What is 200wt fleece??

[webejpn01]

So I am trying to find my "warm" layer for my section hike at the end of april on the AT. Everyone recos a 200wt fleece. What exactly is that? I mean is that a fleece jacket/vest/pullover? that weighs 200grams total??

Just need some clarification.

[mister krabs]

FLEECE TYPE

AKA

GRAMS PER YARD

OUNCES

lightweight/microfleece

100

200-240

7 TO 8.5

medium/regular weight

200

320-380

11 TO 13.5

heavy weight

300

400 & OVER

14 TO 17

[mister krabs]

whoo, sorry about that formatting.

:rolleyes:

[Dances with Mice]

So I am trying to find my "warm" layer for my section hike at the end of april on the AT. Everyone recos a 200wt fleece. What exactly is that? I mean is that a fleece jacket/vest/pullover? that weighs 200grams total??

Just need some clarification.Fleece, in this context, means a polyester material with a brushed nap.

The "200 wt" part means that the material weighs about 200 grams per square meter, in essence that's a comparative measure of thickness.

What they are recommending then is a jacket or pullover made out of a certain thickness of polyester fleece material.

For example "Polartec" is one brand name of polyester fleece material that is used by many different clothing manufacturers such as LL Bean, Patagonia, The North Face, Eddie Bauer, Cabela's, etc. to construct garments. So you have a lot of brands, styles, features and colors to choose from.

[Mr. Regulator]

Take a look at the link below from folks who generally have a greater understanding of these kinds of issues than those who blurt out subjective and unsupported claims as they do on this forum:

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=18950&disable_pagination=1

You'll see that the 200 weight fleece offers little warmth and the weight isn't condusive to add to your load.

If you're looking for something lightweight which offers better warmth, check out the Montbell UL Down Inner which retails for $108-145 and weighs around 6.9 oz. It is generally lighter than any 200wt fleece and is over twice as warm.


So I am trying to find my "warm" layer for my section hike at the end of april on the AT. Everyone recos a 200wt fleece. What exactly is that? I mean is that a fleece jacket/vest/pullover? that weighs 200grams total??

Just need some clarification.

[mister krabs]

The simple answer is that 200wt is the common weight for fleece sweaters. If you had 100wt sweater in your hand you'd think that it was "thin" If you had 300 it would feel hefty and thick.

Fleece is not the lightest or most compressible for its warmth, depending on your needs that may be important to you. Of course, you can get a 200wt fleece at the thrift shop for 4 dollars. That may also be important to you, or not.

[OldStormcrow]

You would be more familiar with 200 wt. fleece as the jacket liners for North Face coats. The 300 wt. is more like the Denali model jacket by North Face. 100 wt. is about the weight of a heavy knit pullover. The 300 wt. is 'way too bulky and heavy for practical use, and is not all that warm in the wind. The 200 wt. is a good all purpose jacket and stuffs down much smaller, but is colder than the 300. The 100 wt. is more for base layer or extremely active wear. Look for something that has Gore Windstopper, Windwall, or something like that, otherwise the wind blows straight through normal polarfleece. Some of the things I like about polarfleece is it's ability to dry very quickly, it's fairly light weight, and if your sweat freezes in it just shake it out the ice crystals the next morning and it's ready to go.

[Summit]

If you're looking for something lightweight which offers better warmth, check out the Montbell UL Down Inner which retails for $108-145 and weighs around 6.9 oz. It is generally lighter than any 200wt fleece and is over twice as warm.I take it you're assuming you can keep it dry (underneath a waterproof outer shell for instance). Otherwise, I'll take the fleece over your down if they both get wet.

I think of fleece weight like 'thread count' in bed sheets or pixel lines on an HDTV (720P vs. 1080P) . . . the higher the number the denser/tighter the weave and thus the warmer and more wind proof (and heavier).

[Kerosene]

Down to about freezing, I'm quite warm in camp wearing a long-sleeve thermal top, 100-weight fleece, and my rain jacket. You'll find that your body thermostat acclimates to the cooler temperature once you've been out a few days. If you're anticipating colder temperatures or just don't believe that you could be warm enough, then add one of the lightweight down "sweaters", which take me down to at least 20F.

[Fiddleback]

Fleece has one great advantage...it's cheap in comparison to other insulations/insulating garments. But it's not always windproof or wet proof, is bulky to pack, and is heavy compared to the insulation it offers.

I've got a Campmor fleece pullover I dearly love, a fleece vest, and some other stuff. But the only fleece pieces I take on the trail are a balaclava and glove liners.

FB

[Toolshed]

You might see sweatshirts advertised as fleece - be careful as Fleece is the way the material is presented.
You could have cotton or poly Fleece.
My 200 was are very warm when used with a shell. I also have various windblock, but for 3 season backpacking a standard 200 wt fleece and rainjacket
Makes a nice versatile combo.

[Feral Bill]

The simple answer is that 200wt is the common weight for fleece sweaters. If you had 100wt sweater in your hand you'd think that it was "thin" If you had 300 it would feel hefty and thick.

Fleece is not the lightest or most compressible for its warmth, depending on your needs that may be important to you. Of course, you can get a 200wt fleece at the thrift shop for 4 dollars. That may also be important to you, or not.

While at the thrift store, check out the wool sweaters, That might suit you as well.

[Mr. Regulator]

For some reason I always get a kick out of the folks who warn of down getting wet. Does it perform poorly when wet, SURE! So don't get it wet. You'll be carrying some kind of rain gear and a backpack, right? In over 20 years of backpacking I literally don't know of a single person who complained of being cold because their down got wet. Why? Because they prepared for it and were responsible for their gear. To me, fear of down is marketing hype (i.e. you'll get eaten by a bear, you need bombproof equipment, you must carry all synthetics because God forbid it rains....). The truth is, you won't need it while moving as you'll simply generate too much heat and therefore it will be fine sitting in your pack behind a garbage bag liner or even in a waterproof stuff sack (along with your DOWN sleeping bag). This winter I hiked in -17 degrees with a 40 mph wind for over 8 straight hours. I could definitely feel the cold, but I hiked just fine with a base layer of merino wool and a Patagonia Houdini windshirt. I actually had to slow down about every 30 minutes because I kept working up a sweat. When I stopped, I pulled out my down and did just fine. Simply put, synthetic insulation doesn't come close when comparing it to down. Manufacturers of synthetic garmets will claim they do, but scientifcally speaking - they don't. Down remains the lightest and warmest fill you can have. The fabric that contains it is obviously some importance too with wind and such.

How does this relate to this posting and 200 wt fleece? Simple. I love fleece. In fact, I wear it literally every day. My wife calls it "my uniform". It is soft and very comfortable. I love fleece and have more of it then even t-shirts. I do not, and will not however, take it backpacking simply because there are better options. When we're talking insulating gear, I carry a variety of items depending on the conditions. As I mentioned, I carry a Patagonia Houdini for wind, not because it is the best option because it actually isn't. The fact is I am 6'6" and finding things to fit aren't easy and that fit the bill after various micro and Pertex fabrics failed. I use DriDucks for my water shell or eVENT if I plan on bushwacking. For genuine insulation, my outer is the Cocoon series by Backpackinglight.com which works fine alone in snow but not well in rain. It IS synthetic which is a smart choice if it is going to be my outer garmet, which it is. If it rains, I put my rain option over it. In very cold conditions, I use the Montbell UL Down Jacket under the Cocoon which is treated with DWR and does just fine in lightweight snow and rain, although I don't see a sense in testing it. Beneath that I've got merino wool.

Again, simply looking at the UTILITY and genuine FUNCTION of each, and not getting caught up in the marketing hype of all the mass merchandisers who convince many of us that we need the latest and greatest of everything, these options are LIGHT, HIGHLY FUNCTIONAL, and quite honestly the warmest option. Let's not forget they pack smaller than the mighty fleece too. These garmets ARE a better option than fleece.

[Summit]

Nothing at all wrong with any of your choices. But until my REI polyester long sleeve T-shirt, fleece pullover (or zippered one) and Marmot Precip let me down, and they haven't yet down into the low 20s, I don't see the need to spend a lot more money on anything else. In fact, if the temp dips below 25 I add another larger fitting fleece pullover (300 wt) and then I'm good down into the low teens at least. Feet are harder to warm, and for that, I put on my Sealskinz socks over merino wool liners. I do have some down booties but seldom bring/use them.

[Bearpaw]

Mr. Regulator, you have great gear. I have similar gear myself. I also work for an outfitter and get fantastic prices on expensive gear.

For someone who is trying to stretch their thru-hiking budget, there are worse options than using a decent 200 weight fleece and polypro underwear versus down or primaloft over merino wool. It's worth knowing about options, but it would be a disservice to rule out using fleece. It served me well for a long time before I bought my first down sweater.

And in an Appalachian spring, I prefer primaloft because I have experienced a minor loss of loft in down from moisture saturated misty air over several days. I have NOT ever had a catastrophic loss of insulation from sheer soaking.

[Wags]

a long sleeve T, a less than 300 weight fleece, and a precip keep you warm in the low 20's summit? seriously?

[Wags]

and mr. regulator...

-17 and a sustained 40mph wind equates to somewhere between -50 and -57 degrees

overexaggerate much?

[Summit]

a long sleeve T, a less than 300 weight fleece, and a precip keep you warm in the low 20's summit? seriously?Absolutely! Was out Sunday afternoon shooting skeet with the temp around 35 and 35 mph winds (made shooting skeet a bit challenging :D ) and was warm as could be. I've walked every evening thru the winter in same setup . . . no take that back, sub regular cotton t-shirt for long sleeve poly, and been perfectly comfortable with temps into the twenties.

[YoungMoose]

its just the type of fleece

[Mr. Regulator]

and mr. regulator...

-17 and a sustained 40mph wind equates to somewhere between -50 and -57 degrees

overexaggerate much?

Not one bit. You can believe it if you like or you can be like a lot of folks on this forum and just spout out comments with no evidence, experience, or study.

Your body generates a tremendous amount of heat. Keep moving, keep your head warm, and you WILL be warm even in difficult conditions. The fact is that my sweat was a bigger problem than anything else. It froze my back panel and my hipbelt. When I took off my pack to rest, my jacket instantly froze. If you read what I wrote, I said I hiked for 8 hours. I did NOT end up spending the night because quite honestly I was poorly prepared. My clothing was freezing as was my pack. Both water containers, despite being insulated, also froze. Some liquid medication I had - froze. The sweat on the inside of my gaiters froze my pantleg, gaiter, and socks. I didn't notice any of this until I stopped walking and noticed white stuff on my gear which I thought was either rock salt or sweat salt. It turned out to be ice. Ice was on the outside of my hat and gloves too, again from sweat. And yet....the whole time I was walking I didn't notice it because I was moving and generating sufficient heat. If I stopped and didn't have the right gear to keep me warm, I'd be dead.

Instead of claiming I overexaggerated - get out and try it instead. Much like my gear choices, I'm speaking from experience not merely to waste time on this forum. When it comes to gear, especially for a thru-hike, money doesn't much come into play for me. Could someone make a thru-hike with poor choices and terrible gear, sure! For me, I'd rather not be miserable and I'd prefer being responsible. My gear choices are based on function, utility and weight. I choose to spend money on better gear because, well, it is worth it quantitatively. Others take pride in misery - I don't. To me it is worth saving some additional money to buy the good stuff. Collectively, backpacking items aren't terribly expensive when compared to other things in life, they are also able to be reused with great frequency. Again, to me it is worth the money to get it right.

[dloome]

than those who blurt out subjective and unsupported claims as they do on this forum:


Nice sweeping generality / subjective and unsupported claim there... well done. :rolleyes:

[JAK]

Fleece has one great advantage...it's cheap in comparison to other insulations/insulating garments. But it's not always windproof or wet proof, is bulky to pack, and is heavy compared to the insulation it offers.

I've got a Campmor fleece pullover I dearly love, a fleece vest, and some other stuff. But the only fleece pieces I take on the trail are a balaclava and glove liners.

FBYou make some good points there, but I have to qualify your statement about fleece's lack of windproof and wetproof. The big advantage of wool and fleece layers is that they are separable from your wind shells and rain shells and skin layers. You have to consider their advantages as part of a system. For insulation, you have to consider them when worn with a wind shell. For wet proofness, you have to consider how little water good fleece holds, which is its great strength, and separates good quality fleece from crap. Wool is a different animal in that regard. Its strength is in its capacity to absorb and recover heat from body moisture, while still insulating. Having some good quality wool and fleece layers makes your whole system more robust. If by chance you fall though ice or into a stream or get soaked from really heavy rain, nothing better than a simple mix of wool and fleece layers, with some skin layers and wind shells and rain shells to complete the system.

Its not easy to find good wool bottoms, but a wool sweater and 200wt fleece pants is a good practical system. You can keep the sweater on by hiking in shorts and sweater most of the time. At camp or hiking in bad weather you can add skin layers and the fleece pants, and wind or rain shells if neccessary. So you are really just packing the fleece pants, as the wool sweater can always stay on. Depending on the season, I take the heaviest sweater I can still wear hiking or skiing on sunny days with shorts. Summer that might be an 8oz $20 merino thrift sweater. There are many to choose from. Winter, maybe something heavier and hand knit. Ironically, heavier sweater take less time to knit.

[JAK]

For some reason I always get a kick out of the folks who warn of down getting wet. Does it perform poorly when wet, SURE! So don't get it wet. You'll be carrying some kind of rain gear and a backpack, right? In over 20 years of backpacking I literally don't know of a single person who complained of being cold because their down got wet. Why? Because they prepared for it and were responsible for their gear. To me, fear of down is marketing hype (i.e. you'll get eaten by a bear, you need bombproof equipment, you must carry all synthetics because God forbid it rains....). The truth is, you won't need it while moving as you'll simply generate too much heat and therefore it will be fine sitting in your pack behind a garbage bag liner or even in a waterproof stuff sack (along with your DOWN sleeping bag). This winter I hiked in -17 degrees with a 40 mph wind for over 8 straight hours. I could definitely feel the cold, but I hiked just fine with a base layer of merino wool and a Patagonia Houdini windshirt. I actually had to slow down about every 30 minutes because I kept working up a sweat. When I stopped, I pulled out my down and did just fine. Simply put, synthetic insulation doesn't come close when comparing it to down. Manufacturers of synthetic garmets will claim they do, but scientifcally speaking - they don't. Down remains the lightest and warmest fill you can have. The fabric that contains it is obviously some importance too with wind and such.

How does this relate to this posting and 200 wt fleece? Simple. I love fleece. In fact, I wear it literally every day. My wife calls it "my uniform". It is soft and very comfortable. I love fleece and have more of it then even t-shirts. I do not, and will not however, take it backpacking simply because there are better options. When we're talking insulating gear, I carry a variety of items depending on the conditions. As I mentioned, I carry a Patagonia Houdini for wind, not because it is the best option because it actually isn't. The fact is I am 6'6" and finding things to fit aren't easy and that fit the bill after various micro and Pertex fabrics failed. I use DriDucks for my water shell or eVENT if I plan on bushwacking. For genuine insulation, my outer is the Cocoon series by Backpackinglight.com which works fine alone in snow but not well in rain. It IS synthetic which is a smart choice if it is going to be my outer garmet, which it is. If it rains, I put my rain option over it. In very cold conditions, I use the Montbell UL Down Jacket under the Cocoon which is treated with DWR and does just fine in lightweight snow and rain, although I don't see a sense in testing it. Beneath that I've got merino wool.

Again, simply looking at the UTILITY and genuine FUNCTION of each, and not getting caught up in the marketing hype of all the mass merchandisers who convince many of us that we need the latest and greatest of everything, these options are LIGHT, HIGHLY FUNCTIONAL, and quite honestly the warmest option. Let's not forget they pack smaller than the mighty fleece too. These garmets ARE a better option than fleece.

I think if you add up the weight of the total system, there is very little difference,
but system A is more versatile, and more robust.

A)
skin layer pants
skin layer top
fleece layer pants
wool layer top
hiking shorts, wind shell, rain shell

B)
skin layer pants
skin layer top
down pants
down top
hiking shorts, wind shell, rain shell

[JAK]

I would agree with Mr. Regulator.
As long as you don't have bare skin exposed -50 wind chill is not the same as -50F.

Mind you, -17F is still freaking cold, but as long as you are wearing sufficient wind layers, and even insulation over your body, including your face, and generating 400kcal per hour of heat, then you shouldn't need as much insulation as you might think. The tricky thing is managing moisture while still avoiding frostbite, and the devil is in the details, like headgear, and footgear. Also, its nice to be able to slow down without having to stop completely and put on down clothing or crawl into the sleeping bag. I like to have enough wool and fleece to be able to stay warm at light activity, like 150-300kcal/hour. An extra layer of clothing doesn't add alot of weight, but it can really take the pressure off getting everything else right. I would sooner have an extra 2 pounds of clothing in -20F than and extra 2 pounds of something else.

[Wags]

he said -17 with 40mph sustained wind. at that temperature, according to the nation wind chill chart, it would equate to a number between -50 and -57. frostbite would occur in less than 10 minutes on anything exposed. hiking and providing body heat or not. the odds of someone actually being in that are not great

maybe he is some elite backpacker though. i don't know. we've never had temps even close to that where i live

[JAK]

I think the idea is to not let anything be exposed.
Dressed properly, you need alot more clothing for -50F than for -50 wind chill.

My biggest beef with wind chill factor is that it overstates the practical risks of cold temperatures combined with low wind speeds, and understates the practical risks of cold temperatures combined with high winds speeds. According to the formula, 5-10mph is much much worse than calm, but 30-50mph is not much worse than 5-10mph. This might be true of risk frostbite, but bears little resemblance to the real world practical concerns of avoiding hypothermia, or injuries.

Better to state it for what it is, which is -17F with 40mph winds. For that you need to be covered up, obviously, but you also need really good traction, and clothing and gear that you can work with in such conditions. For that you don't need super thick insulation, whereas for true -50F you certainly would. Once you have broken the wind, its a simple matter of activity and thickness vs temperature. An extra thick wool sweater never hurts though, and deep pockets for warming hands back up.

[Summit]

Not one bit. You can believe it if you like or you can be like a lot of folks on this forum and just spout out comments with no evidence, experience, or study.Experience? I've been backpacking longer than you've been living! But you do have me beat in the superior, uppity attitude though! :eek: :p

[JAK]

Well he was right about the amount of clothing you need when active.
He's just wrong about the practical usefulness of down clothing vs wool and fleece.