Atsko Water-Guard and Sport-Wash
Field and Final Report by André Corterier
Date: February 2006
Personal Biographical Information:
Name: André Corterier
Gender: M
Age: 34
Height: 1.85 m (6 ft 1 in)
Weight: 80 kg (175 lb)
Email: andreDOTcorterierATfreenetDOTde
Home: Bonn, Germany
Backpacking Background:
I started out with backpacking slowly – single-day 24 km (15 mi) jaunts
by myself or even shorter hikes in the company of my little daughter. I am getting started on longer (overnight)
hikes, as a lightweight packer and hammock-camper. I’ve begun upgrading my old gear and am now shooting for a
dry FSO weight (everything carried From the Skin Out except food, fuel and water)
of about 10 kg (22 lb) for three-season camping. Not quite there yet.
Year of manufacture: 2005
Manufacturer: Atsko
URL: http://www.atsko.com/
MSRP: 8.58 USD (Water-Guard, 296 ml/10 fl oz)
MSRP: 7.40 USD (Sport-Wash, 532 ml/18 fl oz)
Introduction:
This product combination is meant to give clothes a Durable Water Repellent treatment (the Water-Guard) and to allow
washing them in a way which will maintain that treatment (the Sport-Wash). More about this in my
Initial Report.
The Sport-Wash:
Ease of Use:
I have found the Sport-Wash easy to use. I just pour it into the bottle cap, then pour the content into the receptacle
of my washing machine. The substance is liquid enough to pour easily, yet not so thin as to make splashing probable.
Cleaning:
I have not had occasion to try to clean oil or other substances similarly notorious for being hard to get out of
clothing out of my hiking clothes. The trail dirt and sweat stains to which my clothes were subjected came out
without a trace. No complaints there.
Odour:
The Sport-Wash has removed any and all odour which appeared to stick to my clothes, including the more stinky of my
socks or cotton T-shirts (which I will still, occasionally, wear on warm day hikes). As reported before, after
having been washed with the Sport-Wash, the clothes smell clean, though they have less of the "freshly washed"
smell I am used to from clothes fresh out of the washing machine. I assume this is because the smell I associate
with freshly washed clothes is at least in part due to detergent residue in my clothes.
Softness:
The manufacturer claims that the Sport-Wash also "completely eliminates the need for fabric softener". I am
personally of the opinion that being a tough hombre already completely eliminated that need, thank you. But I will admit that
my daughter did not complain about her favourite blanket being too "rough" after washing with this. She has voiced
this complaint before, when I washed her blanket with our regular detergent (when my wife washes her blanket, she
adds a liquid softener). So that's good.
Cost and Effect on DWR:
Atsko also claims that it probably costs less than my usual detergent per washing load. I don't know whether
detergents are more expensive in the US or the manufacturer assumes we all use premium-brand type of detergents,
but after a rough calculation I found that claim to be laughable. Another consideration entirely is the
comparison between cost and effect.
I have tried out and been able to verify that washing DWR-treated garments (in my case, treated with the same
manufacturer's "Water-Guard" - see below) with a standard detergent will reduce the DWR's effectiveness to zero,
and that heat-treating the garments afterwards (by drying in a laundry dryer) was unable to restore the DWR to its
proper function. Washed with the Sport-Wash, however, some effect of the DWR remained behind, and the effectiveness
of the DWR was entirely restored by heat-treating. Taking these issues into consideration, I consider it to be a
fair value. I will be buying more when I'm through with this, as I've come to appreciate the effects of a good DWR.
Pros/Cons:
Pros: Seems to rinse well. Definitely
lightened up
my down bag.
Cons: Requires pre-washing the machine, which is wasteful.
The Water-Guard:
Field Experience:
I have used the pants and shirt I treated with Water Guard on an overnight hike with my daughter (who wore her pants,
which I had treated likewise). I've been wearing the pants often when hiking by myself or jogging, in wind, fog,
drizzle, light and heavy rain. The problem with the shirt I treated is that it soon became too cold to wear it as
an outer layer (temperatures dropped too low for my usual wicking-base-layer-and-flannel-shirt combo). The shirt is
also too tight to fit over my rain gear. Thus, most of the exposure testing of the DWR was done with my pants.
Fog:
I haven't been able to take an hour-long hike through milk-soup-like fog. Yet, what experience I have had with fogs (a quarter of an
hour in light to medium fog with visibility no worse than 50 m (150 ft) showed no tendency of the fabric so treated
to absorb moisture from it. Combined with the results I've had regarding precipitation, I will assume for the
future that no amount of fog will make the garments I treated with Water-Guard take on any amount of moisture at all.
Drizzle:
When hiking or running through drizzle (which, for the purposes of this report, I shall define as a rain so light
that it does not form proper drops), the DWR afforded by the Water-Guard really shone. The only time that my pants
took on any moisture at all from this kind of precipitation was when it was blown by a very strong wind. Even then,
however, this wetting was so slight that the moment the wind shifted, the side of my pants which had accumulated
a touch of moisture was completely dry again within a few minutes of continued running.
Light Rain:
"Light Rain", to me, is the type of rain most common around here - something like an automatic lawn sprinkler in
action (though not the heavy duty kind), the type of rain which can keep up for hours without causing trails to go
entirely muddy. In this rain, the DWR's effect seemed to depend entirely on wind speed. With low wind speeds, not
only were my pants hit a lot less, they were also hit with low force. This was the kind of rain which, even if I
had worn denim, would have seen the drop sit on top of the fabric for a moment before sinking in. Under these
circumstances, the DWR was capable of working its
faucet magic.
The drops rolled right off. With higher wind speeds, the drops would be only partially deflected. After a while,
this would add up to pants which were soaked through. This process took a lot longer than it would have without the
DWR, but was not averted.
Heavy Rain:
With this, I mean the kind of rain that falls down in thick, heavy drops. The kind which downpours are made out of
(though a downpour requires a LOT of heavy rain at once).
On the first experimental outing, an overnight trip over Halloween with my daughter, it began raining at night,
and continued while we packed up in the morning. Walking
through the woods, we were protected from the worst of the rain - what rain hit us was mostly dripping down from
the branches above us. Both of our pants showed spots where the fabric had gotten wet. As the rain come down mostly
from straight above, I usually did not see any drops hit the pants and can report that they weren't subject to a
shower of rain. Nevertheless, exposure was there and clearly more than the DWR could keep away from the pants. I
find it difficult to tell how different this would have been without the DWR treatment. I guess I would have been
tempted to take out my rain overpants (but had left these at home due to the very fresh DWR treatment and a
favorable weather forecast). What water did "soak" the pants did so only in small spots; this was not in any way a
bother.
The one time I did notice water penetrating the DWR was when packing up. I was hunched down, with the fabric of the
pants stretched taught across the top of my thigh, when a drop of water hit it from above. Apparently, the direct
impact (at a right angle) of a fat drop of water was too much pressure for the DWR to stop (at least with the
fabric stretched like that).
Durability:
After my first overnight hike in the DWR-treated pants, I washed them (along with the other treated clothing)
with Sport-Wash. The washing program I chose
includes a "pre-wash" at 60 C (140 F) and then another, full washing cycle at the same temperature. I put half a
cap of the Sport-Wash into the receptacle for the pre-wash cycle and a full cap in the receptacle for the washing
cycle proper. This should have taken care of any detergent residues which might still have been present in the
washing machine.
After spinning and air drying, the DWR's effectiveness was much reduced. When my daughter jumped into a puddle,
the water which splashed up and hit her pants clearly wetted the fabric. I am unable to tell whether this was
reduced when compared to the degree of "soaking" I would have expected without the DWR treatment, but was disappointed
at this.
This prompted me to hold my own pants under the faucet
again.
While some water ran off which would otherwise have
soaked the fabric, the fabric was also very clearly wet where water had run over it (and with a pair of pants as
thin as these, "wet" means "soaked").
I was worried that the DWR might have come off entirely (though my earlier results seemed to show that it worked
as intended). So I decided to attempt to "re-fresh" the DWR by way of another heat treatment (Atsko mentions this
possibility in the brochure which accompanied the product). Another cycle in the clothes dryer did the trick: Water
from the faucet again rolled right off the fabric.
I concluded from this that for the DWR to have its maximum effect, it is absolutely vital to heat-activate it and
to re-activate it after each washing. Further washings have born out this finding. Probably not a problem for people
who own a dryer, but I have to borrow a neighbour's each time. I have also found that the DWR seemed to degrade
with time, not just with washing. Whether this was simply time passing or some UV or moisture exposure in between,
I cannot tell. In any event, it was best soon after it had left the dryer.
Drying:
I believe that the DWR treatment has also caused my pants to dry even quicker. However, they dried very quickly to
begin with (that being in the nature of thin polyester pants), so this isn't an effect I found important.
DWR Effect (Summary):
In all, I find that the DWR makes a substantial difference (more substantial than I would have expected), but does
not entirely obviate the need for dedicated rain gear. The ability to shed water imparted on the treated fabric
seems to depend on the force and direction with which the water hits. Low force (due to small drops and/or low
speed) and acute impact angles are good, large force (large drops, strong wind) and obtuse impact angles are bad.
For my backpacking purposes, I have begun to leave my rain pants at home for dayhiking when it wasn't already
raining when I started. Of course, I was testing this product. But I believe that I will continue to do so in the
future. Even for an overnight hike or maybe three days, as long as the forecast is reasonably benign, I'd leave
them home. Should it rain hard, they'll dry quickly enough and I can probably wait out the worst somewhere. If I
know that I'm encountering real rain, however, on come the rain pants. They feature a water-vapor-permeable
membrane and will also get a treatment of Water-Guard, to help their "breathability". I am also considering to
get my hands on a rain poncho or cape, which would reduce the exposure of my pants as well, in which case I would
likely leave my dedicated rain pants at home for good.
I am impressed by the effect the Water-Guard has had, and will treat more garments with it in the future. (I have
already bought another can.)
Read more reviews of Atsko gear
Read more gear reviews by Andre Corterier
| 