rev

rev

Northern Minnesota

    New Feature

    Browse Your Followers or See Who You're Following

  • #8067of 20369

Aaron's Bio

rev

rev wrote an answer about on March 27, 2012

This is a windshirt, not a rain shell. It can get you through a short rain, but it's not going to keep rain out during a downpour, long or short. If I were to bring the Squamish on a backpacking trip, I'd bring a DriDucks poncho or jacket along for anything other than a short short or sustained misting.

It's cheaper not just because it isn't Gore-Tex- it's cheaper because it's a simple nylon wind shell and has no kind of WPB membrane like Gore-Tex or eVent. It's made of a very light 15D nylon- it's going to be reasonably resistant to abrasion, but this is ultralight gear. The dead bird logo doesn't impart magical properties that allow it to overcome its fundamental nature. :)

It's also not extremely wind resistant- nowhere near as wind resistant as any WPB shell. Far less wind resistant than anything made with PowerShield, Windstopper, etc. For those who want something like the Squamish, that's a good thing- less wind resistant means more breathable. A jacket like this is indispensable when on the move, especially when it's cold.
For what it's meant to do, the Squamish is exceptional- but you're asking for trouble if you get one expecting it to perform like a bomber hard shell made of a 70D nylon or polyester.

(0)

 

rev

rev wrote a review of on February 3, 2012

5 5

My favorite pants for backpacking, hiking, snowshoeing and curling. The color options- black or dark grey- restricts use to the winter. They're way too hot for me to wear in the summer, which is a shame. They breathe really well, block wind well, have a lot of stretch, shed rain and snow better than standard Supplex-style nylon. For hiking below 30 F, I wear these and a base layer- and extraordinarily flexible combination.

The material is very thin and feels somewhat delicate. Even so, I've not had any rips or worn them through, which surprises me. I still think I'd be afraid to use them in situations where I was up against rock a lot or extensively bushwhacking.

Over all, an awesome pair of pants. Even with all the nice features they're only an ounce heavier in XXL than my current favorite for summer hiking, the MW Canyon pant.

(0)

 

0 Comments

rev

rev wrote an answer about on February 3, 2012

You should be able to get it altered professionally for $10-20. It'd be sewn rather than welded/laminated and you'd lose the drawstring at the ankles. Looks like there are a handful of places within 15 miles of Santaquin- any tailor or alteration shop could handle it just fine.

Otherwise, you'll be paying $100 at Rainy Pass. I hear that Rainy Pass does good work, but personally there's no way I'm spending $100 to have a pair of $150 pants altered.

(0)

 

rev

rev wrote an answer about on December 14, 2011

Huh- I actually found something the exact opposite of James. I'd size up- Rab in XXL fits similar to Patagonia, TNF, Marmot, MH in XL for me. The torso on some Rab pieces is a bit larger in XXL than the American brands in XL, but the shoulder and chest cut is pretty similar.

(0)

 

rev

rev wrote a review of on December 8, 2011

2 5

Got these for a treat off of SAC. Not sure what's up with colors- who picked the 1980s ski bum theme? :P Fabric is a stretch woven softshell, no membrane and no polyfleece backing as described. For me, that's a good thing. Have to send them back, though-the fit is weird. I wear a XL for FA Mountain Guide Lite Pants and can wear an XL or XXL for Arc'teryx Gamma LT. I'd really be a 1.5 XL for the Gamma LTs, in a perfect world. Got the Overhangs in XL, but I think I'd need XXL or XXXL (!!!) - they've a trim cut in a weird way. It's less like they made an athletic cut and more like they just downsized it a size and called it good.

If you get these, size up- the sizing chart lists the XL as 40.8-43.6". These Overhangs in XL are closer to 37".

The fabric is nice, and the features are nice. Despite the undersizing, the cut seems more appropriate for snowboarding than hiking and climbing.

(0)

 

0 Comments

rev

rev wrote a review of on September 6, 2011

5 5

A little more expensive than I'm used to spending on handwear, but this is a very nice pair of modular mittens. Great for a wide variety of mid range temps- 10 F with glove and mitt up to the mitt alone in 50 F rain storms. I'd like it if the insulation was a bit heavier on the glove, but you can tell why they didn't- dexterity is great and adding more wouldn't help. These mitts are an awesome compromise. They're easy to take on and off, and the two-lock shock cord setup for the gauntlets is perfect.

The fit on these is great, at least for me. I've got regular men's size hands and usually wear a Large glove or mitten. Problem is, on a lot of brands I find the fingers to be a bit long, reducing dexterity or making it hard to secure the gloves. The Scots must have stubbier fingers, as these are just right.

(0)

 

rev

rev wrote a review of on August 30, 2011

5 5

I wore these all winter long, taking 2-4 mile hikes over my lunch break without changing pants. Pull on my ankle gaiters and my Kahtoola Microspikes and off I go! Descend a snowy, icy hill on my rear? Brush it off.

Got these on sale. $90 is a lot for me to spend on a pair of pants (even my Arc'teryx Gamma LT pants cost me less than that!), but I'd seriously consider it for these guys. These have become my go to pant for just about everything- work, winter/fall/spring hiking, business travel, bouldering, and casual wear. Feature set similar to a pair of Carhartts, without the problems of cotton. I've been wearing these for just about everything. As another reviewer mentioned, the only situation for which they're not perfect is very high temps (85+ F passive, 80+ F active). They breathe a lot better than the other cotton and nylon work pants I've worn, the DWR works quite well, the crotch is at the right place (not too high or low), they dry quickly for their weight, and very comfortable.

My only complaint is that I'd like a belt loop or two more.

(0)

 

0 Comments

rev

rev wrote an answer about on July 8, 2011

@Brandon- thanks for the quick reply!

That's why I'm curious about the chest width of the Atom LT in XL or XXL with the garment laying flat- it'd allow me to compare it other garments.

I plan to use this as light outerwear and as a mid layer. My shells are pretty roomy.

The way Arc'teryx usually fits, I'm a 1.5 XL. :P Stuff on the snug side is good at XXL, stuff on the relaxed/casual side (Apache AR) is good at XL. My main concern is fit around the chest- when Arc'teryx XXL is too big, it's usually way too big around the upper chest.

(0)

 

rev

rev wrote a review of on July 7, 2011

5 5

This shirt is insanely light. It's a killer summertime shirt. In XL, the Breathe 90 is nearly 2 oz lighter than Patagonia's Cap 1, which is saying a lot! Blows my mind.

The cut is great, just like the Stoic short sleeve tops. Form fitting without being tight, and flatting for a wide variety of body types. Sleeves are snug around my biceps, which I like- I hate the flapping of loose sleeves.

The Stoic Breathe 90 is above the vast majority of ultralight base layer tops in how it looks when worn alone. Even with darker colors, I can often see the colors of my nipples or the bumps of chest hair on other ultralight tops. Patagonia Cap 1 and 2 is also good in this respect, but the majority of other synth tops I've tried over the years have this problem to the point that I don't feel comfortable wearing it in public off-trail. To each their own, but it's a big plus for me.

I have three complaints, in order of importance to me:

1. The Logo Art - If I could get this shirt without the big logo and horizontal lines, I'd buy a few more. I'm not totally against logos- the Stoic logo on the lightweight merino T is just fine.
2. The Price - $10 more than Patagonia's Cap 1. Enough said. :)
3. The Collar - I've complained about this with other Stoic shirts. I'm sure they're going for distinctive, and I don't blame them. It's just not my thing, but the ugliness of the collar isn't enough to skip over an otherwise great shirt.

(0)

 

0 Comments

rev

rev wrote an answer about on July 6, 2011

Sorry joomington, but Mads is right on- the Micro Puff's 100g Primaloft is going to be much warmer than the Atom LT's 60g Coreloft. The Atom SV is going to be closer than the LT to the warmth of the Micro Puff.

joomington- just FYI, the Micro Puff != Nano Puff. As an aside, the Nano Puff w/ 60g Primaloft is warmer than the Atom LT w/ 60g Coreloft, due to the stretch panels on the Atom LT. That's by design- the Atom LT is not a belay jacket or camp midlayer, but an active/semi-active midlayer.

(0)

 

rev

rev wrote a review of on May 3, 2011

5 5

The best lightweight short sleeved merino base layer I've come across. The two I purchased from SAC last year as still in great condition. They've been a lot more durable than other 150 g/m^2 wool tops, like Smartwool Microlight, etc. A lot less pilling than the Smartwool Microlight, too. Like a lot of folks, I want a light, thin base layer for 3-season use- but I hate when you can see my nipples or body hair through the shirt. If a shirt does that, I get worried about wearing it as casual wear, or while day hiking. This top doesn't have this problem, at least in Deep/Deep and Beehive/Black. I love the cut- it fits me very well, and I've received quite a few compliments on it. Chest sizing is a bit small, but that works well for me- I wear XL in standard fit stuff like Columbia, but for Patagonia, Mountain Hardwear, Arc'teryx and others XL is a bit small and XXL is too big. XXL for this top fits perfectly, right between most athletic fit XL and XXLs. I wouldn't size up unless you think you need it- XXL is more like a 1.5 XL, not XL.

The only thing I don't like about this top is the collar. I imagine they wanted something distinctive, but the look doesn't work well IMHO. Not a big deal to me, especially at the SAC price- the performance of the top more than makes up for the goofy looking collar.

(0)

 

0 Comments

rev

rev wrote a review of on May 2, 2011

5 5

Been using the SL-3 for solo and trips with a single partner. Started off using it with the SL-3 Nest, but ended up relegating it to car camping- it's just too heavy. The SL-3 shelter, along with a custom ground cloth/footprint is quite light and very comfortable- the headroom in the SL-3 is great. If you can hang the whole shelter/tent from a tree, it's a true 3 person shelter; with the big pole in the middle, it's more of a very roomy 2 person shelter. I've known a lot of folks who use the SL-3 for 1 or 2 person hunting trips, because of the ample space for gear. The center pole is not terribly light, and if you use trekking poles like me, you can use webbing/guy line to unite link poles. If I were taking the SL-3 into high wind or if I expected a snow load, I'd just take the provided DAC center pole- it's incredibly sturdy, especially compared to two lashed together trekking poles.

(0)

 

0 Comments

rev

rev wrote a review of on May 2, 2011

4 5

I've had the SL-3 for a year. The weight of the SL-3 Nest limits its use mostly to car camping, though I have taken it on a few short backpacking trips. Otherwise, I use a much lighter ground cloth I made. The design, features, and durability of the Nest itself are great- the only strike against it is weight. Weight was as claimed, but it's just a bit heavier than some similar options from smaller cottage shops like Bear Paw, who make a much lighter equivalent you could use with the SL-3 shelter if you really wanted to keep the true two wall tent design.

(0)

 

0 Comments

load more