Comments on: Screwy Weather

By: James

James — Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:44:23 +0000

I have Nike’s. You are correct, they are cheaper, but not by much, than Montbell’s and they are nothing like Montbell’s.

I also have Aigle’s which is even more expensive than Montbell’s but are much lighter than both Nike’s and Montbell’s.

Both Aigle and Nike’s are nowhere near as breathable as Montbell’s. That is why I don’t buy them for Alec.

There might be other brand’s which I haven’t discovered, but for what these three brands are worth without going into a big cloth hunt which may drive the costs even higher than what the piece of garment might worth, Montbell suits the budget and the purpose.

By: Toby Chiu

Toby Chiu — Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:27:54 +0000

the dry-fit series of Nike doesn’t comes w/ UV protection bullshit. The same with all soccer wear. They all perform very good in ventilating your body.

For sport gear, it’s always true to buy the best you can afford. But I think we shouldn’t give too much protection to children, physically and mentally.

By: James

James — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:16:07 +0000

All I know, from wearing them, is that they are much better ventilated than regular cotton garments.

By: tin_the_fatty

tin_the_fatty — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:45:28 +0000

Maybe the UV protection is for the garment (so its colour doesn’t fade), not the person?

By: James

James — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:01:49 +0000

I sweat very heavily and Alec sweats even heavier than I. Most sweat wicking t-shirts have UV protection, it is more difficult to find one that’s not.

Nothing is ever considered truly necessary until it is too late.

By: Toby Chiu

Toby Chiu — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:31:28 +0000

Could you tell me, why you need a UV protecting t-shirt? Don’t a regular t-shirt already shade off most sunlight and UV?

IMO, unless you are going to have some heavy hike with Alec, serious gear is not necessary.