SealSkinz Chillblocker Gloves and Socks Review
August 24th, 2006 by MikeWhen it comes to riding in the cold, I am one big baby. It is really hard for me to leave the comfort of my bed to go ride in the biting cold of a Virginia winter morning. But because I love to ride and because that love supersedes my hate of the cold I’ll get up and freeze my junk off for a pre-work ride. I try to pack on as much gear as I can to make sure I stay warm and last winter I had the pleasure of riding with SealSkinz Chillblocker gloves and socks.
SealSkinz gloves and socks are made up of three layers, a liner made of expedition-weight double velour Polartec® Power Stretch™ fleece, the outside layer is knit of nylon/lycra® spandex offering a durable, flexible, stretch covering and in between the two fabric layers is our waterproof MVT membrane. The palms of the gloves also have a bunch of dots for gripping. The gloves are a little oversized to help with the cold but that really didn’t bother me. I rode with the gloves a lot during the winter and they haven’t shown any signs of wearing yet. We were also sent a pair of SealSkinz’s regular water proof gloves. They are much lighter weight but still helped with the cold. I would wear those underneath my cut off gloves to create a full fingered glove with a little extra warmth.
The SealSkinz socks were also very warm and comfortable. They breath very well and allowed my feet to stay warm with out soaking in sweat. The fleece helped draw the sweat away from my skin to keep my feet dry. They are just as durable as the gloves with no signs of wear so far.
The only problem that I have found with the gloves so far is that they don’t have the padding needed when riding for any considerable amount of time. They are large enough to wear over top of a normal set of gloves, but that can be a little much. On the days that were not extremely cold I enjoyed teaming up my cut off gloves with the SealSkinz regular gloves. I have found no fault with the SealSkinz socks so far they feel great and most importantly keep my feet warm.
I would definitely recommend these socks and gloves to anyone who lives in an area where riding in the cold is a must. The three layer combination will make sure that you hands and feet stay dry and warm for the entire ride. The gloves could use some extra padding to help with the long rides but the warmth makes up for the lack of padding for me. These gloves and socks have come in handy on my winter 4-wheeler rides and runs also. You can pick up a pair of these gloves and socks for $49 at Danalco.com.
What is RSS?
Get our articles in your inbox:
WATERPROOF FOR 60 SECONDS … WHY NOT TO BUY (OR SELL) SEALSKINZ
Attention All Motorcyclists:
PIL Membranes Ltd. (formerly Porvair International, website: PilMembranes.com) is a UK-based company that claims to specialize “… in the science, development and manufacture of high-performance waterproof breathable membranes for fabrics and leather”. They, along with California-based Danalco, Inc. (Danalco.com), claim to be the manufacturers and/or distributors of a line of supposedly “waterproof” gloves and socks sold through Bass Pro Shops (BassPro.com) and other major U.S. sporting goods retailers under the “SealSkinz” brand. On the SealSkinz.com website, they make the following claim:
“SealSkinz are suitable for cycling, walking, climbing, golfing, riding, canoeing, motorcycling, sailing, fell running, orienteering, gardening, fishing, rowing, caving, backpacking, mountaineering … and 100% waterproof.”
I AM WRITING TO INFORM YOU THAT BASED ON MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH SEALSKINZ SOCKS AND GLOVES, THEY MOST CERTAINLY ARE NOT “100% WATERPROOF” IN A MOTORCYCLING CONTEXT, NOR ARE THEY LIKELY TO BE WATERPROOF IN ANY OTHER.
Based on the assurances of SealSkinz.com, in October 2006 I placed two online orders through BassPro.com for two pairs each of (a) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Gloves, and (b) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Socks. I placed the second order after road-testing their socks, and being pleased with how well they did in fact “block the chill” under dry conditions. I gambled that they would also in fact be waterproof as claimed. In December 2006, I found out nothing could be further from the truth. In riding through less than 100 miles of hard rain, the SealSkinz “waterproof” socks proved to be nothing more than thick sponges. And just to verify the false nature of their claims, after washing them as instructed I let the lower half of a dry pair sit in a pot of water, weighted by a smaller pot, and in less than an hour they were soaked inside and out!
I Googled the following phrase…
+sealskinz +”not waterproof”
…and discovered I was not alone in my dissatisfaction with SealSkinz. I then conveyed my negative experiences to PIL Membranes in an email addressed to info@sealskinz.com. It was replied to by Sam Matthews of Danalco (sam@danalco.com), whose response included:
“We are the manufacturer of SealSkinz and we make the 100% waterproof claims. We operate an ISO 9001 certified manufacturing facility in California… SealSkinz are manufactured using a patented 3 layer lamination technique that bonds a stretchy waterproof membrane between an inner and outer fabric layer. The same lamination is used in our socks and gloves… Prior to shipping all SealSkinz are 100 % tested for leaks. I have attached some technical test data which supports our claims.”
Please review the “technical test data” he attached in this PDF:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/SealSkinzTestResults.pdf
There you will see that their “100% Waterproof” claim is based on the fact that a test laboratory found no leakage at 4.5 psi after 60 seconds, which they claim meets the requirements of the International Standards Organization’s ISO 811. Sounds pretty impressive, doesn’t it? WELL, IT’S NOT, AND HERE IS WHY:
First of all atmospheric pressure at sea level is about 14.7 psi, so a pressure test at 4.5 psi isn’t much pressure at all. Secondly, the test duration is only 60 seconds. That’s right, SealSkinz are labeled and sold as “100% Waterproof” because they are proven under laboratory conditions not to leak for SIXTY WHOLE SECONDS. When is the last time you rode your motorcycle for less than sixty seconds?!? And even more revealing is what I discovered in this ISO Bulletin from June 2001…
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/commcentre/pdf/Watertightness0106.pdf
… where it states “… According to ISO 811, materials with a hydrostatic head of more than 150 cm can be designated, in general, as rainproof. In the advertising field, however, the manufacturers of rain-protection materials outbid each other with hydrostatic heads of 80 m and more. But the materials are stressed with a static water pressure of only 2-3 mm in use. Rain is a dynamic and not a static process… There are numerous applications where raindrops are projected onto a garment at a high velocity, e.g. by motorcycling or strong winds. These are highly dynamic processes and have to be considered differently.”
In simpler terms, EVEN THE ISO WARNS THAT ISO 811 IS NOT A SUITABLE STANDARD FOR JUDGING WHETHER GARMENTS ARE WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONDITIONS … LIKE RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
So why does PilMembranes/Danalco/SealSkinz base their “100% Waterproof” claim on an inappropriate standard and test procedure? Probably because they know their products have no chance of holding up to more suitable testing standards like the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists’ (AATCC’s) “Water Resistance: Rain Test” Standard AATCC-35, the scope of which is defined here…
http://store.ihs.com/specsstore/controller;jsessionid=mhCf4JEqL5k1qzcxjqki6w**.app12?event=DOCUMENT_DETAILS&docId=RIORXBAAAAAAAAAA
…as follows:
“This test method is applicable to any textile fabric, which may or may not have been given a water-resistant or water-repellent finish. It measures the resistance to the penetration of water by impact, and thus can be used to predict the probable rain penetration resistance of fabrics. It is especially suitable for measuring the penetration resistance of garment fabrics. With the instrument, tests may be made at different intensities … of water impact to give a complete overall picture of the penetration resistance of a single fabric or a combination of fabrics.”
***
I have shared the above with you in the hopes that you may benefit from my experience and research, and not fall victim to the misleading advertising and packaging claims about SealSkinz products. In short, my experience and research suggest:
1. SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS ARE NOT WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONTEXTS SUCH AS RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
2. IF YOU HAVE PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND IMMEDIATELY.
3. IF YOU HAVE NOT PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD DO SO AND IMMEDIATELY RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND. IF WE DRIVE UP THEIR RETURN RATES SUFFICIENTLY, IT WILL FORCE RETAILERS TO STOP STOCKING SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS.
Thank you for your time. I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward this email to every motorcyclist you know.
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/
Don’t see why raindrop size or wind velocity should have any effect on water penetration of socks, unless, that is you motorcycle with no boots on.
Hi, Mikey!
I have been riding motorcycles for over 30 years. They are my exclusive form of motorized transportation. Do you understand those big words, Mikey?
I don’t know how many minutes of motorcycling you have to your credit, but I suspect very few. You don’t need to ride through very much rain–with or without your boots on–to realize that if water CAN get in, it WILL get in.
SEALSKINZ ARE *NOT* WATERPROOF. PERIOD.
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/
Didn’t know you had 30 years experience of testing Sealskinz . If you motorcycle with your boots on, why should raindrop size and wind velocity have any bearing on water penetration of socks? This is important because you have quoted research on these variables as central support for your case, when the test and field situations bear no comparison. Your own experiences may be negative, but any cursory netsurfer can find positive feedback. You won’t strengthen your argument with an ad hominem.
No cigar, clown. “Cursory” is defined as “going rapidly over something, without noticing details; hasty; superficial.” And that’s the only way “…any cursory netsurfer can find positive feedback” about Sealskinz. The negative feedback outweighs the positive several times over.
I don’t need 30 years to test a product that only claims to be “waterproof for 60 seconds”. I just need to point out that Sealskinz’ claim of being “waterproof for 60 seconds” means nothing in the real world, on a motorcycle, riding in the rain.
SEALSKINZ ARE NOT WATERPROOF. PERIOD.
It was cursory netsurfing that led to your rant in the first place. I’m trying to use short words for you, clown .
WATERPROOF FOR 60 SECONDS … WHY NOT TO BUY SEALSKINZ
Attention All Motorcyclists:
PIL Membranes Ltd. (formerly Porvair International, website: PilMembranes.com) is a UK-based company that claims to specialize “… in the science, development and manufacture of high-performance waterproof breathable membranes for fabrics and leather”. They, along with California-based Danalco, Inc. (Danalco.com), claim to be the manufacturers and/or distributors of a line of supposedly “waterproof” gloves and socks sold through Bass Pro Shops (BassPro.com) and other major U.S. sporting goods retailers under the “SealSkinz” brand. On the SealSkinz.com website, they make the following claim:
“SealSkinz are suitable for cycling, walking, climbing, golfing, riding, canoeing, motorcycling, sailing, fell running, orienteering, gardening, fishing, rowing, caving, backpacking, mountaineering … and 100% waterproof.”
I AM WRITING TO INFORM YOU THAT BASED ON MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH SEALSKINZ SOCKS AND GLOVES, THEY MOST CERTAINLY ARE NOT “100% WATERPROOF” IN A MOTORCYCLING CONTEXT, NOR ARE THEY LIKELY TO BE WATERPROOF IN ANY OTHER.
Based on the assurances of SealSkinz.com, in October 2006 I placed two online orders through BassPro.com for two pairs each of (a) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Gloves, and (b) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Socks. I placed the second order after road-testing their socks, and being pleased with how well they did in fact “block the chill” under dry conditions. I gambled that they would also in fact be waterproof as claimed. In December 2006, I found out nothing could be further from the truth. In riding through less than 100 miles of hard rain, the SealSkinz “waterproof” socks proved to be nothing more than thick sponges. And just to verify the false nature of their claims, I let the lower half of a dry pair sit in a pot of water, weighted by a smaller pot, and in less than an hour they were soaked inside and out!
I Googled the following phrase…
+sealskinz +”not waterproof”
…and discovered I was not alone in my dissatisfaction with SealSkinz. I then conveyed my negative experiences to PIL Membranes in an email addressed to info@sealskinz.com. It was replied to by Sam Matthews of Danalco (sam@danalco.com), whose response included:
“We are the manufacturer of SealSkinz and we make the 100% waterproof claims. We operate an ISO 9001 certified manufacturing facility in California… SealSkinz are manufactured using a patented 3 layer lamination technique that bonds a stretchy waterproof membrane between an inner and outer fabric layer. The same lamination is used in our socks and gloves… Prior to shipping all SealSkinz are 100 % tested for leaks. I have attached some technical test data which supports our claims.”
Please review the “technical test data” he attached in this PDF:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/SealSkinzTestResults.pdf
There you will see that their “100% Waterproof” claim is based on the fact that a test laboratory found no leakage at 4.5 psi after 60 seconds, which they claim meets the requirements of the International Standards Organization’s ISO 811. Sounds pretty impressive, doesn’t it? WELL, IT’S NOT, AND HERE IS WHY:
First of all atmospheric pressure at sea level is about 14.7 psi, so a pressure test at 4.5 psi isn’t much pressure at all. Secondly, the test duration is only 60 seconds. That’s right, SealSkinz are labeled and sold as “100% Waterproof” because they are proven under laboratory conditions not to leak for SIXTY WHOLE SECONDS. When is the last time you rode your motorcycle for less than sixty seconds?!? And even more revealing is what I discovered in this ISO Bulletin from June 2001…
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/commcentre/pdf/Watertightness0106.pdf
… where it states “… According to ISO 811, materials with a hydrostatic head of more than 150 cm can be designated, in general, as rainproof. In the advertising field, however, the manufacturers of rain-protection materials outbid each other with hydrostatic heads of 80 m and more. But the materials are stressed with a static water pressure of only 2-3 mm in use. Rain is a dynamic and not a static process… There are numerous applications where raindrops are projected onto a garment at a high velocity, e.g. by motorcycling or strong winds. These are highly dynamic processes and have to be considered differently.”
In simpler terms, EVEN THE ISO WARNS THAT ISO 811 IS NOT A SUITABLE STANDARD FOR JUDGING WHETHER GARMENTS ARE WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONDITIONS … LIKE RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
So why does PilMembranes/Danalco/SealSkinz base their “100% Waterproof” claim on an inappropriate standard and test procedure? Probably because they know their products have no chance of holding up to more suitable testing standards like the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists’ (AATCC’s) “Water Resistance: Rain Test” Standard AATCC-35, the scope of which is defined here…
http://store.ihs.com/specsstore/controller;jsessionid=mhCf4JEqL5k1qzcxjqki6w**.app12?event=DOCUMENT_DETAILS&docId=RIORXBAAAAAAAAAA
…as follows:
“This test method is applicable to any textile fabric, which may or may not have been given a water-resistant or water-repellent finish. It measures the resistance to the penetration of water by impact, and thus can be used to predict the probable rain penetration resistance of fabrics. It is especially suitable for measuring the penetration resistance of garment fabrics. With the instrument, tests may be made at different intensities … of water impact to give a complete overall picture of the penetration resistance of a single fabric or a combination of fabrics.”
***
I have shared the above with you in the hopes that you may benefit from my experience and research, and not fall victim to the misleading advertising and packaging claims about SealSkinz products. In short, my experience and research suggest:
1. SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS ARE NOT WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONTEXTS SUCH AS RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
2. IF YOU HAVE PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND IMMEDIATELY.
3. IF YOU HAVE NOT PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD DO SO AND IMMEDIATELY RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND. IF WE DRIVE UP THEIR RETURN RATES SUFFICIENTLY, IT WILL FORCE RETAILERS TO STOP STOCKING SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS.
Thank you for your time. I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward this email to every motorcyclist you know.
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/
Dude, you got issues.
Yes, I do,
And one of my biggest issues is that SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS ARE NOT WATERPROOF in real-world situations.
So do you sell a rival product or something or why do you spend your life flaming the things?
I bought a pair anyway. If they’re sh*t, I’ll send them back. Big dealio!
Hope you find another vent for your anguish at finding the gloves less than satisfactory…
Hey, guys, enough already……..about time we had a word from someone who isn’t a motorcyclist (with/without boots). I ride a motorless scramble bike (i.e. a mountain bike) come rain come hail come etc. I wear very porous Scott shoes and when the weather is pee-poor I add sealskinz over thin manmade sox. My feet stay dry except when I’m in shorts and the water gets in the top.
Motorcycle boots tend to be sold as ‘waterproof’. This works for sweat getting out as well as rain getting in. Despite all the criticism of official lab tests and kitchen simulations, maybe there is a simpler reason for your wet feet.
And by the way, Bruce, that 4.5psi you tried to pass off as ” not much pressure at all” is nearly one third of the atmospheric pressure you quoted for a comparison. It’s a common mistake to under-estimate how much pressure that is - atmospheric pressure is actually about 33 feet head of water - so the Sealskinz test is actually putting about 10 feet head onto the sealskinz test object. The atmospheric pressure works on both sides so it balances out. (You’ll need very tall boots full of water to apply that much pressure while on ‘active service’ on your motorbike).
Finally - in the engineering world it’s commonly done to apply an excessive pressure for a short time in order to monitor quality - otherwise testing takes far too long. We do this on big pressure vessels which go bang if you get things wrong, so I guess the principle shouldn’t excite comment when applied to socks. On your terms, Lay-Zee-Boy would have to run a two-month test using robotic couch potatoes on every recliner they sell . That would certainly push the price up……think about it.
WATERPROOF FOR 60 SECONDS … WHY NOT TO BUY (OR SELL) SEALSKINZ
Attention All Motorcyclists:
PIL Membranes Ltd. (formerly Porvair International, website: PilMembranes.com) is a UK-based company that claims to specialize “… in the science, development and manufacture of high-performance waterproof breathable membranes for fabrics and leather”. They, along with California-based Danalco, Inc. (Danalco.com), claim to be the manufacturers and/or distributors of a line of supposedly “waterproof” gloves and socks sold through Bass Pro Shops (BassPro.com) and other major U.S. sporting goods retailers under the “SealSkinz” brand. On the SealSkinz.com website, they make the following claim:
“SealSkinz are suitable for cycling, walking, climbing, golfing, riding, canoeing, motorcycling, sailing, fell running, orienteering, gardening, fishing, rowing, caving, backpacking, mountaineering … and 100% waterproof.”
I AM WRITING TO INFORM YOU THAT BASED ON MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH SEALSKINZ SOCKS AND GLOVES, THEY MOST CERTAINLY ARE NOT “100% WATERPROOF” IN A MOTORCYCLING CONTEXT, NOR ARE THEY LIKELY TO BE WATERPROOF IN ANY OTHER.
Based on the assurances of SealSkinz.com, in October 2006 I placed two online orders through BassPro.com for two pairs each of (a) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Gloves, and (b) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Socks. I placed the second order after road-testing their socks, and being pleased with how well they did in fact “block the chill” under dry conditions. I gambled that they would also in fact be waterproof as claimed. In December 2006, I found out nothing could be further from the truth. In riding through less than 100 miles of hard rain, the SealSkinz “waterproof” socks proved to be nothing more than thick sponges. And just to verify the false nature of their claims, after washing them as instructed I let the lower half of a dry pair sit in a pot of water, weighted by a smaller pot, and in less than an hour they were soaked inside and out!
I Googled the following phrase…
+sealskinz +”not waterproof”
…and discovered I was not alone in my dissatisfaction with SealSkinz. I then conveyed my negative experiences to PIL Membranes in an email addressed to info@sealskinz.com. It was replied to by Sam Matthews of Danalco (sam@danalco.com), whose response included:
“We are the manufacturer of SealSkinz and we make the 100% waterproof claims. We operate an ISO 9001 certified manufacturing facility in California… SealSkinz are manufactured using a patented 3 layer lamination technique that bonds a stretchy waterproof membrane between an inner and outer fabric layer. The same lamination is used in our socks and gloves… Prior to shipping all SealSkinz are 100 % tested for leaks. I have attached some technical test data which supports our claims.”
Please review the “technical test data” he attached in this PDF:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/SealSkinzTestResults.pdf
There you will see that their “100% Waterproof” claim is based on the fact that a test laboratory found no leakage at 4.5 psi after 60 seconds, which they claim meets the requirements of the International Standards Organization’s ISO 811. Sounds pretty impressive, doesn’t it? WELL, IT’S NOT, AND HERE IS WHY:
First of all atmospheric pressure at sea level is about 14.7 psi, so a pressure test at 4.5 psi isn’t much pressure at all. Secondly, the test duration is only 60 seconds. That’s right, SealSkinz are labeled and sold as “100% Waterproof” because they are proven under laboratory conditions not to leak for SIXTY WHOLE SECONDS. When is the last time you rode your motorcycle for less than sixty seconds?!? And even more revealing is what I discovered in this ISO Bulletin from June 2001…
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/commcentre/pdf/Watertightness0106.pdf
… where it states “… According to ISO 811, materials with a hydrostatic head of more than 150 cm can be designated, in general, as rainproof. In the advertising field, however, the manufacturers of rain-protection materials outbid each other with hydrostatic heads of 80 m and more. But the materials are stressed with a static water pressure of only 2-3 mm in use. Rain is a dynamic and not a static process… There are numerous applications where raindrops are projected onto a garment at a high velocity, e.g. by motorcycling or strong winds. These are highly dynamic processes and have to be considered differently.”
In simpler terms, EVEN THE ISO WARNS THAT ISO 811 IS NOT A SUITABLE STANDARD FOR JUDGING WHETHER GARMENTS ARE WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONDITIONS … LIKE RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
So why does PilMembranes/Danalco/SealSkinz base their “100% Waterproof” claim on an inappropriate standard and test procedure? Probably because they know their products have no chance of holding up to more suitable testing standards like the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists’ (AATCC’s) “Water Resistance: Rain Test” Standard AATCC-35, the scope of which is defined here…
http://store.ihs.com/specsstore/controller;jsessionid=mhCf4JEqL5k1qzcxjqki6w**.app12?event=DOCUMENT_DETAILS&docId=RIORXBAAAAAAAAAA
…as follows:
“This test method is applicable to any textile fabric, which may or may not have been given a water-resistant or water-repellent finish. It measures the resistance to the penetration of water by impact, and thus can be used to predict the probable rain penetration resistance of fabrics. It is especially suitable for measuring the penetration resistance of garment fabrics. With the instrument, tests may be made at different intensities … of water impact to give a complete overall picture of the penetration resistance of a single fabric or a combination of fabrics.”
***
I have shared the above with you in the hopes that you may benefit from my experience and research, and not fall victim to the misleading advertising and packaging claims about SealSkinz products. In short, my experience and research suggest:
1. SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS ARE NOT WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONTEXTS SUCH AS RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
2. IF YOU HAVE PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND IMMEDIATELY.
3. IF YOU HAVE NOT PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD DO SO AND IMMEDIATELY RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND. IF WE DRIVE UP THEIR RETURN RATES SUFFICIENTLY, IT WILL FORCE RETAILERS TO STOP STOCKING SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS.
Thank you for your time. I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward this email to every motorcyclist you know.
Bruce Arnold
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/
……er…..Bruce…….wasn’t that your June 22 post you just repeated there…..? We already did all that stuff………I was kind of hoping for a bit of a challenge here, or at least a post from a new contributor.
WATERPROOF FOR 60 SECONDS … WHY NOT TO BUY (OR SELL) SEALSKINZ
Attention All Motorcyclists:
PIL Membranes Ltd. (formerly Porvair International, website: PilMembranes.com) is a UK-based company that claims to specialize “… in the science, development and manufacture of high-performance waterproof breathable membranes for fabrics and leather”. They, along with California-based Danalco, Inc. (Danalco.com), claim to be the manufacturers and/or distributors of a line of supposedly “waterproof” gloves and socks sold through Bass Pro Shops (BassPro.com) and other major U.S. sporting goods retailers under the “SealSkinz” brand. On the SealSkinz.com website, they make the following claim:
“SealSkinz are suitable for cycling, walking, climbing, golfing, riding, canoeing, motorcycling, sailing, fell running, orienteering, gardening, fishing, rowing, caving, backpacking, mountaineering … and 100% waterproof.”
I AM WRITING TO INFORM YOU THAT BASED ON MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH SEALSKINZ SOCKS AND GLOVES, THEY MOST CERTAINLY ARE NOT “100% WATERPROOF” IN A MOTORCYCLING CONTEXT, NOR ARE THEY LIKELY TO BE WATERPROOF IN ANY OTHER.
Based on the assurances of SealSkinz.com, in October 2006 I placed two online orders through BassPro.com for two pairs each of (a) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Gloves, and (b) SealSkinz ChillBlocker Waterproof Socks. I placed the second order after road-testing their socks, and being pleased with how well they did in fact “block the chill” under dry conditions. I gambled that they would also in fact be waterproof as claimed. In December 2006, I found out nothing could be further from the truth. In riding through less than 100 miles of hard rain, the SealSkinz “waterproof” socks proved to be nothing more than thick sponges. And just to verify the false nature of their claims, after washing them as instructed I let the lower half of a dry pair sit in a pot of water, weighted by a smaller pot, and in less than an hour they were soaked inside and out!
I Googled the following phrase…
+sealskinz +”not waterproof”
…and discovered I was not alone in my dissatisfaction with SealSkinz. I then conveyed my negative experiences to PIL Membranes in an email addressed to info@sealskinz.com. It was replied to by Sam Matthews of Danalco (sam@danalco.com), whose response included:
“We are the manufacturer of SealSkinz and we make the 100% waterproof claims. We operate an ISO 9001 certified manufacturing facility in California… SealSkinz are manufactured using a patented 3 layer lamination technique that bonds a stretchy waterproof membrane between an inner and outer fabric layer. The same lamination is used in our socks and gloves… Prior to shipping all SealSkinz are 100 % tested for leaks. I have attached some technical test data which supports our claims.”
Please review the “technical test data” he attached in this PDF:
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/SealSkinzTestResults.pdf
There you will see that their “100% Waterproof” claim is based on the fact that a test laboratory found no leakage at 4.5 psi after 60 seconds, which they claim meets the requirements of the International Standards Organization’s ISO 811. Sounds pretty impressive, doesn’t it? WELL, IT’S NOT, AND HERE IS WHY:
First of all atmospheric pressure at sea level is about 14.7 psi, so a pressure test at 4.5 psi isn’t much pressure at all. Secondly, the test duration is only 60 seconds. That’s right, SealSkinz are labeled and sold as “100% Waterproof” because they are proven under laboratory conditions not to leak for SIXTY WHOLE SECONDS. When is the last time you rode your motorcycle for less than sixty seconds?!? And even more revealing is what I discovered in this ISO Bulletin from June 2001…
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/commcentre/pdf/Watertightness0106.pdf
… where it states “… According to ISO 811, materials with a hydrostatic head of more than 150 cm can be designated, in general, as rainproof. In the advertising field, however, the manufacturers of rain-protection materials outbid each other with hydrostatic heads of 80 m and more. But the materials are stressed with a static water pressure of only 2-3 mm in use. Rain is a dynamic and not a static process… There are numerous applications where raindrops are projected onto a garment at a high velocity, e.g. by motorcycling or strong winds. These are highly dynamic processes and have to be considered differently.”
In simpler terms, EVEN THE ISO WARNS THAT ISO 811 IS NOT A SUITABLE STANDARD FOR JUDGING WHETHER GARMENTS ARE WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONDITIONS … LIKE RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
So why does PilMembranes/Danalco/SealSkinz base their “100% Waterproof” claim on an inappropriate standard and test procedure? Probably because they know their products have no chance of holding up to more suitable testing standards like the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists’ (AATCC’s) “Water Resistance: Rain Test” Standard AATCC-35, the scope of which is defined here…
http://store.ihs.com/specsstore/controller;jsessionid=mhCf4JEqL5k1qzcxjqki6w**.app12?event=DOCUMENT_DETAILS&docId=RIORXBAAAAAAAAAA
…as follows:
“This test method is applicable to any textile fabric, which may or may not have been given a water-resistant or water-repellent finish. It measures the resistance to the penetration of water by impact, and thus can be used to predict the probable rain penetration resistance of fabrics. It is especially suitable for measuring the penetration resistance of garment fabrics. With the instrument, tests may be made at different intensities … of water impact to give a complete overall picture of the penetration resistance of a single fabric or a combination of fabrics.”
***
I have shared the above with you in the hopes that you may benefit from my experience and research, and not fall victim to the misleading advertising and packaging claims about SealSkinz products. In short, my experience and research suggest:
1. SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS ARE NOT WATERPROOF IN REAL WORLD CONTEXTS SUCH AS RIDING A MOTORCYCLE IN THE RAIN.
2. IF YOU HAVE PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND IMMEDIATELY.
3. IF YOU HAVE NOT PURCHASED SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS, YOU SHOULD DO SO AND IMMEDIATELY RETURN THEM FOR A REFUND. IF WE DRIVE UP THEIR RETURN RATES SUFFICIENTLY, IT WILL FORCE RETAILERS TO STOP STOCKING SEALSKINZ PRODUCTS.
Thank you for your time. I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward this email to every motorcyclist you know.
Dear Sir,
Wonderful incident you are importer and we are manufacturer, why should not cooperate with each other.
We have the pleasure to inform you that we are engaged in the manufacture-cum-exporter for a complete line of Leather goods having special production of SKI GLOVES, MOTOR CYCLE GLOVES, WINTER GLOVES, CYCLING GLOVES, MOTOR CROSS GLOVES, LEATHER JACKETS/TEXTILES GARMENTS, SAFETY NET WEST JACKETS (adult & Kids), NECK BRASSES and SHIN GUARDS etc since 1985.
We guarantee that you will appreciate the quality, workmanship, durability of our products if try us once. We will welcome your enquiry of the items of your choice.Enabling to submit our samples for your kind consideration.
Should you desire, we will send our current catalogue 2008 for your study and select out the items of your choice.
Always at your disposal and looking forward to the pleasure of receiving your kind reply, With kind personal regards from undersigned,
Best regards
Muhammad