Molicare (Lindor) Men 5D Incontinence Pad Review

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

 

Summary

I’m excited to introduce our first in a series of reviews covering incontinence pads. For this review we evaluate the Molicare (recently renamed to Lindor) Men 5D incontinence pad, which will be followed up by reviews of the Depend for Men, Prevail Male and Tena Men pads. These belong to a sub-category of incontinence pads referred to as “male guards” and are specially designed for preventing leaks from the male anatomy. These pads provide a level of absorbency between the very light level of protection provided by “male shields” and heavier absorbency provided by protective underwear. This being the first formal review I’ve done for such a product, it proved quite interesting as I needed to adapt my usual metricing system designed to assess adult diaper performance. This was particularly challenging for review as my own needs fall between absolute protection for bedwetting at night and very light protection for daily drips and dribbles, whereas this product falls somewhere in between the two. Nevertheless, it’s generally better to have too much protection rather than not enough and I’ve done my best to reflect the needs of those who have moderate daily incontinence. I’d like to give a special thanks to Denis for his suggestion, guidance and donation to support this review!

The Lindor 5D pad sits at the middle of the Molicare line of product absorbency, with the 5D representing 5 drops of absorbency on a scale from 1 to 10 (with 10 being the most absorbent adult diapers). This makes it best suited to moderate incontinence, whereas there are also some lighter absorbency Lindor male guards in the 3~4D range. To account for this sort of pad being of lower target absorbency, I’ve updated the lab test to use smaller absorbency intervals than I do with adult diapers. For these products wettings are measured at 50 ml (1.7 oz) intervals rather than the 250 ml (8.4 oz) used for testing adult diapers. I’ve also updated the absorbency scoring and discretion systems to give two ratings: one reflective of the abilities expected for Male guards and the other an absolute rating to frame them against other adult diaper reviews. Otherwise, I’ve tried to keep the format as similar as possible to the standard diaper reviews for easier comparison.

Key Features:

• Cloth backsheet
• Inner leak barriers
  
• Adhesive tape fastener down the middle

Pros:

• High absorbency for male guard
• Soft comfortable material
  
• Great resistance to surface dampness
• Very effective leak guards
  

Cons:

• Won’t work for bowel incontinence
• A little bulky for light incontinence

Product Details

The Molicare (Lindor) Men 5D comes in a one-size fits all. Consequently no other sizes are listed here and this review should be universally applicable for the product line.

Packaging

Brand: Lindor (Molicare)
Manufacturer: PAUL-HARTMANN AG
Origin: Germany
Units Per Bag: 14
Cost Per Unit: $$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 20 cm (7.9") x 10 cm (3.9") x 14 cm (5.5")
Weight: 0.48 kg (1.1 lbs)
Advertised Absorbency: Super

1.1 Lindor Men 5D Pad Packaging

Pad

Backsheet: Cloth-like (non-woven)
Wetness Indicator: No
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: No
Product Style: Male Guard
Refastenable Tabs: No
Number of Tapes: 1
Repositionable Tabs: No
Outer Color: White
Inner Color: White
Folded Thickness: 1.6 cm (0.63")
Folded Length: 10 cm (3.9")
Dry Weight: 55 g (1.9 oz)
Fragrance: No
Pad Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 34.5 cm (13.6") x 18 cm (7.1") x 11.5 cm (4.5") x 11.5 cm (4.5")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, None
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 30 cm (11.8") x 15 cm (5.9") x 9 cm (3.5") x 9 cm (3.5")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 3 cm (1.2") x 18 cm (7.1") x 0 cm (0") x 0 cm (0")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, None
Total Padding Area: 378cm² (58.6 in²)
Tape (W x L): 3 cm (1.2") x 25 cm (9.8")

1.2 Lindor Men 5D Pad

Laboratory Absorbency Tests

Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 345 ml (12.2 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 370 ml (13.1 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (15 s, 13 s, 15 s, 20 s, 17 s, 27 s, 26 s, 30 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 4 cm (1.6")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 94%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 0.91 ml / cm² (0.21 oz / in²)
Press Out Volume: 25 ml (0.88 oz)

Surface Dampness Rating: 10

As far as male guards go, this pad is top notch when it comes to resistance against surface dampness. During the lab test it didn’t demonstrate any significant surface dampness until the 4~5th light-wetting and even then there wasn’t much. The topsheet seems specially designed to resist such dampness. I can confirm this from real world testing, where I never noticed surface dampness even when it was quite near capacity.

2.1 Wet vs Dry Pad After Capacity Test

 

2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test

"Real World" Absorbency Tests

Posture Tests

Standing-Sitting

Total Absorbed Volume: 320 ml (11.3 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing)
Leaked After Sitting: Yes
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 100%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.85 ml / cm² (0.19 oz / in²)

Standing-Sitting Rating: 2 (Male Guard Adjusted: 10)
To get a rough idea of the maximum capacity before leakage the Lindor 5D pad was pushed to the point of leakage with a regular wetting while standing. To make the test a little more reasonable it was combined with the Carer M67 underwear to assess feasibility with combined protection. During the wetting, moisture was quickly and effectively distributed through the padding right up to the point it reached capacity. Once at capacity it pooled and leaked out the sides, with most of it directed around the protective underwear’s padding. This consequently led to a moderate leak. Even so, this test was well beyond the standard use case for male guards, where they may be expected to absorb drips and dribbles to perhaps moderate voids. The overall absorbency well exceeded my expectations, very nearly absorbing a full wetting. If you suffer from light drips and dribbles I can confidently say this pad won’t leak during daily wear even after an extended amount of time. Even with moderate or continuous drips and dribbles I imagine it will be good for at least 6~8 hours.

Lying Down

Total Absorbed Volume: 195 ml (6.9 oz)
Total Wettings: 1
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 89%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.52 ml / cm² (0.12 oz / in²)

Lying Down Rating: 1 (Male Guard Adjusted: 9)

To assess the maximum capacity while lying down the Lindor 5D pad was again pushed to the point of leakage with a regular wetting while lying down. This was again done in combination with the Carer M67 to assist in containing leakage and assess feasibility with combined protection. During the wetting, moisture quickly flowed through the upper padding and then out the sides where it leaked from the protective underwear. Because the flow was nearly horizontal and the 5D padding was so wide, it didn’t reach the outer underwear padding so it leaked right away. Had the moisture been directed more toward the bottom of the padding the underwear may have caught it. In the end, there was actually a bit of dry padding at the bottom of the pad. This meant less overall absorbency than there was when tested while standing. That may be less of a problem with light or moderate wettings, though this pad is clearly at its best when worn for daily wear rather than overnight wear (the thinner padding at the bottom makes that clear).

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

Daily Wear and Bedwetting

I was quite impressed with the Lindor 5D during my testing. Like other incontinence pads, this product must be placed within the wearer’s underwear and will not provide stand-alone protection. Admittedly, the level of absorbency provided by this pad was much more than I’d typically need in daily wear, which is typically just lighter drips and dribbles. However, I pushed it to its limits during testing and also found it quite helpful when worn for some very long days of travel. Male guards are not designed for bedwetting so I couldn’t effectively test it in that case, but I imagine if you suffer from minor leaks in your sleep it could be sufficient. The primary issue you’ll deal with in overnight wear is that the padding narrows toward the bottom of the padding where gravity will normally direct moisture and there’s no protection at all at the rear. In terms of daily wear, this pad has absorbency on par or better than many categories of protective underwear, consistently approaching 300 ml (10.1 oz) before leakage would be a concern. It has a unique design among the male guards I’ve seen, with the padding fitting the contours of the wearer’s legs and inner leak guards that form a pouch around the male anatomy. This makes it particularly good at preventing the sort of leaks that happen due to shifting underwear and drips making it around the padding. This pad also has a very comfortable design, with a cloth-like backsheet that doesn’t cause any irritation when in contact with the skin and very soft padding and leak guards. It will feel a bit bulky, but I found the softness makes up for that and I could wear it for an extended length of time between changes (also a side-effect of its impressive absorbency). Perhaps the main thing to watch out for with this pad would be when sliding your underwear up and down to use the toilet. If you’re not careful the top of the padding can catch on your skin and fold inward when you re-apply your underwear. This is easy enough to avoid, but may be a bit awkward when you’re in a rush. Otherwise, it holds to the underwear very well and I never had issues with it slipping or coming loose, even during very active wear. I feel this pad is best suited for those with light-to-moderate daily leakage. It feels particularly well suited for men with moderate stress or overflow incontinence. Those with only minor leakage will likely find it a bit bulky for their needs, but if you’ve had issues with leaks from other male guards like Depend, Prevail or Tena I’d highly recommend giving this pad a try.

Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 0 (N/A)

This product is not designed for use with bowel incontinence.

Wear & Tear Tests

Fitting

The Lindor 5D pad has a unique shape unlike most other male guards on the market (others tend to be either triangular or rectangular in shape). This pad has contours that somewhat reflect half of a diaper. The pad has wide, well-defined wings that cover the crotch and narrowing padding at the bottom where the pad sits between the legs. Also, while this pad doesn’t have leg gathers, it has unusually tall inner leak guards, which form something of a pouch for the male anatomy. The leak guards cover nearly all the padding when the pad is unfolded. Moreover, there is a cloth-like backsheet on this pad with a narrow strip of adhesive tape material that runs down the middle to be fastened onto the wearer’s underwear.

3.1 Lindor Men 5D Fastener

Ease-of-Use Rating: 9

The Lindor 5D pad is quite user friendly, as is the case for most male guards. This pad must be worn in combination with regular underwear or meshpants so its relatively large size could make it a bit more challenging to apply quickly than smaller, less absorbent male guards. The folded size is also larger than most others, which could make it more challenging to change discreetly when out. This is the primary reason I refrained from giving it a perfect score for ease-of-use. Otherwise, this pad is easy to apply. You simply remove the taped strip from the middle and apply it to the front of your underwear with the widest portion in the direction of the waist. You do need to use some care to ensure the male anatomy is positioned between the leak guards rather than above them. The shape of the pad makes this positioning easier as the leak guards open up a bit when it’s folded into underwear. It’s highly durable and I never had issues with it coming loose during wear. Likewise, it’s easy to remove when it’s time to be changed. Also, like other male guards, this pad should only be worn with snug fitting underwear and will not be effective with loose boxers.

3.2 Lindor Men 5D Pad Fit

Comfort

Comfort Rating (dry): 10

The Lindor 5D gets top marks when it comes to dry comfort. This pad has a soft cloth-like backsheet that doesn’t cause any irritation when in contact with the skin. Moreover, the topsheet padding is among the softest I’ve experienced, considerably more than the others like the Depend Male Guards. Likewise, the leak guards are very soft and the pouch they form doesn’t cause any discomfort. The padding is highly durable and I never noticed clumping or tearing during wear. In spite of its relative thickness, it’s also highly breathable and great for heat dissipation. You may notice the bulk a bit with this pad, but I don’t feel that detracts from its comfort.

Comfort Rating (wet): 10

The Lindor 5D performed equally well when it comes to wet comfort compared to dry comfort. I really couldn’t tell the difference between the pad when it was wet compared to its dry state. In its wet state the pad retained its form without noticeable deterioration, while the tape continued its grip without slipping. Surface dampness and pressout were pretty much non-existent. For its level of absorbance I feel this is about as good as you can get for such comfort.

3.3 Lindor Men 5D Topsheet and Backsheet

Durability

Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 3.8% (topsheet), 1.9% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 3 shakes to deterioration

Durability Rating (dry): 10
The Lindor 5D gets top marks for dry durability. After wear for an extended amount of time including active wear and exercise this pad had only very minor deterioration at the edges, nothing that would affect its absorbency. I was also impressed with how well the tape adhered to my underwear during wear and didn’t have issues with it shifting. Part of this may be due to its sheer size, which assisted in keeping it anchored in place without shifting. After extensive testing I really can’t fault this pad when it comes to dry durability and thus give it top marks.

Durability Rating (wet): 9

Per wet durability, I noticed only slightly more padding deterioration compared to the dry state. There wasn’t any clumping or tearing but the padding had some minor loosening. Even so, it still held well in place, and the backsheet showed no signs of perspiration, which happens in some cloth-backed products. Also, while not a huge concern for practical use, it gave out relatively quickly in the wet shake test. For practical purposes, I feel this pad is incredibly durable when wet and you’re unlikely to have any associated issues so I certainly rank this among the top performers in this regard.

3.4 Lindor Men 5D Dry Test Deterioration

Discretion Tests

Profile

Profile Discretion Rating: 9 (Male Guard Adjusted: 6)

The Lindor 5D pad provides a high level of overall discretion, though it’s rather thick for a male guard. For the most part I found it could be worn discreetly but will create a bit of a bulge at the crotch if worn under tighter clothing. Compared with adult diapers reviewed so far this would put it up near the top for discretion. However, for male guards I feel there are more discreet, albeit less absorbent options.

4.1 Lindor Men 5D Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

4.2 Lindor Men 5D Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

 

Noise

Noise Rating: 10

The Lindor 5D is pretty much completely silent. I never noticed a hint of noise while wearing this pad. Its soft, flexible padding and backsheet doesn’t create resistance and it fits snugly in the wearer’s underwear. I don’t think you could do any better than this for noise reduction.

4.3 Lindor Men 5D Noise Profile

Odor Reduction

Odor Reduction Rating: 10
For its level of absorption this pad comes out on top when it comes to odor reduction. First, it’s highly resistant to surface dampness compared to other male guards. This aids in reducing the formation of odors. But it also features specialized leak guards that form an additional barrier, or pouch, to help with containment. I don’t think you’ll find a male guard better at containing odors than the Lindor 5D.

Want to give the Lindor (Molicare) Men 5D pad a try?

Help us continue to produce quality reviews by making a purchase through our Lindor (Molicare) 5D Pad affiliate link. With every purchase this blog will earn a small amount of commission at no extra cost to the purchaser.

Leway (aka Are you Ready?) Tape Diaper Review

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

 

Summary

The Leway Tape Diaper is a plastic–backed diaper that uses a “hybrid” style fastener with a special landing zone and hook & loop fasteners. This diaper is made in Korea and is sold in many stores across the country. Like many other Korean diapers, the sizing on this seems to be a level smaller than you’ll find in other regions. This diaper only comes in a Large and X-Large size, but in reality the Large is similar to Medium in most other regions. It seems this diaper was formerly marketed under the brand “Are you Ready?” but has since been renamed to “Leway”.

In terms of absorbency, it advertises an absorbency of 1500 ml (50.7 oz) for the Large and 2100 ml (71 oz) for the Extra Large, but in reality I found the absorbency to be far lower. In my experience it would be best used for daily wear, where it should take at least one wetting before leaking, or with a sufficient booster pad to increase absorbency. The tapes and fit are highly durable and I never had any issues with sagging or loosening with wear. However, the padding can be susceptible to tearing and is rather thin. It also is a bit less capable of heat dissipation than I’d typically like, though that could be a reflection of the thin padding putting the backsheet in closer contact with the wearer’s skin. I feel that adding a bit more absorbency could go a long way to improving this diaper, but I was still impressed with its design compared to what you’ll normally find in a store-bought diaper.

Key Features:

• Plastic backsheet
• Patterned landing zone
  
• Repositionable hook & loop fasteners
• Standing inner leak barriers
  

Pros:

• Snug fit / durable design
• Easy to use
  
• Strong leak guards
  

Cons:

• Low level of absorbency
  
• Can feel a bit warm
• Padding susceptible to tears

Product Details

For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the large-sized Leway Tape Diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:

Packaging

Brand: Leway
Manufacturer: Dasan Hyzen Co., Ltd. (by Future Life Co. Ltd)
Origin: Korea
Units Per Bag: 10
Cost Per Unit: $
Dimensions (L x W x H): 23 cm (9.1") x 16 cm (6.3") x 24 cm (9.5")
Weight: 0.88 kg (1.9 lbs)
Available Sizes: L, XL
Advertised Absorbency: 1500 ml (50.7 oz)

1.1 Leway Tape Diaper Packaging

Diaper

Backsheet: Plastic (poly)
Wetness Indicator: Yes
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: Yes
Product Style: Tab-Style Brief
Refastenable Tabs: Yes
Number of Tapes: 2
Repositionable Tabs: Yes
Outer Color: White (purple diamonds and numbers in landing zone)
Inner Color: White
Front Waistband: No
Rear Waistband: No
Folded Thickness: 2.2 cm (0.85")
Folded Length: 25 cm (9.8")
Dry Weight: 92 g (3.3 oz)
Fragrance: No
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 83 cm (32.7") x 63 cm (24.8") x 33 cm (13") x 61 cm (24")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 67.5 cm (26.6") x 29 cm (11.4") x 17 cm (6.7") x 34 cm (13.4")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 6 cm (2.4") x 13 cm (5.1") x 8.5 cm (3.4") x 22 cm (8.7")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Semicircle, Semicircle
Total Padding Area: 1678 cm² (260 in²)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 5 cm (2") x 12 cm (4.7")
Tape (W x L): 4.5 cm (1.8") x 3.5 cm (1.4")

1.2 Leway Tape Diaper

Laboratory Absorbency Tests

Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 683 ml (24.1 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 708 ml (25 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (65 s, 70 s, 95 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 3 cm (1.2")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 77%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 0.41 ml / cm² (0.09 oz / in²)
Press Out Volume: 25 ml (0.88 oz)

Surface Dampness Rating: 3

The Leway Tape Diaper has much room for improvement when it comes to surface dampness. During the lab test it demonstrated considerable dampness after the first wetting. This was backed up during testing with initial pooling and continuing susceptibility to pressout. I rank it similar to the Attento Tape Diaper in this regard, where it is probably best designed for use with a booster pad.

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: 533 ml (18.8 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing, 1 sitting)
Leaked After Sitting: Yes
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 86%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.32 ml / cm² (0.07 oz / in²)

Standing-Sitting Rating: 4
The Leway diaper performed about as might be expected for a lower absorbency diaper when tested when standing and sitting. The first wetting while standing was fully absorbed without any sign of leakage, though there was a little initial pooling. After it was absorbed there was still unused padding at the front/rear and it remained reasonably comfortable. Upon sitting shortly after there was no pressout or further signs of leakage, the leg gathers and leak guards did a great job of containment. On the second wetting while seated there was a lot of initial pooling and moisture moved well up the front of the diaper. Initially there was no sign of leakage, but eventually I noticed a modest leak through the left rear leg gather. Given the amount of pooling I was surprised how well the leg gathers held up with the core padding clearly past its capacity. I’d expect this diaper to manage at least a single wetting when worn for daily wear.

Lying Down

Total Absorbed Volume: 533 ml (18.8 oz)
Total Wettings: 1
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 75%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.35 ml / cm² (0.08 oz / in²)

Lying Down Rating: 2

The Leway diaper would best be used with a booster pad if worn when lying down. During testing it leaked on the first wetting. Initially there was a fair amount of pooling over the back padding, which eventually leaked out from the rear of the diaper. Interestingly enough, there was no obvious leakage through the leg gathers and much of the front padding remained dry. But otherwise, the diaper was completely saturated at this point and even if it had contained this wetting it likely wouldn’t have held another wetting at all. For a moderate wetting it will likely absorb a wetting without leaking but I wouldn’t expect that for a heavy wetting and don’t feel it would be well suited for bedwetting without the addition of a booster.

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

Daily Wear and Bedwetting

The Leway Tape Diaper combines the benefits of a plastic-backed diaper with the convenience of the fasteners in a cloth-backed diaper. This is often termed a “hybrid” design, which is made possible by having a specialized textured landing zone for the hook & loop fasteners. What’s particularly interesting about this diaper is that it’s available from a cheaper Korean store-bought model, whereas I’ve typically seen it in expensive specialty diapers like the Rearz Barnyard. Consequently, this diaper has a level of absorbency comparable to the other lower absorbency diapers you’ll find in store like the Depend Protection with Tabs. The plastic backsheet provides the extra security in terms of leak protection compared with many cloth-backed diapers that can allow moisture perspiration. This backsheet is different from many others I’ve seen as it has a soft-textured appearance with minor indentations similar to those you might find on a wet wipe, but is still completely moisture impermeable. The advantage of the hook & loop/landing zone tape system is that it retains an excellent grip with multiple refastenings with little risk of accidental damage to the backsheet in the process. Additionally, this diaper demonstrated highly effective leg gathers and leak guards in spite of its otherwise weak absorbency. With the strength of the leak guards I feel it could make a decent daily diaper so long as you could change after a single wetting or use it with a good booster pad. The primary limitation beyond absorbency would be the issues with padding durability, but I found it didn’t affect enough of the core padding to significantly reduce absorbency. It’s harder to recommend it for bedwetting as I found the leg gathers are not so much the problem as moisture pooling and spilling toward the rear. Again, with a booster pad this will be solvable but it’s an added expense to get it to the level where it will protect against at least a single wetting while lying down. I found this diaper wasn’t the best for heat dissipation and in warm weather that could cause skin irritation. In terms of comfort I rank it near average. The materials seem good and soft but it didn’t have the “breathable” plastic feeling you’d get in some diapers and I noticed sweating a bit more in this one. All in all, this one was an interesting one to review and, to keep things in perspective, certainly ahead of most diapers you’d find available in store in North America.

Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 8

This diaper has many of the features that should make it good for managing bowel incontinence. It has a very durable plastic backsheet with strong tapes and a generous area of rear padding. It also features good standing inner leak guards. The only downsides are that the padding is a bit thin and susceptible to dampness and it's hard to close the diaper up after use due to the hybrid fastener mechanism not clipping onto any part of the backsheet. For bowel incontinence, where quick changes are important it might still be a decent choice, but not quite at the level of one like the Forma-Care X-Plus or TotalDry X-Plus.

Wear & Tear Tests

Fitting

The Leway Tape Diaper has an interesting “hybrid” design for fit. It features a plastic backsheet with the hook & loop fasteners you’d typically find in a cloth-backed diaper. It accomplishes this with a textured landing zone specially designed for the fasteners to grip on. This is similar to the design of the Rearz Barnyard or Bambino Karnevalee diapers but the plastic-backsheet is a different material and the padding is much thinner.

3.1 Leway Tape Diaper Fastener

Ease-of-Use Rating: 9

The Leway Tape Diaper is highly user friendly. I had no trouble applying this diaper and getting a relatively snug fit. It’s nearly full featured with standing inner leak guards and repositionable tapes, though it lacks waistbands. It features a rare “hybrid” design with hook & loop fasteners and a plastic-backsheet. This combines the benefits of the hook & loop fasteners, which are typically easy to refasten and don’t lose adhesiveness quickly, with those of the plastic-backsheet, which generally provides better protection against backsheet perspiration as well as more resistance to odors than you typically get in cloth-like bachseets. This diaper features a patterned tape landing zone to make it easy to achieve the same fit once a proper fit has been discovered with numbers and diamonds marking tape placement location. It also features a wetness indicator of blue dots running down the middle, which fades when wet, making it a decent choice for a care-giver environment. With that said, one small disadvantage of the “hybrid” design is that it makes it a bit tougher to close up the diaper after use. The issue being that the fasteners will only attach to the landing zone and won’t stick to any other part of the backsheet. Otherwise, you may also want to use this diaper with a booster for added absorbency, but I expect most will find it easy to use.

3.2 Leway Tape Diaper Fit

Comfort

Comfort Rating (dry): 7

The Leway diaper sits snugly and is quite easy to adjust so I didn’t notice any discomfort relating to fit. The primary factor holding back comfort is the thinness of the padding, which has a tendency to separate from the backsheet. I’ve also found it’s not as good at dissipating heat as some other plastic-backed diapers, so may not be the best choice in hot weather. Otherwise, the topsheet and backsheet are both quite soft and won’t chafe against the skin. For this reason I’ve ranked it slightly toward the higher end of the rating scale, but it loses points on account of the tendency for padding tearing and struggles with heat dissipation.

Comfort Rating (wet): 6

I rank the Leway diaper at about the middle of the range for comfort when wet. Generally for a single moderate wetting it will distribute moisture effectively so as not to cause much discomfort but it does suffer from initial pooling and is susceptible to surface dampness. On the plus side, the tapes are strong and it doesn’t have much tendency for sagging. Padding deterioration was largely in the form of tearing, but there wasn’t much clumping and wasn’t a major detractor. I feel that more absorbent padding would bring significant benefits for wet comfort and perhaps even counter its issues with heat dissipation.

3.3 Leway Tape Diaper Topsheet and Backsheet

Durability

Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 21.6% (topsheet), 24% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 9 shakes to deterioration

Durability Rating (dry): 5
The structure of the Leway diaper is clearly well made and it holds up well under activity. I never had any issues with the fasteners coming loose or any other deterioration in the backsheet. However, the padding proved fairly susceptible to deterioration. It won’t easily form clumps, but it does tear and frequently comes detached from the backsheet. This may partly reflect the thinness of the padding, and may be less of an issue if the padding were a bit thicker. If the padding were more durable this could prove an excellent diaper for active wear as far as durability goes.

Durability Rating (wet): 7

In its dry state the padding of the Leway diaper easily separates from the backsheet, and this causes issues with tearing. However, when wet I found the padding actually clips back to the backsheet and previous tearing is less of an issue. In terms of durability the padding is really the only area that takes away from durability in this diaper. Otherwise, the tapes continued to hold up very well when wet and the backsheet and form stayed strong with a snug fit and limited sagging. Consequently, I actually rank it a little better for its wet durability than I do in its dry state.

3.4 Leway Tape Diaper Dry Test Deterioration

Discretion Tests

Profile

Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 5 cm (2"), 5 cm (2")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 7 cm (2.8"), 6 cm (2.4")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 4 cm (1.6"), 5 cm (2")

Profile Discretion Rating: 7

The Leway Tape Diaper provides a reasonable level of profile discretion. The padding is pretty thin so it will easily collapse snugly with underwear or meshpants. Without these, I found it had a bit of a diaper bulge at the rear but far from that of the Trest Elite Briefs or BetterDry. Otherwise, the only other issue affecting discretion is that the backsheet rises quite high above the waistline.

4.1 Leway Tape Diaper Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

4.2 Leway Tape Diaper Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

 

Noise

Noise Rating: 6

The Leway diaper isn’t the loudest on the market, but not exactly silent. The plastic-backsheet and tendency for the backsheet to separate from the padding makes it quite susceptible to crinkling noises during movement. I rank it similar to the Attends Slip Regular Plus or Carnation Adult Diaper in this regard. Noise can be somewhat minimized when worn with underwear or meshpants, though you’re still likely to notice it.

4.3 Leway Tape Diaper Noise Profile

 

Odor Reduction

Odor Reduction Rating: 7
I rank the Leway Tape Diaper similar to the Tranquility ATN when it comes to resistance to odors, though for different reasons. While the Tranquility ATN has a strength in providing good protection against surface dampness, it has a looser fit that allows odors to escape more easily. The Leway diaper, on the other hand, has a design that does a good job at preventing odors from escaping, but is more susceptible to surface dampness. Overall, I rarely noticed odors from this diaper but wouldn’t rank it at the top either.