OR Ferrosi vs Patagonia guide pants

How do the two compare? Patagucci says their pants are good for everything? Are the ferrosi and guide very similar?

I have a pair of the simple guide pants and don't like them. They breathe well but are too flimsy and not very durable. They wrap right around my leg in even light wind, and i wasnt impressed with the dwr either. I have soft shells from several other companies that are more robust Without sacraficing weight or breathability. They all protect me from wind and light rain better than the Patagonias.

earl mcalister wrote:How do the two compare? Patagucci says their pants are good for everything? Are the ferrosi and guide very similar?

I was just trying both of these on yesterday - the ferrosi is much more similar to the simple guide and the rock craft pant from patagonia
I liked the features on the ferrosi better.

I have a pair of Ferrosis and Rock Guides in last year's model. The Ferrosis are stretchier (4-way versus 2-way). I don't know about the men's but the Ferrosi pants run short in women's (I'm 5'6"). Unlike the Rock Guides I have yet to put a hole in my Ferrosis, although they haven't been used quite as much.

I am now a big fan of First Ascent Guide pants. I prefer them over my OR Pants. They offer a variety of lengths which creates a better fit for me. Only beef with the FA pants is the cargo pockets, which have a small access zipper. Retail is 70 bucks.

i just picked up the ferrossi on sale at campmor and got them in today. Very thin material with great stretch. Should be perfect for the summers int he SE. Cant say much about performance other than i'm a 31x32 and have skinny legs and as long as they dont shrink in the wash the 30x32 fits well. Seem to be constructed well.

The FA pants come in a variety of inseams for each waist size, that is a plus for me. It allows more fitting options. The OR pants just don't fit me as well, the 32's are to short while 34's are the right length but to big in the waist.

The FA pants fit really nicely, at least my body type. They look and fit like a regular pair of pants, not to tight but not baggy. I'm completely sold on them. As I stated before the only negative is the small access zippers into the cargo pockets. They have their reasons for that design, read on their site, but I would prefer a wider zipper opening.

I own a pair of the Stoic Overhang pants for all season softshells, and I like them a lot. Used them primarily for alpine/ice this past season as I got them in the fall. The perks are the softshell material dries extemely fast, they're comfy/stretchy, and are also pretty cheap in comparison to other brands as they're the backcountry.com house brand. Definitely worth a look imo.

im blowing through a pair of FA guide pants pretty quickly ... already alot of wear and tear in the last 2 months or so with a hole ... ill likely take em back after my yos trip coming up

im normally a fan of FA stuff ... but in squamish, the pair i have arent lasting ...

Greg G wrote:I own a pair of the Stoic Overhang pants for all season softshells, and I like them a lot. Used them primarily for alpine/ice this past season as I got them in the fall. The perks are the softshell material dries extemely fast, they're comfy/stretchy, and are also pretty cheap in comparison to other brands as they're the backcountry.com house brand. Definitely worth a look imo.