of Outdoor Research PL 400 Gloves that I was happy with for winter backcountry use, but I kept the wool Duragloves in the back of my head as a possible replacement when the time came.

I still have Outdoor Research PL 400 Gloves and I am still pleased with the warmth they provide for cold weather hiking, but I’ve never been satisfied with them on the bike. Even in cold temperatures, I always manage to work up a sweat when cranking on the pedals. The PL 400 gloves are just too warm for that application. This past October I decided to purchase a pair of the wool Duragloves to see if they would be better suited to fill that niche.

The wool Duragloves are a blend of 40% merino, 40% Cordura, and 20% Lycra. Their thickness is that of your typical liner glove. The palm and fingers are covered with rubber grippy things. My medium sized pair weigh exactly 2 oz.

The gloves are designed specifically to address the problem that I was having. They are meant as a cool weather cycling glove that don’t cause your hands to overheat and sweat on hard hill climbs, but still keep you warm on the descent.

Duragloves are not made to climb Mt. Everest. They are made to climb mountains at a hard pace, descend the other side, and do it over and over until your ride is done. Thin enough to ride at your maximum effort and still give you dexterity to fiddle around in your jersey for food. Thick enough to keep frostbite off your fingers at 50mph down alps still laden with snow.

I’ve worn my pair on every commute for the past three months and can report that they do exactly what they claim to do. Temperatures this winter have been anywhere between 30° and 45° Fahrenheit and raining more often than not. Throughout it all the Duragloves have kept me warm and comfortable, even when wet, and I’ve never felt the desire to take them off to cool down. The thinness of the glove means that very little dexterity is lost. I do not need to remove the gloves to manipulate objects with my hands. I’ve had them for too short a time to comment on durability – and, until a crash, riding a bike tends to not be very demanding of a glove’s durability – but given the blend of wool and synthetic materials, I’m confident that the gloves will fully satisfy my demands in that department.

I have tried using the gloves on backcountry trips. I still prefer the Outdoor Research gloves for that application. Walking does not consistently get my heart-rate up to the extent that riding a bike does, and the Duragloves are simply not warm enough to keep my hands comfortable during that activity. Used as a liner with an insulated mitten I’m sure they would be adequate, but I prefer to use a thicker glove with an uninsulated shell mitten.

My only complaint concerning the Duragloves are the rubber grippy things. They could be grippier. When wearing the gloves it is difficult for me to twist the bezel of my Fenix LD20 headlights to adjust their mode. This is not the case on a more general-purpose glove, such as Mechanix gloves or Kuiu Guide Gloves. Even the grippy things on my Outdoor Research PL 400 gloves, despite having been worn down for years, do a better job adjusting the lights.

I can work around the lack of grip (adjusting the lights is the only application where this has come up) and everything else about the gloves is close to perfect. They are an affordable, American-made glove intended for aerobic activity in cool conditions. If you’re looking for a glove in that department, the Duragloves are well worth your consideration.

2012-12-09

review, bicycle, gear

Evaluating the Marathon Supremes

Last March I bought a pair of Continental Ultra Gatorskin tires. Their flat protection proved to be excellent – I have not had a single flat with them – but I found the durability of the tread to be wanting. They are now worn down to the point where they are basically racing slicks, which, while fun, is certainly not appropriate for wet weather riding. I don’t own a cycling computer or keep track of my miles in any other way, so I’m not sure how many miles the tires have on them. I think it’s fair to say that I average about 500 miles a month. The tires are likely to be just shy of 5,000 miles. For a pricey tire like the Gatorskins, I’d prefer to see a bit more longevity.

The various tires in the Marathon series from Schwalbe have an excellent reputation among long distance riders, both in terms of flat protection and durability. Peter White maintains a description of the various models which helped me to understand the differences between them. I decided that the Marathon Supremes would be a good fit for my needs. They are normally absurdly expensive, but I was able to find a good deal and pick up a pair of them for about the same as what the Gatorskins would cost.

I’ve been using the Marathon Supremes for a week of wet riding now and I’m very pleased with them. They certainly offer better grip than my worn-down Gatorskins. I feel more confident when aggressively cornering with them. The reflective sidewall is a welcome addition to my dark commutes. Despite the Gatorskins being considered a “race” tire and the Marathon Supremes more of a general road-riding/commuting tire, I haven’t noticed a significant difference in speed or rolling resistance. With the Marathon Supremes, I’ve gone back to a 700x28 tire in place of the skinnier 700x25 size of my Gatorskins.

The Marathon Supremes were much easier to get on my rims than the Gatorskins, which makes me feel a little better about the prospect of fixing a flat with these tires. Of course, if I get a flat anytime within the next 5,000 miles, the tires will receive a negative mark in comparison against the Gatorskins.

The real question about the Marathon Supremes is durability. I’m looking forward to see how they handle this winter and how long they last into 2013.

2012-12-08

battery, edc, review, gear

Impressions of the Preon P1

I use two Fenix LD20 lights mounted to my handlebars via Twofish Lockblocks as headlights. An old TAD-branded JETBeam Jet 1 MkII is mounted on my helmet. As a result, whenever I have my bike – which is the majority of the time – I have a light. When I’m not around my bike, I tend to be left in the dark. I do carry a Photon Freedom Micro on my keychain, which is a great little device, but no replacement for a hand-held torch. A more substantial light has not been part of my on-body EDC for a few years.

Last month I decided to change that. I wanted to find a small, unobtrusive LED light that I could carry in a pocket. My JETBeam helmet light is powered by a single AA battery. While the height on that light is about right, I felt the diameter was too large for what I had in mind. I decided to look for a light powered by a single AAA. Two options presented themselves: the Maratac AAA Rev 2 and the Foursevens Preon P1. They both have similar specifications and both seem to earn equally positive reviews. The Maratac light is less expensive and features a knurled body, as opposed to the Preon P1’s smooth body, which made me initially favor the Maratac. Unfortunately, both lights are twist-activated. One of my requirements for any light is that it can be activated with one hand. That necessitates a clicky tailcap.

A review of the Preon P1 on ITS presented a solution. The Preon P1 is compatible with pieces from the Preon P2, which is a double-AAA flashlight that does have a clicky tailcap. I could purchase a replacement Preon clicky tailcap and install that on a Preon P1 to get the light I wanted. The Preon P1 and the tailcap cost $45. That’s a lot for a small light, and quite a bit more than the $25 price of the Maratac light, but it would make for a system that fit my requirements. I chose to purchase the Preon.

I have been carrying the Preon P1 for a couple weeks now. At a height of about 3 inches and a diameter just over half an inch, I can clip it in my pocket and completely forget that it is there until I need it, which is exactly what I was looking for. All the various modes of the light can be cycled through by clicking the tailcap, although I don’t particularly care about them – I only use the light with its standard output setting.

The clicky tailcap could be improved. I’m accustomed to tailcaps being inset into the light slightly. The Preon tailcap juts out from the top of the body of the light, which I think increases the chances of it accidentally being clicked on and draining the battery. It also has an amount of free movement in it. The button can be depressed about halfway before it actually hits the clicky part of the mechanism, which makes the button feel a bit loose. I don’t know that this affects the functionality of the tailcap, but it does make it feel cheaper.

Despite the less-than-perfect tailcap, I’m happy with the light. The runtime isn’t incredible, but that’s acceptable for my use. I intend to use the light only as a backup to those on my bike. When the battery does die, I just throw it in the charger and install another Eneloop. If you’re looking for a small EDC light, the Preon P1 is worth consideration.

2012-11-10

review, gear, writing

The Field Message Pad

My first experience with a field message pad was in 2005. I carried a Field Message Pad Cover by Canadian Peacekeeper – now CP Gear – filled with the Canadian military standard issue pad. I was introduced to the concept by one of the early episodes of Patrolling with Sean Kennedy. The idea of having a cover for one’s notepad, which not only protected the pad but also contained pens and the other tools necessary for a dead tree data dump, simply made sense. The system was a pleasure to use, but after filling my last Canadian pad in 2006, I left it in favour of more conventional notepads. The refill pads, being available only from Canada, were difficult to acquire, and all the cool kids were using Moleskines and similar products. I forgot about the old field message pad until this year.

I keep a box that holds all of my filled notepads. Last March I was digging through the box, looking for a particular note (sadly, you can’t grep dead trees), when I came across the Canadian pad and cover. I was reminded of the pleasure the system previously provided me, and the practicality of it. No more digging around for a pen – if you have your notepad, you have your pen. Need to toss your pad into the dirt to free both hands? No problem, it’s protected by the cover. I decided that I would like to revisit the system, but perhaps with a more commonly available pad, and a more mature eye brought to the market’s current offerings.

One of Sean Kennedy’s original requirements for the notepad was that the paper was gridded. I agree with that. Graph paper can be incredibly useful in certain circumstances, and the rest of the time holds no disadvantage for me. The original Canadian pads were gridded, but only on one side of the paper. That made the back of each page less useful, and seemed wasteful to me.

The size of the Canadian pad was acceptable, but a little larger than my ideal. Particularly when the cover was added, it made for just a little bit too much bulk and was sized slightly too large for some cargo pockets. I’d used plenty of the pocket-sized Moleskine notepads. Their size is also acceptable, but if I’m being picky: they’re just a tad too small. Ideally, I would like something sized in between the two.

My third requirements was the the notepad was top-bound. I prefer that over a side-bound pad, as I find them to be easier to access quickly. The binding should be spiral, as that allows the pad to lay open.

It’s a fairly simple criteria, but I was surprised at how difficult it was to accommodate.

The only pad I could find that met the requirements was from Rite in the Rain. Specifically, the 146 (or 946 or 946T for tacticool colors). It is gridded on both sides, is spiral bound on the top, and measures in at 4” x 6” – just slightly larger than a Moleskin, and a bit smaller than the Canadian pad. Rite in the Rain makes an excellent product. I always carry one of their pads when in wilderness environments, but I prefer not to carry them around town. Their waxy paper is unpleasant to write on. If I do not need to worry about the paper getting soaking wet, I prefer to carry a normal notepad. It makes the act of writing more pleasant, which encourages me to write more often.

The nice thing about Rite in the Rain pads, though, is that covers are readily available for them. Tactical Tailor makes a line of covers that Rite in the Rain sells. Maxpedition produces their own. The Tactical Tailor / Rite in the Rain cover for the 146 notepad is the C946. Maxpedition offers a similar cover. They looked great and encouraged me to revisit the notepad search, this time armed with a specific size: 4” x 6”.

Having the dimensions to narrow the search made all the difference. I quickly came upon the Rhodia 13500. It is gridded, 4” x 6”, and top-bound. The exact same as the Rite in the Rain 146, but with normal paper.

These findings allowed me to put together my new field message pad system: a Rite in the Rain pad, Rhodia pad, and a cover. I chose the Tactical Tailor cover simply because it is made about 60 miles from me, where Maxpedition claims that their covers are “imported”. With that cover and two identically sized pads, I could swap in whichever pad was more appropriate for my environment. Around town I carry the Rhodia pad. When I’m heading to the mountains I install the Rite in the Rain pad. Inside the cover I carry a pen (I’m partial to a Parker Jotter with a gel cartridge), a No. 2 pencil, a Sharpie, and a ruler. When I swap the Rhodia pad for the Rite in the Rain, I sometimes also swap the Parker pen for a Fisher Space pen, but in general I don’t like the way the ink comes out of the pressurized cartridges (and I already carry the pencil, which is field-serviceable and is able to write in inclement conditions just as well as the space pen).

I’ve been using this system since April. It is both versatile and functional, and has proved itself perfect for my needs. It is large enough to write on without feeling cramped, and small enough to place in the cargo or ass-cheek pocket of my pants when running around the woods in the middle of the night setting up dead-drops. The cover, Rite in the Rain pad, ruler, Sharpie and pencil are all made in the US. The Parker pen and Rhodia pad are made in France.

Photo comparisons between this and the Canadian system are available on Flickr.

2011-09-25

battery, review, gear

Sanyo Eneloop Rechargeable Batteries

I go through batteries at a fairly high rate. Electronic devices for the wilderness, such as my headlamp and GPS, see regular use. At home, things like my wireless mouse need power. The biggest drain are my lights – particular in the winter, when they are used to light my regular commute.

This last spring I decided to invest in a set of rechargeable batteries. Although some of my devices run on CR123 batteries, most use AA or AAAs. To start with, I was concerned only with being able to recharge the AA and AAA batteries. Years ago I had a set of rechargeable batteries, but I think the technology was not very developed back then. They seemed to drain quickly and not hold many charges. Today, the market is different. Some brief research showed that there were many options out there, with positive reviews for most of them.

What most reviews seemed to suggest was that the majority of the offerings were all of equal quality, with most differences unlikely to be noticed outside of a laboratory. The most popular, though, seemed to be the Sanyo Eneloop and Maha Powerex batteries. I found some claims that, between the two, the Eneloops held a charge longer while on the shelf.

I decided to try the Eneloop batteries, and purchased a package that included a charger, 8 AAs and 4 AAAs. The charger can charge up to four batteries at once, either AAA or AA, but it must be done in pairs. It cannot charge one battery at a time, or three. This has turned out to be an occasional inconvenience. I have some devices that use three batteries, and some that need just one. To charge the batteries for those devices I always have to give the charger an extra battery.

The charger takes around five hours to bring a dead battery up to a full charge. I have read that the Maha Powerex MH-C9000 charger can charge the batteries in a shorter period of time. It also gives the user more control over the charge, which has the potential of increasing the life of the batteries.

The batteries themselves I have been very happy with. I don’t have the knowledge to provide any objective information on their chemistry or electronics. Suffice it to say that they work. They seem to last longer in the same devices than their non-rechargeable counterparts did. I have not noticed any degradation in those batteries that I have recharged. That is not surprising. Sanyo claims the Eneloop batteries can be recharged 1,500 times – a number I have not come anywhere near to approaching.

Since the initial purchase, I have bought two more packs of AA and AAA Eneloops. All of my electronics now run on rechargeable batteries, save for those few that require CR123 batteries. The batteries themselves are an expensive investment, but they have payed off. Now that I have a good number of both AA and AAA sizes, and am happy with the Eneloop brand, I would like to purchase a more specialized charger, such as the aforementioned C9000.

If you use any non-rechargeable AA or AAA batteries in your electronics, I recommend giving Eneloops a try. The financial savings alone is enough of a benefit to justify their use.

This article was modified 2012-12-02.

2011-09-08

review, howto, gear

Modifying the Outdoor Research Flex-Tex Gaiters

I purchased a pair of Outdoor Research Flex-Tex Gaiters last spring. I had owned the full-length Rocky Mountain High Gaiters from Outdoor Research for a year, and was a big fan of them. They are not completely waterproof, but are highly water-resistant, and still maintain a level of breathability that makes them appropriate for year-round use. I find them adequate for protecting my legs when bushwhacking and for keeping me warm and dry when traveling in rain and snow – but I’m always looking to loose weight. My eye had been on the Flex-Tex gaiters for a while. I thought that they would be a good alternative to full-length gaiters during the warmer months: something lighter and cooler which could provide protection from debris but would also handle the wet and snow that is often found in the alpine summer.

When I went to purchase the gaiters, I found that sizing was an issue. Unlike Outdoor Research’s other gaiters, the Flex-Tex do not come in normal sizes. They are offered only in the combination sizes of Small/Medium and Large/Extra Large. In the Rocky Mountain High gaiters I wear a medium. The Small/Medium Flex-Tex gaiters were far too small for me to even get on. The Large/Extra Large gaiters fit well around my footwear, but were loose at the top around my calf. Unlike other gaiters from Outdoor Research, the Flex-Tex had no adjustment to tighten the fit.

I purchased them anyway, thinking to give them a shot. After using them on an early season trip in the snow, it was evident that they would not work. The loose top allowed too much snow to enter the gaiter.

Rather than giving up on the gaiters and immediately returning them, I held on to them for a while. I thought that it would be simple enough to modify the gaiters by adding a new cuff on top of the gaiter, creating a channel of material through which could run a thin piece of webbing. The webbing could be cinched down around the leg and secured with a camlock. This would provide the same adjustment mechanism as that found on my full-length gaiters. It would not be a perfect seal, but short gaiters will never keep out as much debris as tall ones.

The gaiters lay neglected for a while. A few months later I found myself in Seattle Fabrics and wound up purchasing the needed webbing, as well as some stretchy Lycra material which I thought would serve as the added cuff. Then I forgot about the project again.

Eventually, I remembered the gaiters, and wanted to get them done. At that time I had some material left over from hemming a new pair of Kuiu Attack Pants. The Kuiu pants are made out of Toray Primeflex, an impressive soft-shell which I discussed in my review of the Kuiu Guide Gloves. While heavier than the Lycra, I thought that Primeflex would provide more durability and be a better match to the soft-shell of the Flex-Tex gaiters.

The project was a success. With the Primeflex cuff sewn atop the gaiters’ normal cuff and a piece of webbing put through it, I can cinch down the top of the gaiter around my calf and secure it with the camlock buckle. Because the top of the gaiter has not been modified to be permanently smaller, I can still wear the gaiters over pants – although I almost always wear them next to skin. I have not done much post-holing in snow this summer, but the new cuff has provided a tight enough seal to keep out flying snow that comes from glissading down snowy slopes and kicking steps on the way up. Neither rocks, dirt, nor twigs have yet to find their way in.

Now that I have a proper fit, the Flex-Tex gaiters have become my preferred wear. They are breathable, water-resistant, and tough. At 5.29 ounces, the modified gaiters are only slightly lighter than the 6.98 ounces Rocky Mountain High gaiters. It is not a huge difference, but I find that I still prefer the Flex-Tex gaiters. The Rocky Mountain gaiters I never wore specifically for debris. They stayed in my pack until I encountered wet or snow. The Flex-Tex gaiters are comfortable and breathable enough to wear all the time – even when gaiters are not necessarily needed – which makes them more efficient at keeping out debris. For my type of travel, I find the Flex-Tex gaiters more functional than short gaiters that I’ve tried from other companies, such as Integral Designs and Dirty Girl.

This article was modified 2013-05-17.

2011-08-31

review, gear

Kuiu Guide Gloves

I reviewed the Kuiu Guide Gloves on ITS Tactical. Check it out. Or just go straight to Kuiu and buy a pair. They’re that good.

At 2.6 ounces (74 grams), the Guide Glove weighs only 0.3 ounces more than a pair of Mechanix Original Gloves of the same size – an impressive feat, considering that the Guide Glove is made of much more substantial materials. In every way, the gloves have exceeded my expectations. They are more breathable, more water repellent, and provide a higher dexterity than I expected.

Photos are on Flickr.

This article was modified 2012-09-15.