Free 2-Day Shipping on Orders Over $50* - Limited Time Only
kelp49729

kelp49729

kelp49729

kelp49729wrote a review of on March 23, 2015

3 5

Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer
Fit: True to size
Height: 6' 1"
Weight: 185 lbs
Size Purchased: large

This was my 6th pair of Flylow Chemical pants, going back to the originals. Sadly, this is my last pair, and I've returned them. Each year, they get baggier and shorter. Not bro baggy, which is bad enough, but oddly, inexplicably baggy. Right below the belt loops on the outside of each leg, Flylow began adding an extra yard of fabric a couple of years ago that has no discernible function: it doesn't make skinning or skiing in them any easier or more comfortable. It's just extra fabric that pooches out noticeably to each side and makes you look wide and pear-shaped(and I'm not that: 6'2" / 185 llbs) and just plain silly. And they've gotten a little shorter each year as well, so now they're just too short. I haven't changed, but Flylow has. So they're not for me anymore. The Outdoor Valhalla pant fits and looks and works almost exactly now what Flylow Chemicals used to be. Too bad.

(0)

 

0 Comments

kelp49729

kelp49729wrote a review of on March 4, 2013

1 5

Size is right on in length and waist (large size, anyway). Nice color and quality. Yet again, however, these pants, like the Patagonia Powder Bowl Pant, fit like clown pants. Hilariously baggy in the legs (and I have big quads) and almost elephant bell-ish at the bottom. I just don't get it. I'm not looking for Arc Terycx climber weenie fit here at all. I like Flylow's slight baggy fit. But these are just ridiculous. So if you like looking like the clown posse at the park, then these are for you. If you want a yard or two less fabric flapping around your legs, look somewhere else.

(0)

 

kelp49729

kelp49729wrote a review of on February 27, 2013

1 5

Cool Madras color, goretex, etc. Looked so great. With a 34" waist, 34" inseam, 6'1", 190 llbs, it appeared that the large would fit the bill. Many reviews on this site declare that these are baggy. But that doesn't really describe it. So unless you have 2 butts to stuff into the extra cubic yard of space that Patagonia has inexplicably built into these pants, I wouldn't bother. No mediums to try, but I think they'd be too short. I can't figure out why anyone would build a pair of ski pants this way. I'm not wasting time on Patagonia again.

(0)

 

0 Comments