mozy Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Hello, I am going to buy pants from arcteryx for my backpacking trip end september. So I decided I must go for a shell pant if it will rain, or the weather turns bad - so it will prapably the "beta ar" pants. But then I need a pair of some pants for the time the weather will still be good. I thought about the Gamma LT, and my question is if they give some insulation if the weather turns bad and I layer gamma lt/theta ar? Anyone with any experience of layering theese pants? Will it fot well if I layer the same size? Thank you in andvance fr your answers. Marek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 yes, yes and yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scot'teryx Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 I have a pair of Dark Blue Beta AR Pants I want to sell for $75. They are Mens Small Tall's. They have been worn about 5 times, and even though I am NOT tall, they worked just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Arc'teryx from scot'teryx? You can't pass up that deal'teryx! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtom Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 w00'teryx! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted August 17, 2004 Author Share Posted August 17, 2004 @scot'teryx What are "Small Tall's" ? Anyway, I do not really understand the sizing for the arcteryx panst - what indocates the waist and what the lenght(inseam)? marek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 "Small" is waist and hip size. Waist=approx 30", and hip=approx 37" "Tall" is the inseam=approx 31.75". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbw1966 Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Tall is only 31.75"??? Is all that molson stunting canuck growth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 In a Size Small, tall is 31.87" (81cm), in a Size Med, tall is 32 1/2" (82cm), Size Lg, tall is 33 1/8" (84cm) and Size XL, tall is 33 3/4" (86cm) More of these exciting stats, in fact the entire Arcturd sizing chart at: http://www.arcteryx.com/sizing_wear.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbw1966 Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 I'll wait for the movie. Thanks Will! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_Husbands Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 1. why won't arc'teryx finish their zippers? 2. Do any other outerwear companies size their pants/bibs short-tall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 1? what? finish how talls are an option on any pants the teryx makes. you can get an xs-tall or an xl-tall if you need it or you used to be able to anyways. the tall pants are just 2 inches or so longer for the same waist than the regular pant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_Husbands Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 1? what? finish how i like full zips so as to don them w/o stepping through anything. i fall over and its embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 you'd have to talk to the designers but i recall they dislike those zips for some reason, so probably no Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 They don't use full length zips on the pants to eliminate having a zipper under your pack's hipbelt. Personally, I think it's a really good feature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Patagonia does this with their waterproof zippers too. It does clean things up a bit, and puts the zipper in the perfect location for venting hot gasses quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_Husbands Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 hmmm... does anyone else value being able to zip pants on while wearing crampons? If not, why have zippers run up to your hip joint anyway? why not ankle zips? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 hmmm... does anyone else value being able to zip pants on while wearing crampons? If not, why have zippers run up to your hip joint anyway? why not ankle zips? Long zips for better venting. Zips that don't cover your hip so you don't get gauged when wearing a pack/harness. My goretex has long side zips that don't go over hips. Hasn't really been a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Oh, I almost forgot. SHORTS OVER POLYPRO, BIZZATCH! But no gaitors! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_Husbands Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 i just take gore tex off when its hot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted August 18, 2004 Author Share Posted August 18, 2004 thank's now understand the sizing.... but based on my waist, I am "M" (my waist=84cm), but inseam lenght is "Tall" for "L" (inseam= 84). The inseam for "Tall M" is 2 cm shorter (82cm), so I do not know - should I go for the M Talls, or for the L Talls - in the first case the panst could be 2 cm too short and in the second the waist will be too large (7cm larger). But I wonder if, when I go for the exactly fitting waist, will I still be able to layer the pant - won't it be to small then? And please do not say- "go to your retailer and try it on" since here in Poland you don't have Arcteryx at all.... marek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Serl Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 (edited) mozy, i seldom get into expressing opinions about gear and clothing, cuz so much of it is just personal opinion (not objective performance difference), but i'll make an exception here... the Arc'terxy Gamma LT pants have got to be the finest climbing pants on the face of the planet. the Tweave fabric is way more real-world abrasion-resistent, puncture-proof, and snow- and water-repellent than any of the Schoeller options. i had water spewing over my leg on the pillar on red wall wanderers last winter, and arrived at the belay totally DRY - without gaiters! i fell off a log bushwacking out from the same waterfall and punched a snag-end into the back of my thigh, and did NO visible damage to the fabric. i've got lots of experience with Schoeller pants (various generations of MEC ferrata pants, plus North Face too), and the Gammas cut them dead in both situations. i was SHOCKED by the superiority. i bought "talls" (2" longer inseams) so as to get lots of leg length, then installed a double-length loop of tent shock-cord and a cordlock thru the cuffs to cinch 'em down around my boot-tops. i haven't had gaiters on since. [the one serious criticism i'd make of the pants is that for US$200/cdn$300, they ought to come with pre-installed cuff elastics! aside from that, i would not change a single detail on the design. the name, on the other hand...] the fabric is not as "insulative" as any of the Schoeller options, which means u gotta pop on long johns when you might otherwise go without, but that same "thinness" keeps them cooler in warm weather. some people don't like the relatively "hard hand" of the Tweave fabric (it has less "appeal" in the shop), but it softens up a bit with use and washing, and it's indicative of greater toughness, water-resistence, and snow-shedding. you're making a GREAT choice... (and, no, i do NOT work for the bird!) oh, just a suggestion, but why not go for a CHEAP pair of shell pants (even just PU-coated waterproof, not breathable) - you probably won't be using them much. cheers, Edited August 18, 2004 by Don_Serl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 I also have these pants (Gamma LT) and I will make one comment concerning fit: The "rise" in the crotch seems very short to me. I wear a 30" waist in everything. I have the small/tall and I have to wear these lower on my hips than I typically wear pants because there would not be enough room in the crotch. I almost went with a medium/reg to get a slightly longer rise, but the waist would be 3" larger and leave me swimming in them and with baggy hips/ass, or trying to get alterations done. Second Don's suggestion about a cheap pair of shell pants. I have a SUPER light shell set that is Campmor house brand coated nylon, and they have been great. Very light, and very cheap...like $20 for each piece. I lost the jacket somewhere, but it stood up to daily use and abuse just fine. Pants are still going strong, but the ankle openings are a tad small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndavidjr Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 ------------------ Subtext is Arcteryx is somewhat for the heli-skiier crowd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dylan_taylor Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 hmmm... does anyone else value being able to zip pants on while wearing crampons? If not, why have zippers run up to your hip joint anyway? why not ankle zips? FWIW, I haven't had too much of a problem putting pants on over crampons when the pant zips only go up to the hip. I have done it at hanging belays without even puncturing my pants! You have to be kind of careful with balance, it can be a bit tricky... You would never be able to do this with ankle length zips, furthermore, it is a pain to put pants on over plastic boots with ankle zips. Full sidezips are all but obsolete. I second that the hip length zips are far more comfy when carrying a pack. They are also way more comfy when you have to bivy with the pants on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.