Arcteryx Zeta vs Beta--Opinions?

I live in in the rainforest if southeast Alaska and therefore need a shell that can stand up to persistent rain (though we are in a disconcerting drought), sea-spray, and bushwacking. Any strong opinions on the Arcteryx Zeta vs the Beta--either LT or AR models? I prefer pit-zips, though am intrigued by the C-KNIT, slimmer fit, and longer hem on the Zeta. Thanks! 

Those are pretty different jackets and fabrics. Personally not a fan of paclite for jackets so would stay away from the Beta LT. So between Beta AR and Zeta LT, those are very different jackets. Different fit, different fabrics, major weight difference. Beta is better for skiing. Zeta for on trail hiking. 

al ex wrote: Those are pretty different jackets and fabrics. Personally not a fan of paclite for jackets so would stay away from the Beta LT. So between Beta AR and Zeta LT, those are very different jackets. Different fit, different fabrics, major weight difference. Beta is better for skiing. Zeta for on trail hiking. 

Thanks for the reply. To my understanding, the Zeta AR and LT are both 3 layer Gore Tex--essentially Pro Shell. The Beta AR and the LT are also Gore-Tex Pro Shell, with the LT of both models being less substantial and "lighter". I guess I'm interested in the fit and durability, as both Beta and Zeta are basically Pro Shell.

Billy Pilgrim wrote:

Thanks for the reply. To my understanding, the Zeta AR and LT are both 3 layer Gore Tex--essentially Pro Shell. The Beta AR and the LT are also Gore-Tex Pro Shell, with the LT of both models being less substantial and "lighter". I guess I'm interested in the fit and durability, as both Beta and Zeta are basically Pro Shell.

Looks like they did reshuffle the lineup and Beta LT is now GTX Pro, and not paclite. Anyway, the Zeta jackets are GTX with C-KNIT which I believe are more supple and less crinkly than GTX Pro. Pro is probably still a more durable fabric. Or at least that’s what Gore claims. The Beta line also has the helmet compatible hoods, while the hiking focused Zeta do not. 

I think the Alpha line is something to look at too if you want a GTX Pro fabric. The Alpha AR is a couple ounces lighter than a Beta AR and has pit zips and I think a little more length. That’s the jacket I have, along with an Alpha FL. 

I would only go for the Alpha if you are a climber. While it does have some extra length in the back, the lack of hand pockets can be annoying for hiking and casual use. While they sit high (to avoid your hip belt), the pockets on the beta are better if you want hand pockets.

As far as Beta vs Zeta, the Beta is the all-round jacket (Essentials line) and the Zeta is specifically hiking/backpacking focused (Traverse line). I'm personally with you on pit zips being essential. I think this really comes down to the hood area and the length. The Zeta is longer than the Beta (29.7 vs 32.25 center back length in inches) and has a closer fitting hood. The big hood on the Beta is certainly better with a helmet, but they can sometimes be annoying in persistent rain if you aren't wearing one. They do cinch down pretty well, but they still leave a lot of space. I also really hate the collar on the Beta AR, but that's just a personal thing.

If you know you'll never be want to use it with a helmet (Skiing, climbing, etc), the Zeta is probably a better bet. More protection from the length and a whole ounce lighter!

Personally, like the other poster here, I have an Alpha AR. But I climb in it all the time with a helmet in winter, so it fits my needs better and I can deal with the downsides when I'm crossing it over to other activities.

Yeah the pockets on my Alpha AR aren’t comfortable at all as hand pockets, and the FL doesn’t have them at all. But, for me it’s not an issue because I only use these jackets when I am wearing gloves. I wouldn’t wear them around town or anything.

I would actually like to grab a Zeta LT for hiking because the helmet compatible hoods are not great without a helmet. But I have too many jackets. Maybe I can sell my excellent condition Alpha FL. 

Thanks very much to you both for your thoughtful and helpful answers. I will be using the jacket primarily in the woods and oceans around southeast Alaska. I do bicycle, though rarely put a hood up over the helmet anyway, so think that either the Zeta or Alpha (thanks for that suggestion) might be the way to go. I've had a Beta AR in the past, and did like it, though found the fit either too baggy as a Large, or too short as a Medium. Hopeful the Zeta or Alpha might hit the sweet spot at Large, with their slightly trimmer fit. I am most interested in something sturdy but light that can handle rambling and roaming in the woolen mists of this perplexing and beguiling planet. Thanks again. 

The face fabric on both the Beta LT and Zeta LT is a 40D plain weave.

The Beta AR and Alpha AR are primarily 40D ripstop with 80D plain in the shoulders, elbows and hood.

So the Beta AR and Alpha AR will be slightly more durable.

I have Beta AR and Alpha Fl. Zeta line to me was never consideration due to smaller hood - but if I did not climb i would probably get Zeta... Between my 2 jackets I much prefer the fit of Alpha as it is a lot slimmer and drops a little lower.. While it certainly has its minuses in city use - it is my preferred jacket and i pretty much stopped using Beta AR...