Product Overview

Overall rating:

Score 9

Pros:

  • Comfortable
  • Fitted
  • Big pockets

Cons:

  • Large cut

Product:

dhb Windslam Blade jersey

Manufacturer:

Price as reviewed:

£79.99

Despite being classified by dhb as a jersey, the Windslam Blade is definitely an outer layer capable of being used when the temperature drops.

The 235g/m2 Miti Lombardia Roubaix fabric is similar to that used in legwear and this accounts for the soft feel, comfort and fit. A common failing of jackets is the tail riding up, but there was no danger with the Blade.

The long rear section never moved, even with laden pockets – these are note worthy in themselves.

You still need to carry plenty in winter so it was nice to see three traditional pockets (plus a zippered security pocket) but it was the detail that stood out. An accordion-like lower seam means they expand well to take a load without causing the tail to rise.

Zippered vents offer airflow over the armpits when riding hard, to cool without chilling the chest, but beware: the cut is larger over the shoulders than the body.

Verdict

It's worth trying a size down, given the stretch of the fabric. Despite not being from a big ?name', the Windslam Blade impressed.

Full Specification

Supplier: www.wiggle.co.uk
  • Alsore

    about themselves. I think that what Key has raelised is that even if they did have a secret far-right agenda and implemented it when they got into power they’d just get annihilated in the next election and Labour would spend the next decade-or-so back in power reversing all their policies.What is blindingly obvious is that if National campaigns by promising to do what needs to be done, the will not get elected. A campaign is one thing: government is another. The Labour party has forgotten this crucial distinction since at least 2000: much of its corruption, bribes, and destructive policy comes from that basis.National will not forget – and shows no sign of it.The real question for Key and English will be whether or not they have the courage to make the changes that are necessary, and to make them in such a way that any successive government could not reverse them. Changes such as* sell all school properties* close down TEC, NZQA, ministry of education* sell all hospital properties, close ministry of Health* close all boutique ministries. * remove all ACC premiums and benefits (retaining only the removal of the right to sue)* remove the ERA, moving all employment to “at will” for employers* sell all SOEs* stop all benefits except war pensions* arm the police* repeal the RMA* move to a flat 10,000 poll taxcould all be made relatively easily and would be very expensive to renege upon – once they were made. At which point – like Ruth Richardson – it really doesn’t matter if you are elected or not. the ultimate point is not to get elected, it is to change the countryOn the other hand, changes such as the following(which the EFA fiasco shows are clearly all constitutional with a simple majority) would ensure the policy settings were unlikely to be changed in the future.* remove the Maori seats* remove MMP – have 60 MPs elected FPP* move to a 5 year term* move to (proportional) taxpayer franchise* add in nominated MPs, ideally based on export income (say 20 for fed farmers; 20 employers federation of NZ, 10 each for Manufacturers Fed, BRT, Police, NZDF)this could also be enacted in three years by a government prepared to move fast enough. The legislative requirements are very few. But any party campaigning on such a policy would be, well, nuts.