UKH

Is Marmot generous for size, eg Patagonia, OR, than perhaps Mountain Equipment?

Stuart

In reply to Stuart the postie:

I hoped this was going to be a about big beaver.

D

In reply to Stuart the postie:

I find Marmot sizing fairly consistent with other American brands eg Arcteryx & Patagonia in that I happily wear mediums from each and find the legs and arms a bit friendlier than euro brands eg Rab & Mammutt which tend to be a bit longer.

In reply to Stuart the postie:

I go size smaller than ME, RAB, etc.

In reply to Stuart the postie:

Can only speak for XL, but they seem consistent with Patagonia, OR and Arc'terx. Be wary of the "athletic cut" hidden in the description, this can slim a garment down and cause your sizing to be out by one.

Rab seem to assume Xl means you are tall and thin as opposed to ....err .."chunky".

In reply to Stuart the postie:



I find the Marmot sleeves infuriatingly a couple of inches too short, and the 'Angel Wings' thingy a gimmick, it still rides up with a high reach! Really well put together stuff, but you've got to try it on, to suit your own body shape.

In reply to Stuart the postie:

Funnily ME medium seems to fit me fine as does Marmot. I've done lots of Marmot reviews for UKC and have always felt very safe getting sent a medium as they all have fit me well. Patagonia is similar although some of their mediums can be a bit baggier I've found. Rab sizing is the one I have problems with - medium is OK with stretchy stuff but too tight with non-stretch. So Marmot is definitely bigger than Rab medium but I don't think so different to ME.

In reply to Stuart the postie:

Just to muddle things up a bit I have two Marmot tops in medium that feel that they are a bit too tight, one that is like a tent on me and a couple that are just right.
Depends on the model and fit I guess.
That angel wing thing is pure marketing except for the alpha pro top I have. Which has sleeves about 4" longer than they need to be. That's one top that stays put when you reach above your head.