What are the opinions of those who live in colder climates on owning the U.S. Army’s New Generation III Extended Cold Weather Clothing System? Is something like this available to civilians? I'm clueless.

http://www.adstactical.com/about_ads/gen3_ecwcs.htm

I found this comment on it:

"During Operation Mountain Lion I found myself praying for bad weather, the first time in my military career I was actually begging for a cold front to come through. I knew my soldiers could handle it and the enemy couldn't. ECWCS allowed my men to outlast the enemy on their own terrain. When the enemy was forced out of the mountains due to the bitter cold to take shelter, that's when we got them."
-- LTC Christopher Cavoli, US Army 10th Mountain Division, Afghanistan

Simon

So they don't have ACU's yet? I figured they all would by now if they're Army and deployed.

On another forum the price given for the soft shell jacket was $349.99 for civilian sales. You could look at BlackHawk's stuff, it's not as expensive. I'll keep my used
Gen-1 Goretex or get a German flecktarn Goretex parka.

Dave

There are reports of problems with synthetic underlayers melting to the
skin of the troops in bombings etc. They might well want to go back to the
wool now that they have itchless, machine wash versions. The superlight
stuff works better than synthetic too for wicking and staying warm when
wet.

Here are some example for research.
http://www.icebreaker.com/site/home.html
https://www.smartwool.com/default.cfm

Last winter up in the White Mountains, I had on UnderArmour Cold Gear, a fleece pullover and a Gen I ECWCS parka. Wind chill was around -20*F. I was sweating when we got to the top. The point I'm trying to make is I would rather spend $100 or less on Gen I and combine it correctly with other layers than whatever Gen II or III costs.

Simon, the government stuff is certainly good. But it is really no better than what is (and has been) available on the civilian market for a long time from companies like Patagonia, Mountain Hardwear, Marmot, The North Face and many others.

All ECWCS consists of is modern mountaineering clothing done up in drab colors and with the layers given a numbering system. The technology is nothing unique to the government items.

If you look for sales at places like Patagonia, Sierra Trading Post and BackCountryGear (among others) you can get the same technology for a lot less $$$ and hassle. If you are lucky enough to live near a Patagonia outlet store then you can get even better deals.

BlackHawk did not invent the softshell, they just overcharge for it.

Good point. I have read that some military commanders have forbidden their troops to wear synthetic underwear. Massif makes fleece & other warm gear from fire-resistant Nomex but the cost is significant.

I've worn the ECWCS since almost its inception. They are following the civilian market; not the other way around. You get get the same, or better, quality stuff with brand name gear. And, if you buy it through certain companies, can probably get it replaced for free in the event of failure.
The military stuff is usually built too heavily for my liking (personal preference). Even though I posess a set of gen II gear, I only keep them in my jeep, as just in case items. When I go out in winter, I prefer my gear, as its lighter, less constricting, and generally all around more comfortable. But, thats just my $0.02 worth. Others may differ here.

I have a few decades of mountaineering behind me and many more decades of backpacking, camping and hiking. I have been there when new things like Gore-Tex, polarfleece, polypro and other miracle fabrics came along. While some have been excellent when used properly and understanding what to expect, others are hyped too much and really seem to perform somewhat less than desired. While I have numerous polarfleece items and like some aspects of them, I also have become aware of limitations and some negative aspects. Besides the melting to skin in a bombing (which I no longer need to endure...I hope) the fleece will melt small holes when a campfire ash lands on them and have some potential to burn of not watched carefully. I also do not like wearing fleece while hiking or doing strenuous activities, it makes me sweat and feel uncomfortable. Wind cuts through most fleece garments and can make me feel colder than if I wasn't wearing it.
Synthetics do dry rapidly because the fibers do not soak up water, only retain it between actual fibers, which is a good feature. It does not seem to keep me very warm if it becomes wet though, which is not a very desireable feature and could be dangerous in extreme conditions.
I have gone back to a combo of wool, synthetics and wind layers of Gore-tex or similar. I prefer the properties of wool mainly the abliity to insulate when completely wet, more wind resistant and does not end up with small burn holes when worn near a fire. Wool also drys rapidly compared to other natural fabrics and most wools are comfortable worn next to the skin. I realize some are allergic or have itching problems with wool, that is sometimes due to the quality of a particular garment.
I recently watched the Everest shows on Discovery and noticed a lot of synthetic clothing, which is not all bad, just probably not a good as a mix of wool in the layering. It is to me, more a trend then a carefully researched method of outdoor dress. I would like to see some serious research into the effects on a person in all conditions while wearing synthetics vs. wool. I think some polarfleece aficionados would be surprised at the outcome! Cheers!

I have read that GI's hate the new ACU's. They reportedly hate the material it is made out of, and they hate the design in general. Don't know myself, having never worn the stuff.

I do know that, even though for my personal use there are many civilian items that I feel equal or exceed the new GI cold weather stuff, I think that it is great that the military is finally issuing adequate cold weather gear. I can still remember being kicked out into sub-zero weather in the 60's with only cotton fatigues and a cotton M-65 field jacket with liner. Insulated underware? Only if you bought it yourself...

I work around full-time National Guard guys that wear ACU's every day. They never complain, but I know they can get hot in a hurry, because they shed the shirt (which has a zipper) alot.

"The bottom pockets on the jacket were removed and placed on the shoulder sleeves so Soldiers can have access to them while wearing body armor."

Remember Izzy, changes in functionality were made to improve the soldier's ability to perform in COMBAT, and all changes were made for a reason.

I have a few GeN-1 gortex jackets and pants and wouldn't trade them for the world.
Sure the "name brand" stuff may be slightly better but for $30 or LESS shipped for near new items I think they are the BEST bang for the buck!!

I did some digging (while laughing my way thru "Armed and Famous," what a hoot), and in the Jan 2007 issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine I re-found one of the articles I had read before. It is part of a statement made by a US Army sniper re the mis-deployment of snipers in the sandbox, and their equipment. Re the ACU's he said "...The ACU's are garbage (unless you work in an office). They do not help you blend with any kiind of terrain or urban setting, the Velcro has to be one of the worst ideas in U.S. Military history. The pockets are still coming open on their own, the arm pockets still snag on things and let out that gut-wrenching r-r-rip when then come open, magazines don't fit into the magazine pouches on the leg and a broken down MRE will not fit in the leg pouch. I'd like to have a few words with the f*ing REMF that decided that we should have them (you have to wonder who is making money on it)..."

Good point, OldSoldier (thank you for your service, by the way). I feel the same way. There's plenty of military designs that work well but they weigh 2x to 3x as much as the comparable civilian gear. I realize that sometimes you need that level of durability, but usually the military stuff is so heavy because 1) no one pushed the mfgr to engineer a capable but lighter design and 2) too many GI Joes (God love 'em!) treat their gear like hated mules instead of applying a little care. Also, some military designs are extra heavy and NOT more durable!

If weight (and bulk) is not an issue then a $30 gen 1 ECWCS setup is fantastic but IMO the civilian stuff is a better choice if you are bearing the weight on your own 2 legs.

Note that a lot of the current civilian gear is available in earth tone colors if that is a factor for you.

Sounds like something that a sniper would say.... LOL

The "REMFs" actually put the ACUs thru alot of real field testing by Stryker Brigade Soldiers in Iraq and got alot of feedback and made appropriate changes before they actually started issuing them as standard.

Here's one link:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/acu.htm

While I'm not a mountain climber or a soldier, I'd like to add my 2 cents to this. Further, I'd like to supplement the previous posters positive remarks regarding wool. I personally wear wool relatively frequently. More specifically I am a skirmisher. This is slightly different from civil war reenacting in that it's a competitive shooting environment. You can read details on it here since I don't feel like explaining it: http://www.n-ssa.org

That being said, we have to wear wool. We wear it in summer. We wear it in winter. We wear it year round. At least my team does. Certain teams make due with 'dickies' since they kind of LOOK like blue wool pants.

That being said, be it a stupidly hot and sticky virginia summer or a "so cold the caps cut your fingers and you don't bleed till days later" virginia winter day I have found over the years that I actually enjoy getting into the wool. This is because I know what's coming. I know that I'm going to be comfortable in any situation.

I know you're thinking.. wool.. on bare skin.. COMFORTABLE? But seriously. It only itches for about 2 minutes. Then... no more itchy! Only comfort. In summer your sweat provides a wicking of the cool air around you and cools you off dramatically. In winter, you find yourself insulated against even the harshest elements. I've literally gone out in a standard confederate "b-class" uniform of wool pants, wool shirt, wool coat with only my underwear and some pajamas underneath in 10 deg f weather and been comfortable enough to shoot for hours. Rain, wind, sleet, snow, 110 degree heat.... I've shot in ALL of it and I really think that's only been possible because of the excellent qualities of wool as a fabric.

I am a believer that wool, despite it's weight and itchiness has serious benefits that I'm yet to see out of a commercial fabric and enjoy it's use thoroughly.

/rant

Izzy,

Do you have link to the Champ9 line or retailer? I went to the Champion Home page, but I am unable to locate the product line.

Thanks-
Pete

Interesting. I kind of forgot (in addition to what I had for breakfast) that I wore wool uniform pants for 30years. Wool gaberdine instead of the rough fuzzy stuff, but still wool. In the 100+ temps of the San Joaquin Valley of CA in the summer too. Didn't really notice being any hotter in them than a pair of Levis...

Interesting info, thanks. I don't really understand this part tho...
"...not having to take uniforms to the cleaners..."

I never thought that BDU's (or fatigues from my era) had to go to the cleaners. They could of course, but I just learned how to use the washer/dryer and iron. Guess the new guys don't have to be ironed, which would be nice...

A pair of levis on a normal day or a 100+ degree day?

<img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

That being said, I can say when I was first told to wear wool I was probably 16... and I must have shot this completely "you've gotta be kidding me" look to them. 8 years later, I couldn't care less, though in reality it took only a few shoots to get comfortable. I just find it ironic that when I at first was shooting I was afraid of the discomfort, now I welcome them as comfortable severe weather clothing!

Thank you Izzy, I will check it out.

Pete

Yep, I seen soldiers at the laundromat take them ACUs right out of the dryer as smooth and wrinkle-free as can be. As far as "not having to take uniforms to the cleaners" goes - I guess they were just referring to those guys who don't do their own laundry.

"...those guys who don't do their own laundry..."

Didn't know too many of those, back in the days of $200 a month pay. Before taxes...

Oh, I remember what it is now. They are referring to the uniforms it replaces. There is only going to be two uniforms in the U.S. Army now. The Dress Blues and the ACUs. EVERYTHING else is being phased out. The ACUs will be accepted as normal wear as opposed to before when they expected some kind of dress uniform that has to be maintained by taking to the cleaners, etc. Believe it or not Dress Greens are going bye bye.

Actually, I had dress blues, but I was stuck working with the guys wearing dress greens for most of my four years...

By cleaners, I think they mean that it doesn't need to be ironed, pressed or (for all old soldiers out there) startched.

Dave

Well, I think that most in the combat arms part of the military didnt worry too much about taking our stuff to the cleaners. In the units I served with, we had ONE pair of starched BDUs, and ONE pair of "garrison" boots. The rest were ratty field wear stuff. We figured we were out in the field 8 months out of the year, so, we could get away with wearing a highly starched uniform for a week at a time, without going back to the cleaners.
And, field boots didnt polish well. Shiny things in the field=bad.

Took the brass a while to figure that one out...

How are the ECWCS (any generation) regarding noise while moving? Stalking wildlife in the field (camera shooting - gotta get closer than for ammo shooting!) with some of the civilian brand jackets/pants can be a challenge sometimes when the fabric layers rub together and make too much noise. To me it's almost like walking too fast in corduroy pants! Is the military stuff any quieter?

SIMON SAYS "What are the opinions of those who live in colder climates--"

PERFECT - If you want total coverage in extreme cold, wind and wet weather for extended periods, you won't be disappointed.

If the criteria is cheap, light, flimsy, cute or quiet or PC, there are alternatives.

Short answer; no. The material they use is stiff (on gen II anyway), and crinkly.

Simon says don't worry Ponder, that's one main reason I asked, because I didn't have any of those qualities in mind.