UKH

Is it me, or should top of the range winter climbing bib's from a manufacturer such as Rab last more than one single day climbing in the cairngorms? Recently went up to Ethcachan on Saturday and climbed Guillotine and used my brand new Rab Latok Bib's for the first time. Much to my delight I can back with over 6 holes in the knees. 

I've had similar bib's from Jottnar, Mammut, ME, Acr'teryx and Patagonia and all have lasted several seasons. The Latok's are built with 80D fabric but feeling the fabric compared to even my 6 year old Jottnar's they do not seem robust enough. In my opinion, they are not fit for purpose for Scottish winter yet alone match their description in their recent advert as 'unrivalled durability'. I contacted Rab and they claimed that this was accidental damage, which it most certainly wasn't. I've climbed up to VI and over 130+ routes over 15 years and never had this with a pair of bib's before. 

Unsurprisingly I think I'll be staying away from Rab in future and looking elsewhere to a manufacturer that actually offers 'unrivalled durability'.... 

Are they lightweight? Very important these days, apparently.

According to the stats they are as heavy as my old Jottnar ones.

This is why I buy from Patagonia! 

The promised “high breathability” shouldn’t be an issue though, at least for the knee area.

Thanks for the heads up!

Abrasion and not crampon holes?

Stuart 

Stopped buying their kit last year after seams unstitching after a few uses, tops bobbling like crazy and pockets wearing through too fast. Shame, used to be a great brand.

You can destroy any item in a single day if you try hard enough.

It's very hard to separate longevity from actual usage conditions, because they are not controlled.

Not sure how you would get crampon holes in the knee's, you must be very flexible!

In reply to Captain:

Yes of course buy my partners 4 year olds bib's had no issues whereas my brand new ones have become trashed. This seems to suggest that its not fit for purpose rather than intended destruction. 

But still not the same experience; you're different people. Did you both drag your knees over exactly the same bits of rock, with the same pressure, & duration?

I was with a mate who had just bought a new pair of Ron Hills. He slipped on his arse and ripped a hole in them. I stayed upright, and my trousers were untouched. Does that mean my trousers were more robust than his?

I came to the same conclusion but a decade ago…..

I've put holes in shell garments from various manufacturers on their first day out. Scottish winter isn't kind to kit and granite chimney squirming like Guillotine is by far the worst thing you can do! I'm not surprised Rab said it was accidental damage. +1 for buying Patagonia who will fix it for free, although now days I just get cheaper non-goretex waterproof trousers so I don't feel so bad when I inevitably put a hole in them.

You could try a section 75 claim for them on your credit or debit card if you used one. Just reading the financial ombudsman website about it (link below) and the things you have described are listed there as reasons your bank or credit card company should consider a chargeback or section 75 refund.

I've used this only twice before, once for a Moka pot that never arrived (scam company online) and once for a convenience store that charged me twice for something (on a holiday miles away in the UK so couldn't go back). Both times the credit card company refunded me immediately with no questions asked (other than the ones on the simple form on their website). I've just looked at how much those bib's cost (look like trousers to me but what do I know! 😂) and I wouldn't accept the accidental damage fob off if I was in your position (I mean, if I had the climbing and gear history experience you describe). 

Worth a try... nothing to lose. Shame on Rab though.

The website says:

These are often valid reasons for raising a chargeback:

- the goods or services received don’t match the description

...

When things go wrong with goods and services such as these, we’ve heard comments like:  

- I’m unhappy with what I was told about the goods or services before I bought them

- goods I paid for are of poor quality or defective

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/complaints-can-help/credit...

WOW, I genuinely never heard of a "bib" other than to stop baby dribble etc. I'd always called them salopettes (or possibly if some 80s fashion.. dungarees).

Learned a new word today and it's still the morning Thanks

I was complaining about my ME Tupilak trousers only an hour ago re similarly poor durability. The reinforcements against crampon and ice screw damage are just cosmetic as far as I'm concerned. Older versions definitely had a tougher material here. The reinforcements against ice screw damage aren't even positioned correctly as it's directly below the reinforcement that there is contact with a 16cm screw or longer.

In a week that I've also broken a fourth pair of crampons in four seasons, I am generally getting a bit bored of all this lightweight bull**** that doesn't last or is reliable for longer trips. It's hard finding good alternatives, irrespective of what I'm willing to pay. 

I gave exactly this feedback to ME recently after ripping a huge hole in the cosmetic ankle patch on the Tupilaks with a minor crampon snag that the old cordura type would have shrugged off.  Agree on the screw patch placements too. Email them, maybe the weight of our feedback will get through to the design team for the next version

For the dislikers I would just say look at the banks' profits this year, look at Rab's profits and how much they've increased in recent years before questioning the morality of employing your consumer rights for an expensive purchase you don't think meets it's description.

It's not like Rab's profits have gone up because they've invested in making clothes more durable and long lasting ...

(PS - I love my Rab down jacket and trousers, I have nothing against them)

What crampon models have you broken? Were they particularly lightweight ones?

I was just reflecting at the weekend how ridiculously strong crampons tend to be! My newest pair must be at least 7 years old and the one careful owner before me had used them to the climb the North Face of the Eiger! I still use 20 year old crampons sometimes with no issues.

G22s and G22 pluses, which I used primarily on water ice. Might be made worse by having size 48 feet, but not much I can do about that. Know a few people that have had similar failures though. Think I'll give the Petzl crampons a go, which is ironic as I swore I would never buy Petzl again after my third set of wobbly head Nomics. 

Yes, that's a good idea.

I absolutely trashed a Rab 3 layer winter jacket in one season and eventually got refunded for it after a battle. I don't necessarily blame Rab for the issue. Everything modern in mountain clothing is very thin and light compared to the 90's when I started. I think there's a balance to be struck, and IMO light is not always right. 

I had a look at these earlier in the winter and almost bought a pair so I'm glad I saw this. Outside of skiwear, there are very few bib/salopettes to choose from these days and I have a bit of a bugbear about it. I have a pair of tupilaks which I got second hand and they are fine but not hugely robust and similar to the rab ones they aren't a true bib, more like high waisted trousers with braces. 

Keela Munro are robust, but they're about a kilo - I guess that is the trade off. They're less than £200 as well. Arc-teryx's and BD's options (Sabre and recon) are both aimed at skiing/snowboarding now with flared legs. Patagonia's Dual Aspect and Klattermusen's Vidar Salopettes are the both aimed at climbing, but neither have ankle/knee/bum patches and are £400-600. 

Unfortunately Rab’s after sales, warranty and general customer service is appalling.  They do not stand by their claims and won’t even tell you how long a “lifetime” guarantee is.  
 

It is a shame, as some of their kit is decent.