Anonymous

Anonymous

    New Feature

    Browse Your Followers or See Who You're Following

  • #1484of 20358

Garth's Passions

Camping

Garth's Bio

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on April 28, 2014

5 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer
Fit: True to size

I've owned many wind-breaker-shell like most of us, and this is my favorite. The fabric feels good on the skin unlike most glossy ripstops. This has a matte finish, and has some mechanical(no lycra, all nylon) stretch to it. It's quiter in the wind too .

The hood I was hesitant at first sight. I've not met a "one cord does all" that fit the way I wanted, but this does . The zipper is very easy to use with one hand.

Rain resistence is very very good. Breathability , of course relative to each person, I find very good.

If you're comparing this with the Houdini, well, don't. Ahahaha ! The fit of this is trimmer, and the matte fabric w/mechanical stretch is a huge improvement over the glossy ripstop and well worth the extra dollars.

For fit, I requested this from Acr Teryx, and they answered !
"Thank you for contacting Arc'teryx. Here are the measurements for the Squamish Hoody:"

Medium:
Chest: 119.8cm
Neck: 50.5cm
Sleeve: 96cm
Front: 72.6cm
Back: 74.9cm

Large
Chest: 127.8cm
Neck: 52.4cm
Sleeve: 98.5cm
Front: 72.6cm
Back: 74.9cm

The chest of the Large I received in Oxblood appears measured by them right at the arm pit, and it tapers from there. I measured 1" below the seam across the chest just below the pocket, and measured 48"/120cm.

(1)

 

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on April 16, 2014

3 5

This hat is following the "low profile" trend, sigh. I have 2 of the original Longbill caps and they are wonderful, none of this low profile nonsense. My head has not suddenly gotten "low profile" , so these don't work so great in the wind because you can't pull it down any further. A Patagonia rep on the website suggested a string , how odd, if you made the cap like it used to be you'd need no string ! Strings just get in the way too. With the Originals, You can pull it down just a little bit, to the top of your ears and tighten. It doesn't get blown off very easily like this one does. The quality, albeit subjective, is not like the prior ones either, it feels like any other department store cap now.
To each their own. I returned this.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on February 19, 2014

4 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer
Fit: Runs large

These are very good mitts, plenty of down around the fingers. Warm .... but not overly so.

The sizing is misleading from RAB. These, compared to the Large Endurance Mitt , are an XL or XXL. I like this , as it is very hard to find large enough what I'll called "sized and made in Asia" mittens that I can wear heavy fleece gloves inside . BTW, the Endurance Mitt and these are exactly the same length, in the photos you can't tell.

The palm material has no extra grip, it basically a Cordura, no rubbery quality to it at all. This could be improved.

The label says 50g of 850 fill, but compared to the 50g of 750 fill in the Endurance, these appear and feel less full. The Endurance mitts are stuffed, like an airbag, wow. These, not . The good news though is there is the down is where it counts, around the fingers and in the hand.

The pile liner is awesome, and it's thick and huge ! It measures almost 7 inches across at the cuff and almost 6 across the palm. I've used just these in warmer conditions with a shell, very versatile. I've also used just the dowm mitt with my own windstopper glove inside. I'v also used the down mitts alone inside a shell. These are very versatile Mitts . Nice :)

The safety leashes btw, have no adjuster, they're stiched together 2 inches from the end. I guess you're supposed to tie a knot or attach it to your body with a carabiner(RAB told me this one) . I use my own.

Overall, they do the job they are intended to do , all one can ask for .

(0)

 

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on February 19, 2014

3 5

Fit: Runs small

These Mitts are bit odd to me. The sizing from RAB is confusing and misleading. RAB USA was of no help before I ordered these. I also have their Expedition Mitts, which is the same labelled size Large, compared to these is an XL or XXL. For me these are just not large enough.

The Expedition Mitts have lots of down around the fingers , where it counts. These do not . The long, wide cuffs are stuffed to the max, but the hand narrows down considerably . At the tips of the fingers there is not that much down, so ALL that cuff down is rather misplaced in my opinion. I've not heard many say "My forearms are freezing but my hands are warm !" Put the down where it matters, around the hand.

The palm material is great, grippy. I wish the Expedition Mitt had that, it only has a heavier cordura nylon with no grip.

(0)

 

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote an answer about on February 4, 2014

I have some of these Mitts from 2001, when they used 2 layers of PL One 4 oz./sq. yd on the palm, and 3 layers on the back. That was then.

I just ordered a new pair of Exp. Mitts, as my 2001 pair have been compressed in the palm for most of the years I've had them, rendering them for use only with thick liners and no colder than about 20F. A con of Primaloft is holding it's loft under long term compresion.

That said, these new ones, by my educated guess, are using no more than the 200g back and and a little less in the front. It's nowhere as thick as the previous version.

The sizing is smallish, about the same as it was in 2001. I can wear a powerstretch liner in an XL and that's it. My originals were undersized too, considering the "Expedition" tiltle where you'd assume they could handle a heavy glove inside for use in real cold. I thought they'd change that but they did not.

I imagine true professionals likley have their mitts made for them custom, and what is sold to the public is a "consumer" version.

(0)

 

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote an answer about on December 11, 2013

There is not a simple answer to this question, as any comparison depends on how much and what kind of down is used, and what the weight per square yard of the synthetic insulation is used, as well as the brand and type of sythetic fill that is used . Simply, there are infinite variables when comparing.

As far as Marmot in particular goes, if you email or call their design department, they would be best sutited to answer your questions , but even then they would only tell you what jacket may be comparable relative to another jacket.

Myself, having worn both down and Primaloft jackets for many years , they are both great and each have pros and cons. It's like Apples and Oranges, alike and yet different.

(0)

 

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote an answer about on October 9, 2013

125g for the Ama , 99g for the Zeus. (from scanning online) Accounting for the hood of the Ama, the fill is about the same.

Warmth is so subjective, fill alone is only a rough guide.

I have last years Ama, and I've worn a Zeus. Fit is quite different from my subjective standpoint. The Zeus was overly snug at the collar, too large in the body. The Ama is trimer in the body and the neck is much roomier . The fit of the Ama for me is darn near purrfect (Size L, 75 inches tall, 170lbs.) :)

(1)

 

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on October 20, 2011

2 5

The high loft fleece is great but the un-atomical cut to the shoulders leaves the sleeves riding up severely. You'd have to add about 3 inches the the sleeve length, but that'd be silly and doesn't address the shortcomings of the cut. I don't know how Marmot and Patagonia used to do it with their Angel Wing and Y-joint shoulder cuts , but they're not doing it much anymore. Not on this jacket. The powerstretch panels are useless, as on all fleece jackets. This fleece has plenty of stretch on it's own, and the ps panels just serve to create chilly spots on the jacket. I wish every manufacturer would stop using ps panels to fool people, trying to replace a properly designed jacket!

If anyone here owns/ed a Patagonia Pile jacket from back in the 80's, you'd know what design perfect is . I can't seem to find anything close, but I'll always be looking for it:)

(1)

 

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous posted an image about on September 15, 2011

Pocket/Pitzip inside out

Heres a large M10 inside out. The pitzip is underneath the mesh if you look closely(in green). The 2-way pitzip itself is 17-1/2". You basically have a huge pocket on each side. You can have the pitzip open and still carry things in the pockets .... just don't open the pitzip all the way to the bottom, you'll still get plenty of ventilation.

The photo uploader appears broken, I tried both Firefox and Chrome.... ho-hum ..

(0)

 

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote an answer about on September 15, 2011

I've worn Patagonia stuff since the 80's, and their choices of when or when not to include a drawcord has always been apparently wacky.... more so now than ever. The R4, a windproof jacket has no drawcord .... while the R3 ... a slightly wind resistant fleece does! That's just nuts. Unless you are a FOAM fit (Fat Ol' AMerican), the waists on their windproof fleece jackets is HUGE . Have they never heard or felt the chill of the chimney effect?

Yes .... functionality is not their strong suit anymore(as it once was)..... it seems fashion and or a self deluded belief that they are saving the planet by practicing "minimalism" is.

hearty laughter :)

(4)

 

0 Answers

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on July 2, 2011

5 5

I bought 3 of these a few years ago due to frequent power outages in our area. They are terrific, and do last a very long time. I have yet to wear out a set of batteries on any one lamp. I often use them now around the house at night instead of a flashlight.

For maximum life, you don't need to run it on high, you can run it near high, and save a lot of juice that way, but still get a ton of light. On lower settings, it will run seemingly forever.

My only suggestion for an improvement would be make the LED's less visible, make the lens material more opaque. As they are now... you get lighter and darker spots from the individual LED's. Not a huge issue..but room for improvements.

Regardless, I'd buy more if I ever needed them, and recommend them to anyone.

(0)

 

0 Comments

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on October 10, 2010

2 5

I can't recommend these, unless you like the feeling of wearing cut off jeans, meaning the fabric has no give, the fit is snug in the hip/upper thigh, and it just doesn't move with the rider. They could be designed better, more anatomical. The velcro cuffs are an afterthought, there isn't nearly enough of it to snug them around the calves.

For now I'll stick to Ex Officio Amphi pants rolled up as my knickers. These are not intended for cycling, but their cut is perfect for it as the pleats in the front offer plenty of freedom for the legs, unlike the Zyme.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on March 20, 2009

4 5

I like this tool.... but I've tried 4 of these and each one has irregularities in the accuracy of the hex heads. Some fit very loose, rendering them as useless as a very used hex key. Some have been so tight I can't get it to even fit in. The box wrenches seem fine. Yes, it's for emergency use only and I don't expect it to wear like a shop tool. It should be accurate from new though. I use their AWS-1 also and it's dead on snug fitting. I contacted Park about this tool and they suggested sending it to them so they can measure it's accuracy and offer me another, as the do warranty their tools for the life of it.

If you get can get a good one, it's a very useful tool to carry.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote a review of on March 20, 2009

3 5

The Atmos would have been okay for me, but it seems Giro decided to leave out any pads on the top of the helmet. The postage stamp sized "excuse me" pad on the crown doesn't count. If the crown was smooth, it may not be an issue, but it's not.... so it digs into my skull in one place where the roc-loc attaches.

For reference, I use a Pneumo. I've also used the Ionos and Saros/Athlon, and even some of their lower-end helmets.... all of which have pads on the top of the helmet and feel great. It appears the Atmos is a bit of anomaly. Of the Giro's I've seen, the Atmos was the least well finished of them, meaning irregularities in the roc-loc attachment to the helmets, sloppy velcro attachments, and sharp points in the front of the Atmos. The technology may make it a high end helmet, but by the sloppy construction I'd think it was a $50 helmet.

The Ionos and Saros are both fine helmets. The Saros, which is noticeable more narrow in the width and outer profile than any of these helmets, is a nice new addition. I can't say I notice ventilation difference between any of these Giros despite the claims, as I am a human and not a test dummy.

To place a relative value on the Atmos, it's not worth it for myself. Everyone's different though, so try one.

(0)

 

0 Comments

load more