Free 2-Day Shipping on Orders Over $50* - Order by 5pm MST on 6/30 to get it before the July 4th Weekend
Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77W

Illinois

Tigerotor77W's Bio

But I love MRNP and NCNP.

Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77Wwrote a review of on December 25, 2014

4 5

Familiarity: I've used it several times

Short version: the Tarmac AWD 22 is an excellent carry-on bag. It offers decent interior space, the comfort of knowing it'll comply with just about every airline's carry-on policies (for dimensions), and a solid construction. The weight, clamshell design, and lack of interior pockets may make it less appealing for certain travelers.

Detailed review: I was looking for a rolling bag that was well-built and lightweight (under 9 pounds). A laptop compartment or suit storage bag were not necessary.

Weight: the bag tips the scales right around the advertised 8 lb 4 oz. It's heavier than others in its class, but the counterpoint is its construction. Solid handles (very little flex), tough cloth, and durable wheels give the bag a dependable demeanor. Note: some airlines -- eg Lufthansa -- impose a carry-on weight limit of ~16 pounds.

Build: I've had it gate-checked due to flying on regional jets six times, and so far no abrasions or scratches. The wheels are still great. Handle still telescopes and locks in position with no issues. No frayed threads.

Size: it's a 22" bag, but that includes the wheels. As such, you'll get less interior volume with this bag than with 22" rollaboards. However, it'll fit in most any overhead bin.

Features: the coat keeper is a great idea. The side buckles aren't all that helpful. Some reviews mention that they are at seat armrest height, but this hasn't been my experience on larger (737/A320 sized planes and up). There is a lack of pockets -- definitely not a lot of places to stash random small items, so pack smart!

Design: the clamshell design is both good and bad. It makes it easy for organization of items, but it also prohibits carrying thicker objects easily. The rails for the telescoping handle are inside the unit, which prevent having a flat packing area. The wheels are 58 mm in diameter and are hard plastic, which makes them noisy over textured surfaces.

Overall: I'd give the bag 4.5 stars but without 0.5 stars, 4 it is.

(0)

 

Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77Wwrote a review of on May 12, 2013

4 5

Compared to the REI Endeavor, this pant has better breathability, looser fit, and no full-length zip-offs (so with certain boots will require you to remove the boot before zipping off the lower leg). The zipper around the zip-off shorts is also much better protected against the leg, reducing chafing (compared to the Endeavor).

For my taste, the zip-off section and the looser fit (I wear 28"-29" jeans but the 28" Cruz is extremely loose around my waist) I rated this a 4. Otherwise, in most aspects it's a superior pant to the Endeavor for warmer climates, comfort, and flexibility.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77Wwrote a review of on February 23, 2013

Fit, quality excellent
4 5

I was originally expecting to write a review just like magp416423's ("Very slick"), but he beat me to the punch and stole most of what I was going to say.

I'm 5'6", 125 lbs and the small fit great. The silicone grippers at the leg openings didn't feel intrusive and held the legs in place rather well.

The reason I give this four stars is the presence of the large "PANTHER" across the lower back of the bib -- it's typically covered up but it still is a little bold (and odd, in my opinion). As a bib and not a fashion statement, there seems to be little to complain about.

Ignore the two books below the bib... just picked them up and was laughing my way through them!

(0)

 

0 Comments

Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77Wwrote a review of on February 23, 2013

4 5

I'm new to road biking and was looking to get started with a bib set. Stumbled across this one here and on SAC and gave it a try.

Chamois feels less dense than others but still offers decent support. I'm 5'6, 125 lbs and typically wear small (or XS in certain jersey sizes). The jersey here in S is really, really tight -- and the sleeves barely are long enough to go halfway down my biceps.

For $60 it's an excellent deal, but at least on size small be aware that you may need to order a size up. (Of course I didn't try medium so it's hard to say if it would have been too big.)

(0)

 

0 Comments

Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77Wwrote a review of on June 1, 2012

5 5

I'm not too familiar with performance jackets of this caliber and price range; I've mostly been a softshell guy given my Midwest upraising. I've had some experience with Marmot's Membrain fabric and with the Pertex implementation in the OR Igneo, but that's about it.

I bought the Victorio and used it on a few hours recently snowshoeing in the backcountry around Mt. Rainier. The temperatures were between 30 and 50 °F, with periods of sun, rain, and snow (yup, mountain weather!). Not having used an eVent or any Gore products, I don't have a basis for comparison, but with just a tee and the jacket, I noticed two things:
1) the jacket never felt clammy against my skin like the Membrain fabric does.
2) even in direct sunlight, I never felt "claustrophobic" in the jacket; it didn't feel constrained from a breathability perspective.

When it was snowing or raining, snowflakes and raindrops beaded on the exterior of the jacket with no wetting through.

Wind did not cut through the jacket at all (any loose opens will of course catch gusts). Pit zips were useful but not terribly necessary given how well the jacket breathes. When I started off with more layers, I noticed that with heavy perspiration the jacket didn't seem to move moisture away from skin as well as when I had on only a tee, but this is to be expected and certainly was of no worse performance than with my other jackets.

I'm 5'6" and 130 pounds, and the small fits quite well. Chest is a little loose but accommodates additional layers well; the waist area is a little large for my frame. Hood is quite large and accommodates a climbing helmet more than just a head + beanie.

I chose this jacket over the Jovian for its 70D material (I tend to be hard on gear when I'm using it), but otherwise either jacket would likely serve my needs well.

Other small observations:

- as noted in other reviews, zippers can be difficult to work... but to me this was not a hindrance.
- one side of the zipper stays mostly upright; the other side flaps over. Makes it difficult not to zip up the jacket the whole way
- chest pockets take some getting used to -- not really practical for keeping hands warm, unless you want to walk like a mummy

Overall, I'm quite pleased with the jacket. I'm hoping it's more durable than some of my other ones, but given that I'm now living in Charleston, I'm not sure how much use I'll get out of this. Will keep this review updated when anything new happens.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Tigerotor77W

Tigerotor77Wwrote a review of on February 12, 2010

5 5

I was going to give these shoes a 4 at first, but as I typed this review, it occurred to me that my expectations may be too high. The main attributor to a 4 rather than a 5 was the breathability of the shoe: I was hoping for something that was entirely breathable; these shoes are not.

I was looking for a pair of waterproof shoes that I could use mostly to wander around campus (I'm a college student). Whenever the sidewalks were wet, my old shoes would let water in, and I was getting a bit sick of having wet feet every spring day. That being said, I didn't want a full-out boot or something that looked like a rubber mold, and I had narrowed my choices down to this shoe and the Saloman XA Pro 3D Ultra GTX. I went with the Blur because it was cheaper and had just as good (if not better) a review. My criteria:

1) Some degree of waterproofedness. I know that "waterproof" carries different weight among different people, but I wanted something that wouldn't routinely let water in.

Rating: pretty darn good. I haven't splashed around in puddles just yet, but I went out for a photoshoot on a particularly slushy day, and no water ever crept in (maybe except at the ankle, but that's to be expected). I've had snowplay and a few other outings where the shoe was exposed to some water, and still very dry. Admittedly I haven't dunked the shoes in water to get a feel for drenching, but again, the shoe performs admirably.

2) Breathability. Gore-Tex isn't always that great, but for the waterproofing, it would be worth it. Still, some air would be nice.

Rating: eh, so-so. This shoe definitely breathes less than my Asics (2110 and 2130) do. That being said, in the month or so of pretty heaving use, my feet don't really complain much at the end of a day, either, so while I do feel like my feet aren't breathing, I don't have quantitative evidence that something's amiss.

3) Comfort. I should be able to walk around in this shoe my feet complaining.

Rating: Not bad for a trail shoe.

4) Traction. I tend to venture off the sidewalk, but even when on slippery surfaces (damp wood is notorious for slipping), I want a sure grip.

Rating: excellent. I have a series of wood steps outside my building that can be lethal when wet (there's some mold on them, too), and these shoes have done very well. They slip on ice and have slipped once on another floor (indoors, but I forget where this was -- I think it was polished stone), but on almost all outdoor situations, they've been outstanding.

5) Durability.

Rating: hard to tell after one month's use. Some threads are beginning to fray around the toe-box, but so far nothing has come undone and no separation of sole, say, has occurred.

Overall, I'm pleased. I think the price is a little more than I'd normally be willing to pay (I paid just under $100), but it's a good shoe. I think of it as a ruggedized version of my Asics, and even though I haven't gone running in them (or hit any trails), it suits the "general purpose all-weather shoe" pretty nicely.

Note that the green on my shoes is actually a little more lime than in the photo; the two green stripes on either side of the "VASQUE" logo (side of the shoe in the photo on the BC site) is a bit lighter and brighter and not, say, Hoh Rainforest-mossy.

(0)

 

0 Comments