Damm! Pampers have changed again!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nam Repaid

Est. Contributor
Messages
839
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
NewPamp.jpg

The recent Pampers had the "12 hours of protection" tag in the corner of the package while the newest version has "Extra Absorb Channels" and it is a wholly different diaper. The change will likely not affect babys, moms or slim ABDLs who use them whole but I use them as suffers and the new ones are not as good. The older Pampers could be pulled apart removing the leg gathers and pealing the plastic backing off leaving the SAP & fluff sealed in a fluid permeable package while pulling the back off the new ones exposes the core creating quite a mess in your larger diaper.
Sadly dissapointed in my recent pampers purchase I ventured out to several stores and found one lone package of the old ones in a display of the new.
All is not lost yet for as Huggies, CVS and now Pampers do not peal apart to a nice liner Luvs still do.
 
Yeah, I picked up a pack of these the other day. As I had feared when I first saw the Extra Absorb Channels icon on the package, these new Baby Dry diapers have been reduced in size to match Cruisers 7 and Swaddlers 7. They're now about an inch shorter. Get a big box of the pre-Channels version while you still can!

Luvs seems unaffected. So far.

I find it funny when people make threads about how baby diapers keep getting bigger. In the last 10 years, the only changes I've really seen in that regard have been the numbers on the packages. The actual diapers have either stayed the same, size-wise, or have gotten smaller.
 
You know the last version had fluid channels in them too right. And I have no idea why you're pealing them apart lole that. They work perfectly as a booster when left intact.
 
Slomo said:
You know the last version had fluid channels in them too right. And I have no idea why you're pealing them apart lole that. They work perfectly as a booster when left intact.
The Extra Absorb Channels are new to Baby Dry as of just a couple of months ago. Cruisers got them first, last year. And then Swaddlers. The padding takes on a very distinct shape when wet, very unlike the old padding.

As for tearing them apart: I usually rip the elastics and leak guards out when using them as boosters. Otherwise they bunch up and become uncomfortable really quickly.
 
Cottontail said:
The Extra Absorb Channels are new to Baby Dry as of just a couple of months ago. Cruisers got them first, last year. And then Swaddlers. The padding takes on a very distinct shape when wet, very unlike the old padding.

As for tearing them apart: I usually rip the elastics and leak guards out when using them as boosters. Otherwise they bunch up and become uncomfortable really quickly.

Yeah, I noticed them on the swaddlers about 6 months ago. I've actually found that leaving the leak guards in place (and cloth backing) actually help them as boosters. I do tear off the velcro tabs though as they somtimes will press into my skin if its not positioned just right.
 
I have found use with using baby diapers as stuffers with out much altering.
Using a cloth backed adult diaper, in my case a bambino stretch, I put a pamper onto of the adult diaper, I lay down on it, I then fan out the front of the pamper on me then pull the front of the adult diaper up, I then take the tapes of the pamper and attached then to the front cover of the adult diaper, then tape the adult diaper over that, this keeps the baby diaper in place, it keeps the back of the baby diaper from moving around and giving me a weggie.
 
cottontail, i bought a pack of 2016 pampers with extra absorb channels. did they get shorter in 2017 or in 2016?
 
GuybrushT said:
cottontail, i bought a pack of 2016 pampers with extra absorb channels. did they get shorter in 2017 or in 2016?

Cruisers 7 shrunk sometime mid-2016, and was until recently shorter than Baby Dry 6 by most of an inch. The new Baby Dry 6 with the Absorb Channels just shrunk to match, leaving Luvs 6 as the largest/longest P&G diaper. No idea how long that'll last. Get 'em soon!
 
Cottontail said:
Cruisers 7 shrunk sometime mid-2016, and was until recently shorter than Baby Dry 6 by most of an inch. The new Baby Dry 6 with the Absorb Channels just shrunk to match, leaving Luvs 6 as the largest/longest P&G diaper. No idea how long that'll last. Get 'em soon!

I just went around the neighborhood and got a pack of 2016 ones that have a different style lot code, and no 3 channel style. They are an inch longer! It is possible that they could have become shorter but stretch wider, like goodnites have....

Diaper Safari complete!

- - - Updated - - -

Oh wait--my diaper safari is never complete....(sheds one single tear)
 
Slomo said:
You know the last version had fluid channels in them too right. And I have no idea why you're pealing them apart lole that. They work perfectly as a booster when left intact.

No the new ones are quite different. The old are a humongous blend of SAP and fluff tapering in thickness from the front to rear in a fluid permeable layer inside and out with the outside layered with printed plastic and then a cloth like layer. The new ones have a curlicue pattern in the SAP-fluff layer and no fluid permeable layer under the printed plastic outer sub layer. There are no obvious "fluid channels" as shown in the new graphic either. The Muppet prints are different Too.
If you do not peal them apart you have to slit them with a razor blade so the excess "fluid" passes through to the host adult diaper allowing SAP granules to escape leading to much extra clean up effort.
 
GuybrushT said:
It is possible that they could have become shorter but stretch wider, like goodnites have...

I wish! No... As far as I can tell, this change is all "take" and no "give"--unless you count the "Extra Absorb Channels." I don't. I mean, they don't totally suck, but they also make the padding look/feel like an oversized maxi pad when wet, so... :shrug:

Go to WalMart and get some of their special "Extra Absorbency" Luvs 6. Those have advanced to #1 on my list, anyway. They've so far retained the old Pampers sizing, the absorbency is almost as good as Huggies Overnites, and a bag of them costs like $7. Whether you mean to wear them like diapers or use them as boosters, they're an insanely good deal. The normal Luvs 6 (non-WalMart) are considerably less absorbent.
 
Thank you, again, Cottontail! I am so impressed by your diaper knowledge; I am excited about getting Luvs Size Super Absorbent Nightlock Plus diapers, and some Parent's Choice 7 tomorrow. I am thinking about whether I want to buy some Cruisers from 2011 for like, $12. Are they longer than early 2016 Pampers Baby Dry?
 
Cottontail said:
I wish! No... As far as I can tell, this change is all "take" and no "give"--unless you count the "Extra Absorb Channels." I don't. I mean, they don't totally suck, but they also make the padding look/feel like an oversized maxi pad when wet, so... :shrug:

Go to WalMart and get some of their special "Extra Absorbency" Luvs 6. Those have advanced to #1 on my list, anyway. They've so far retained the old Pampers sizing, the absorbency is almost as good as Huggies Overnites, and a bag of them costs like $7. Whether you mean to wear them like diapers or use them as boosters, they're an insanely good deal. The normal Luvs 6 (non-WalMart) are considerably less absorbent.

I've been having some issues with the extra-absorbent Luvs. While they're OK for a single daytime flood - standing up only - they seem to have a real problem with concentrated nighttime pee. While I don't expect them to hold a full morning's bladder, I figured I could at least take some pressure off in them - but ended up with wet pants. A 4T-5T Pull-Up, on the other hand, can take it.
 
GuybrushT said:
I am thinking about whether I want to buy some Cruisers from 2011 for like, $12. Are they longer than early 2016 Pampers Baby Dry?

The first "3-Way-Fit" version? No, those aren't any longer, however the elastic wings are a good bit stretchier. IMO, those 2011 "3-Way-Fit" Cruisers were the best ones. If you have a good source for those, stock up! (Here's one of those diapers with the tabs stretched to a full meter apart. And that wasn't even my record.)

KimbaWolfNagihiko said:
I've been having some issues with the extra-absorbent Luvs. While they're OK for a single daytime flood - standing up only - they seem to have a real problem with concentrated nighttime pee. While I don't expect them to hold a full morning's bladder, I figured I could at least take some pressure off in them - but ended up with wet pants. A 4T-5T Pull-Up, on the other hand, can take it.

There could be some girl/boy anatomical differences in play there, too. I wonder. And also there's the general problem that all of these products are too small for us, and so the ways in which we adapt them to our bodies are going to be major factors in how well (or if) they work.

I'm a bit jealous of the smaller ones and the girls among us. I can remember fitting into some of the very first Pull-Ups. Now, even modded, they're too small to use. The crotches are so narrow, even compared to baby diapers, that they can't span my guy-bits. Curses! GoodNites and UnderJams barely make it, and so are barely better. I still leak almost immediately. And, of course, arousal exacerbates things considerably. Using any baby diaper pre-arousal cuts my chances of having an accident by half, at least.

With baby diapers, though, things might favor the guys slightly, depending on the scenario. I can "point up," and also shift the padding forward so that gravity helps me to maximize my use of it. Or that, at least, is how I usually do things. It does help (me) a lot, at least when sitting or standing. Lying down would be another matter, probably. There, I'd expect the advantage would shift back to the girls somewhat.

...but then if you've had better luck with other Pampers diapers than with Luvs, I suppose I don't have any good ideas. Maybe I should lie a few of them out, side-by-side, cross my eyes, and look for subtle differences. Sounds fun, anyway. :)
 
Cottontail said:
IMO, those 2011 "3-Way-Fit" Cruisers were the best ones. If you have a good source for those, stock up!

If I had them, and I thought they were something special, I would sell them. However, they'll not quite fetch much, but I imagine they might in time, so best to let them rest on that shelf. To paraphrase G&S "Patience:" "If you had Elysian Fields," opines Bunthorne, "wouldn't you just rent 'em out?" Ebay-wise, there isn't a significant contingent of 20 and 50 year olds (that's what Laurie at Rearz says is her big money demographics) interested in the subtetlies of pampers, unless they are foreign.

Cottontail said:
Maybe I should lie a few of them out, side-by-side, cross my eyes, and look for subtle differences. Sounds fun, anyway. :)

Now that, sir is a grand idea. I have been inspired to synthesis some photo comparison, and synthesis of the facts that you and a few others possess on the sizing and changes of baby diapers. Essentially, write up a "state of the field" summary on baby diapers, based in no small part with your research. Would you be interested in co-writing it?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, a partner of mine who wore Pull-Ups to work every day -- he is teensy -- says that they got more absorbent last year, although he doesn't use them much.
 
Cottontail said:
...but then if you've had better luck with other Pampers diapers than with Luvs, I suppose I don't have any good ideas. Maybe I should lie a few of them out, side-by-side, cross my eyes, and look for subtle differences. Sounds fun, anyway. :)

I prefer Luvs to Pampers. I tried Pampers once a few years back (after I snuck out of the house when my parents weren't here and walked to get them; at least those days are over), and while they seemed alright at first I then developed a chronic leak problem.

Huggies are still kind of king in my book, although I can't seem to find the Snug and Dry size 6 in small packages at the local Walmarts anymore. Guess I'll have to make due with Little Movers.

I suppose that is one good thing about having female parts though - that even with my pin-and-underwear mod, Pull-Ups remain quite functional and can take a nice amount before leaking.
 
Slomo said:
You know the last version had fluid channels in them too right. And I have no idea why you're pealing them apart lole that. They work perfectly as a booster when left intact.

the point of a booster is to increase capacity. To do that they usually need to allow flow through them once they're soaked, to make use of the diaper they've been added to. If you leave the waterproof shell on them, the booster gets soaked, your diaper stays mainly dry in that area, and you leak.

But to be fair, you can usually just cut slits in the shell rather than removing it outright. It's a bit less effective though.

If you're using them entirely as an internal booster, you'd probably be better off just cutting one slit in the shell down the centerline from front to back. That would allow a fair amount of flow-through while maintaining most of its structural integrity.
 
Nam Repaid said:
No the new ones are quite different. The old are a humongous blend of SAP and fluff tapering in thickness from the front to rear in a fluid permeable layer inside and out with the outside layered with printed plastic and then a cloth like layer. The new ones have a curlicue pattern in the SAP-fluff layer and no fluid permeable layer under the printed plastic outer sub layer. There are no obvious "fluid channels" as shown in the new graphic either. The Muppet prints are different Too.
If you do not peal them apart you have to slit them with a razor blade so the excess "fluid" passes through to the host adult diaper allowing SAP granules to escape leading to much extra clean up effort.

I'm not saying they haven't changed, I'm saying that for the last year, Pampers swaddlers have had those fluid channels. It is a couple of curved lines where there is no sap. As the diaper gets wet, these areas do not expand loke the rest of the diaper does. This effectively creeates a fluid channel. It is not something just newly introduced like you said before.

- - - Updated - - -

bambinod said:
the point of a booster is to increase capacity. To do that they usually need to allow flow through them once they're soaked, to make use of the diaper they've been added to. If you leave the waterproof shell on them, the booster gets soaked, your diaper stays mainly dry in that area, and you leak.

But to be fair, you can usually just cut slits in the shell rather than removing it outright. It's a bit less effective though.

If you're using them entirely as an internal booster, you'd probably be better off just cutting one slit in the shell down the centerline from front to back. That would allow a fair amount of flow-through while maintaining most of its structural integrity.

Yes exactly. That is the intent for the adult diaper to stay (mostly) dry until the baby diaper leaks a lot. Once soaked, the baby diaper will leak, that is a given. This is why it's imperative the width of the baby diaper is smaller than the width of the leg guards on your adult diaper. This will create a channel that will keep pee from the leaking baby diaper inside of your adult diaper.

This is why there is no real need to cut slits on the baby diaper too. Plus, it has the added benefit of keeping your adult diaper mostly dry for longer. And, adds in the option to change out the baby diaper booster to extend the time between changes even longer. Cuttng slits in it won't allow for that.
 
Cottontail said:
I wish! No... As far as I can tell, this change is all "take" and no "give"--unless you count the "Extra Absorb Channels." I don't. I mean, they don't totally suck, but they also make the padding look/feel like an oversized maxi pad when wet, so... :shrug:

Go to WalMart and get some of their special "Extra Absorbency" Luvs 6. Those have advanced to #1 on my list, anyway. They've so far retained the old Pampers sizing, the absorbency is almost as good as Huggies Overnites, and a bag of them costs like $7. Whether you mean to wear them like diapers or use them as boosters, they're an insanely good deal. The normal Luvs 6 (non-WalMart) are considerably less absorbent.


Always impressed by your knowledge cottontail. As far as Luvs are concerned, is it a size or absorbency difference between their
"Super absorbent" and "ultra" series?
 
FudgedInLuvs said:
Always impressed by your knowledge cottontail. As far as Luvs are concerned, is it a size or absorbency difference between their
"Super absorbent" and "ultra" series?

Ha-ha. Oops. Mixing the names, wasn't I. I meant "Super Absorbent." ("Extra Absorbency" is a Pampers thing.) Anyway... As far as I can tell, the Super Absorbent diapers are the same as the Ultra Leakguards, just with more SAP. The comparison is similar to Baby Dry versus the now-discontinued Extra Protection, and Swaddlers versus Swaddlers Overnights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top