Feb 16, 2014 at 11:17 am #1313381
@bolsterLocale: Between Jacinto & Gorgonio
The title is from a song we used to sing in gradeschool…but…according to my spreadsheet, my polyester long pants are my #2 most heaviest piece of clothing (following shoes) at a whopping 11 ounces! Wow. Is that way out of range for medium-sized long pants, or is that normal?
PS: Asking about long pants, not shorts or even convertibles; for me its long pants or nothing. "Nothing" is lighter, but has various drawbacks.Feb 16, 2014 at 11:41 am #2074086
@justin_bakerLocale: Santa Rosa, CA
This week I went on a long day hike wearing 19 ounce cotton jeans.
Forgive me padre for I have sinned!
11 ounces is a pretty average weight for nylon pants. Keep in mind your pants take much more abuse than your shirt.Feb 16, 2014 at 11:52 am #2074089
My Patagonia Tropical Flats pants are 7.5 ounces, shed dirt well, and have three seasons on them without significant wear.
UNfortunately, Patagonia "improved" them by adding an elastic waist.
So, lightweight, reasonably durable pants are possible…
Good Luck.Feb 16, 2014 at 11:52 am #2074090
Your reported weight is normal. There are lighter options, though. I wear nylon ripstop windpants, Golite Trunk I think no longer made. They dry fast, breath well and have some DWR to them. They weigh about 5.5 oz. they have an elastic waist and slash pockets. Simple but effective. At least for three seasons. I also wear nylon trail pants but it's hard to beat the athletic comfort of these simple light pants.Feb 16, 2014 at 12:10 pm #2074096
I wear Gramicci climbing pants most of the time. They weigh in at 7.3 ounces on my scale. They have zero DWR but they dry extremely fast, even in humid PNW weather. They are very durable IME, I have a pair that are still going strong after 10+ years of hiking. I love them but they are hard to find. A few months ago I snagged another pair off of Ebay for $10, which got me VERY excited. Keep an eye out for these if the lack of DWR isn't an issue for you.Feb 16, 2014 at 12:22 pm #2074104
@rcaffinLocale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
A bit heavy imho. How they got that heavy I do not know: too many 'features' maybe?
The Taslan/Supplex ones I make for Sue and me weigh about 6.1 oz, and have lasted an awful long time in the field. See
CheersFeb 16, 2014 at 12:26 pm #2074105
In the summer and fall, I wear Marmot Cruz pants. A lightweight "peached" nylon hiking/travel pant. Front pockets, one zipper pocket on the thigh, two zipper pockets on the back. 9.2 ounces. They are super comfortable and I pretty much live in them in summer as they are passable for eating out, etc. They also make identical shorts and the obligatory "convertible" version. I find that I prefer to just wear the shorts or the long pants.
In the spring and winter, I wear the Marmot Scree pants. Awesome unlined stretchy softshell pant. Articulated knees, two zipper front pockets. One zipper pocket on the thigh. One zipper pocket on the back. DWR finish. The stretch is great for rock scrambling and these comfortably accommodate baselayers, even as thick as Power Stretch Fleece. I was out this morning snow shovelling in a pair of these over Capilene 4 baselayers. I've yet to be cold yet winter hiking or snow shoeing with these over baselayers. These weigh 15.4 ounces.
I think that most outdoor fashion brands sell versions similar to both of these. They seem to be pretty standard. Marmot offers Long, Regular, and Short lengths.Feb 16, 2014 at 12:46 pm #2074108
Chad “Stick” PoindexterParticipant
@stickLocale: Wet & Humid Southeast....
I'd say that's pretty average, although, by the other comments, it looks like maybe not…
I wear a large pair of Columbia Silver Ridge 2 convertible pants. With the supplied nylon belt, they weigh 12.6 oz. TBH, I have been fine with them, despite the weight (that I always figured was good until this thread…) But, they fit me better than any of the other pants I tried on, I love all the "features" that they have (which are really just pockets and the convertible option). They are "light" enough so that they breathe fine on hotter days, and they dry super fast when they get wet. They have lasted me the last 5 years now and while they are dirty looking (they are tan colored) and even has a little melted spot on the bottom of one of the pants legs, they are still holding up quite well and I look forward to using them for at least a few more years.
Saying all of that, I would really love to go the the MB Dynamo wind pants. These are super lightweight (about 2.5 oz) but have absolutely no features (read: pockets), which is why I have not went with them yet. But, John Abela has used a pair of these for something like 1200+ miles and he has great things to say about them…Feb 16, 2014 at 4:56 pm #2074184
@woodenwizardLocale: Greater Mt Tabor
When your pants are kinda heavy,
With people fleeing by the bevy-
Diarrhea!Feb 16, 2014 at 7:07 pm #2074227
@bolsterLocale: Between Jacinto & Gorgonio
That's the one! Did we go to gradeschool together?
On topic, thanks for the pants recommendations. Which of the above are in the "sweet spot" of very functional but moderate price?Feb 16, 2014 at 8:12 pm #2074255
The pants I have are now discontinued but Gramicci still makes nice stuff along the lines of what you're looking for. If you do look on Ebay then the material of the pants I have is called Qwik Dry nylon. I got mine for $10.Feb 16, 2014 at 8:44 pm #2074263
@ngatelLocale: Southern California
Not that heavy to worry about it. My Rail Riders Eco-Mesh pants weigh 10 ounces including the belt.
Comfort, function, and durability trump weight.Feb 16, 2014 at 9:33 pm #2074270
^^^ This. I do like hiking in nylon because when it rains lightly, the water sheds a little nicer. When it is something you are wearing vs in the pack, I don't notice a few ounces, but I would notice if the pants didn't fit well or didn't have the pockets I want.Feb 16, 2014 at 10:02 pm #2074275
@saparisorLocale: Pacific Northwest
I have two pairs of (mostly, 95%) nylon pants I'm using now:
(1) older-style Arc'Teryx Ramparts = 9.0 oz
(2) First Ascent Guides = 12.3 oz (these feel like a heavier nylon and have zippered leg pockets; I'm guessing that accounts for the difference).
But . . . I occasionally also carry separate shorts (between 3-5 oz depending on the pair) so its really a wash with convertibles. I just happen to not like convertibles very much.
I do have MB Dynamo pants + shorts that I'm going to try this upcoming summer.Feb 16, 2014 at 10:09 pm #2074276
Used running shorts and MB Dynamos for all my trips in the last 8 months or so. Absolutely love the combo.Feb 16, 2014 at 10:26 pm #2074279
Thin Equilibrium pants weigh 3.3 oz.Feb 17, 2014 at 12:03 am #2074292
@uclacody0908Locale: Nor Cal
I get lightening your load for a 20 to 30 lb backpack on your back but why would you care if your pants weigh 11 oz or 18? I guarantee it won't help you to hike one mile further… I think this is just going way to far, but to each his own I guess.Feb 17, 2014 at 1:20 am #2074295
@rcaffinLocale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
> why would you care if your pants weigh 11 oz or 18? I guarantee it won't help you to
> hike one mile further.
There is virtually no difference between 7 oz on your waist and 7 oz on your back. And we KNOW just how many miles are chopped off your day per pound weight extra. See Ryan's article on the Arctic 100 trip, where he spells the numbers out clearly.
So sorry, but your guarantee may fail.
CheersFeb 17, 2014 at 1:53 am #2074300
my dead bird pallisades/ramparts are around the same weight … as are the 20$ stormtech ones i bought … and various light softshell pants
consider that theres usually a tradeoff in durability for very light pants … pants take alot of abuse, especially if yr scrambling, climbing or in the bush
butt sliding off rocks, scree, snow/ice and fallen logs will make that apparent after some use
;)Feb 17, 2014 at 5:31 am #2074309
@leadfootLocale: Middle Virginia
+1 on these pants. I have them in women's and these things wear like iron. I think I snagged the last pair Gramicci made and disconitnued,in lavendar. Travel Smith sells the almost exact pant for both men and women, but much pricier.Feb 17, 2014 at 7:01 am #2074322
"And we KNOW just how many miles are chopped off your day per pound weight extra. See Ryan's article on the [Arctic 1000] trip, where he spells the numbers out clearly."
True if you are operating day after day at the limits of your physical abilities. But for many, a day of hiking is well below that, with the extent limited by smelling the roses, photography, daylight, etc.
Your days May be enjoyable with less weight, but the tipping point will vary, depending on strength and ambition.Feb 17, 2014 at 8:13 am #2074349
@owenmLocale: SE US
"In the summer and fall, I wear Marmot Cruz pants. A lightweight "peached" nylon hiking/travel pant…They also make identical shorts and the obligatory "convertible" version. I find that I prefer to just wear the shorts or the long pants.
In the spring and winter, I wear the Marmot Scree pants. Awesome unlined stretchy softshell pant…I've yet to be cold yet winter hiking or snow shoeing with these over baselayers. These weigh 15.4 ounces."
Always wondered if I had a long lost twin! Those are my exact pants/shorts choices.
I'm kinda distraught over the newer versions (edit: of the Scree) with numbered waist(2012 and up?), as they are indecent on me in both the 32 and 34 while the old Medium is perfect. I haven't found anything comparable(for me) in fit and comfort.Feb 17, 2014 at 9:05 am #2074364
…Feb 17, 2014 at 11:11 am #2074401
I bought and tried 8oz Outdoor Research nylon pants. I found them annoyingly slim, non-stretchy, and I longed for a few simple features.
My 13oz Prana pants are stretchy, comfortable, have neat features like snaps to roll them up and a small belt for a snug fit, have a liner in the waist to prevent chafing, have a cargo pocket on the side with zip openings in two directions… Do I need all these features? No! But they make for a much more "livable" pair of pants.
However, when I bike tour, I bring a 3.5oz pair of wind pants as my only long trousers.Feb 17, 2014 at 5:57 pm #2074520
"And we KNOW just how many miles are chopped off your day per pound weight extra. See Ryan's article on the Arctic 100 trip, where he spells the numbers out clearly."
Can someone point me to this article? Looked for it for a bit, but no luck.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.