Tuesday, 25 August 2020

Drylife SlipSuper Adult Diaper Review

 *For more information on how I do reviews see Diaper Test Methodology

Summary

The Drylife SlipSuper is a premium European-made diaper that appears to have been manufactured by a UK-based company. This company only sells a limited range in higher absorbency products, which I believe in many cases can lead to some of the best products (e.g. a more focused product with emphasis on quality). In Drylife's case that certainly holds true, they've created a great premium diaper but sell at a pretty affordable price in their home market. Unfortunately it's a bit tougher to get a hold of in North America.

This diaper features a soft-plastic backsheet with two different types of wetness indicator. It's well constructed and proved incredibly durable during my testing. Initially I thought this was a rebrand of the very similar iD Expert Slip Maxi (PE), but it has some important differences that I describe throughout this review. Overall, I found it better suited to overnight wear because it can be bulky and noisy, but if it works for you this diaper will do an excellent job at resisting leaks for up to 3 wettings.


Key Features:

  • Plastic-backing
  • Thick padding
  • Strong refastenable tapes
  • Rear waistband
  • Standing inner leak barriers

Pros:

  • Super absorbent/leak resistant
  • Perfect for overnight use
  • Snug fit
  • Highly durable

Cons:

  • Brief pooling after wetting
  • Bulky padding is hard to conceal
  • Limited availability


Product Details

For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the medium-sized Drylife SlipSuper diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:


Packaging

Brand: Drylife SlipSuper
Manufacturer: Drylife Ltd.
Origin: EU
Units Per Bag: 15
Cost Per Unit: $$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 35 cm (13.8") x 18 cm (7.1") x 23 (9.1")
Weight: 2.63 kg (5.8 lbs)
Available Sizes: M, L
Advertised Absorbency: Super



1.1 Drylife SlipSuper Packaging


Diaper

Backsheet: Plastic (Poly)
Wetness Indicator: Yes (double yellow lines down the middle, blue when wet/blue line disappears)
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: Yes
Product Style: Tab-Style Brief
Refastenable Tabs: Yes
Number of Tapes: 2
Repositionable Tabs: No
Outer Color: White (blue line and text down the middle beside wetness indicator)
Inner Color: White
Front Waistband: No
Rear Waistband: Yes
Folded Thickness: 2.7 cm (1.1")
Folded Length: 23 cm (9.1")
Dry Weight: 167 g (5.98 oz)
Fragrance: None (or slight sweet synthetic smell)
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 76 cm (29.9") x 64 cm (25.2") x 18 cm (7.1") x 58 (22.8")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 58 cm (22.8") x 30 cm (11.8") x 17 cm (6.7") x 29 cm (11.4")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 6.5 cm (2.6") x 11 cm (4.3") x 6 cm (2.4") x 15.5 cm (6.1")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Semicircle, Semicircle
Total Padding Area: 1315 cm2 (203 in2)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 4 cm (1.6") x 14 cm (5.5")
Tape (W x L): 2.5 cm (1") x 4.5 cm (1.8")


1.2 Drylife SlipSuper Diaper


Laboratory Absorbency Tests

Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 1133 ml (40 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 1300 ml (44.1 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (42 s, 38 s, 42 s, 54 s, 46 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 5.5 cm (2.2")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 90%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 0.86 ml / cm2 (0.2 oz / in2)
Press Out Volume: 200 ml (7.1 oz)

Surface Dampness Rating: 8
The Drylife SlipSuper did a good job at resisting surface dampness with one caveat. In the laboratory test it absorbed quickly and didn't show any sign of dampness until the 3rd wetting. However, it seems susceptible to temporary pooling during the initial stages of a wetting. Generally this lasts under a minute and in my experience the diaper does a decent job at resisting surface dampness.



2.1 Wet vs Dry Diaper After Capacity Test


2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test


"Real World" Absorbency Tests

Posture Tests


Standing-Sitting

Total Absorbed Volume: 1308 ml (46.1 oz)
Total Wettings: 4 (1 standing, 3 sitting)
Leaked After Sitting: No
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 98%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.99 ml / cm2 (0.23 oz / in2)

Standing-Sitting Rating: 8
With its front-focused padding I expected the Drylife SlipSuper diaper to perform well in the standing-sitting test and it did perform reasonably well. The first wetting while standing was barely perceivable and absorbed quickly, while there was no squishiness upon sitting down. The padding did swell during testing but its firmness was little changed from its dry state. There was a brief pooling of moisture initially upon wettings but once it was absorbed the diaper remained dry. By the 3rd wetting the diaper was noticeable damp with moisture pushing up its front side. The backsheet prevented leakage but it could lead to temporary discomfort for the wearer. The diaper clearly reached saturation on the 4th wetting with moisture moving back up the front and leaking out the sides. The leakage was relatively minor and had it had padding rising further up the front with wider wings I believe it could have easily handled the 4th wetting as well. Based on this test I feel the Drylife SlipSuper can generally handle 3 wettings while seated without leakage putting it in the low-to-mid range of premium adult diapers.


Lying Down

Total Absorbed Volume: 1458 ml (51.4 oz)
Total Wettings: 4
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 97%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 1.11 ml / cm2 (0.25 oz / in2)

Lying Down Rating: 9
The Drylife SlipSuper diaper breezed through the first three wettings while lying down with no sign of leakage. The diaper remained dry and comfortable for the most part with the moisture contained to the padding. By the 3rd wetting the diaper did have a bit of dampness to it, but not in a significant way. This diaper's only significant fault might be that moisture can pool temporarily within the first minute of a wetting in spite of its relatively fast absorbance. This may have been more of a problem in a less structurally sound diaper, but the high quality waistband at its rear does a good job at directing moisture and prevents any from coming out the back. What's interesting about this diaper is that it performed so well on the lying down test in spite of seemingly having its most absorbent padding at its front. The snug fit and decent wicking ability appears to have directed more moisture to the front of the diaper and the back only started to become noticeably damp after the front was mostly saturated. By the 4th wetting the diaper was completely saturated and there was clear leakage out of the sides. I had trouble rating the Drylife SlipSuper as it could have been either an 8 or a 9 on this test, but I erred upward because of its high absorbency rate and structure that backs that up.


2.3 Pattern of Used vs Unused Padding Test Stand/Sit (right) Lying Down (left)


Daily Wear and Bedwetting

I found the Drylife SlipSuper to be an interesting diaper. In many ways it's similar to the iD Expert Slip Maxi (PE) particularly in the relatively small sizing, but with a few notable differences. This diaper felt thicker at its crotch with a rear waistband that held the padding up better. If you're a male this may cause it to feel a little tight at the front. It also could be problematic for those with bowel incontinence because the pouch at its rear is relatively small. Furthermore, this diaper features a double wetness indicator, with two yellow lines that turn blue when wet and a blue strip that disappears. In terms of overnight wear, this diaper was among the best I've tested, with a high rate of absorption and good wicking of moisture from the front to the back (the snugness in the front was likely a contributing factor). It can take 3~4 wettings without leaking while laying down, which is often more than enough for overnight wear, but its plastic backsheet and thick padding could make it feel a bit warm in warm weather. In terms of daily wear, I'd say this is more of a stay-at-home sort of a diaper, as it really does stand out under clothing and its thickness can make it a little tough to walk in. Still, it was consistently able to absorb at least 3 wettings without leaking during daily wear. I probably pushed it a bit far in some of the tests but I never noticed any significant skin irritation (even after extended wear while wet). Where it's widely available this diaper comes at a decent price and is certainly worth a try if you're in the market for a reliable premium diaper for overnight wear.


Wear & Tear Tests


Fitting

The Drylife SlipSuper features two double-tape fasteners per side, which allow for the diaper to be detached and reattached multiple times in the same position. The tapes are of high quality and relatively long; they can be expected to hold up well to use and I've never had an issue with them coming undone.

3.1 Drylife SlipSuper Fastener

 

Ease-of-Use Rating: 8
The Drylife SlipSuper diaper runs a little on the small size, which can make getting a good fit a little tricky. The padding can also be a bit stiff and wide between the legs which will lead to bunching or a crease like seen in figure 3.2. Even so I didn't find it particularly difficult to apply. It has the added benefit of a high quality rear waistband, which makes it easier to get a snug fit. The plastic backsheet is also soft and flexible so it won't put up a lot of resistance during a change.

3.2 Drylife SlipSuper Fit


Comfort


Comfort Rating (dry): 8
The Drylife SlipSuper's relatively small sizing could be a comfort issue for some but it features a soft/flexible backsheet and the rear waistband keeps the padding from sagging too low. This diaper also features a wide/dense area of padding between the legs that I've found can bunch up and form a crease. I attribute that mostly to its thick/firm padding. The denseness and snugness of the padding in the front is interesting. The padding itself is comfortable but not particularly soft, less so than the Tranquility ATN, but I've rated it similarly because I feel like its structure does a better job at keeping the diaper in place. Its fit most similarly resembles the iD Expert Slip Maxi (PE), with the rear waistband giving it a slight edge over that diaper in terms of comfort.


Comfort Rating (wet): 8
The Drylife SlipSuper performed well in terms of comfort when wet, with its padding keeping perfect form and surface dampness reduced to a minimum until it approached saturation. The padding remained relatively firm when wet, not so different from its dry state. What was interesting about this diaper was that most of the padding swelling occurred at the front crotch area, while there was relatively little swelling at the back; I believe its most absorbent material exists at its front so this isn't a huge surprise. The diaper also felt thick between the legs when wet, probably due to its extra width collapsing there. It's not the most comfortable diaper on the market with its relatively firm padding but it makes up for that in other ways like keeping its form and reducing surface dampness.


3.3 Drylife SlipSuper Topsheet and Backsheet


Durability

Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 0.6% (topsheet), 1.3% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 12 shakes to deterioration


Durability Rating (dry): 10
The Drylife SlipSuper proved incredibly durable during the dry durability test with few signs of padding damage after well over 10 hours of wear/tear. There was a bit of padding deterioration at the diaper's mid-section but the padding runs a bit wide at its crotch and has to collapse a bit to achieve a good fit. Overall its performance was very similar to the iD Expert Slip Maxi (PE) but where it didn't achieve quite as strong the results in terms of deterioration its use of a rear waistband likely did a better job at holding it together. Moreover, the wetness indicator was infallible to sweat/light dribbles during wear. 


Durability Rating (wet): 10
The Drylife SlipSuper had the best performance of all diapers so far when it came to the wet shake test, holding together for 12 shakes after the capacity test. This was in spite of it being a high absorbency diaper, which typically hurts otherwise durable diapers in the shake test (due to the weight). Moreover, in real world use the diaper showed no hints of tearing or clumping even after extended wear. Its durability when wet was comparable to durability when dry and there was little sign of a change to the padding integrity when wet. It's hard to imagine a diaper being more durable when wet, so the Drylife SlipSuper joins the ranks of the iD Expert Slip Maxi (PE) with top marks for wet durability.


3.4 Drylife SlipSuper Dry Test Deterioration


Discretion Tests


Profile

Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 4 cm (1.57"), 4 cm (1.57")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 2 cm (0.79"), 1 cm (0.39")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 2 cm (0.79"), 2 cm (0.79")

Profile Discretion Rating: 5
Given its relatively small padding area the Drylife SlipSuper is far from discrete. Its thickness makes it pretty hard to conceal under most outfits, particularly in the front where the padding is especially thick and swells a lot when wet. This diaper is almost certain to produce a diaper bulge. That said, it's not the least discreet diaper on the market and its backsheet barely rises above the pant line.


4.1 Drylife SlipSuper Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)


4.2 Drylife SlipSuper Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)


Noise

Noise Rating: 6
The Drylife SlipSuper is one of the noisier diapers of those I've tried to date. I found that a bit surprising because diapers with thick padding tend to dampen sound a bit and its padding seems to do a good job at adhering to the backsheet. Whether I was walking or sitting, this diaper had a very distinctive crinkle that could be challenging to hide in a quiet room. This could be somewhat concealed if worn under mesh pants or underwear but this probably wouldn't be your night out diaper anyway.


4.3 Drylife SlipSuper Noise Profile


Odor Reduction

Odor Reduction Rating: 9
The Drylife SlipSuper provides top tier odor protection. This seems to come from a balance of its very absorbent padding and the rear waistband, which gives it a snugger fit to reduce odors that might escape from around the waist. It doesn't appear to have any added fragrance but if you open a new Drylife SlipSuper diaper you may notice a very slight sweet synthetic smell. All in all I don't have any complaints with respect to odor reduction in this diaper, but I feel the BetterDry/Crinklz diaper does a slightly better job so I couldn't quite give it a 10.


Sunday, 16 August 2020

Top 10 Adult Diapers 2020 Rankings

*For information on how I do reviews see Diaper Test Methodology


Summary

With 10 full adult diaper reviews completed I've started crunching the numbers to evaluate some metrics for this diaper metrics blog. My previous reviews included a mix of adult diapers with many of the best on the market, but also some cheaper-to-mid range diapers. All diapers reviewed so far are plastic-backed, however, in the next series of posts I will start including more diapers with cloth-like backsheets together with more premium plastic-backed diapers.

To better assess each diaper for its individual strengths as well as overall performance they have been evaluated according to 4 different criteria: absorbency, comfort, durability and discretion. To reduce my scoring bias I've written several formulas to balance the weight of my personal scores against more objective measurements. This way my ranking accounts for easily measured aspects of performance like absorbency as well as harder-to-measure aspects like random leaks experienced in real world settings. All scores have been normalized from 0-10 to give an idea of how each performed relative to the other and this ranking system will continue to be used to update the top 10 as future reviews are added.

1.1 Adult Diaper Comparison Spreadsheet

Absorbency Ranking

The absorbency ranking was calculated using the formula in figure 2.1. It combines the scores I personally assigned to each diaper based on experience with the average total absorbency across each test and average absorbency per unit of padding ratio. These measures will give weight to a diaper that can absorb a huge amount as well as one whose padding is highly efficient at absorbing moisture. Additionally, I give a small amount of weighting to diapers with leg gathers and inner leak guards for the value these provide in preventing leaks. I also give a small weight to the average used percent of padding across all tests because this is reflective of the diaper's wicking ability.
 
2.1 Absorbency Score Formula

ab: average total absorbency between lab/stand+sit/lying down tests
ar: average absorbency ratio between lab/stand+sit/lying down tests
st: standing/sitting score
ld: lying down score
lg: leg gathers = 1, none = 0
ig: inner leak guards = 1, none = 0
ud: used percentage
 
DiaperScoring
Score: 9.96
Absorbency: 1895 ml (66.8 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 1.17 ml/cm2 (0.27 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 10
Lying Down Score: 10
Used Percent: 93
Score: 8.67
Absorbency: 1601 ml (56.5 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.88 ml/cm2 (0.20 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 8
Lying Down Score: 10
Used Percent: 88
Score: 8.03
Absorbency: 1292 ml (45.6 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.96 ml/cm2 (0.22 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 8
Lying Down Score: 8
Used Percent: 98
Score: 7.96
Absorbency: 1365 ml (48.1 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.80 ml/cm2 (0.18 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 9
Lying Down Score: 8
Used Percent: 87
Score: 7.96
Absorbency: 1225 ml (43.2 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 1.12 ml/cm2 (0.25 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 8
Lying Down Score: 7
Used Percent: 87
Score: 7.38
Absorbency: 1221 ml (43.1 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.70 ml/cm2 (0.16 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 8
Lying Down Score: 8
Used Percent: 86
Score: 6.47
Absorbency: 935 ml (33 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.59 ml/cm2 (0.13 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 7
Lying Down Score: 7
Used Percent: 90
Score: 5.40
Absorbency: 813 ml (28.7 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.61 ml/cm2 (0.14 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: yes
Stand/Sit Score: 7
Lying Down Score: 4
Used Percent: 90
Score: 3.35
Absorbency: 624 ml (22 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.41 ml/cm2 (0.09 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: no
Stand/Sit Score: 3
Lying Down Score: 2
Used Percent: 89
Score: 2.39
Absorbency: 525 ml (18.5 oz)
Absorbency Ratio: 0.23 ml/cm2 (0.05 oz/in2)
Leg Gathers: yes
Inner Leak Guards: no
Stand/Sit Score: 2
Lying Down Score: 1
Used Percent: 61



Comfort Ranking

The comfort ranking was calculated using the formula in figure 2.2. It combines my personal scoring for different aspects of comfort with padding area and absorption time. Of the rankings calculated here this is the most biased toward my personal ranking as measures of comfort are tough to quantify. I've attempted to reduce any bias by including the surface dryness rating, which is reflective of the laboratory tests and the formula gives a lower ranking to diapers that demonstrated slower absorption times as it would result in the wearer feeling dampness for longer after a wetting. On top of that I'm giving more weighting to diapers with a larger padding area because padding contact with the skin typically provides better comfort than contact with the backsheet.

2.2 Comfort Score Formula
 
pa: total padding area
at: average lab wetting absorbency time
ds: dry comfort score
ws: wet comfort score
sd: surface dryness score
es: ease of use score


DiaperScoring
Score: 9.21
Padding Area: 1625 cm2 (252 in2)
Absorbency Time: 58 s
Dry Comfort Score: 9
Wet Comfort Score: 10
Surface Dampness Score: 10
Ease of Use Score: 10
Score: 8.83
Padding Area: 1823 cm2 (283 in2)
Absorbency Time: 97 s
Dry Comfort Score: 9
Wet Comfort Score: 10
Surface Dampness Score: 9
Ease of Use Score: 10
Score: 8.46
Padding Area: 1095 cm2 (169 in2)
Absorbency Time: 52 s
Dry Comfort Score: 10
Wet Comfort Score: 9
Surface Dampness Score: 7
Ease of Use Score: 7
Score: 8.28
Padding Area: 1747 cm2 (271 in2)
Absorbency Time: 53 s
Dry Comfort Score: 9
Wet Comfort Score: 9
Surface Dampness Score: 6
Ease of Use Score: 7
Score: 7.21
Padding Area: 1587 cm2 (246 in2)
Absorbency Time: 101 s
Dry Comfort Score: 8
Wet Comfort Score: 7
Surface Dampness Score: 8
Ease of Use Score: 7
Score: 7.18
Padding Area: 1341 cm2 (208 in2)
Absorbency Time: 47 s
Dry Comfort Score: 7
Wet Comfort Score: 8
Surface Dampness Score: 7
Ease of Use Score: 7
Score: 7.15
Padding Area: 1701 cm2 (264 in2)
Absorbency Time: 54 s
Dry Comfort Score: 9
Wet Comfort Score: 7
Surface Dampness Score: 4
Ease of Use Score: 6
Score: 6.05
Padding Area: 2253 cm2 (349 in2)
Absorbency Time: 46 s
Dry Comfort Score: 9
Wet Comfort Score: 3
Surface Dampness Score: 1
Ease of Use Score: 6
Score: 4.80
Padding Area: 1336 cm2 (207 in2)
Absorbency Time: 76 s
Dry Comfort Score: 6
Wet Comfort Score: 4
Surface Dampness Score: 2
Ease of Use Score: 6
Score: 3.74
Padding Area: 1536 cm2 (238 in2)
Absorbency Time: 150 s
Dry Comfort Score: 5
Wet Comfort Score: 3
Surface Dampness Score: 1
Ease of Use Score: 4


Durability Ranking

The durability ranking was calculated using the formula in figure 2.3. It gives equal weighting to my personal assessment of durability and quantifiable diaper metrics. The ranking is weighted a little more toward assessing the diaper's dry durability performance since the wearer would typically spend longer in a dry diaper than a wet diaper, particularly in cases where durability is important. I also give a small additional weighting to diapers with waistbands because I've found these can provide a snugger fit and reduce factors that cause deterioration. This ranking also leans heavily on the dry durability test whereby the diaper is worn in its dry state for an extended period of time with modest activities and the proportion of padding that has deteriorated is calculated at the end of it. Moreover, I give the wet diaper shake test a relatively small weighting as I've found it isn't particularly reflective of durability in reality.

2.3 Durability Score Formula

ta: total tape area (how much tape attaches to backsheet)
dd: dry durability score
wd: wet durability score
st: shake test (number of shakes to deterioration after lab capacity test)
td: topsheet deterioration percentage after dry durability test
bd: backsheet deterioration percentage after dry durability test
wb: has waistband [front/rear = 1, rear = 0.5, front = 0.5, none = 0]


DiaperScoring
Score: 9.04
Tape Area: 45 cm2 (7 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 10
Wet Durability Score: 10
Shake Test: 7
Topsheet Deterioration: 0.54%
Backsheet Deterioration: 0.56%
Waistband: none
Score: 9.01
Tape Area: 69 cm2 (10.7 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 9
Wet Durability Score: 9
Shake Test: 4
Topsheet Deterioration: 1.22%
Backsheet Deterioration: 1.78%
Waistband: front/rear
Score: 9.00
Tape Area: 72 cm2 (10.7 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 9
Wet Durability Score: 9
Shake Test: 4
Topsheet Deterioration: 4.13%
Backsheet Deterioration: 1.61%
Waistband: front/rear
Score: 8.19
Tape Area: 60 cm2 (9.3 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 9
Wet Durability Score: 6
Shake Test: 4
Topsheet Deterioration: 0.56%
Backsheet Deterioration: 0.70%
Waistband: front/rear
Score: 8.07
Tape Area: 42 cm2 (6.5 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 9
Wet Durability Score: 8
Shake Test: 2
Topsheet Deterioration: 1.50%
Backsheet Deterioration: 1.01%
Waistband: rear
Score: 7.79
Tape Area: 36 cm2 (5.6 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 7
Wet Durability Score: 8
Shake Test: 9
Topsheet Deterioration: 3.49%
Backsheet Deterioration: 2.43%
Waistband: none
Score: 7.54
Tape Area: 54 cm2 (8.4 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 7
Wet Durability Score: 7
Shake Test: 8
Topsheet Deterioration: 8.75%
Backsheet Deterioration: 4.93%
Waistband: none
Score: 6.73
Tape Area: 40 cm2 (6.2 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 7
Wet Durability Score: 6
Shake Test: 3
Topsheet Deterioration: 8.33%
Backsheet Deterioration: 5.17%
Waistband: none
Score: 6.66
Tape Area: 40 cm2 (6.2 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 6
Wet Durability Score: 5
Shake Test: 9
Topsheet Deterioration: 11.02%
Backsheet Deterioration: 7.38%
Waistband: none
Score: 4.39
Tape Area: 60 cm2 (9.3 in2)
Dry Durability Score: 2
Wet Durability Score: 1
Shake Test: 3
Topsheet Deterioration: 33.70%
Backsheet Deterioration: 30.80%
Waistband: front/rear


Discretion Ranking

The discretion ranking was calculated using the formula from figure 2.4. A large part of the weighting comes from the scores used to assess how the diaper performed in terms of reducing odors, how much noise it produced and how easily it could be concealed. Those scores are given equal weighting so a diaper that might not otherwise seem discrete due to bulkiness can rank higher because it's quieter and better at reducing odors than thinner ones. Although this rating leans toward my personal rankings it also assesses objective metrics including how high the diaper rises above the wearer's waistline and the folded diaper's dimensions (thickness/length/weight), which may be important for a hiding the diaper in a bag or purse. I also gave some weighting to how much the diaper will swell when wet, because this may result in a diaper bulge becoming visible after a wetting.

2.4 Discretion Score Formula

ds: profile discretion score
ns: noise score
os: odor reduction score
dw: dry weight
fl: folded length
wt: wet folded thickness
ar: average rise above waistline
dt: dry folded thickness


DiaperScoring
Score: 7.76
Profile Discretion Score: 9
Noise Score: 9
Odor Reduction Score: 10
Dry Weight: 125 g (4.4 oz)
Folded Length: 25 cm (9.8")
Wet Folded Thickness: 5 cm (2")
Average Rise Above Waist: 4.4 cm (1.7")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2 cm (0.79")
Score: 6.78
Profile Discretion Score: 9
Noise Score: 7
Odor Reduction Score: 6
Dry Weight: 93 g (3.3 oz)
Folded Length: 26 cm (10.2")
Wet Folded Thickness: 4.5 cm (1.8")
Average Rise Above Waist: 3.9 cm (1.5")
Dry Folded Thickness: 1.6 cm (0.63")
Score: 6.51
Profile Discretion Score: 7
Noise Score: 8
Odor Reduction Score: 7
Dry Weight: 150 g (5.3 oz)
Folded Length: 25 cm (9.8")
Wet Folded Thickness: 6 cm (2.4")
Average Rise Above Waist: 2.8 cm (1.1")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2.6 cm (1")
Score: 6.47
Profile Discretion Score: 8
Noise Score: 6
Odor Reduction Score: 7
Dry Weight: 105 g (3.7 oz)
Folded Length: 24 cm (9.5")
Wet Folded Thickness: 4.5 cm (1.8")
Average Rise Above Waist: 3.8 cm (1.5")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2.4 cm (0.94")
Score: 6.38
Profile Discretion Score: 5
Noise Score: 8
Odor Reduction Score: 10
Dry Weight: 217 g (7.65 oz)
Folded Length: 26 cm (10.2")
Wet Folded Thickness: 9 cm (3.5")
Average Rise Above Waist: 4 cm (1.6")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2.8 cm (1.1")
Score: 6.19
Profile Discretion Score: 6
Noise Score: 8
Odor Reduction Score: 6
Dry Weight: 100 g (3.53 oz)
Folded Length: 25 cm (9.8")
Wet Folded Thickness: 4 cm (1.6")
Average Rise Above Waist: 6.3 cm (2.5")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2.3 cm (0.9")
Score: 5.88
Profile Discretion Score: 4
Noise Score: 7
Odor Reduction Score: 10
Dry Weight: 225 g (7.9 oz)
Folded Length: 30 cm (11.8")
Wet Folded Thickness: 6 cm (2.4")
Average Rise Above Waist: 6.6 cm (2.6")
Dry Folded Thickness: 3 cm (1.2")
Score: 5.76
Profile Discretion Score: 7
Noise Score: 5
Odor Reduction Score: 5
Dry Weight: 93 g (3.3 oz)
Folded Length: 29 cm (11.4")
Wet Folded Thickness: 4 cm (1.6")
Average Rise Above Waist: 2.8 cm (1.1")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2.3 cm (0.9")
Score: 5.60
Profile Discretion Score: 2
Noise Score: 8
Odor Reduction Score: 8
Dry Weight: 166 g (5.9 oz)
Folded Length: 24.5 cm (9.7")
Wet Folded Thickness: 4 cm (1.6")
Average Rise Above Waist: 5.2 cm (2")
Dry Folded Thickness: 3 cm (1.2")
Score: 4.88
Profile Discretion Score: 3
Noise Score: 7
Odor Reduction Score: 5
Dry Weight: 183 g (6.5 oz)
Folded Length: 26.5 cm (10.4")
Wet Folded Thickness: 5.5 cm (2.2")
Average Rise Above Waist: 5.1 cm (2")
Dry Folded Thickness: 2.8 cm (1.1")



Overall Top 10 Ranking

Different people have different needs when it comes to adult diapers so it's hard to give a conclusive overall ranking. Some may prefer a diaper that's more discrete even if it comes at the cost of absorbency, while others only wear for bedwetting and will want a diaper that provides the best protection with no care to discretion. In this regard I hope the above category rankings are helpful. Another consideration is price, which varies greatly by region so I've left it out of my ratings. To calculate my overall ranking I take all 4 of the above rankings and combined them by my own interpretation of value to the wearer with a little more weight on absorbency and a little less on discretion (see figure 3.1).

3.1 Overall Ranking Formula

Looking back at the above rankings I found there was a huge range in performance when it came to absorbancy but far less when it came to discretion (probably because I only assessed heavy incontinence adult diapers in this ranking). In most cases the best performing diapers were also the pricier ones, as expected and overall the BetterDry/Crinklz diaper was the clear winner. The scoring system gave a good sense of how similar the performance of each was, with this we can see the First Quality Briefs and Attends Care Waistband diapers were far worse at 4.63 and 3.69 points lower than BetterDry/Crinklz. Whereas the Tranquility ATN, while 4th from last ranking was only 2.1 points lower than the BetterDry/Crinklz (nearly twice as good by this measure). This is worth considering when accounting for the fact the ATN can often be found for half the unit price of some of the higher ranking diapers.

DiaperScoring
Score: 8.82
The BetterDry/Crinklz diaper was by far the winner for absorbency and also ranked best in comfort due to its full feature fit and resistence to dampness. This diaper comes with either a plain white backsheet or colorful patterns depending for wearers who appreciate that.
Score: 8.24
There's little surprise the ConfiDry 24/7 came in second with its great absorbency and comfort (particulary for bedwetting). It's a shame the production of this diaper has been inconsistent lately because when they get it right it really is an amazing diaper.
Score: 8.07
I was a little surprised the Tena Slip Maxi ranked 3rd as it isn't among the most absorbent of the diapers rated, but it had great all around performance with the best discretion ranking without sacrificing comfort or durability.
Score: 7.76
The iD Expert Slip Maxi (PE) was another surprise as it's not very well known and often cheaper than the Abena M4 or Molicare Slip Maxi. Even so it was great all around and proved to be the most durable of all.
Score: 7.35
The Molicare Slip Maxi is a super comfortable diaper, its padding is about as soft as you'll find on the market. It also provides an excellent level of protection. I was surprised it didn't rank higher but it was a little less durable and absorbent than those ranked above it.
Score: 7.04
The Abena Abri-Form M4 was the first premium diapers I tried, but it is no longer the best on the market. It has decent absorbency but struggled with surface dampness and related issues resulted in a lower comfort and discretion ranking. It also comes in at a similar price-point to the BetterDry/Crinklz so it's harder to justify purchasing unless you get a discount.
Score: 6.74
The Tranquility ATN is a great mid-range diaper, that will easily take a wetting. It's far from the most absorbent and if you can't change after 1~2 wettings you'll want to go with something better (particularly for overnight wear). On the plus side, it comes in at a competitive price-point and is relatively easily to find in North America.
Score: 6.22
Depend Protection with Tabs is a popular mid-range medium-heavy absorbency adult diaper. They run on the thin side and are poorly suited for bedwetting but they will typically handle a full wetting without leakage and are widely available.
Score: 5.13
This First Quality Briefs product performed incredibly poorly, leaking on the first wetting in every test. Its standout feature is extensive padding that helps bump its comfort rating but there's not much point when it won't provide adequate protection. I'd recommend their newer Prevail products instead (even if they are cloth-backed).
Score: 4.19
The Attends Care Waistband diaper came in dead last, which is a shame because it sounded great in theory. Unfortunately with flimsy padding and no leak guards it falls flat and leaks at the first sign of moisture. It's a shame because Attends made a decent plastic-backed diaper in the past. Now their premium products are all cloth-backed.