BackpackGearTest
Google
Web BackpackGearTest.org
  Home Guest - Not logged in 
 
 » Register
 » Login
Gear Reviews
Documents
Tools
 » Contact

Reviews > Footwear > Care Products > Atsko Sno-Seal > Kathryn Doiron > Long Term Report

Atsko Sno-Seal - Long Term Report


April 3th 2006

Personal Information:
Name: Kathryn Doiron
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Height: 1.7 m (5' 8")
Weight: 68 kg (150 lb)
Email: kdoiron 'at' gmail 'dot' com
Location: Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Brief Background: I started backpacking and hiking seriously almost four years ago. Most of my miles have been logged in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. I have recently finished 1200+ miles of the Appalachian trail. My style is to be as light as possible while not spending a fortune. My pack weight tends to hover around 25lbs. I have recently starting getting into winter hiking and snowshoeing.

Atsko Sno-Seal


Manufacturer: Atsko
Material: Beeswax paste - Made in USA
Website: http://www.atsko.com
MSRP: US$6.95
Weight (as stated): 8 oz (226 g)
Weight (measured - product + jar): 8.6 oz (241 g)
Applied to: Asolo GoreTex boots, Born shoes

Long Term Report:

I initially applied the paste to only one hiking boot and a pair of shoes. After the field report, I applied the Sno-Seal to the second boot to compare a two month old application to a fresh application. I used an old toothbrush as an applicator and had very good success with it. Better than using my finger and less messy. The toothbrush helped get the paste into the seams and after application, I was able to give the boot a minor buffing with the same toothbrush. The fresh application had a slightly nicer sheen to it compared to the older application on the other boot.

Left boot sealed, right boot unsealed
The left hand boot is Atsko Sno-Seal protected while the right hand boot is in original condition.

The fresh application of Sno-Seal had a few differences versus the two month old application. I did notice there was a nicer sheen to the fresh application. The fresh application did a better job of causing any water to bead up on the boot. There did not seem to be any difference in the waterproofing abilities. I was still able to stomp off most of the water from the boots. Snow did have a greater tendancy to stick to the top of the toe. I did not notice any water seepage into the boots nor did I observe any water seepage into the leather around the toes. I would expect the toes to be a weak point on the boots simply due to the badly scuffed nature of the toes. In the end, the Sno-Seal did a wonderful job of rehydrating the scuffed toes, as evidenced by the picture above, and has sealed the toes very well.

I noticed that a fresh application on the second boot did have a slight stickiness to it that faded after wearing the boot two to three times. I noticed that upon first wearing a freshly Sno-Sealed item outside, any excess Sno-Seal not buffed off will form small whitish globs on the surface of said item. It also took two to three wearings of the boot for those extra Sno-Seal globs to disappear. I found that the globs did not seem to interfere with the waterproofness of my boots in any way.

The boots have seen two more months of wear, both in snowy, wet conditions and in dry, dusty conditions. The fresh application of Sno-Seal still has a sheen to it but I can see that it is fading. The 4 month old application does look dull and the leather, while still supple, does look drier than the other boot. I would be thinking about putting on another layer of Sno-Seal soon except for the fact that the boots still repel water nicely. In dry weather, I did notice that the boots picked up dust, but no one boot had more than the other, and the dust was easily removed with a dry rag. I do not feel the boots picked up more or less dust than in the past but I cannot recall how much dust they normally collect. The boots handled mud very well. Most of the mud was removed by kicking a rock or stamping the foot. I did notice after walking through the mud that the sheen of the newer application had diminished but the boots were still capable of repelling water.

With the shoes, I have noticed that they have become scuffed again under normal wear. I did not expect Sno-Seal to be a preventative to scuffs, but it did nicely buff away some of my nasty, existing scuffs. I have also happily noticed that lack of sheen does not mean that the protection is gone. An older, dull coat works almost as well as a shiny fresh coat.

Field Conditions:

The boots have still been more intensively tested than the shoes as I wore them to work almost every day for at least three of the four testing months. Conditions routinely encountered included slush, snow and ice, with a quick trek through a park with no gain in elevation. Mostly dayhikes with no elevation gain but otherwise rugged. Temperatures in the first three months of testing have varied from just above freezing to -20 C (-4 F). I have purposely encountered deep puddles of slush and cold rain water as well as slogging through snow.

More recently with the nicer weather, both the boots and shoes have seen mostly sunny and warm weather varying from 5 to 20 C (41 - 68 F). I took the boots on several day hikes that while rugged, had little elevation gain. The conditions were dry and dusty with temperatures between 18 and 22 C (64 - 71 F). There was a little moisture and mildly muddy water near the pond to play in. Even a heavy rainfall the night before left only a few patches of mud to play with.

Pros:

    - Pleasant aroma, easy to apply
    - Scuff marks diminished
    - Buffs to a nice sheen
    - Long lasting protection


Cons:
    - Label not printed on jar
    - No applicator


Read more reviews of Atsko gear
Read more gear reviews by Kathryn Doiron

Reviews > Footwear > Care Products > Atsko Sno-Seal > Kathryn Doiron > Long Term Report



All material on this site is the exclusive property of BackpackGearTest.org.
BackpackGearTest software copyright David Anderson