Arc’teryx Sigma SL or Gamma LT pants?

Anyone have experience with either of these pants? The Sigmas are thinner and super comfy but the Gammas feel more durable

Sigma Fl

Ben Johnson wrote: Sigma Fl

What do you like better about them?

They are very durable and allow full freedom of movement.

Sigma line has a longer and slimmer cut than the Gammas they are mapped better for climbing. I have both of the sigmas and love them. I use the SL's for hot days, and the FL's for alpine/cooler days.

Sigma SL. Successor to the Gamma SL which is slimmer cut and has a better fit for climbing as Ethan pointed out.

Sigmas are new and unproven. I trashed the older version - psiphon, SL + FL, in under a year. My Gamma LT's are at least 7 years old and have lots of life remaining. 

I love my Sigma FL’s, especially the fit. They are plenty breathable and surprisingly water resistant.

I ended up ordering SIgma SLs and FLs from backcountry with the plan of returning one pair. The SLs seem light, and comfy but I'm worried about durability. The FLs seem very durable but warmer... which you don't need as a California climber

Anybody have any other thoughts? I’m doing Denali this May/June. Looking at Gamma MX and Sigma AR. They are the warmest ones.

Thanks!

Daniel

I would consider a more versatile system like an uninsulated softshell pant and some fleece or synthetic pants to go under it when necessary. Suspect you'll find a sizeable temp delta between KIA and the upper mountain.

I did wonder about getting hot on the glacier. Guide service said get warmer pants like MX or AR for the early expeditions, but fleece lining would be hoooot in 70° sun. So maybe the FL with some leggings?

Daniel Lewis wrote:

I did wonder about getting hot on the glacier. Guide service said get warmer pants like MX or AR for the early expeditions, but fleece lining would be hoooot in 70° sun. So maybe the FL with some leggings?

I wouldn't want to be wearing fortius in the high mountains, it just doesn't block wind. I would recommend some trousers in burly, they're fine when it's hot just not super comfy. Bring a pair of lightweight leggings and wear them lower down. surprisingly though I would say Burly fabric is less durable than fortius.

that guy named seb wrote:

I wouldn't want to be wearing fortius in the high mountains, it just doesn't block wind. I would recommend some trousers in burly, they're fine when it's hot just not super comfy. Bring a pair of lightweight leggings and wear them lower down. surprisingly though I would say Burly fabric is less durable than fortius.

Burly like in that Sigma AR?

Daniel Lewis wrote:

Burly like in that Sigma AR?

Haven't tried their mini burly but if it's anything like the last burly it doesn't hold up to anything sharp, good with abrasion, catch it on sharp rock, crampon, axe it puts up 0 resistance. But as I said good wind resistance and good temperature regulation. 

I have worn all three sigma line pants. the sigma ar strike a great balance for breathability in aerobic pursuits and weather resistance. I would agree that they are not super abrasion resistant. but if you're not knee jamming and scraping up chimneys ass first, and watch your crampon points, they should be fine. I wore the AR for ski touring and ice climbing and found they excelled at both. the zipper cuff fits a ski boot and tightens up nicely for climbing. the FLs are more burly and waterproof than i thought they would be and really fit well - slim through the leg for climbing. i have rock and ice climbed in mine; they hold up to water and wind more than I thought they would, but are also a bit thinner and can be stretched into warmer weather alpine season. the SL are super light and strictly a summery alpine rock pant.