Your only assumption for someone telling the truth is that the method in which they test are not the same.tautologies wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:46 pmYou know neither of these graphics are really showing enough for us to say much about how anyone are lying. It might be that both are correct. Your only assumption for someone not telling the truth is that the method in which they test are the same. That might not be the case. Both tests could be true because of how they test it.Faxie wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:52 pmWell, for one, according to the 'test results', D2 and T9600 are very similar. That was not what we were led to believe when D2 was introduced. So at least someone is lying, wether it be North, Naish, or Teijin.
According to North about Trinity: The 3x2 yarn combination has proven to be the best solution in performance as well as durability, overall superior to any 2x2 or 4x4 yarn solutions. Well, looking at the graph, not according to Naish.
Somehow I have a feeling that in a few years the multiple ripstop hype will stop (people are already opening their eyes it seems, because we are getting to a point where it gets kinda ridiculous) and it will be single ripstop again, but with smaller squares. Will be called 'high density ripstop' or something like that (looks like that name already exists, but you get the point). Just watch.
Still, it's strange that North is getting a 70% better tearing strength (in favor of their new material), while Naish finds almost no difference (in favor of their new material). And according to North, the Trinity is superior to the X4. If a different test method can produce that much differences, you cannot take them seriously at all imo. The only credible test would be a standardized 3rd party test, and none of those exist to my knowledge.