UKH

Seen various posts praising the Decathlon options for cheap winter trousers, but it seems the models change slightly each year. Can anyone confirm if these are the ones to go for? Unfortunately out of stock at the moment. https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/men-s-mountaineering-trousers-alpinism-black/...

Eyeing up the ME Mission pants as an alternative - has anyone tried both and care to compare?

Cheers,

I don't think they make the ones people (including myself) were buying a while back which were the winter weight ones of the version in your link, these look like the newer version as they have the braces and built in gaiters etc same as the older version, still look good for the money but a lot more expensive now as they used to be less than £50 from memory:

https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/men-s-mountaineering-waterproof-trousers-casc...

Don’t know what your plans are for these, but one concern I would have using these in Scottish Winter is that they’re  only water resistant not waterproof. 

I just bought my second pair of these because I'd worn the first pair so much. Their inability to withstand my ski crashes and kicking myself with crampons notwithstanding, I highly recommend them.

I've not used the Alpinism ones, but I have the Cascade trousers Sans-Plan linked, and think they're great. Unlike Suncream I've found that they've resisted me kicking myself with crampons and numerous skiing crashes. Full disclosure - I have put two small crampon holes in the non-reinforced part of the left leg, but they're not ripping to be larger, which is nice because I'm too lazy to get round to fixing them promptly.

Those were the soft shell trousers that were regularly discussed & recommended, yes. With the Simond branding. They are the winter weight version; the Alpinism Lite are different...

I note the £60 price tag. They used to be £40, for many years, which is why they were such a bargain.

Try kicking harder.

Seriously though, they're a stretchy softshell-type material, so they're never going to be as durable as a harsdshell, but the crampon reinforced patch seems to work well. My one gripe is that the reinforced patches for ice screws aren't quite long enough, I had some abrasion from 19cm and 22cm ice screws. For Scottish 10cm/13cm screws they'll be fine though.

Yes that's them.  They've upped the price to £60, but still good value.  Best to try them on if you can.  I was in Decathlon in Glasgow yesterday and saw these which seemed pretty good too - https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/men-s-water-repellent-walking-trousers/_/R-p-...

I have a pair of the Simond ones, mainly used for skiing. I think they are brilliant, really well cut (I'm tall and slim) and with enough room for thin thermals underneath if it's really cold. The elastic braces are a bit cheap in the design department but they work well enough. Incredible value too.

Thanks all. The Cascade ones seem to be back in stock, but I suspect they might be a bit boil/bag, being waterproof with just a mesh liner. Think I'll hold out for the Simond ones.

Yeah I also wouldn't get waterproof ones. I think the ones wee jamie linked look good too. Its not really a requirement to have braces on winter trousers IMO, but a good built in gaiter is worth having (although they can be a bit sweaty I find)

I'm sure some like built in gaiters but they make altering the leg length much more difficult.

Th built in gaiters on mine can be zipped off. They're good for ski boots, I take them off for mountaineering boots.

Yep, those are the Decathlon one I’ve got, and I’m very impressed with them - so much so that I’ve got two pairs. 👍

Ps - as usual, Decathlon’s bizarre sizing meant I ended up getting size 36 waist, despite everything else I’ve got being 32/33”. Same goes for jackets, where in every other manufacturer I’m a medium, but for Decathlon it’s XL.

These are good, managed to get myself a pair in early December, they go out of stock quickly, so worth signing up for notification of when in stock.  Robust and waterproof.  Maybe buy a size bigger than you think you need, or if there is any debate about size go for the larger one.

I don't find this. They're not a hardshell trouser, very much a softshell with some water resistance. Cheeky and unhelpful of Decathlon to market them as waterproof really (though as I said before I think the product is great).

The internal gaiter is pretty good, through will start to struggle in a prolonged section of deep snow where you're sinking every step. It's unzippable if you don't want it.

The Cascade trousers are waterproof. The Alpinism trousers are not. Two different products. Mowglee was talking about the Cascade trousers in the comment you replied to.

I had the same issue, except that I didn't ever manage to find a pair that fitted acceptably.

Off out tomorrow to try out my new Rab Ascendor Alpine Pants tomorrow. I've been trying to find this exact pant for the last 5 years, but no-one seemed to make them! Hopefully it lives up to my expectations.

Mini review to follow... 

Yeah, I thought he was talking about the Cascade not the Alpinism. These ones, for the avoidance of any doubt: https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/men-s-mountaineering-waterproof-trousers-casc... sorry for massive URL.

I have a pair of Cascade trousers, and can say with some confidence that my pair are not hardshell and are not waterproof. Maybe I have an old version and the new version is hardshell, but having seen/felt them recently in my local Decathlon I don't think that's the case.

I don't think I've seen Decathlon making an inaccuracy as gross as claiming waterproof rating for things that aren't waterproof. This is how they describe them:

<quote>

Waterproof

Textile waterproof to 20,000 mm. Taped side zips.

Breathability

Breathable membrane, RET = 6. Side ventilation thanks to the two-way zip.

Product Composition

Lining 100% Polyamide Main fabric 93% Polyester, 7% Elasthane Yoke 61% Polyester, 37% Polyamide, 2% Elasthane Coating 100% Polyurethane

</quote>

I would be very surprised if that is so grossly inaccurate.

Hard and some soft shells look much like standard stretchy soft shell but have internal membranes ofc. Perhaps there is just an internal membrane you’ve not noticed. Those cascade pants have had an internal membrane for a long time now iirc.

Well you both might be/probably are correct. I'll just clarify my position to be that my Cascade trousers feel very like a softshell in comparison with my hardshell waterproof trousers and that they let water in when I was climbing in them last week and have done on previous occasions. They've been more like water resistant than waterproof.

I've just checked and the Cascades do indeed have an internal waterproof membrane with taped seams. I agree with Fellover though that they feel much more like a softshell to wear as they're very stretchy, and I haven't had any problems with 'boil in a bag', because they have huge vents on the thighs, in addition to the smaller vents I've added at random to my older pair.

I suspect that because of the type of material, unless you very regularly wash and reproof them, they will saturate quite easily and so will seem to be letting water in more easily than a traditional hardshell. I've mainly worn them in snow rather than rain and haven't had any problems myself.

Water repellent reproofing treatments never seem to act as well as an original waterproof membrane even when new and, as you note, seem to quickly wear out.

Thanks.

I've only had them let in water when they've been pressed against ice, mostly on the knee. In snow they've not let any moisture through. My hardshell trousers don't let water in when pressed against ice, which is why I don't really consider the Cascades properly waterproof, just water resistant, though tbf at the higher end of water resistant. Must admit I've never reproofed them...

Edit to add: I've not actually worn them in the rain that I can remember, so don't know how waterproof they'd be against rain.

The waterproofness on the cascades (20k mm) is only just about enough to stop water penetrating with pressure so its no great surprise an older pair would allow water to penetrate in this case. Breathable hard shells aren't really waterproof anyway, more towards very water resistant. 

Yeah agreed - I'm not surprised by it, it just means I don't think of them as properly waterproof.

I don't know what the technical definition of a hardshell is (in my mind simply having an internal membrane is not enough to qualify as a hardshell, maybe I'm wrong), but to me the Cascades are a softshell, they're soft and stretchy and feel nothing like any pair of hardshell waterproof trousers I've had.

my point is most outdoor gear isn't 'properly' waterproof. That's why it has a hydrostatic head advertised!

"I don't know what the technical definition of a hardshell is (in my mind simply having an internal membrane is not enough to qualify as a hardshell, maybe I'm wrong),"

Not really relevant either way. A traditional hard-shell waterproof maybe be less breathable and / or less waterproof than a shell with a stretchy fabric outer and an inner waterproof membrane. My experience is this type tends to fail more quickly than a hard shell as the inner membrane rips, wears away or the seams come unstuck because of all the 'play' between the layers of material.

Either way personally I find it best not to mix waterproof membranes and soft shells. I prefer my soft shells to have no membrane and I carry a water proof on days that may warrant it top put over everything else (including softshells). That way my soft shells are as breathable as they possibly can be and over all my kit is more hard wearing.

Those look like the up dated versions of the pair I bought over a decade ago. I even wrote a review on my blog I was so impressed with them! https://lightfromthenorth.blogspot.com/2013/03/simond-alpinism-pants-review...

Yeah, I'm sure the Cascades pass the test for not letting water through at 20,000mm water pressure. The minimum requirement to describe jackets/trousers as waterproof is (from memory...) 10,000mm water I think, so I'm sure Decathlon aren't doing anything legally wrong by describing them as waterproof, which is why I said I thought it was cheeky, not legally incorrect or unacceptable or something stronger.

I just don't think the Cascades are waterproof for 'normal outdoor use' (vague I know). No other pair of 'waterproof' trousers I've used has let water through the material under the same circumstances (or similar, such as sitting on a wet rock or moss etc.). I think that Decathlon selling a pair of trousers specifically aimed at ice climbing and marketed as being waterproof is cheeky, when during ice climbing they will let water through if pressed against the ice!

For what it's worth, I'll just say again, in case it's been lost in all of this, that I think the Cascade trousers are fantastic and don't give me the 'boil-in-the-bag' feeling that a normal hardshell waterproof trouser does.

Yeah, I agree it's not relevant - I just felt like you were implying that the Cascades were a hardshell trouser and I wanted to say that I don't think they are. If you weren't implying that I'm sorry.

Anyway, have a nice day. I'm going to try and not reply any more, because I think I've made my points and we're starting to go round in circles.

I have a pair of Cascades, they've proved waterproof in my work use in N Wales. They're kind of an all day trouser though, rather than an over trouser. As someone else said, size up if you get a pair!

Did a review here:  youtube.com/watch?v=ktxE3CxnWM0&

I'm saying there isn't really any defacto difference between a traditional hardshell waterproof and a  stretchy shell with waterproof membrane in terms of breathability or waterproofness so your differentiation is largely pointless. You also get materials like Goretex pro stretch that further blurs the differentiation.

It's 1500mm:

https://heinnie.com/blog/-waterproof-rating-explained-ip-code-and-fabrics/

Thanks - lower than I thought