Polartec 300

2:23 p.m. on September 3, 2003 (EDT)
30 reviewer rep
1,238 forum posts

does anyone know if Polartec 300 fleece series is really that much warmer than polartec 200 series?

I left my Polartec 200 fleece pullover in a Pittsburgh restaurant and need to replace it.

4:20 p.m. on September 3, 2003 (EDT)
TOP 10 REVIEWER REVIEW CORPS
2,329 reviewer rep
5,299 forum posts

Quote:

does anyone know if Polartec 300 fleece series is really that much warmer than polartec 200 series?

Yes. The "300", "200", etc designations are basically the thickness, hence, insulation values of the fleece. 300 is roughly 50 percent more insulation than 200. But it is also bulkier and doesn't compress as much when sticking it in the pack.

Your choice. I have tended to get fleece in the 200 range (or Pata's R-series equivalent) and layer. Even 200 is a bit warm when doing active things in sub-zero weather sometimes, but ok sitting around in camp. Then again, I have been known to go without gloves when backcountry skiing in subzero weather, so YMMV

9:50 a.m. on September 6, 2003 (EDT)
5 reviewer rep
74 forum posts

I second the opinion that the 300 weight is quite a bit warmer and bulkier than the 200. I had a 300 weight jacket from Cabela's, nice in the winter, but was too warm for me for active use. (The jacket went through the dryer with a load of jeans, shrunk up and now one of the kids uses it on cold days.)

I like to the combination of a larger cut fleece vest over my 200. (A 200 weight knock-off of the TNF Denali vest - Love the extra chest pockets)

October 2, 2014
Quick Reply

Please sign in to reply

 
More Topics
This forum: Older: Looking for northwest territory tent Newer: Packing light - since people keep asking
All forums: Older: Herman survivor boots Newer: FS: Nikon SLR w/28mm f2.8 lens