Quote:
Originally Posted by speedyman
Wouldn't something more substatial like the Vernasca vs the Merino be more durable and less likely to wrinkle, crease, or pierce? I have the Vernasca and it is very nice indeed but definitely not a silky soft glove leather which I would not be interested in. No need for the self appointed leather thread police to take their shots at this one, just an honest question.
|
I havent had the merino leather long enough, but the nappa is pretty close to it, and we've had that for 4 years in the f15. its pretty durable. I bought a set of lexol wipes when we initially got it but I only ever used it once just to see what would happen. ie i've put no special care into the seats and they've held up perfectly fine. no obvious wear after 4 years of daily use, certainly no piercings. I would imagine the merino to be close to that type of durability.
mind you in our family its just adults, no kids or pets so I cant speak to that. But we don't roughhouse but we certainly don't 'baby' it, and they've held up just fine.
The vernasca isnt bad at all. It's just that the surface is a lot rougher to the touch than the nappa or merino. that's what was immediately apparent to us on the g05 test drives. But if i didn't touch it, I'm not sure how much of a difference I would have felt. I think, the tactile toughness of the vernasca hide makes it feel like its more durable, but like I said, we've never put any special care onto either truck and the leather has held up just fine. I feel like the durability thing is overblown, I think they're all probably about the same toughness, except the way the texture feels, people just assume/are scared of merino thinking it'll break apart quicker.