Stopped into the Patagonia store yesterday, trying to find a versatile, hood-less, light softshell for ice, rock, running, pretty much whatever I'm in the mood for, though climbing takes priority. 
  
As usual, the patagonia fits were all over the charts (I still can't figure out if there's any rhyme or reason) and the salespeople were largely clueless.  The height of absurdity was the Grade VI jacket which seemed to be cut for the f*cking michelin man... 
  
Anyway, both the figure 4 and french roast jackets seemed to be, more or less, what I'm looking for.  Problem is, the salespeople kept insisting that the french roast jacket isn't primarily geared towards ice and rock.  They kept telling me the figure 4 is cut more for the alpinist (this coming from those who were more hipsters than climbers).  I don't know what the f*ck they're talking about: whereas the fig. 4 felt somewhat sloppy, the french roast felt nice, athletic and trim (in marketing speak), with layers. 
  
So, my question is: is there something I'm missing?  Is there any reason the french roast wouldn't work as well as the figure 4?  I know, I know, the $20 cheaper price tag means it will shred at first contact with rock and the non-CSS seams will mean immediate failure on my next route.  Anyway, what gives?  Will one be obviously warmer than the other? 
  
A quick recap of specs: 
Fig. 4: 
5.5-oz. double-weave stretch woven polyester with DelugeĀ® DWR finish 425 g. (15 oz.) 
French Roast: 
4.5-oz. 94% nylon, 6% spandex stretch woven; DelugeĀ® DWR finish 383 g. (13.5 oz.)