Trying to see the reason for lightweight softshells

I'm not a huge fan of softshells, but I can understand why they are popular. They are a compromise, in that they:

1) Breathe better and fit closer to the body than a puffy jacket/pant.
2) Provide more rain protection than fleece.
3) Breathe better than a rain shell.

Because of this, they make sense for a lot of conditions (like cross country skiing in the Northwest). In general, I think they make more sense on day hikes than on backpacks, because they are a bit heavier.

So they are more for your weekend warrior types that might go home that night or the next day than for those who might spend 3-4 days out or better. I can see that then.

>So they are more for your weekend warrior types that might go home that night or the next day than for those who might spend 3-4 days out or better. I can see that then.

That's putting it politely. Most people I see wearing them are around town waiting for a bus or walking the dog, and the function appears to be more of a fashion statement than any improvement over other options.

Yeah, mostly weekenders. I do think they make a lot of sense for Nordic skiing in slushy weather. Folks in the Seattle area do a lot of this type of skiing (several inches of snow with temperatures quite close to freezing). For pants, softshell makes a lot of sense. Long underwear with a breathable shell gets pretty clammy if you ski in it. If you have full zip pants, then the weight of the system may exceed softshell. Fleece (which is what I tend to wear since I haven't gotten around to buying softshell) breathes well, but collects the slush (especially when I fall down). For a top, I think they make less sense since layering is much easier (no skis or boots to worry about). I know someone who gets out about 100 times a year and he really likes softshell (he has a lot of gear).

Okay then, the jackets are a fashion statement. The pants might be useful, but how? Without side zips they are pretty much useless for layering. They do have some water and wind resistance properties but won't they get overloaded after a few days of hiking in snow or if the wind starts to blow? I see why you would want to use them in warmer cold climes for out and about hiking because they breathe. But wouldn't a pair of full zip shells like the Marmot Precip Full Zips be better because you can have them fully zipped to keep out the cold and water, partially zippped for when it is getting warmer or off when it gets really warm. Plus you would be able to layer a pair of side zip insulating pants over and under them as you saw fit. For maybe an ounce or two more or less depending on the pant. I could see how they would be useful for day ski trips but I am not seeing it for longer excursions.

For winter use I find them only useful during high intensity day activities like running or snowshoeing. For most of my winter hiking I use a pair of Patagonia Cold Track Light pants (super light 9oz softshell) which work well as part of a layering system. To start most of my hikes these do the trick well with merino long underwear. They are super breathable so my legs do not overheat. Once the wind really picks up or I start to get chill I put a pair of 7oz Wild Things Epic wind pants on over them. It is a light and breathable system that adapts well to the many forms of weather we see in a single day up here in New England.

As other have indicated… soft shells shine in cooler conditions when engaged in moderate to high level aerobic activities. They are particularly nice for nordic skiing, snowshoeing, cold weather fastpacking, or climbing. In these conditions you want a garment that will shed incidental weather while being highly breathable and not too insulating.

A good soft shell is a jack of all trades, master of none. It is possible to construct a layered clothing system which will outperform a soft shell while weighting less. The soft shell advantage is that you don't need to mess with your layers except when to activity level changes significantly for a prolonged period of time. For multi-day activities or activities that have significant stop / start periods soft shells work best when paired with a high loft synthetic (or maybe down) garment that can be layered over the soft shell when the aerobic activity has ended and the temperatures drop.

–mark

Have to agree with Jonathan and Ross; I use a pair of old Arcteryx Gamma LT pants (Schoeller Dynamic) and find them indispensible in cold weather. The compromises are what make them work so well for me. They offer enough weather protection when snow is more likely than rain, they are far more breathable than a hard shell, and they are also far more durable in brushy terrain.

I typically wear them directly against the skin, and I don't take them off during a trip. I've found they deal quite well with both internal and external moisture and dry rapidly if they do wet out. I actually use Precip full-zips to layer over in case of really heavy rain or snow. Insulated pants for camp and sleeping complete the system. So these function as both a base layer and light shell.

In addition, I often use a softshell jacket in winter. Again, it's a piece I pretty much wear constantly, so pack size doesn't really bother me. It's far more durable than my UL windshirt. The jacket I use is the (unfortunately)discontinued Ibex Randonee Pullover, unique in one big way: pit zips! It's a Skifans pullover, so the wool lining is great at wicking if worn right on the skin. The pit zips let me easily regulate my temp. It's a feature that makes this piece much more useful in the field, and I wish other makers would adopt venting in softshells.

Another factor influencing my choices is my camping style. I'm a tarp & bivy guy, so I never really have a wind-sheltered place to change clothes. By using softshell baselayers, I reduce the chance of windchill when say, I get camp set up in the wind and rain and then have to remove wet shells to swap for dry insulation. The softshell is great at maintaining that nice boundary layer of warm air against my skin.

There might be some "band" on the weather/temperature spectrum where a pair of softshell pants might make sense. However, folks generally opt for softshell — sacrificing some rain/wind protection in exchange for higher breathability — for upper body garments rather than for pants — where high breathability isn't as critical.

brettpeugh

zips a plenty:
http://www.miniurl.com//389

So other than being more durable and stretchy, how would your Arcteryx Gamma LT pants do versus a regular pair of trekking or convertible pants that have a DWR finish?

Softshells are also quiet. Not sure if that has been mentioned.

But does it offer really any benefits other than a compromise? My DriDucks jacket or a wind shirt and a LS polypro top would give me better wind and rain protection and more options for less money and weight.

The benefits have been listed several times. If it doesn't fit the bill for you then don't use them.

So I guess you could say that the softshell usually takes the place one piece of a light insulation layer and stretches it towards being a shell but if you expect inclement weather you should probably bring that shell and insulation piece instead.

"The benefits have been listed several times. If it doesn't fit the bill for you then don't use them."

What I am debating are the benefits if there are any beyond being a niche piece of gear for a specific instance or range. So far what I have seen can be taken care of by layering system pieces at a reduced cost and weight. I am not trying to be rude but I really can't see the point of these beyond what I have stated. And if that is what they are, then that is fine. Maybe it has to do with certain climates as I live in an area where it will go from 95F to -20F with wind chill. Me, I am just trying to get my layering system done so that I can exist in that range and use what I have efficiently and maybe that is why I can't see how these fit in too well.

Maybe too they seem like snobbish overpriced suburban pieces of gear like all of those North Face expedition down jackets you see every winter. There I said it. I guess if people do have a use for them that is fine but I just can't see spending that much money on something like that.

Just my two cents regarding this topic. In all seasons and in nearly any conditions requiring weather protection I prefer a hardshell jacket paired with soft shell pants. During warmer seasons this may be an Arcteryx Alpha SL jacket used with MH Transition tights/pants. For me keeping my core warm and dry is critical, I have found that my legs can handle less protection in most conditions. This system works well for me but may not for others.

The big benefit (as suggested previously and one I would confirm) is that you don't have to layer. I personally don't use softshell clothing, but understand why someone would use them under certain conditions. When skiing in the Cascades or Olympics, it is often 25 to 25 degrees (Fahrenheit) and snowing (or slushing) heavily. A shell (even Epic) would not breath nearly as well as softshell pants. Fleece (which is what I use) breathes well, but soaks up the moisture and offers no wind protection. Yes, I could layer, but layering sucks when you have skis on. I know of no one who makes a wind pant with a full length zipper (I've asked several times). So, that means I would have to either take my skis off (and maybe my boots) every time I put on my wind pants, or I would have to use a rain pant with a full length zipper. The rain pants (with the full length zipper) plus the fleece pants would weigh more than a softshell. So, I just leave the shell at home and put up with the moisture, wind and ultimately, cold. So, while I don't own a pair, I can sure understand why someone would want to (and believe me, fashion has nothing to do with it).

> Maybe too they seem like snobbish overpriced suburban pieces of gear like all of those North Face expedition down jackets you see every winter.

Doubtful. The jackets have snob appeal; the softshell pants don't.

I have some Italian 'Sportful' ski trousers which might qualify as softshell. They shed the wind moderately well, they repel water, they are warm, and they are comfortable. In a howling gale (ahem) I might put some overpants on, but otherwise they work very well for me over a wide range of snow conditions.

I mentioned 'repel water'. Indeed. I had a slight mishap with the ice over a swollen river in the snow, and ended up sitting in the water. My underpants got wet, but the trousers seemed to absorb almost no water at all. Very impressive.

Cheers

Someone needs to step up I reckon…

Pants: They'll block enough wind to keep you warm in all but the coldest places. They'll breath and wick to keep you from freezing when you stop moving, or from icing over on the inside in very cold weather. They're durable, quiet, and move with you.

People actually use hard shell pants anymore?

Shell: All of the above, with the moisture management issues exaggerated. Benefits highlighted most in aerobic activities, cold weather, and especially any combination of the two.

Recall, this stuff was invented for alpine climbing.

I've found my softshell pants useful on there own from
15-60F. At 15F I add a 2.5oz windpant and that works to about -5F while moving. They shed snow really well, breathe very well and resist wind pretty good. I add insulated pants when stopped. When the temps reach 65F I rather wear shorts or I need to roll the legs up on my pants.

My softshell jacket is useful in temps below 15 down to -5F when moving.

I recently bought my first softshell jacket – an REI Mistral (weight of ~13 oz), its made of Polartec PowerShield. I bought it for a few reasons: (1) it was on sale for $37 (down from $140) and (2) for fringe season and winter hiking/snowshoeing as a substitute for a thin fleece and a windshirt (and maybe a dedicated base layer, too).

This morning, I wore it while biking to work, and got caught in a brief, al beit, light rain. The jacket absorbed little water, and dried quickly once I got inside. If had I been hiking and the shower just a quick-moving storm, I would have been fine. But that is a big "If."

My issue with softshells is that they are masters of none, particularly a true hard shell. I will always take a waterproof jacket and pants for winter conditions. Getting wet means getting cold, and that is simply unacceptable for me. I have read BPL's lightweight winter clothing systems article and I cannot accept leaving a hardshell (at least a jacket) at home in the winter. I would rather stay dry than have to dry out and risk hypothermia.

I think we should be thankful that there are plenty of people willing to buy these "snobbish" items. The more money in the outdoor gear market the better. It drives competition and innovation.

Interesting thread…I'll just say that I own and love my Ready-Mix. It was purchased after I boiled in a hardshell and my windshirt didn't block enough wind and wet through too easily. I guess I think of my softshell as a thicker windshirt…
I wouldn't use my softshell in any weather other then sub-freezing, but reading these posts, I'm guessing that some people do. The comment about always bringing a hardshell in winter conditions just shows how the different environments require different gear…I never bring a hardshell in winter because I would never use it. To me, there is no alternative to my softshell – that being said, I have limited experience trying combinations with my windshirt…the few times I did try it proved it not worthy for the conditions.
I think that a windshirt is more suited to warmer conditions while a softshell excels in cold conditions. If conditions allow you to get away with a windshirt and long sleeve tee, go for it!