Dry Weight vs Wet Weight — Placard Comparison
This test measures how much water weight different rigs retain after full submersion and how long they take to dry. The goal is to quantify water absorption and drying performance between the MAS rig (details to follow), the U.S. Army issue TAPs rig, and a popular competitor's chest rig. No harnesses were used in the test. No additional items were added to either the TAP rig or the competitor.
MAS Chest Rig Products
The placard used for this test is the exact placard that was recently used for four days of range use at Fort Stewart. The products included: Placard 1, 5 x Rifle Magazine Retention, Expander Board, Wrap, Wingman, Wingman Flap, and full set of Tubes Adapter.
Test Setup
- Each rig was fully submerged in water for 5 minutes.
- All rigs were hung up in direct sunlight for 5 minutes. After this they were weighed.
- They were then laid out flat in gravel, and direct sunlight for 20 minutes and weighed again.
- Weights were recorded using a digital food scale.
Results
| Rig | Dry Weight (g) | Wet Weight (g) | Water Gain (%) | After 20 min | % of start weight (g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAS Rig | 781 | 917 | +17.4% | 867 | 111% |
| TAP | 735 | 984 | +33.9% | 923 | 125.6% |
| Competitor | 500 | 687 | +37.4% | 619 | 123.8% |
Analysis
The results show a clear difference in how each kit interacts with water. The MAS kit absorbed the least amount of water—only a 17% increase in weight after full submersion—while the TAPs Rig and the competitor's kit absorbed roughly double that, at 34% and 37% respectively. That means the MAS kit is significantly less prone to holding water, indicating tighter material construction, more efficient drainage, and fewer absorbent fabrics overall.
When it came to drying, both the MAS and the competitor's kits shed about 36% of the water they absorbed within just 20 minutes, while the TAP Rig lagged behind, losing only 25%. After 20 minutes, the MAS kit was back down to just 111% of its original weight, compared to 124–126% for the others. In practical terms, that means the MAS kit would feel lighter, dry faster, and be more comfortable to wear much sooner after exposure to rain, submersion, or sweat.
Conclusion
The Dry vs. Wet Weight test shows that the MAS kit performs best in resisting water absorption and drying quickly, gaining only 17% in weight after submersion and returning to near-dry levels (just 11% over baseline) within 20 minutes. In contrast, the TAPs and competitor kits absorbed roughly twice as much water and retained significantly more moisture over the same period. These results suggest that the MAS materials and design are more hydrophobic and better optimized for real-world conditions where moisture management matters—offering users a lighter, faster-drying, and more field-ready system compared to conventional gear.