Novel warning. Going to rant about significant inconsistencies from a premium product manufacturer.
I’ve used the search and perhaps I missed something, but haven’t been successful finding anyone else with this same issue.
The only pair of #50127 Ascent pants that I ever tried on were 40r and fit fantastic. The knee pad pockets were the perfect height for me. The inseam of the pant actually measured a 31.5” length with the material loose or 32” with the material tight. The overall fit throughout that pant was perfect and I was hooked.
Based on the experience, I ordered two pair of 40r Mountain pants #50104 direct from Sitka. Waist size was identical to the Ascent, but that’s where it stopped. The seat, thighs, and legs were huge like MC Hammer pants from way back in the day. The inseam measured 34” loose and 34.5” tight. The too of the knee pads were below the bottom of my knee caps when standing and beat against my shins while walking due to such loose fabric. I took out the knee pads and wore them a few times hopeful they would grow on me but I just couldn’t handle the swishy long huge pants. Couldn’t return them to Sitka because I wore them to the field so I sold them.
Fast forward to just before waterfowl season. At this time I still owned my Mountains pants. Went to local retailer to try on new waterfowl pants. Ended up buying Dakota pants #50153 in 38R. They fit amazingly. 32” inseam when measured loose 32.25” when tight. Slightly bigger than Ascent in thigh and calf, but these pants are designed to be a little bigger and looser due to intended layering. Even with that being said they were still substantially more form fitting than the mountain pants. I could actually put the mountain pants on over the Dakota pants they were so baggy and loose. This is what convinced me to sell the mountains.
February rolls around and I decide I’m going to find some more Sitka pants that fit, but instead or ordering I go to my local retailer. They have limited stock, but enough to try some things out. What I found really shocked me.
Traverse pants. They had 3 pair 40R in subalpine and 1 pair in open country. All 3 SA had an inseam length measured loose at 34” exactly or 34.25” tight. The open country measured exactly 32” loose and 32.25” tight. Overall fit was not nearly as trim as the Ascent, but was in no way baggy like my Mountain pants were. All of my camo is subalpine, so for now I left the open country pants on the shelf.
Apex pants. They only had one pair of 40R in subalpine. Waist, thighs, legs, were an amazing fit. Length and knee pads were a problem however with again the top of the pads being below the bottom of my knee cap. Inseam again at 34” loose and 34.25 tight. Amazing pant that is just too long for me.
They didn’t have any timberline pants for me to try so I can’t say anything to how they fit, but they did have a set of cloudburst rain pants. An XL in those fit like they were made for me. They also had a set of Grinder pants which I found interesting. Had to go 40R in those as the 38R I could get buckled, but would not have been comfortable with layers underneath. While the pant length and waist were great in the grinder pants, the thighs were enormous and pant bottoms were like bell bottoms. The grinders were considerably bigger throughout then the Dakota. Very odd given that the Dakota is supposed to be more of a layering pant for foul weather.
I’m not very tall. Sorta pudgy. 5’10” fluctuated between 235-245lbs for the last 15 years. Normally wear XXL sometimes XL shirts. Almost always wear XL or 38x32 in pants with the exception of dress pants being a 39x31 from the tailor.
According to Sitka sizing chart a 40R should measure a 33” inseam, but I’m yet to find a pant that even hits that mark. They are either significantly longer then that, or shorter. Obviously in my case shorter works out better for me, but I could make their pants that measure true to their own chart work. I just can’t make their pants that measure an inch longer work. Can’t believe for what Sitka charges for these products that I have to take a measuring tape with me to my retailer to buy pants. Walmart clothes have better QA/QC than this.
My question is this. Are all of Sitka’s line of pants this inconsistent, or is it just for the rounder guys like me? I would assume that the Timberline pants would be identical to the Mountain pants, but does anyone have a set of 40R timberlines they wouldn’t mind measuring the inseam on?
Really frustrating when a pair of Ascent, a pair of Open country Traverse, and a pair of Dakota fit amazingly, but everything else was way off the chart.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’ve used the search and perhaps I missed something, but haven’t been successful finding anyone else with this same issue.
The only pair of #50127 Ascent pants that I ever tried on were 40r and fit fantastic. The knee pad pockets were the perfect height for me. The inseam of the pant actually measured a 31.5” length with the material loose or 32” with the material tight. The overall fit throughout that pant was perfect and I was hooked.
Based on the experience, I ordered two pair of 40r Mountain pants #50104 direct from Sitka. Waist size was identical to the Ascent, but that’s where it stopped. The seat, thighs, and legs were huge like MC Hammer pants from way back in the day. The inseam measured 34” loose and 34.5” tight. The too of the knee pads were below the bottom of my knee caps when standing and beat against my shins while walking due to such loose fabric. I took out the knee pads and wore them a few times hopeful they would grow on me but I just couldn’t handle the swishy long huge pants. Couldn’t return them to Sitka because I wore them to the field so I sold them.
Fast forward to just before waterfowl season. At this time I still owned my Mountains pants. Went to local retailer to try on new waterfowl pants. Ended up buying Dakota pants #50153 in 38R. They fit amazingly. 32” inseam when measured loose 32.25” when tight. Slightly bigger than Ascent in thigh and calf, but these pants are designed to be a little bigger and looser due to intended layering. Even with that being said they were still substantially more form fitting than the mountain pants. I could actually put the mountain pants on over the Dakota pants they were so baggy and loose. This is what convinced me to sell the mountains.
February rolls around and I decide I’m going to find some more Sitka pants that fit, but instead or ordering I go to my local retailer. They have limited stock, but enough to try some things out. What I found really shocked me.
Traverse pants. They had 3 pair 40R in subalpine and 1 pair in open country. All 3 SA had an inseam length measured loose at 34” exactly or 34.25” tight. The open country measured exactly 32” loose and 32.25” tight. Overall fit was not nearly as trim as the Ascent, but was in no way baggy like my Mountain pants were. All of my camo is subalpine, so for now I left the open country pants on the shelf.
Apex pants. They only had one pair of 40R in subalpine. Waist, thighs, legs, were an amazing fit. Length and knee pads were a problem however with again the top of the pads being below the bottom of my knee cap. Inseam again at 34” loose and 34.25 tight. Amazing pant that is just too long for me.
They didn’t have any timberline pants for me to try so I can’t say anything to how they fit, but they did have a set of cloudburst rain pants. An XL in those fit like they were made for me. They also had a set of Grinder pants which I found interesting. Had to go 40R in those as the 38R I could get buckled, but would not have been comfortable with layers underneath. While the pant length and waist were great in the grinder pants, the thighs were enormous and pant bottoms were like bell bottoms. The grinders were considerably bigger throughout then the Dakota. Very odd given that the Dakota is supposed to be more of a layering pant for foul weather.
I’m not very tall. Sorta pudgy. 5’10” fluctuated between 235-245lbs for the last 15 years. Normally wear XXL sometimes XL shirts. Almost always wear XL or 38x32 in pants with the exception of dress pants being a 39x31 from the tailor.
According to Sitka sizing chart a 40R should measure a 33” inseam, but I’m yet to find a pant that even hits that mark. They are either significantly longer then that, or shorter. Obviously in my case shorter works out better for me, but I could make their pants that measure true to their own chart work. I just can’t make their pants that measure an inch longer work. Can’t believe for what Sitka charges for these products that I have to take a measuring tape with me to my retailer to buy pants. Walmart clothes have better QA/QC than this.
My question is this. Are all of Sitka’s line of pants this inconsistent, or is it just for the rounder guys like me? I would assume that the Timberline pants would be identical to the Mountain pants, but does anyone have a set of 40R timberlines they wouldn’t mind measuring the inseam on?
Really frustrating when a pair of Ascent, a pair of Open country Traverse, and a pair of Dakota fit amazingly, but everything else was way off the chart.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
