>but what is techwear ?
>is there a cheaper version of x ?
No, techwear is expensive because you pay for the materials, that's the whole point of it. It requires a lot of R&D, expensive manufacturing, etc.
>what's the difference between a soft-shell and a hard shell ?
Does anyone have that site where I can purchase round shoelaces?
I remember a pic of Roshes using one of their laces posted a while ago
So when is the neoprene trend going to end? Looks like shit in most applications imo, and noone wants to wear a wetsuit day to day. Isaora, although I'm not a super big fan of the brand is try some interesting textile stuff with it though, threads of neoprene foam with bonded nylon or something (don't quote me on that) - looked pretty decent (read: not neoprene) from what I saw.
i feel like the neoprene thing isn't going to end anytime soon, in fact i think that it's only going to get much worse before it gets better. i think fast fashion places like hm and zara are going to be inundated with neoprene shit before the trend dies.
as far as isaora's collection, is that even really neoprene? the description made it seem like it was just "neoprene" which made me thing they were just bandwagoning without even using the material.
personally i don't understand why it's gaining popularity, yeah i have qasas and the neoprene is cool but like you said i wouldn't want to wear a fucking wetsuit every day. i can't see myself wearing neoprene outerwear.
Adidas is releasing some new gore tex stuff
My main problem with it is just how effective it is at keeping heat in. If I wear my neoprene sweater I'm sweating in minutes if it's not winter conditions, when I'm wearing my qasas I realize just how sweaty my feet can get. Sure it's job very well, keeping heat in. Unless your wearing it in the winter it's not practical at all, also the fact that it is so bulbous and boxy you can't get a tight fitting neoprene garment unless it's something like a wetsuit. It's still a really cool material but I completely agree that I'd be happy not to see much more of it. Those Juun J neoprene tees are tacky as hell but I still want one, but again it's a perfect example of neoprene making boxy oversized silhouettes.
>No, techwear is expensive because you pay for the materials, that's the whole point of it. It requires a lot of R&D, expensive manufacturing, etc.
Re: affordability, that's true of some garments, but by no means all, even just talking new and excluding secondhand stores, online marketplaces, dumpsters, sample sales, etc.
>the materials, that's the whole point of it
"The technology is not the fabric. The fabric is not the technology." - the guy in your picture.
Even fabrics that aren't neoprene but have that same kind of feel do it. I've got this odd sweatshirt from a thrift store where the face fabric is a relatively standard but rough-feeling polycotton blend and the back is 100% polyester but it feels just like neoprene, just a little smoother. Same sweating in minutes deal.
Any textilefags know how this kind of thing works?
copped the new model looks awesome
been huntin theese fuckers for almost a year
I just looked it up on Wikipedia so I might be completely wrong but it looks like the cells of neoprene are not only bonded together tightly but also closed. This means that water stays out bad heat stays in. It is used almost universally as an insulator and aquatic activities so I'm assuming this is correct.
As good as they say they are, pretty much. The Simple Guide Hoody is, well, simple - not much in the way of features, visually plain but not in a bad way - but the performance is there.
Check under Patagonia's Web Specials section - they have a lot of softshells that are discontinued and current stuff in old colorways for much less.
Anyone know how the breathability is on the Alpine Houdini? A 10,000mm water column suggests it's good, but there's seemingly no information available on the membrane.
Pretty sure he was referring to my pic which was Juun J ss14
You're getting what you pay for, it'll keep you dry for a whole but you immediately get a damp feeling in anything more than a drizzle. This is because the water is getting trapped in between the two layers. With better shells and jackets in general the dwr is going to be much higher quality on the top layer and the bonding between the layers will be much better. If it's all you have money for right now I would definitely cop though.
imo techwear is as expensive as you want it to be.
it's when you're trying to achieve a certain aesthetic that it becomes costly.
you want to look like a future ninja? then expect to pay a lot of money for that coat.
you want to get a jacket which is waterproof and breathable? then you can get this on a budget
Your completely right about the aesthetic youre paying a good amount for it. But when it comes to quality lower price range shells just don't perform the same thing high end ones do.
I would look to snowboarding and skiing brands for this. Probably more so snowboarding than skiing actually, those types of jackets are really popular for stiff like that you could easily find something like that from Bonfire, Burton, Volcom. The tough part would be finding something that is unbranded.
You can still get the look cheap, just not as refined on a number of vectors.
Also, I'm not really sure how many people are going for "future ninja"/how accurate that is as a descriptor of even the stuff I think you're talking about.
Anyway, here's a quick sample fit. You could tweak it a few ways - get a jacket that's more breathable*, sub in cargo pants of some variety, etc. etc.
http://www.outdoorknitwear.com/store/product.php?product=52 (~70 USD)
$635 for all outer layers. If you really want to take it from zero, add $20 for a pair of socks and $30-40 each for top and bottom baselayers, although you can go cheaper with all that.
I chose purely on looks, speed for posting, and being in the lower end of the price range. You can definitely do better on a number of vectors - none of that is the cheapest relevant offering from the company, all of it is new at MSRP, the jacket's made of the lowest end, least performance oriented type of WP/B material, even though Marmot actually has some great cheapish breathable shells. E.g.
This is just going off of what I've seen, but based on past threads here and the Urban Tech thread on sufu. It seems that very few people who wear techy clothes live in areas where it's not needed and two very few of them drive. Most of them are biking or walking. To me it seems like many people get into tech because there surroundings call for something more durable and high performing but still want an aesthetically pleasing piece rather than your typical outdoorsy brand
I'll post a little for this later, but the R1 is definitely a great classic. Only problem (I'm assuming about what >>8849762 wants) is it doesn't look much like outerwear and the hood is only available with a partial zip.
Not much! But this is why people need to forget about hardshells and get softshells for urban use.
Acronym builds zips meant to interface with shoulder bags into many of its jackets, and many people make jackets that expand in front to fit insulation. And, of course, plenty of ultralight hiking companies make combined poncho/backpack rain cover things.
A backpack oriented jacket would be interesting to see. The ergos would be kind of tricky, but something like a double sided version of the zip apparatus on the J41-GT might work. Just annoying to deal with two zippers.
I think most don't drive and nearly all wear it where they're not *needed*, i.e. the city. People make do with all kinds of junk, even bike commuters in cotton fast fashion jackets.
A hardshell is definitely overkill for most urban users, and people seem to jump at those because of a toughness/impenetrability/etc. fetish instead of getting more practical softshells.
the future ninja comment was aimed more at those who either want acronym stuff or items which emulate it, as well as those who think techwear has to be all black errything.
I was able to get the basics of my tech stuff for less that that: 2 nano trousers both both for less than £200, Rains coat for £60, waterproof paladiums for £70, Head goretex sweater £10 off ebay. socks don't matter unless you get a really cold winter i.e Canadia but i live in London so idk
That's what I figured and aimed for with the fit.
I don't typically wear socks, either, and most of my kit was got on the cheap. My style also tends to cleave towards the extremes in price - it's basically playful fashiony /out/core, so I can work either $60 MSRP hiking pants or advanced designer cargos.
What's the deal with Rains as a brand? I've heard them talked about a lot but never in any detail.
they do the job, i got one of their jackets back when they had a lot less options in terms of style and colour. not great at keeping you warm due to the lack of insulation but perfect for keeping you dry and makes for a nice lightweight layer. plus the price point is good
A hardshell certainly isn't overkill, but it won't necessarily work all that well either. Biking in the rain, especially if it's warm, is among the hardest challenges you could put on a technical fabric. You're producing a lot of heat and moisture inside the the fabric while the outside is soaking wet. No amount of money will buy you a fabric that will deal with that well. Soft shells? Expensive DWR wets through about a minute later than the cheap stuff.
god i want these pants. they look 2 comfy in the rain
It's a neoprene-poly textile, my understanding is that it's threads that are neoprene foam wrapped in polyester. I imagine the desired effect is that its' a neoprene weave rather than a solid piece of neoprene that needs to be glued or stitched together.
Neoprene is a synthetic rubber, ergo it isn't very breathable. I don't mind it if used for special applications or as a small part of a garment but as the majority of the textile it's too much.
just ordered some Outlier Slim Dungarees, praying they live up to my expectations
what are some good shoes to wear with them? I have a pair of CPs, Blue Suede Sambas (although my dungarees are black) and some leather converse I use as beaters/club shoes
are you people living in Iceland ??
I don't understand how's that a thing ?
why would anyone want some gore tex all over him ?
I wear cycling shoes to school and don't have room to stuff a pair of shoes into my backpack after everything else. Is there any way to make this fit into a techwear look or are they outright not /fa/?
pic related is the shoes I have
do you mean damage the SPD cleat?
The "tread" on these don't let that bit touch the ground. I don't really think the tread seems to be wearing out either, it's really hard plastic for rigidity and digging in when running up muddy hills while carrying a bike.
are you the same /fa/scist that was here in like 2010?
how would it feel like wearing a wetsuit? 1) almost all outwear I've seen using neoprene is lined 2) it's not tight and 3) won't be wet
it's cool to not like neoprene because of its look, but its insane to shit on it because wetsuits are made out of it. people like them because of the interesting texture and structured fit. might as well shit on leather jackets as well, they stink like shit when worn unlined and skin tight to the beach. what retard would buy one?
eh, a little more techy looking than that. Kinda like these 4dim ones
Those are techwear you fucking boob. You don't want techwear though you just want futuristic looking clothing. You should have said that in the beginning. Kids like you give this style such an awful name you don't care about the fabrics, you don't care about the cutting, you couldn't care less about anything as long as you look like a sick techninj. Right? Techwear doesn't always have to be the crazy futuristic stuff. To tell you the truth that stuff is much less functional than something is both minimal in design and concept. Are you really going to use every pocket on your Acronym jacket. Do you really need the sling, the magnets, the hidden pockets. Why not have your one main piece that grabs the attention and then have everything else showing off that? Simple shorts and shoes and than a fantastic torso one you can hardly look away from. Sorry that was much longer than expected it's just funny that you say more "techy" looking when the BDV shorts are such a nice techwear short.
another techwear autist pissed off that you can get a rain jacket at kmart for $20 that performs just as well as his $500 dead bird hard shell
calm down and accept that people like different brands for different reasons. we are all in this together, there is no need to be so damn angry
>being this mad
hey man i just said techwear because i felt it described it better than 'futuristic looking clothing' which could be pretty broad. hey you're right though I don't give a shit about the function of the clothing. you probably didn't even read my post and thought I said "good tech shorts" rather than "good looking tech shorts" top kek cause you care that I don't. deal with it.
I'm not mad I just find it funny. Why would you want to fake a style? I just don't understand it's the same thing with stuff like zaras dark collection it's not real it's just half assed watered down goth-ninja. Same with H&M making knockoff SLP bikers. Sure you can buy those but everyone who likes and follows that style will instantly know your fake and even more with techwear sure that piece may look awesome but it defeats the point of techwear if it fits like every other pair of shorts out there. If there is not special cutting to make sure a full range of motion is allowed. Or if it's just cotton compared to a dwr coated blend. I know I'm being harsh, if you don't want to do shit like that and just want the aesthetic by all means do it. You really want find what you're looking for in your price range though.
it better be for 50 times the price.
but honestly plenty of people make do with cheap polyester shells from budget brands. "techwear" brands are simply not necessary and are overpriced for what you get. it's a hobby and they look cool. that's great but don't pretend like you can justify the expense as a necessity when people who are way fitter than you are using mall tier stuff in way worse conditions and are perfectly fine using them.
also, belittling some anon who likes futurey looking brands like acronym is douchey as hell, especially considering if you told the average pleb what you paid for your dadcore dead bird they would balk and think something is wrong with you. if you can't understand someone's aesthetic choices, then just ignore and move on. you won't make people stop liking acronym just by throwing a hissy fit
First fa I'm taking it you've never handled anything higher quality than TNF, so most of your argument is invalid anyways. But I will pretend that is not the truth.
>Techwear brands are not needed
Sure of course their not they are luxury clothes that have a much more functional aspect than most clothing. But by your same login anything that is luxury should not exist. So goodbye Lanvin, Givenchy, Dior.
>belittling some anon for what he likes
I never put him down for his taste alone. Just when he said that he wasn't interested in any of the technical aspects of it at all. Which literally defeats the entire purpose of the style.
>you won't make people stop liking Acronym
I love Acronym, it's one of my favorite brands just because I criticized doesn't mean I instantly dislike it. If you love someone can you not see imperfections in them and longer? No to like something and understand it you have to see multiple points of view. And that's exactly what I did, Acronym has given techwear a stigma of over-designed pieces. You don't need all those features at all. I still love them though.
Do you not find it funny or atleast strange in the slightest that when you are looking for "technical" clothing you completely disregard the technical parts of it? Hopefully this had cleared up some stuff. Again I'm not mad at all just trying to explain.
I'm not saying any of it should not exist. There are a lot of brands I don't like, but I wouldn't want them not to exist as long as some people like them.
The design is more important than function for some people, that's it. On top of that quality and design are subjective concepts and something you might find ridiculous, others may prefer to what you think is cool.
I like techwear (from many different aesthetics) but one thing that irks me are the people who get OCD on technical specs and the "objective performance" of the garments. It's like those watch autists who go on and on about why a $15,000 watch is better than a $200 Seiko. They both do the same thing and it's really cool that you appreciate and can afford the higher end items, but it's delusional to think that they are "better" for everyone.
Try to just appreciate pieces you like, ignore what you don't and add value to the conversation instead of sperging out.
Agh, I wrote a perfect response to this and Firefox crashed when I was finishing up a little research.
Short and fast version for now:
I, too, share your frustration with a lot of the culture behind this. IIRC, the company behind that picture is just a trendhopping garbage brand. So much of the attitudes people bring here are so pathetically macho, obsessed with toughness yet prissy as all hell about personal climate control. And trying to get with cash intangibles that have nothing to do with them.
But you're aiming at the wrong targets. The BDV shorts are incredible; the Schoeller twill BD is using for that line is, no kidding, one of my favorite fabrics ever even on just an aesthetic level. But you don't see why two standard, large pouch cargo pockets would be more functional than the small one the BDV shorts have? It's also worth noting the shorts in that image - again, not backing them - have a rather prominent crotch gusset.
As far as Acronym, only two of their jackets I know about - the J1 and J28 - go really crazy on the pockets. Their descriptions, respectively, are:
> This is not a jacket. J1A is a Technologietraeger [technology carrier]; the very idea of ACRONYM® rendered in physical, wearable form.
> Full frontal. Uncut. Hard R. NC-17. Overbuilt. Ultralight. Asymmetric. Epic®. Acronym®. Interopsæ. Mofo.
So, relatively conceptual pieces built because they're AWESOME. Even then, I personally can think of how I'd at least occasionally make serious use of every pocket on the J1A, though not the J28.
It's worth noting that pockets aren't just for schlepping. They're also for comfort (I personally prefer to keep my hand pockets otherwise empty, if possible) and organization. Symmetry also plays a role - don't you wish your BDV shorts had a matching pocket on the other side? I do.
The sling is one of the most useful and practical things about Acronym and other jackets that have them (Rick does, a lot, for one). It turns the jacket into a bag and gives it something to do and somewhere to go during the hot midday. The magnets - I'm assuming you mean Forcelock, the thing for your earphones - are just a nice, useful touch.
BD, who are no question my favorite /out/core brand, optimizes their stuff for climbing, which means a certain kind of minimization. Of weight, of things that could go wrong. When that doesn't apply other design imperatives can take over.
Don't think it's original. It's an old slur among overly thrifty hikers, likes "Patagucci."
That covered most of it, actually, though sloppily and with less examples and citation. Some philosophical stuff - about cohesion, thoroughness, why you should think in terms of experience vs. performance, and about fabric - tomorrow-ish.
Also, guy who set all this off, your best bet is looking in thrift stores and punching outdoor brands (TNF, Columbia, and more obscure shit like Klattermusen and Paramo are more likely to pay dividends than Patagonia and Arc'Teryx, I think, but try everything) into eBay. Isaora also has made shorts in the past that I think will be to your liking.
I mean, in one sense you don't really need any of this. Go down to a day labor place on a downpour day and see what you need.
I should've mentioned necessity in that list of philosophical stuff. I think looking at, feeling other kinds of necessity is super useful for figuring out what you should actually wear.
That's vague as hell; keep the thread bumped and I'll write more when I can. Out for now.
All the anons that have interesting views post while I am away :<
totally agree m8. just looks odd. he'd suit stuff from Palace though imo.
man techwear is mad expensive. found this patagonia jacket (not my pic, but same jacket) at a thrift for $5. needless to say i picked it up.
more like vintage techwear. kinda bright, but w/e.
besides this, picked up a clean simple arcteryx t for $10 at REI.
REI has solid entry-level basics
Silhouette is really similar along with almost everything else you could see why I was confused.
anyone else planning on buying the Big Boss boots? depending on the price I might cop them. Yes it's autistic to wear vidya apparel but I reckon they'd look great in some tech fits. Made by Puma.
Of course, I would do the exact same thing
MGS clothing is pretty dope
I have a MGS field jacket and it's really good quality at least
I don't think I have one right now
This is the exact jacket I own
I guess it's technically a shirt but I use it as spring/summer jacket
nah m8. US.
here are a couple pics. shorts cus im lounging
its slightly big - see neck area. but silhouette itself isnt too bad. also, nature of the jacket allows for wiggle room
found a receipt in the jacket. not for the jacket itself, for some other shit. but says 1997
dunno. but i agree. not sure if i'll be able to outfit it. skintone doesnt work w/ such bright colors, i dont think..
also, mfw people pissing their paints over this.. staymad plebs.
if anything i can flip it on ebay.
for the brandies
>dunno. but i agree. not sure if i'll be able to outfit it. skintone doesnt work w/ such bright colors, i dont think..
If it's mostly cotton or natural materials you could try dying it, I mean let's face it, you don't have much to lose.
The model itself and the fit does not look too bad but the color is pretty bad.
You're free to have an opinion, but tech doesn't have to equal = murdered out badass tough guy. I like the more playful, oddball uses of it. I'd squeal in the unlikely event of a Grimes x Errolson collaboration.
>Tacky is the most disgusting word in the style vocabulary. It’s fascinating and gross. Tacky like glue. Like you’ll catch poor [ed note: or like poor sticks to you, no matter what you do?]. Tacky like you’re trying to climb up to somewhere you “don’t belong.” Tacky is the opposite of rich solitude and desire for exclusion.
>Early 19th century: of unknown origin. Early use was as a noun denoting a horse of little value, later applied to a poor white in some southern states, hence ‘shabby, cheap, in bad taste.’
>I have this joke about Uggs and fashion kids: people who wear Uggs think they're cooler than the weird Goths that wear black, and fashion kids who wear black think they’re cooler than people who wear Uggs. Now fashion people wear Uggs and think they’re cooler than everyone?
- Arabelle Sicardi
It's possible to dye almost anything with the right technique; it's blends that get impossible.
What does the comp tag say? The construction looks more like a hardshell than a windbreaker.
Either way, if you don't want it, it was $5. Pass it off to an unsheltered person. Good rainwear can make a huge difference to them.
tag confirms 100% nylon. having never dyed anything, i fear fucking it up and ruining it.
i think i'll keep it though. $5 is not a big deal.
but you're right. it's in great condition so someone could make great use out of it.
would be ~$100 going w/ metro dyeing. but, according to their website, nylon dyes nicely.
hmm.. will check for local places around me. if it's not too expensive, maybe i'll do it.
recommend a color scheme? wonder how black would take...
Don't know what you like or what you'd be wearing it with.
I think black will take to pretty much everything, and if not, just blast it again or stick with a nice brown-tinted black that shows the history of the garment some. Whoever you get to dye it will be able to advise you better.
So, this is gear that has been used in backpacking for the past 20 years or more just made less functional, less durable and more expensive for people in cities to buy? Where do I buy stock in these companies so that I may make money off of morons?
Reccommended softshell or hardshell for someone in the southeast of England? Need a decent outer layer for the winter, not sure whether to go for a softshell or hardshell given how unpredictable our weather is. A local store has 50% off North Face gear at the moment (I'd go ask advice now but they close early), so preferably something North Face so I can get a bargain if it's in stock.