Loose fitting technical clothing doesn't just look awful, it also undermines the performance of your clothing system, so what the heck is happening? The editor goes off on one...
Every so often I'm stricken by a desperate need to have an
editorial rant and, you'll be glad to know, today is the day...
So what's the rant about? Fit, that's what, or more specifically,
outdoor clothing fit. Could someone please tell me why so much
outdoor clothing has enough spare room inside it to carry the odd
hyena, a selection of comfy cushions and still leave a massive air
gap?
Surely, you think, outdoors people are fitter, healthier and
slimmer than the rest of the population? So what's going on. Okay,
here's an insider secret. Gear companies want to sell as many jackets,
trousers and so on as possible. If you cut your kit slim and
athletic, you automatically exclude anyone who happens to be carrying
a bit of extra weight and, that cuts sales. Cue pressure from the
company's sales reps and retailers for a fuller cut.
Better Fit - Better Function...
The result is a 'fit-as-many-people-as-you-can' generous
pie-eaters' cut that hangs loose on anyone who's moderately fit. So
what? I'll tell you what, close-fitting technical clothing works
better than loose-fitting technical clothing.
Not only
does it weigh less, but by removing gaps and flappy pockets of air
inside the clothing system, it ups the insulation value by reducing
heat loss by convection currents.
In the case of base and mid-layers, it allows your wicking
clothing to do its job by actually being in contact with the skin
rather than hanging over it - how can a baselayer wick if it's not
touching eh? And with breathable outer layers, it's just as
important.
Gore-Tex, for example, requires a temperature and humidity
gradient between the inside and outside of the garment to drive
moisture outwards. If you introduce huge air gaps, the temperature
and humidity of the higher volume of air inside the clothing goes
down, the gradient is reduced and the whole system works less
effectively.
Then there's neatness - what's the point of climbing jackets that
billow out under a harness and pack, sometimes so far that you can't
see your feet properly on the rock?
Stretching The Envelope
Properly-cut articulated clothing doesn't need to be loose to
allow mobility and even better, the technology is there to improve
fit even further. I'm talking about stretch fabrics...
Unaccountably
a lot of garments use stretch panels at the back of the shoulders
say, or at the elbows to 'increase mobility'. But if you do pull
against the stretch, the cuffs simply pull up your wrists, duh.
There's nothing to hold them in place. Nope, the real potential of
stretch fabrics is to improve fit, use them in side panels to pull
the backs and fronts of jackets in or at the base of the hood to
allow the wearer to remove and replace it without adjustment. It
makes so much sense, but you rarely see it done.
Hats off to the handfull of companies that stick to their guns and
produce slim-fitting technical clothing that's cut to work for active
people. I'm talking the likes of Arc'Teryx, Patagonia, Montane and
Rab - with their Extreme range - and, though they seem to get
precious little credit for it, Lowe Alpine, whose latest shells are
beautifully sculpted. Maybe they'd sell more if they went for a
fuller cut, but then they'd lose their technical effectiveness and
after all, isn't that what it's all about...
More generally though, if you want your clothing system to work as
well as it possibly can, whatever size you are, then you need to
track down clothing that's cut to fit you as well as possible without
restricting your movement. We take it for granted that some boots
suit our foot shape and some don't, so why don't we take the same
attitude to clothes?
And as for women's-specific clothing, don't get me started on
that...
Rant over. Have a close-fitting sort of day :-)
Jon - the editor
