Pampers Underjams XL

LilxFawn

💖🧸🍼Daddy’s precious little prince🍼🧸💖
Est. Contributor
Messages
1,216
Age
28
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Babyfur
  3. Diaperfur
  4. Little
  5. Other
Has anyone tried the Pampers underjams XL? I wear the Goodnites and they fit me, but I want to have more options. Would the underjams XL fit someone who is 145lbs? If anyone has had success with them please let me know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrsZaronab
Love'em! There so cute. Underjams X/XL just fit me. Although I'm around 100lbs and a girl. Sorry, I doubt they'll fit someone who is 145lbs.
 
MrsZaronab said:
Love'em! There so cute. Underjams X/XL just fit me. Although I'm around 100lbs and a girl. Sorry, I doubt they'll fit someone who is 145lbs.
Aw crap 😞. Yeah I figured they wouldn’t fit, they seem smaller than the Goodnites. Thanks!
 
Unfortunately, Underjams are a tighter squeeze than Goodnites. They have a much lower rise than Goodnites but do stretch a good bit being they still retain the old Easy Ups-style sides. They make decent stuffers though, and do swell up quite a bit. Parents for years have been asking them to make a larger size, and it would make sense to in order to stay competitive with KC, but they haven’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LilxFawn
They'll fit, because they stretch quite a bit, although if you are taller, with their low-rise style, you may end up with a "plumber butt" look. The bigger problem is that even if you are just over the weight limit, the sides tend to wear out and then will tear away, especially if you are also using them.

My older son is about 100 lbs. and wears them, and between 9-10 hours of wear at night plus soaking them (he's a VERY heavy wetter), the sides barely hold up on him by morning. I imagine at 145 lbs, they won't last more than a couple hours, maybe?
 
  • Sad
Reactions: LilxFawn
Underjams are discontinued in the UK.

They are smaller and weaker than the DryNites/GoodNites and sides may have a fair stretch, but they don't last. And well i'm a 38" waist. Great for 1 wetting but no more.
 
It really infuriates me why Underjams made weaker side panels, and never improved them. They should be directly competing with Goodnites more often. However, they're not. :(
Anyone remember Luvs Sleepdry's? They failed to strongly compete against Goodnites too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LilxFawn
12srepaid said:
Anyone remember Luvs Sleepdry's? They failed to strongly compete against Goodnites too.

I remember these, I actually still have 2 packs of them on a shelf in my closet.
 
Its a shame they don't upgrade the underjams, they are so comfortable to wear, but the sides tear up really badly making them fall if you don't wear a onesie to hold them in place, the ideal product would be the Goodnites sides on a Underjam along with the double leak guards of the goodnites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12srepaid
12srepaid said:
It really infuriates me why Underjams made weaker side panels, and never improved them. They should be directly competing with Goodnites more often. However, they're not. :(
Anyone remember Luvs Sleepdry's? They failed to strongly compete against Goodnites too.
CodyBaby said:
Its a shame they don't upgrade the underjams, they are so comfortable to wear, but the sides tear up really badly making them fall if you don't wear a onesie to hold them in place, the ideal product would be the Goodnites sides on a Underjam along with the double leak guards of the goodnites.
There’s a good reason for this, actually. KC has a number of patents for the way their side panels operate on their products. Because of this, it limits the options other companies have for their products.

I do agree P&G should be more competitive in that segment. Heck, parents for years now have been petitioning for a larger Underjams size to compete with the larger Goodnites, but they have yet to do anything about it. Honestly, if they added a size, it’d be a fantastic product considering how the current Underjams stack up performance-wise to Goodnites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DiaperedBedwetter1998, 12srepaid and dltyty
PaddedBrony said:
There’s a good reason for this, actually. KC has a number of patents for the way their side panels operate on their products. Because of this, it limits the options other companies have for their products.

I do agree P&G should be more competitive in that segment. Heck, parents for years now have been petitioning for a larger Underjams size to compete with the larger Goodnites, but they have yet to do anything about it. Honestly, if they added a size, it’d be a fantastic product considering how the current Underjams stack up performance-wise to Goodnites.

In P&G mindset they already have a larger version of Underjams. It’s called Always Discreet Underwear. They consider it the next size up from Underjams. My wife was using the Always Discreet Underwear for her periods but moved to Goodnites because she said it’s more panty like and comfortable.
 
Ashton84 said:
In P&G mindset they already have a larger version of Underjams. It’s called Always Discreet Underwear. They consider it the next size up from Underjams. My wife was using the Always Discreet Underwear for her periods but moved to Goodnites because she said it’s more panty like and comfortable.
Kind of reminds me how K-C treats Depend in relation to GoodNites, except Always Discreet doesn't absolutely suck compared to its smaller sister product.
 
Ashton84 said:
In P&G mindset they already have a larger version of Underjams. It’s called Always Discreet Underwear. They consider it the next size up from Underjams. My wife was using the Always Discreet Underwear for her periods but moved to Goodnites because she said it’s more panty like and comfortable.
That's really sad that P&G believes that Always is the next step up from Underjams. Besides, Always, a female product! Although to be fair, KC is trying to push their crappy Depends product on people.
 
Last edited:
Ashton84 said:
In P&G mindset they already have a larger version of Underjams. It’s called Always Discreet Underwear. They consider it the next size up from Underjams. My wife was using the Always Discreet Underwear for her periods but moved to Goodnites because she said it’s more panty like and comfortable.
That’s a huge gap to cover, not to mention they’re different markets. There’s still a gap of children and adolescents still not being served because Underjams don’t have that larger size. Even the smallest Always pant is too big for some kids, but they’ve grown out of the Underjams range. Hence why a larger size would make even more sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12srepaid
PaddedBrony said:
That’s a huge gap to cover, not to mention they’re different markets. There’s still a gap of children and adolescents still not being served because Underjams don’t have that larger size. Even the smallest Always pant is too big for some kids, but they’ve grown out of the Underjams range. Hence why a larger size would make even more sense.

I agree with you my friend. Sadly I don’t believe P&G really cares. They seem happy to cater only to women. That gap needs to be addressed and the first company that truly does will make so so much money. Special needs alone I see countless parents begging for that product. Being incontinent all my life I was in that gap for many years after outgrowing pampers. A larger size refastenable diaper like a pamper that has the quality of pampers and that’s all white would be a gold mine. The special needs community would buy it in droves. I honesty believe P&G is also scared if they made said product that the ABDL community would buy it up like never seen on a scale before and P&G would get negative press from vanilla people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lewis Badger
Ashton84 said:
I honesty believe P&G is also scared if they made said product that the ABDL community would buy it up like never seen on a scale before and P&G would get negative press from vanilla people.

I think one reason they don't make that kind of leap is that the major diaper manufacturers are already in constant hot-water, due to the environmental impacts of their products, and that there seem to be far more non-special needs children wearing diaper past the usual age, even starting kindergarten and first grade still wearing diapers, so if KC or P&G were to produce even larger sizes than they do know, they'll get shit-on by critics saying that they're just doing it to keep children in diapers as long as possible, so they can make as much money as possible, rather than actually trying to meet the needs of people/children that legitimately need such a product.
 
Last edited:
68Bonnie said:
I think one reason they don't make that kind of leap is that the major diaper manufacturers are already in constant hot-water, due to the environmental impacts of their products, and that there seem to be far more non-special needs children wearing diaper past the usual age, even starting kindergarten and first grade still wearing diapers, so if KC or P&G were to produce even larger sizes than they do know, they'll get shit-on by critics saying that they're just doing it to keep children in diapers as long as possible, so they can make as much money as possible, rather than actually trying to meet the needs of people/children that legitimately need such a product.

It's worth noting that this is more or less what happened when Pampers first introduced Size 6 in the late 90s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lewis Badger
68Bonnie said:
I think one reason they don't make that kind of leap is that the major diaper manufacturers are already in constant hot-water, due to the environmental impacts of their products, and that there seem to be far more non-special needs children wearing diaper past the usual age, even starting kindergarten and first grade still wearing diapers, so if KC or P&G were to produce even larger sizes than they do know, they'll get shit-on by critics saying that they're just doing it to keep children in diapers as long as possible, so they can make as much money as possible, rather than actually trying to meet the needs of people/children that legitimately need such a product.

Is there really much evidence to support though that more non-special needs kids are going to school at 5 or 6 diapered? I've heard the (rare) occasional story in the news, but I'd be surprised if that's truly common. My oldest was 5 years and 2 months old before being potty trained for daytime, and literally ALMOST would have had to start school diapered, but he has a number of sensory issues, and that was with us trying for 3 years to get him trained.

I think there's probably a lot more kids like my youngest, who didn't train for day until he was 3.5 years old. Not because he wasn't capable, but because he was stubborn and argumentative and fought us every step of the way. But by the time kids are 3, 3.5+, many of them are going to be in size 6 or even size 7 diapers, and 4T-5T pullups.

There are also going to be parents (and we do this with my youngest, who is 5) who will use diapers or pullups for long drives, flights or places where their child who may be potty trained but accident prone would benefit from having that protection. Doesn't mean they use them all the time, but they certainly serve their purpose during those times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12srepaid
I seriously don't think there are that many non-disabled kids going to school in diapers/pull-ups. And I don't put the blame on the diaper companies for bigger sizes making kids stay in them longer mumbo jumbo. Of course some of these kids that may not look disabled physically, may have problems developmentally. Also it's the parents part of whether their child is toilet trained.
Not the diaper's fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spidermanbatman
Back
Top