UKC

I'm after a simple pair of hard wearing hard shell trousers with full or 3/4 zips and no pockets, preferably made of Goretex pro. I don't want or need pockets on my waterproof trousers and figure they just add weight. What happened to minimalist high performance technical clothing? Have had Event and other materials in the past and personally think goretex is the most effective/hard wearing/lasting.

No bibs/braces please.

Basically I want a Patagonia Triolet without the handwarmer pockets, or a Rab Latok Alpine made of Goretex ~80D.

Does this trouser exist?

Doubt that, as the hard wearing ones will most likely include 2 to 3 pockets.

Only the uber light come without pockets... but they ain't hard wearing.

'Ryx Beta AR or Alpha AR come as the closest I can think of... But I'm sure there are others.

Both are, spendy, minimalist and robust.

In reply to Timothy:

What HeMa said.

The Arc'teryx Beta AR are in my opinion probably the best waterproof trousers for mountain use out there.

In reply to Timothy: Speaking from experience I think you should def go for a pair with removable braces, then when you find your harness pushing them down and restricting your movement, you can always put the braces on next time your out. Also the Beta AR had a bit of the old ski boot cut with excess material round the cuff if I remember.

In reply to Timothy:
Yep, its this one below. Awesome trouser. Bib is removable.

http://www.mountain-equipment.co.uk/tupilak-pant

In reply to Timothy:


You underestimate the value of pockets in cultivating a nonchalant-yet-nails air as you saunter back to the car

In reply to nufkin:

Also what an arse you look when you catch a crampon on level ground and fall flat on your face, hands still in pocket

Thanks all for the ideas, they are pricey so will definitely try and have a look at them first.

Thing with braces is that I'm often already wearing a jacket by the time I need to put a pair of shell trousers on. And if its got to that stage how do you put the braces on without stripping off your top half in a Cairngorm hoolie?

Its very frustrating, I thought this stuff was designed and tested by top 'athletes' who are all apparently more interested in how good it looks when you walk through the pub door than weight/functionality. Plus I'm sure you end up paying more for the 'beneficial pocket feature.'

In reply to Timothy:

Am I reading it right? You don't want pockets because that adds weight, but you want 80D?

I find this combination of requirements a bit odd - you either go light and minimalist or heavy duty and don't care about the weight. But what do I know, I don't do ice climbing.

Yes you are reading it right. I want tough simple trousers that will last. Happy to carry heavier material that will stay bomb proof and won't wear through in a couple of years. Not happy to carry superfluous material with added weaknesses/zips.

In reply to Timothy:

Mountain Equipment Tupilak Pant.

80D, no pockets, very robust zips, good crampon and ice screw patches.

No worries about the braces issue. Put you waterproof trousers on until just below you jacket. Unzip jacket until 15 cm to bottom, take arms out so it is hanging around your waist, then pull braces under the jackets hem and over your shoulders and then do up the jacket.

How do braces make stuff look better? Most winter shells that are any good look ridiculous as they have a high waist and braces.

I’ve no idea about the Arc’teryx stuff but you have basically described the ME Tupilak, apart from the fact it has braces but they are removable. However, i’d never buy a pair of winter she’ll pants without them so........

(The Patagonia Triolet are quite baggy below the knee and prone to crampon snagging and have a reasonably low waist, they are a long way from being the perfect winter trouser even if the pockets were removed)

In reply to Timothy:

If the braces buckle up then you can put the trousers on and post the braces up your back underneath your jacket. Alternatively if you've got full length zips then you can be one of the cool kids who walks in with their trousers on but unzipped and the legs tied fashionably around your waist.

In reply to Timothy:

The perfect winter climbing trousers are stretch ski racing pants with bib and braces.
They have integral gaiters, knee protection, windproof, don't get wet in winter conditions and there are probably thousands of old pairs available in people's lofts as they are not fashionable any more.

In reply to galpinos:


I managed to pick up a new pair on eBay for £60, I was genuinely surprised how baggy and flared they were below the knees, I can't understand why there's so much additional fabric. If I'd spent anywhere close to the RRP they'd have been returned and swapped for something with a narrower leg. They do feel quite clumsily designed.

In reply to tspoon1981:

I have decently thick legs and yet most of outdoor trousers are flappy as hell.

Maybe that, or I am just proving my inner hipster as I wear glasses, have long-ish beard and prefer skinny jeans too.

In reply to PPP:

Skinny goretex pants, I'm sure patagucci will make some eventually.

I do find most Outdoor trousers quite loose, the triolet just feel like you've got bin bags flapping around your ankles.

In reply to tspoon1981:


To my mind, and as I'll happy tell anyone prepared to listen (skip to the next post if you're not), the best winter climbing troos I've come across are the Patagonia Back Country Pants. Or rather were, since they seemed to stop making them after a year or two. They were a sturdy but stretchy fabric that hugged the legs and didn't flap, had waterproof panels at the knees and arse, and had braces you could take off if you felt like.
They did have pockets, but I actually grew to like them, both for being able to stash handy jelly babies and for warming hands against the thighs. They didn't even seem too prone to filling with snow if you forgot to zip them up when things got blowy.
They were heavier than waterproofs, but also warmer - maybe less appealing to walk fast in, but better when actually climbing. No need to faff around with oning and offing layers either.

I wonder if the nee to have long zips on winter waterproof trousers might account for some of the bagginess? It's probably hard to design them without some extra material to allow for bending and avoiding strain on the zip. This is one of the advantages of softshells, which don't need more zip than to allow a bit of space at the cuff to accommodate different sizes of boots, and which usually are also stretchy anyway

In reply to Sharp:

"Alternatively if you've got full length zips then you can be one of the cool kids who walks in with their trousers on but unzipped and the legs tied fashionably around your waist."

Love this image, great idea. Thanks for the info on the Triolet's bagginess, despite not being perfect I was tempted by the price over the ME Tupilaks.

In reply to Timothy:

If you shop around you should be able to get the price of the tupilak down to about £200, which is about what the triolet pant is, it does help if you're in the market for a larger size.....

Sort of in the same boat myself. Does anyone have a view on the Patagonia Galvinized pants which fit the OPs spec and seem for value at £220 RRP.

Tom