Originally Posted by
WCoastPeddler
Sorry, I absolutely disagree. It does not say "waterproof" and there's no implication that it is.
I've worked in the outdoor equipment industry for several years and there is a difference between waterproof and weatherproof. No question about it. There is nothing misleading about it and MEC makes NO claim in their description of the product that it is "waterproof".
Waterproof means that the gear is impervious to water. Weatherproof means that it will keep water and wind out for a limited time but does not imply in any way that it will keep all the water out for extended periods of time. They are two different degrees of dealing with the weather and both terms are accurate and not interchangeable (there are two very different definitions in the dictionary). Generally speaking, I'll use weatherproof gear for shoulder seasons and waterproof gear for winter use or when it's raining hard (which in this neighbourhood is about 5 months of the year).
I see people interchanging the two words all the time but it's their ignorance (for lack of a gentler word) that they do so. For instance, I was reading a thread in these forums about shoulder bags and someone mentioned that the Seal Line Urban Shoulder Bag is waterproof -- it also is not, nor does Seal Line say that it is -- although it does do a pretty good job of keeping things dry (I have one and it's an excellent bag).
Definitely, MEC is not being misleading.
Sorry, you can disagree but it's clearly confusing and I believe deliberately. I've been confused. The person who started this thread bought his gloves thinking they were waterproof. Why do you think Pearl Izumi doesn't describe them as "water-resistant"? It's because weatherproof sounds tougher, like they're waterproof. The fact that there's some sort of "technical" industry lingo that "technically" differentiates the 2 doesn't change that. Browsing through their site, Pearl Izumi is pretty bad with this stuff.
And what does "weatherproof" mean, anyways? Waterproof means it's immune to water - water can't get through. So it would follow that weatherproof means no weather can get through them - no water, no wind, no weather. But instead it means...it's less? good against weather than something that's waterproof...riiiiiiiiight. Like I said, if they had wanted to be clear they would have said water-resistant. It's just not as good of a marketing term because people don't get as confused about it and buy something they think is waterproof by mistake.
And I looked up the SealLine bag you mentioned. In addition to being made Sealline, a company who used to only make waterproof bags, there's this in the product description "Constructed of a burly, waterproof 600D, urethane-coated polyester". I can just see it now - there's Jim the marketing guy with a straight look on his face going "I have no idea why someone would think this bag is waterproof!" You would have to be willfully ignorant or an idiot to not believe a ton of people are going to be confused.
For an example of a site trying to be helpful and honest despite that manufacturers deliberately misleading claims, you can also look at the
www.mec.ca site.
Here's what Pearl Izumi says about their Pittards Elite Thermal Gloves (
http://www.pearlizumi.com/product.ph...uct_id=1321951) -
"3-layer stretch laminate materials are water-proof and wind-proof"
And here's what the mecca.ca site says about the same gloves, as someone obviously decided they wanted to be clear rather than sell gloves based on "misleading" claims:
http://www.mec.ca/Products/product_d...45524442627562
"The three-layer stretch-laminated materials are waterproof and windproof, but please note that the glove is not taped and will not be entirely waterproof."
See? THERE'S an honest description.
If they wanted to be honest (and by "they" I mean anyone who makes water resistant and waterproof gear), they would do 2 things:
1. They'd refer to gear that's water resistant as being water-resistant, not "weatherproof" which sound to much like waterproof.
2. Any time they start to make claims about it being water resistant or waterproof, they would also clearly state something like "While this product is made with waterproof materials, it is not completely waterproof and will soak through if left in the rain to long".
It's like I met a girl, told her she was cute, took her out and bought her dinner at a fancy restaurant several time where we always talked about romantic movies and great loves scenes, and then acted shocked - shocked! that she thought I was hitting on her (didn't she know I was married even though I *somehow* never actually said I wasn't?).
P.S. However, I wasn't accusing MEC of lying. I was saying that Pearl Izumi's claims were misleading, I don't think it's an "honest mistake" where they were trying to let you know the gloves were only water-resistant but somehow didn't communicate it, and MEC and every other site that sells those gloves simply copies the wording. I think "lying" would have been to harsh, but "misleading" is very appropriate concerning the wording chosen by the manufacturer.