So you would much prefer the goretex pro shell or membrain in a hardshell? I think the point that I am at is that I don't know whether to give any creedance to the "figures" in the chart because it looks like they are from the manufacturer (and a manufacturer like goretex seems to be notorious for over hyping their product). I see a lot of negative reviews for even quite expensive offerings (like say the marmot pro shell offerings), and so I'm starting to sway towards just getting something that works well enough for a reasonable price.
Many membrain offerings seem to fit the bill, but as I have thought about it more, I wonder whether the 20K number is sufficient waterproofness. One of the primary functions of this jacket will be to save my butt in an unexpected mountain downpour, where I would very much like to remain dry from the outside (and from the inside too, but that gets back to me not trusting the breathability numbers and seeing reviewers saying that materials like pro shell don't offer them much in the way of breathability). I spend a lot of time in places (like the high sierra) where I could foresee me ending up on a poster in the ranger's office because I got soaken wet at the wrong time.
I would say that my pattern tends toward Gore-Tex, but that's for reasons that are both empirical and also reasons that are dogmatic and a bit clinging.
Head and shoulders above everything else is that in my experience I have never had Gore-Tex leak. Considering all the rubbish I tried prior to Gore-Tex that alone is something which gets burned into you irrespective of figures or what any other product may or may not achieve. It sets up a relationship of trust. And when I say never leaked I'm talking about being in a jacket, trousers with bib-n-brace, and sealed at the bottom with gaiters. Didn't matter whether I was in driving rain or soddin' about in a muddy hole or in melting slushy snow. I could be in the same ensemble for several days in a row without taking it off and not experience problems. Quite understandably that inspires confidence. No umm and rrrrr, just reach for what you know does the job without fail. It can also unreasonably prejudices one against any other contestant that isn't Gore-Tex. That's wrong, but I'm sure at some points it has happened to me. I take comfort in that being a quite natural feature of learning and I'd be a bit of a thicko if it didn't, despite it being wrong.
Further, in a strange twist on how I normally prefer things, the amount of control Gore exercised over its product ensures quality. You couldn't just get some Gore-Tex off the roll and start punting out products with dodgy taped seams. Gore has sufficient control over it's product and who gets to use it that if garments aren't up to snuff they'll stop the tap. There's a bunch of politics between manufactures that can be read up on concerning that, but that's not the subject here. Here it only means that to me, regardless of manufacturer, if it has the Gore stamp on it there is quality assurance. You might buy an inappropriate design of garment but you can't buy a bad one.
Does that mean I wont explore other products, no. An example I'll offer up is when I tried Sympatex boots. They worked great and were indistinguishable to me from what one could reasonably expect from a Gore boot. Still, despite reading up on the fabric I didn't enter that transaction with the confidence to which I am accustomed. It worked out fine though.
Similarly, I'm sure there are other fabrics that would work just as well as Gore-Tex in jackets, for the purpose I put them to. My feeling is the Gore set the bar so high that anything with figures that are a close approximation of its is good. Suppose it was a tad more waterproof in laboratory testing, I don't think I'd notice. If it was a shade more breathable in lab testing, well, same response. Out on the hill there are a lot more factors that come into play than pedantry over a few numbers, like the shape of the thing, how fit I am, how much I am carrying .etc. Clearly it is important to start in the lab controlling variables and keeping everything constant, but I can say with absolute certainty that supposing I knew the build quality of garment X was just as good as Gore insists on but it was a tiny little bit less breathable and water resistant, I may well pick that garment on something as arbitrary as colour. Gore-Tex is the benchmark by which all other products are judged. As far as I'm concerned if I'm in that ballpark then fine.
How far I'm willing to deviate is totally dependent on my intended use. I've seen people denigrate Gore-Tex boots. They were clearly insufficient for their purposes. I happen to love 'em. If I were doing the tasks those people were doing I would have been in a rubber foot boot. They go back to their military surplus hobnails, and I think they are idiots. Each finds his path. I have a jacket that is only rated 10000-10000. I own it because the design is country / fieldsports without recourse to the clammy old waxed cotton efforts. It wouldn't put up much of a fight against a decent amount of water pressure but I don't use it for that. It turns a shower and has never leaked. In terms of what is available for going hardcore it is rubbish, but I have a niche for it. I'll buy something similar to it to replace it when it is time.
In short, I tend toward Gore because I know it works well for what I I use it for, and no surprises. Would I be open to other products, absolutely, but Gore is my default. Do I think is is the best thing to watch gorillas in the mist where you'd sweat through a shirt anyway, probably not. I'd probably just ignore the wet and dry myself off later. MVP figures in that environment mean squat to me. Do I prefer a windproof with a good amount of water resistance whenever I can get away with it. Do I think I could tell the difference between comparable eVent and Gore-Tex jackets in a blind pepsi challenge? Ha, there's no amount of money I'd bet on my ability to do that.
