Review: Panda Cotton vs Cascade Fixation
By Brianna on May 30, 2007 in Reviews: Yarn
Let me preface this entry by thanking a reader, Wendy, for sending me a wonderful package with two skeins each of Crystal Palace’s Panda Cotton and Cascade’s Fixation. It was a fantastic gift and I’ve enjoyed e-mailing with her.
Before I get to the yarn, I want to also apologize for the fact that this all sounds so dry. Just straight facts, folks.
Crystal Palace - Panda Cotton
55% Bamboo, 24% Cotton, 21% Elastic Nylon
170 yards per skein
I crocheted a basic single-crochet swatch with a Boye C hook, which is 2.75mm. The recommended gauge according to the label is 2.25-3mm Needles with 24-28 sts within 4″ wide. There was no row gauge. Since they didn’t recommend a hook size, I chose a half-way point between the recommended needle size and went with the 2.75mm hook. With that, I found my gauge to be 21sts x 26r within 4″ square. This is smaller than the given gauge, but any smaller a hook and I think the fabric would be too compact to move as well as it does with the 2.75mm.
With 21sts x 26r there is a solid fabric with great ease of movement and the fabric is extremely flexible. There is greater vertical stretch than horizontal, but the elastic nylon present in the yarn lets the fabric snap back with very minimal shaping issues. A huge plus for me is that it feels nice within the hand and retains a cool temperature like high thread-count cotton sheets.
Cascade - Fixation
98.3% Cotton, 1.7% Elastic
186 yards (stretched)/100 yards (relaxed) per skein
Once again, a basic single-crochet swatch with a Boye C hook. Recommended crochet gauge was 25sts x 40r in 4″ square with a 1.75mm hook. Due to the fact that I wanted to compare these two yarns, I kept the hook the same. I may crochet another swatch with the recommended hook size, but with the swatch fabric already solid, I can’t imagine it would provide much movement or flexibility.
With the 2.75mm hook I reached a 20sts x 23r within 4″ square. Greater vertical stretch than horizontal. I think the higher percentage of cotton keeps the fabric from snapping back. It shows a great amount of pull when stretched, which is unfortunate I think since the hook size I used allows gaps between rows to show. I wouldn’t necessarily use Fixation for a garment piece. Accessories, perhaps, but not a garment.
Of the two yarns, I prefer the Panda Cotton for a variety of reasons. It feels the thinner of the two yarns, glides more smoothly between the fingers and feels less coarse than the Fixation. The only issue I’ve had is with the yarn splitting. Unless you do a lot of elongated stitches, like the below image shows, this shouldn’t be more than an annoyance when you work with it. It’s not always split, but there are moments where it just unravels.
3 Comment(s)
By vashti on Oct 23, 2007 | Reply
This is a helpful review. The last photo is so great I have to leave a comment! I’ve used Cascade Fixation but have never seen the Panda yarn so I really appreciate the closeup. That’s some serious unplying.
By Shevon on Dec 14, 2007 | Reply
I haven’t worked with Cascade Fixation, but I have worked with Panda Cotton. I knit socks in (sorry for using the K word but as it’s a yarn review, it’s relavent) and the splitting was horrendous. It also doesn’t wear well at all. I thow them in the washer and dryer to tighten up the stitches, but after a few minutes of wearing them around the stitches on the bottom of the foot and the toe stretch out. If I wear them with shoes they sometimes slip into the shoe, but that hasn’t happened as much since I started machine drying them.
The fabric does have a nice hand to it, but it’s not the most practical for socks. It might be good for something like a headband.
By kathleen on Aug 2, 2008 | Reply
I have not worked with the panda but have made headbands with the fixation. I love the fixation yarn. I want to make a tube top with it next. I think it retains its shape well when crocheted into a headband, even after several wearings before a wash. I work with sugar ‘n creme, too. It splits pretty bad, too.