GEAR REVIEW: Patagonia Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket

By Will Rietveld

I reviewed the Patagonia Nano-Air Jacket a year ago and found the jacket’s active exertion comfort range occurs at temperatures lower than I normally encounter. In other words, it is more insulation than I need in my location for high exertion activities. Granted, it is a very attractive, and warm, jacket for less active endeavors.

Still wanting to test the concept of “breathable insulation”, I opted to next test Patagonia’s Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket, which is a lighter weight version of the Jacket.

Here’s the stats: the Nano-Air Jacket has 60 ounces/square yard polyester insulation, while the Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket has 40 ounces/square yard insulation, one-third less.  The fabrics in the two jackets are very similar.

The whole idea behind these jackets is to provide extended range comfort and avoid overheating during aerobic outdoor cool weather activities. So, how does the lighter weight Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket perform in active exertion conditions?

Specifications and Features

Manufacturer	Patagonia (www.patagonia.com)
Model	Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket
Fabrics	Outer shell is 1.3 oz/sq yd nylon ripstop, lining is 2 oz/sq yd nylon plain weave, both with stretch and DWR
Breathability	Frontside fabric: 40 CFM, backside fabric 130 CFM
Insulation	40 oz/sq yd Full-Range polyester
Weight	Size men’s Large tested: measured weight 10.85 oz; mfr specification 10.1 oz for size Medium
Features	Full-height front zipper, slim fit, stretch fabric, wind-resistant frontside fabric, breathable backside fabric, 2 zippered handwarmer pockets, elastic hem and cuffs, thumbloops
MSRP	$199

Description

The Patagonia Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket is designed to be a high performance garment. Patagonia’s synthetic Full-Range polyester insulation is analogous to Polartec Alpha, which is a “breathable insulation” meant to keep you comfortable during aerobic activities in cool temperatures, and provide an extended comfort range.

The frontside of the jacket is insulated and has a tighter weave shell fabric to provide some wind resistance (40 CFM); the backside of the garment is uninsulated and has a knitted weave to provide greater breathability (130 CFM). Both the shell and lining have a DWR finish, which I previously tested to be very effective.

Close up of the insulated frontside and knitted backside.

Field Testing and Performance

I tested the jacket on 20 outings consisting of day hiking, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, backcountry skiing, and backpacking. Testing was mostly done in cool temperatures ranging from 15 to 40F.

Fit – Excellent, as I have found with all Patagonia garments. The garment’s body is extra long to cover the butt, and the sleeves are longer too. Its slim cut makes it fit closer to my body, so it’s not bulky, and layers well.

Features – The hand pockets are nice and roomy, and zip for security. I like the stand-up collar to provide some sun protection for my neck. The thumb loops are handy to donn the jacket over a baselayer or other garment.

Wind-Resistance – The tighter front fabric provides needed wind resistance so a cold wind does not readily penetrate.

Breathability – The frontside fabric does allow for some air exchange; it’s basically a trade-off between wind resistance and insulation. The backside fabric is much more breathable, but it is often mostly covered by a day pack or backpack. Breathability is maximized in activities like running, bicycling, and cross-country skiing where one does not normally carry a pack.

Performance – The graph below tells a lot about the jackets performance while speed hiking an undulating trail, carrying a daypack, in temperatures ranging from 25 to 30 F and calm air. The test was done before sunrise to avoid sun warming. I recorded the temperature and relative humidity inside the jacket with a Kestrel 4000, located at mid-chest, at 10 second intervals.

Test data for Patagonia Nano-Air Hybrid Jacket

Note that the jacket’s insulation maintained a fairly constant internal temperature in the 65 to 70 F range, which is good. However, humidity steadily built up inside the jacket as I hiked, and flattened out at about 65%. That indicates that the jacket’s fabric breathability was not enough to exhaust the moisture, allowing it to build up.

In terms of perceived comfort, it took about 45 minutes for the humidity inside the jacket to build up to the point where the jacket felt somewhat steamy inside and time to open the front zipper to increase ventilation.

But that is only part of the comfort story, because the test was done without any influence from the sun. I live in the Southwest US, where we get a lot of sun, and the sun is warm even in the winter. Thus the radiant heat from the sun has a big influence in jacket comfort, even in cold air. There were many occasions when I simply had to take the jacket off because it was too warm, when the air temperature was in the 30s and 40s F.

Issues – I found that the jacket’s fabric gets dirty fairly easily, as evidenced by the ring around the neck (from sunscreen) in the photo. And the photo was taken after laundering the garment. Also the jacket incurred some abrasion damage from a skiing fall, so it requires careful use.

Assessment

Although the Nano-Air Light Hybrid Jacket was often too warm for me in the sunny Southwest, I found its sweet spot is cool, overcast, and breezy conditions, which is what the jacket is designed for. When I had those conditions, the jacket performed well for maintaining comfort over an extended range. In locations where it is overcast or breezy much of the time, or the sun is low, this jacket is capable of providing comfort over an extended range of conditions, as claimed.

The more consistent conditions are – namely overcast, cool, and breezy – the better this jacket will perform. Then all is good. The problem I found is variability; when the sun comes out or the wind stops, I get too hot. Opening the front zipper regulates comfort to some extent, but eventually it is not enough. The Nano-Air definitely provides some extended comfort, but the end result is usually the same – the jacket has to come off. 

Bottom line, it’s a very attractive, great fitting, hi-tech jacket that helps to provide extended comfort in cool, overcast, breezy conditions, but in my situation those conditions don’t exist for very long. If you exercise where those conditions are more typical, then this jacket is for you. However, don’t expect a silver bullet, the breathability part is subtle.

GEAR REVIEW: Crescent Moon Eva All-Foam Snowshoes

By Will Rietveld

This is a new snowshoe with no metal in it; it’s made of EVA foam, the same stuff used for cushioning in the midsole of athletic footwear. It’s received numerous awards for innovation, which is well deserved. It’s fairly light weight at 3.5 pounds per pair, which is true compared to many conventional snowshoes that weigh over 4 pounds per pair.

The new Crescent Moon Eva All-Foam Snowshoe is made of dual-density EVA foam; there is no metal in them. The bottomside has a tread molded in that makes a track in the snow like a snow tire. A hard plastic plate with spikes in inlaid into the bottom of the shoe for climbing traction.

And they certainly attract attention, as was the case when I tested the Eva All-Foam Snowshoes with experienced snowshoeing friends. They all asked how well they perform – traction on uphills, downhills and sidehills – and how do they feel without a binding hinge. That’s what I wanted to know too, which was my reason for testing this unusual snowshoe.

First a little background: I have been testing snowshoes for 14 years, and have published numerous reviews and articles on snowshoes in Backpacking Light Magazine during my 10 year tenure there. I snowshoe with a bunch of hardcore seniors who love to make their own trail through rough, steep, and very scenic terrain. So we know snowshoes, and that’s why my companions were so inquisitive.

So, how did these Eva All-Foam Snowshoes perform in different types of terrain and snow conditons? Read on.

Specifications and Features

Manufacturer	Crescent Moon (www.crescentmoonsnowshoes.com)
Model	Eva All-Foam Snowshoe
Deck	EVA foam and hardened plastic.
Binding	Embedded adjustable hypalon over the foot and heel straps with hook and loop closure
Dimensions	8 in x 24 in
Weight/Pair	Measured weight 3.5 pounds, mfr specification 3.5 pounds
MSRP	$160

Description

The topside of the snowshoe is a softer EVA with the binding embedded. The bottomside is a molded harder EVA with a traction tread molded in plus an inlaid hard plastic plate with sharp spikes.

These snowshoes are definitely a new concept; some details: 

• They are made of dual density molded EVA foam that is flexible.
• The upper layer of the foam (white) is softer and has the binding anchored into it, so it’s not removable or replaceable.
• The bottom layer of EVA is harder and has a traction tread molded into it, like a snow tire.
• A hard plastic traction panel sporting 10 clusters of three-pronged spikes is inlaid beneath the binding, which serves the function of crampons in a traditional snowshoe.
• The snowshoe does not have a binding hinge; instead it has lots of rocker (curvature) and flexibility to facilitate walking.
• Since there is no binding hinge, the tail of the snowshoe does not drop when you lift your foot; rather the snowshoe stays flatly attached to the bottom of your boot.
• The foam construction makes the snowshoes somewhat lightweight at 3.5 pounds, but they are not as light as they look, and certainly not the lightest ones to be found.

The simple binding is made of Hypalon rubber. Two adjustable top straps and one heel strap fit boots from a women's 7 to a men's 14. The underheel strap at the back is my gaiter strap.

There is no doubt that these snowshoes are unconventional, but how do they compare to conventional snowshoes? And are they any better?

Testing and Performance

I obtained a pair of the snowshoes for a few weeks to test them out, and had the opportunity to try them out in shallower snow, wet snow, and deep snow.

My first impression, in shallow (12 inches deep) and wet snow, is they feel the same as conventional snowshoes, which is remarkable since I was expecting some sort of adjustment to them. They walked, climbed, descended, tracked, and gripped as well as conventional snowshoes. They broke trail just fine. I did not have any icing up problems when I went from wet (open sun) snow to cold (shade) snow.  The peripheral lugs in the bottom tread gave the snowshoes good lateral stability. I had a hard time finding any fault with them.

Then I tested them on deeper softer snow (30 to 36 inches deep), and discovered their limitations. When following a few snowshoers who created an 8 to 10 inch trench, I sank in much deeper – these snowshoes lack adequate flotation for softer snow. Exacerbating that problem, the flat attachment of the snowshoes makes then act like scoops – snow  piles up on top of the snowshoes, which I have to lift when I pull them up out of the holes. They are laborious to use in soft snow, and forget about breaking trail with them in deeper soft snow.

I noticed after using the snowshoes on three all-day hikes (there were used some before I got them)  that the hard plastic spikes on the bottom are already rounded off, making one wonder about the longevity of these snowshoes. There is no noticeable wear in the molded EVA tread. Note: I did not walk on rock or pavement with the snowshoes, although I did walk on hard ice and hit an occasional rock buried in the snow.

Assessment

I found from my testing that the Crescent Moon Eva All-Foam Snowshoes are best described as an entry level or beginner snowshoe best suited for packed trails. If you are making your own trail with a group of people, you want to be near the end of the line.

In soft deeper snow, because of their teardrop shape, they lack the flotation of other snowshoes the same length. Added to that, their flat position loads them with snow, making them laborious to lift. Overall, they are very unsuitable for breaking trail, or following a few others on a newly broken trail.

The hard plastic spikes on the bottom allow these snowshoes to climb quite well in firm snow, and I did not find the lack of a pivot point to be a limitation. When I am steeply climbing I concentrate my weight on the toe crampons of conventional snowshoes, but I found the spikes on the foam snowshoes seemed to function as well. However, the spikes are getting rounded off after only a few trips with normal wear and tear, which makes me wonder what the longevity of these snowshoes will be. Conventional snowshoes, with metal crampons, will last a long time.

Version 2 of the Eva All-Foam Snowshoe is coming in fall 2018 (right). It will add aluminum crampons to make them climb better, with no weight gain. Also note that the molded tread is revised too. Looks like they won't be all-foam anymore. The aluminum crampons should help with both traction and longevity. The current version is shown in the left photo.

The Eva Foam snowshoes cost less than most conventional snowshoes, and weigh a bit less, but I believe the old adage applies “you get what you pay for”. For example, the MSR Lightning Trail snowshoe in a 25-inch length weighs 3 pounds 6 ounces (2 ounces less), has a metal frame and crampons, provides serious traction in all directions, and costs $220 ($60 more). That’s where I would put my money, but I'm more of a hardcore snowshoer.

It's important to evaluate these snowshoes for what they are -- less expensive snowshoes for beginner and intermittent snowshoers who mainly travel on packed snow. They are simpler to put on and use, with no learning curve; simply walk on them. And for that niche they are a good choice. They are unique, simple and easy to use, function very well, and attract a lot of attention.