View Full Version : Clothes
Ok this is something I have never really thought much about but I am starting to realize is important.
What are the best clothes to wear when doing a class/training. I normally shoot in Jeans and a tshirt but the jeans can be more restrictive on movement that I would like. Any particular brand/cut that people find are best?
Weather expected would also dictate
Very true. For now lets stick with Fair weather.
Iraq Ninja
10-22-09, 02:40
For a cheap alternative to jeans, just wear an old BDU bottom.
Personally, I would never wear jeans to a class and hardly wear them in real life. Khaki 5.11 style pants are the norm, but the 5.11 style is outdated and other companies have improved on the design. Military Moron's site has plenty of reviews and suggestions.
I like to wear the long sleeve underarmor shirts when shooting.
I either wear Carhart shorts or pants. Knee Pads if I need them. I use the Arc'y Knee Pads but do not recommend them except under your trousers. Carhart trousers you can also slide in foam knee pads directly into the pants. I like the shorts. They also have the tool pockets which hold some gizmos reducing a few gizmos off of webgear. Tho if it rains hard wet Carharts suck:p
Iraq Ninja does have a point BDUs were kinda made for this use;)
Iraq Ninja
10-22-09, 03:32
I got so many old BDUs and 5.11s that I have no problem finding something to wear. :).
There are three things to consider for range clothing- hot brass, hot weather, and hot babes. Brass can burn and is very distracting when you kneel on it or bounces off your bare arms. Hot weather is obvious. Hot babes... you have to look good for any women that show up.
Don't be a PUFF- someone who dresses all tacticool and can't shoot to save their life (literally).
I still need to get a multicam kilt for courses. That would be too cool, in many ways than one...
I was at the Scottish Highland Festival in Estes Park in Sept. I saw them in many camo tartan's but did not see Multicam. I'm sure someone makes it.
If you are going to wear your kilt during training and wear it "regimental" make certain its in warm weather:eek:
I've been told more than once I look cold and need to sit closer to the fireplace:p
Jay Cunningham
10-22-09, 04:19
Killer advice so far.
I tend to wear Carhartt cargo pants, UA long sleeve base layer shirt and boxers and maybe a T-shirt or polo shirt on top.
;)I've only run one combat course while wearing a kilt... marriage:p
http://i491.photobucket.com/albums/rr280/45Fundi/08030002_2_2.jpg
http://i491.photobucket.com/albums/rr280/45Fundi/08020012_2_2.jpg
The Bow Tie keeps hot brass out of your shirt:D
I am carrying a Milt Sparks VM II & a P-35;)
IMHO the tactical clothing thing has gotten well past completely out of hand to beyond ludicrous. I assume that there is a reason some of these pants are costing upwards of $60-$100+, and that for those that wear them daily going in harm's way they may be worth the cost, but for me I'm over it. I've followed along with the trends like a faithful sheep, starting with BDUs, then Royal Robbins, then 5.11 when they broke off from RR, then the Woolrich Elite, then Eotac when they broke off from Woolrich.... but the goddamn pants are $60 now, and if you get really silly with brands like TAD you can get to britches that are over $100. $100/pair is $300 in britches alone for a three day class. For pants that the vast majority will never wear other than at the range, no less. That is just plain bonkers.
Many people will go on and on for days talking about "train as you fight", but then show up to the range in clothes they would NEVER wear out and about. Or (just as bad) they start wearing this silly shit all day every day as part of some delusional preparedness fantasy.
I've recently been looking back over some old photos, and there I am in all of my early training classes in jeans or short-pants. Wore the same clothes to the class that I would wear to the movies with my family the following week. More and more I think I need to get back to that. It took the prices of these thins getting completely silly for me to snap out of it, but I'm glad that it worked out. Hell, the tactical yellow visor was a reaction and a parody of the hive I saw at my first IDPA match all wearing their Royal Robbins, and here I am so many years later dressing just like them.
If you simply must have dedicated training clothes, I wouldn't get too nuts with whatever the latest and greatest training uniform is. BDU pants in a variety of colors are typically available from Propper for $20-$25/pair. I have a ton of them from when I sold this stuff and in the cooler months I actually do wear them around the house starting as soon as I get home until I get dressed for work the next day. In the hotter months I have a few that I cut the legs off of and wear those. Proper also has a line of tac pants and shorts and I picked up a pair of each that I'm pretty happy with so far. They need to adjust the design a little bit, but at a price that is 2:1 of some brands and 3-4:1 of the $100+ guys I can live with those little concessions.
Here ya go
http://i491.photobucket.com/albums/rr280/45Fundi/2009092411302695302_big_2.jpg
I was at the Scottish Highland Festival in Estes Park in Sept. I saw them in many camo tartan's but did not see Multicam. I'm sure someone makes it.
If you are going to wear your kilt during training and wear it "regimental" make certain its in warm weather:eek:
I've been told more than once I look cold and need to sit closer to the fireplace:p
http://www.utilikilts.com/
:p
I were jeans or plain khakis most the time. Last June I attended LAV's 1911 Operator Course and I wore jeans and a polo shirt. I'm not a big fan of cargo pockets. You'd be surprised at the stuff you can find at the Gap, Walmart, etc. I did buy some TAD pants last summer, and they're nice, but the quality really doesn't seem any better than a pair of $25 BDU pants.
My only real 100% rules are cotton or wool, both at the range and when deployed, and I think of my stuff as semi-disposable when deployed, so not something that's so expensive or fancy it would burn my ass to abandon it.
Iraq Ninja
10-22-09, 06:15
In regards to shorts, has anyone ever worn a pair of BDUs cut down to capri length, just past the knees? It offers good ventilation and knee protection.
If you go on Ebay, you can buy used BDUs all day for less than 20, often for 10.
In regards to shorts, has anyone ever worn a pair of BDUs cut down to capri length, just past the knees? It offers good ventilation and knee protection.
If you go on Ebay, you can buy used BDUs all day for less than 20, often for 10.
I haven't. I wear cut off BDUs a lot but I cut them off just below the cargo pocket and then just strap on knee pads whenever the need arises in classes. obviously I won't have that opportunity "WTSHTF" but I figure that in my situation I can deal with it.
I'm sitting here in a pair of medium/long BDU pants and it looks to me like if you cut them off just below the reinforced double layer at the knee you'd get the effect you're looking for.
But if you do it, and I see it, I'm going to point and laugh. :D
I use to use reject BDU pants that a local shop carried for under $15. They have creeped their price up to $18 now.
Lately, I have been using LAPoliceGear "The Operator" pants. They're $20 & as durable as lgt wgt BDU's. Same ripstop material, but many more pockets and a zipper instead of buttons for a fly (important for small badder disabled people)
I recently got their "FUBAR" (rejects) of the same pants for $15. Sloppier stitching, but seem to fit fine.
I got so many old BDUs and 5.11s that I have no problem finding something to wear. :).
..
If only we could bottle you and make women take you..........Then we would have more ammo money from all the clothes they wont have to buy.
Shirts ... I just wear something appropriate for the weather and close fitting. Hate reaching down to draw the pistol or grab a magazine and getting a handful of shirt. I do like wearing undershirts for comfort and usually stick to an Under Armour type shirt of the appropriate thickness, again to minimize the bulkiness.
Pants.... For matches I mostly wear "carpenter" jeans. The extra pocket mid-way down the leg makes a good spot to stash a barney mag... and that is really the only "extra" thing I need on me when shooting a stage. I have learned to intentionally avoid cargo pants for matches as I tend to find that if I have extra pockets they will fill up with shit one way or the other and that is just more crap I don't want to lug around while attempting to shoot stage.
On the other hand for training I usually wear cargo pants specifically to have extra pockets to stuff shit in. Since I might on on "the line" for more extended periods I am usually carrying lots of "extra" things... multi-tool, extra mags, gloves, loose rounds, chamber flags, etc.
For matches I wear aggressive soled athletic shoes unless it is pouring rain or a mud pit. For training or nasty weather I wear a good set of boots, which are my every day wear anyway.
militarymoron
10-22-09, 10:59
IMHO the tactical clothing thing has gotten well past completely out of hand to beyond ludicrous. I assume that there is a reason some of these pants are costing upwards of $60-$100+, and that for those that wear them daily going in harm's way they may be worth the cost, but for me I'm over it. I've followed along with the trends like a faithful sheep, starting with BDUs, then Royal Robbins, then 5.11 when they broke off from RR, then the Woolrich Elite, then Eotac when they broke off from Woolrich.... but the goddamn pants are $60 now, and if you get really silly with brands like TAD you can get to britches that are over $100. $100/pair is $300 in britches alone for a three day class. For pants that the vast majority will never wear other than at the range, no less. That is just plain bonkers.
Many people will go on and on for days talking about "train as you fight", but then show up to the range in clothes they would NEVER wear out and about. Or (just as bad) they start wearing this silly shit all day every day as part of some delusional preparedness fantasy.
rob, the same can be said for many other things - gun parts, shoes, gloves etc. but what puzzles me about what you said is that similar arguments about why one would choose quality components for their firearms can also be applied to clothing or other tactical gear - am i seeing an apparent double standard? :p
TAD gear for example - i like their stuff; that's why i feature it on my site. i wear their Force 10 cargos more frequently than any other one pant. i have jeans and many other tactical pants in my closet to choose from. i keep reaching for the Force 10s because i find them more comfortable than jeans and they carry and organize my little odds and ends much better. they also fit me better than BDUs, of which i have a bunch as well. and it's not part of any delusional preparedness fantasy - just comfort and practicality.
from my observations, the vast majority people who buy these expensive pants wear them quite often for everyday use, and get a lot more utility out of them than the expensive guns they shoot at the range. if i count the number of hours i spend in 'silly' pants and jackets, it's a hell of a lot more than the numbers i'm shooting my guns.
how can a pant cost $100? well, how can a magnifier cost $500 with no electronics? rip-off clothing costs less than the original designs for the same reason knock-off aimpoints cost less than the real thing.
a personal preference for quality clothing is no different from firearms, cars, tools etc. if cheaper stuff works for your needs, fine. but there's no need to be condescending one way or the other of people's choices.
back to the OP's question about what to wear. IMHO, comfort and mobility would be the most important factors for range use, with durability a secondary concern. no matter what the quality is of the garment, it's going to get torn up. so, if you'd rather not tear up a $100 pant, and a $20 BDU works for your needs, that would be a better choice. your range clothing is going to get scraped, worn, stained etc, so choose your clothing with that as a given.
i prefer clothing that has a minimum of excess fabric, for comfort when worn under gear and also access to equipment. i've found that baggy clothing tends to snag and get caught on stuff.
also, in colder weather, if the clothing you're wearing keeps you comfortable when standing still/resting, you're going to be too hot once you start moving and doing drills etc. i've found it's better to start a bit cold, and to have layers you can take off when you start running around.
I would imagine that yes, if I spent $100+ on a pair of pants I'd be looking around for more excuses to wear them too. ;)
Personally I think the comparison of cool-guy pants to quality firearms and gear is a major stretch but we'll just agree to differ on that one as it's not worth debating to me.
All one needs to see my theory on these clothes in action is the thread on LF about "hippie flage" or whatever it's being called. What it really should be called is "what's the latest, coolest, only known by the coolest guys, stuff that I can buy and wear so that they know I'm one of them".
ETA:
Maybe somebody needs to make a chart to explain why all these fancy-pants cost 3-5x as much as regular britches. Make sure to put in a column for marketing.
militarymoron
10-22-09, 11:25
All one needs to see my theory on these clothes in action is the thread on LF about "hippie flage" or whatever it's being called. What it really should be called is "what's the latest, coolest, only known by the coolest guys, stuff that I can buy and wear so that they know I'm one of them".
ETA:
Maybe somebody needs to make a chart to explain why all these fancy-pants cost 3-5x as much as regular britches. Make sure to put in a column for marketing.
haha - i thought the whole idea of 'hippie-flage' was to blend in and look like everyone else, and NOT let on to the fact that you may be one of the 'cool guys'. :)
no chart is needed to explain that - just a basic understanding of manufacturing economics based on size of market, quantities, sourcing unique colours etc.
even a seemingly simple task of colour-matching fabrics, hypalon, hardware (zippers and D-rings) is neither easy nor cheap.
also - i think you answered your question when you used the words 'fancy' and 'regular'. of course, whether 'fancy' provides more utility and equivalent value to the user is subjective.
I'm just a "use the cheap shit until it fails" kind of guy. I ran cheap ARs until I had problems with them. I ran cheap 1911s until I had problems with them. I lost sight of the fact that I was running around in cheap clothes with no problem, and have decided to go back to them.
DZ posted on LF about the Jesse James work pants at Walmart for something like $20. That's where I'm headed this weekend and I'll be stocking up on $20 Levis too.
It keeps getting explained to me that the fancy-pants are $100+ because it costs more to make them. It would cost me thousands of dollars to bring an Iraqi turd back to Boca, but it don't mean I can sell it for $10k at the Town Center Mall. ;) Well, not without a marketing juggernaut and the right folks in the right videos playing dreidel with that turd.
(and the "don't stand out" is what they are saying but the truth of that thread is in the subtext. as I posted there, if they really wanted to blend in they'd just buy whatever everyone else in their A/O is wearing and they'd be more likely to blend in than by wearing $700 worth of super-secret-cool-guy-clothes.)
Ok this is something I have never really thought much about but I am starting to realize is important. What are the best clothes to wear when doing a class/training. I normally shoot in Jeans and a tshirt but the jeans can be more restrictive on movement that I would like. Any particular brand/cut that people find are best?
I dress the same as when I'm not training. Cargos and tee shirts. The only thing I change is that for training, I will probably wear one of the gun, mil, or LE-related shirts that amass in my drawer, since I won't wear them elsewhere.
Killer advice so far. I tend to wear Carhartt cargo pants, UA long sleeve base layer shirt and boxers and maybe a T-shirt or polo shirt on top.
Cabelas has a lighter weight Carhartt with two side pockets for $39.95. 7.5oz fabric, nice fit. I'm going to pick up a couple of pairs. Much lighter than the 12oz I've used.
Many people will go on and on for days talking about "train as you fight", but then show up to the range in clothes they would NEVER wear out and about. Or (just as bad) they start wearing this silly shit all day every day as part of some delusional preparedness fantasy.
Like the wanna-be meat-eating warriors that show up to class with the latest greatest clothes and kit, but are found out and about in shorts and crocs without a gun because it's too hot/bulky/heavy/inconvenient to carry it.
Or the guys that buy all their clothes out of the 5.11 catalog, and even wear the free hat that came with it all. :D
Cabelas has a lighter weight cargo with two side pockets for $39.95. 7.5oz fabric, nice fit. I'm going to pick up a couple of pairs. Much lighter than the 12oz I've used.
I went looking for those, and found these (http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0063927904549a&type=product&cmCat=SEARCH_all&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&Ntk=Products&QueryText=cargo&sort=all&Go.y=0&_D%3AhasJS=+&N=0&Nty=1&hasJS=true&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.form23&Go.x=0&_dyncharset=ISO-8859-1). $10! :D
CharlieMike
10-22-09, 12:07
For training in the heat, I'm a fan of tennis style synthetic polo shirts. I have a few Nike "dry fit" (http://shop.nordstrom.com/S/3015822/0~2376777~2374609~2374623~2374687?mediumthumbnail=Y&origin=category&searchtype=&pbo=2374687&P=3) and Adidas "climalite" (http://www.amazon.com/adidas-ClimaLite-Stretch-Jersey-Polo/dp/B001BS04DS/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1256228921&sr=1-13) polos that I cycle and play racquetball in and they've worked fine for me when shooting.
I found a good (read relatively inexpensive) source for Under Armor Tactical Range polo (http://www.underarmour.com/shop/us/en/innovation/gearline/pid1005492-Men-s-Tactical-Range-Polo/1005492-390) shirts. I'm planning on getting a couple for upcoming shoots. They tend to run HUGE and even a large person could probably get away with a medium.
For pants, again I synthetic blends like Columbia Utilizer (http://www.cabelas.com/p-0057257904466a.shtml) pants. I like that they really light weight and they have belt loops that can accomodate 1.75" belts.
My only problem with the Utilizers is that I can't find an inseam longer than 34" and after a few washings, mine have turned into knickers. :(
I've tried a pair of Mountain Khakis (http://www.mountainkhakis.com/handler.cfm?cat_id=19807&cat_id=19883&cat_id=19886&prod_id=1000) but they're heavy cotton and so they take a long time to dry -- not to mention they're EXPENSIVE!
Frank Castle
10-22-09, 12:22
I would add that Dickies carpenter pants wear nearly as well as Carhartt's and can be found at most Walmarts for about $16 in an assortment of colors.
Cabelas has a lighter weight cargo with two side pockets for $39.95. 7.5oz fabric, nice fit. I'm going to pick up a couple of pairs. Much lighter than the 12oz I've used.
I went looking for those, and found these (http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0063927904549a&type=product&cmCat=SEARCH_all&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&Ntk=Products&QueryText=cargo&sort=all&Go.y=0&_D%3AhasJS=+&N=0&Nty=1&hasJS=true&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.form23&Go.x=0&_dyncharset=ISO-8859-1). $10! :D
I meant to post, "Cabelas has a lighter weight Carhartt...", not cargo. Cabelas trail-hikers and other house-brand pants leave a lot to be desired.
Thanks for all the advice guys. I wasn't looking for "tactical" clothing. Just something that is comfortable to shoot and train in. the Normal Jeans I wear when out with friends are ok but as I said I always worry about tearing them up when training and they are a little restrictive.
I meant to post, "Cabelas has a lighter weight Carhartt...", not cargo. Cabelas trail-hikers and other house-brand pants leave a lot to be desired.
this? (http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0026935922372a&type=product&cmCat=SEARCH_all_NYR&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&Ntk=Products&sort=all&Go.y=0&_D%3AhasJS=+&Nty=1&hasJS=true&nyr=1&Ne=2510&Ntt=carhartt&N=48+4916&_D%3Asort=+&Go.x=0&_dyncharset=ISO-8859-1&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.form1)
militarymoron
10-22-09, 13:01
It keeps getting explained to me that the fancy-pants are $100+ because it costs more to make them. It would cost me thousands of dollars to bring an Iraqi turd back to Boca, but it don't mean I can sell it for $10k at the Town Center Mall. ;) Well, not without a marketing juggernaut and the right folks in the right videos playing dreidel with that turd.
so, which part of the explanation do you not understand?
a turd is a turd, marketing or not. we're talking about well designed, good quality clothing here, being marketed and sold as such, not crap stuff that is being marketed as high quality stuff.
this? (http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0026935922372a&type=product&cmCat=SEARCH_all_NYR&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&Ntk=Products&sort=all&Go.y=0&_D%3AhasJS=+&Nty=1&hasJS=true&nyr=1&Ne=2510&Ntt=carhartt&N=48+4916&_D%3Asort=+&Go.x=0&_dyncharset=ISO-8859-1&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.form1)
Looks like it. I was short on time, so I need to get back there to see how compatible they'll be with some mods I like.
BDU's.
Cheap, close enough to a basic pair of pants, and I don't care how ripped up they get. :)
so, which part of the explanation do you not understand?
a turd is a turd, marketing or not. we're talking about well designed, good quality clothing here, being marketed and sold as such, not crap stuff that is being marketed as high quality stuff.
The part where I'm supposed to care about things like "manufacturing economics based on size of market, quantities, sourcing unique colours". To continue the firearms analogy from before, that to me is akin to paying 3x as much for a Colt with "color matched upper and lower".
I can take a $1k professional grade blender and dump another $1k in $1 bills into it, shredding the money. That doesn't mean that the $1k blender should now sell for $2k. Whether it's a $10k turd or a $1k blender, the analogy is still good in that the weaknesses of the parent company and dumping cash in that has no impact on quality out have no bearing on the value of the product, although they clearly impact the price.
I don't ultimately care what anyone else buys, but I've been trying to figure out the added value of these 2x, 3x, 5x as expensive products for years, it just took them getting to that 5x point for me to really start to question it.
I understand that these are clothes, and therefore by definition for most people are more about appearance and image than anything else. I'm typing this wearing a pair of $200 shoes that I bought because I liked the fact that they are $200 shoes. But for me, that level of vanity doesn't carry over to the range anymore. It did, but the 5x cost was the breaking point for me personally.
militarymoron
10-22-09, 14:44
I can take a $1k professional grade blender and dump another $1k in $1 bills into it, shredding the money. That doesn't mean that the $1k blender should now sell for $2k. Whether it's a $10k turd or a $1k blender, the analogy is still good in that the weaknesses of the parent company and dumping cash in that has no impact on quality out have no bearing on the value of the product, although they clearly impact the price.
whether you care or not is irrelevant. it doesn't change the economics, just whether you choose to buy the product.
i disagree with your analogy. i'm very surprised that you use that, considering that the whole reason i thought you made your chart was to point out the differences in between the different manufacturers that affect quality, from which people could make value judgements based on their own needs. quality differences between clothing is easily seen (if you care to pay the same amount of attention to them as you would gun parts), and value is subjective.
i've seen both the expensive stuff and cheap stuff. there's definitely a difference. whether that difference in quality and features justifies the difference in price is up to the individual to decide. you've obviously decided 'no', and that's perfectly acceptable. you can spend your money however you want. but to make general statements that high end clothing is priced higher because the manufacturers are wasting money on who knows what without a perceptible increase in quality and value to the consumer is just presumptious and inaccurate (from my limited experience).
to me, it seems hypocritical to apply a double standard to clothing vs. guns and accessories. you don't advocate buying cheap knockoff aimpoints - why the difference when it comes to the clothes you wear?
so, in your eyes, 'buy cheap, buy twice' or 'you get what you pay for' only applies to firearms, and nothing else?
Maybe somebody needs to make a chart to explain why all these fancy-pants cost 3-5x as much as regular britches. Make sure to put in a column for marketing.
perceived brand value
and
market size
Wrangler etc sell a lot more pants than EOTAC or TAD does so they can sell at lower prices. Boutique stuff costs more.
SeriousStudent
10-22-09, 14:58
Maybe somebody needs to make a chart to explain why all these fancy-pants cost 3-5x as much as regular britches. Make sure to put in a column for marketing.
I can just see Ralph Lauren wearing a t-shirt that says "I hate that chart and all that it stands for....."
;)
I like my Sigtac pants. Sig has discontinued them but they are very comfortable (and I still have some on closeout for $42 delivered if you mention TOS or M4C). I wore them to all my classes this past year except a day or two wearing some Tru-Spec TRU pants to try out.
I wear them every day for normal wear as well. Most comfortable pants I have tried -- better than the 5.11 I got (on closeout for less than $10 in desert camo).
Chad
not an expert on this
I agree with Rob.
For two reasons.
1. I want to avoid looking Tacticool.
2. I'm not likely to wear these clothes elsewhere.
So what do I wear? J. Crew khakis or cargos and a long sleeve underarmor shirt (to keep sun off arms) Because that's my normal attire elsewhere other than usually t-shirts.
I'm not going to be grabbing my go bag, rifle, chest rig and throw on a pair of TAD Gear Force 10's, a Crye battle shirt, and OTB boots.
Chris
I haven't yet been able to find an application where the expensive pants will do anything better than my Carhartt's or Dickies. They also share the happy coincidence that they are my work pants so I'm in them all the time anyway. Train as you fight just sort of worked out for me in that regard. I also think that at some point dressing tacticool makes you stand out like a sore thumb. This isn't nearly as bad as the guys you see wearing their IDPA vests all over town, and maybe it's just more obvious to us "gun guys", but to me CCW doesn't mean just hiding your gun, it's blending in as completely as possible. If something is going to happen I'm going to be in my street clothes anyway, why spend good ammo money on pants that don't deliver any great performance gain while at the same time offering the potential to be singled out?
That all being said I own an "expensive" TAD Gear jacket because it doesn't seem to be any more expensive than comparable jackets with the features I want. If I could find a jacket that offered the same features at wally world for 50 bucks I'd jump on it in a heartbeat.
We call those "Shoot me first" vests.
For a cheap alternative to jeans, just wear an old BDU bottom.
Personally, I would never wear jeans to a class and hardly wear them in real life.
I agree completely. Rip stop BDUs that are good and broken in are comfortable and easy to move in.
A good pant to wear would be the Force 10s, but at 100 bucks per pair, there's no way I'd wear them to train. :p
In regards to shorts, has anyone ever worn a pair of BDUs cut down to capri length, just past the knees? It offers good ventilation and knee protection.
If you go on Ebay, you can buy used BDUs all day for less than 20, often for 10.
I used to do this all the time back in the 80s :)
I am no operator etc... :) but I hate long pants and love shorts so this was kinda the way to wear mencapris :)
I like the Woolrich Lightweight Operator pants.
I work in them, train in them and play in them. I do not go "casual" in them.
When I want to get "tacticool" I put the knee pads in. It sure beats the hell out dropping a knee on a spent case and is way more comfortable that conventional knee pads.
As far as BDU/cargo style pants, I guess I am in the minority here. I can not stand not having cargo pockets. I always need to have room for my "stuff". LWO cargo pockets make great drop pouches.
Besides being functional, they are the most comfortable pants I own.
Shirts for training consist of "311", "Wayne's Beer Truck" or whatever scrougy t-shirt I find to throw on. It gets covered by armor anyway. Under Armour "Cold Gear" goes on when it gets cold.
misanthropist
10-22-09, 22:13
I am a new and unimportant guy here but I did have a couple of thoughts while reading this thread so I thought I would mention them.
1) I shoot in my normal clothes - usually a t-shirt and jeans, although I admit I do own one pair of 5.11 tac-lites - because if I ever need to grab-and-go, that's what I'll be in. Although since I sleep naked, I should probably shoot naked sometimes too. I will bring that up at the next training session.
2) I have spent about 8 hours over two days working on two cordura mag pouches for a VZ58. I have learned a lot from this exercise:
a) there is webbing and there is mil-spec webbing and they are not the same, even if they look the same at first. One frays faster than the other and you have to go back and get the more expensive one which is a pain in the ass.
b) There is a lot of stitching on a mag pouch and it's not that easy to design and make one.
c) there are, however, cheap mag pouches available from China, etc. They would also hold my mags, I think. For a while, anyway.
d) it's worth it to me to do this right even though it's expensive and time consuming. If TT made a VZ58 mag shingle I would buy a couple and have done with it. But I wouldn't buy chinese.
So I don't know about pants, but there is no doubt that some fabric-based assemblies are superior to others. I can't think of any particular reason that COULDN'T be true of clothing if it IS true of the various pouches and carriers and slings we all own.
Now maybe $20 cargo pants obscure your groin and legs from the eyes of the world every bit as well as a pair of Eotacs. I know I am as happy with $20 Wranglers as I would be with $85 dollar Guess or whatever jeans.
But it is ALSO possible in my opinion that Eotac pants MAY be more durable, have better stitching, better material, and be better designed, much like ATS, ICE, TT, TAG etc over UTG or whoever is making airsoft gear these days.
Outlander Systems
10-22-09, 22:35
For barely more than some Old Navy cargos:
Got a pair this weekend for $27.00:
http://www.afmo.com/24_7_Series_Pants_p/205-00386.htm
99superduty
10-23-09, 01:17
Interesting discussion...........
Its funny how the trend over the years has been that if you use "cheap" gear (clothes, parts, etc..) that you were somehow less capable than those who buy the latest and greatest gucci gear.
Forums have perpetuated this to the point of being ridiculous like Rob said. Look at some of the AARs that folks post about classes and it seems like folks buy and wear all that stuff to just show off. Clearly in any shooting situation they are not going to have all that multicam gear on so whats the point?
The last point I want to make is this.......do all the folks that advocate buying all this gucci kit have a financial interest in doing so? Even if they were given the gear (or whatever) for free to evaluate? Is that really an objective assesment?
I think some of the discussions are becoming a bit egocentric in that what applies to oneself does not necessarily apply to all and we all probably really agree about that.
Stateside I wear Carharts almost everyday. I have a nice home with a nice washer and changes of Carharts available. They are comfortable and perfect for a stateside carbine course. I work primarily in 3rd World countries and Carharts are usually not my first choice. I will sometimes where them in the savannah but usually I wear EXPENSIVE Patagonia's old synthetic "Stand Up Shorts" that are not your usual paper thin light weight synthetic shorts, but pretty burly with double layer seats, reasonably thorn proof and dry VERY fast (and expensive), but not as comfortable as a CHEAP, well worn, heavy, cotton, sponges in the rain pair of Carharts. Clothes are mission specific and Levis do better at the mall/office, etc. than 5-11s probably, but the Hi-Tec gear is worth the $ in the correct environment. IMHO
militarymoron
10-23-09, 09:22
The last point I want to make is this.......do all the folks that advocate buying all this gucci kit have a financial interest in doing so? Even if they were given the gear (or whatever) for free to evaluate? Is that really an objective assesment?
that depends on the person's integrity. same thing with paid writers or anyone with any kind of relationship to a manufacturer. speaking for myself only, i'm a consumer and my first loyalty is to the consumer, not the manufacturer. i do writeups on both gear that's provided, and gear i've purchased. you can't tell which one is which in my writeups because there isn't any difference. most of my writeups are positive because i choose products that i know i'd like - i turn down those i know i won't. by the way, i know that i wasn't mentioned by name, but it's implied since i do write evaluations. to those who may question my integrity, i say 'please do'. you have every right to - you don't know me from adam. i'd ask exactly the same questions (and for those of you who know me, i'll readily answer them as i have in the past). i don't have any credentials or a military/LE background for anyone to check up on to back me up as a 'reliable' source of info. without that, i'm basically an average joe, with nothing but my honesty, integrity, limited experience and personal point of view to write from. and i can take decent pics. :)
i think the original discussion has become muddied - confusing recommendations for range wear vs. gucci gear/cheap gear (when rob posted his rant on expensive clothing).
my posts on more costly vs. less costly clothing are to point out that there can be differences between them that account for prices differences, NOT as a recommendation on which one to get. it's the same kind of discussion when folks ask why smoe firearm components or brands may cost more than others.
i also questioned the double standard i perceive - people question how a pair of pants can cost $60 yet a $60 sling doesn't make them blink?
if you read my original answer to the OP, it is: "IMHO, comfort and mobility would be the most important factors for range use, with durability a secondary concern. no matter what the quality is of the garment, it's going to get torn up. so, if you'd rather not tear up a $100 pant, and a $20 BDU works for your needs, that would be a better choice. your range clothing is going to get scraped, worn, stained etc, so choose your clothing with that as a given.
i prefer clothing that has a minimum of excess fabric, for comfort when worn under gear and also access to equipment. i've found that baggy clothing tends to snag and get caught on stuff."
"Its funny how the trend over the years has been that if you use "cheap" gear (clothes, parts, etc..) that you were somehow less capable than those who buy the latest and greatest gucci gear."
the quality of gear and clothing obviously has no bearing on the capabilities of the person wearing them, and i completely agree that it should not be implied as so.
i've noticed this trend more with firearm components and gear; less so with clothing. but often it is less to do with attacking the capabilities of the purchaser, but more as a backlash against rip-off, airsoft and stuff of poor quality.
clothing manufacturers face a tough market, as i think conditioning has a lot to do with it. we, as consumers, have been conditioned to expect clothing to be inexpensive, with our frame of reference usually being BDUs, or other clothing produced in large quantities (jeans, carhartts etc).
on the other hand, we've been conditioned for the opposite when it comes to firearms and accessories. i remember when $250 was a lot to pay for a scope. nowadays, we're used to seeing red dots around $500 and optics at $1000 or more.
my purpose of the posts on manufacturing/costs/economics is to point out that in general, the same principles apply to clothing as it does to firearms/accessories, or just about any manufactured product.
the inconsistencies that we perceive are often due to our own conditioning, expectations and double-standards. i'm trying to promote or gain understanding here, not recommend any product over another to the OP.
I can take a $1k professional grade blender and dump another $1k in $1 bills into it, shredding the money. That doesn't mean that the $1k blender should now sell for $2k. Whether it's a $10k turd or a $1k blender, the analogy is still good in that the weaknesses of the parent company and dumping cash in that has no impact on quality out have no bearing on the value of the product, although they clearly impact the price.
:eek:
I can't believe that you of all people would throw out an analogy like this. That sounds exactly like a gun buyer saying something like "Well, I don't need that MP barrel inspection; it's just smoke and mirrors anyway."
Some tactically oriented clothes are probably over-priced. I won't argue with that. But to say that a pair of $15 pair of Dickies work pants in the Walmart bargain bin are just as good as something like a pair of TAD Gear Force 10 trousers is insane. That's exactly analogous to saying that an Olympic Arms is the same as a Colt because it's working fine for you and you can't tell a difference. Surely you must see that?
There are LOTS of things that go into clothing that can increase the price. Fabric treatment and country of origin, design features, assembly (labor), and country of assembly just to name a few. The Crye and TAD clothing, for starters, is made in the USA out of US made materials with design features that make for a very comfortable and athletic fit.
I wear Kuhl mostly these days BTW. Decent price, athletic cut, and non-tactical looking.
Stephen
99superduty
10-23-09, 10:42
MM....that wasnt directed at you, honestly. It was directed at the folks that mimic their internet idols when they pimp the gucci kit.
However, since you brought it up, what if Dickies decided to send you some of their new tactical line of clothing (this is hypothetically speaking)? Are you saying that you wouldnt accept it for review, even if you tested it out and found it to be on par with some of the other stuff you have tried?
What if it was superior to some of that stuff? What kind of endorsement would you give it?
For pants, woolrich and EOTAC is what I wear almost dailey (have like 30 pairs of them).
For shirts, I tend to wear polo type shirts (something with a collar). UA heat line is one of my favorites for hot weather classes.
C4
militarymoron
10-23-09, 11:11
99superduty - no worries at all even if it was directed at me.
if dickies (or any other company) contacted me, of course i'd consider it. if it performed on par or better than other stuff i reviewed, i'd say it.
bear in mind that it's never cut and dry when it comes to 'better' - everyone has different criteria. something might be more durable, but another one might have more features. it's not up to me to decide which one is better for someone else.
that's why i try to provide enough information in each writeup so it stands on its own, and people can compare the different features and decide for themselves.
i think the most common question i get emails on is 'which softshell should i get - which one is better - X or Y?' i'll always answer with 'list the features you're looking for and you intended usage', and the question usually answers itself. for example - this one guy said he wanted a hood. well, that automatically eliminated one of his choices because it wasn't available with a hood.
another thing i'd like to bring up is how i choose which items to review. i have a full time job and a toddler son, which leaves me very little time anymore. hence, i choose between spending time with my family on the weekends, and do a lot of writing late at night after i put him to bed. i've given up PAYING product photography jobs in favour of writing reviews, as i find that people get more benefit out of them. so, in other words, my time is precious (to me), so i pick items to review that i'm excited about. since i usually have more items to review than time, something has to give. it's usually products that i'm less interested in. they may be excellent products, but i just may not be able to accept them. writing is actually pretty difficult and requires motivation, if i'm not excited about a product, it really becomes a lot of work and i don't feel my time is well spent. i'd rather read or watch a movie with the wife. my site is a hobby, not a job, and i do it because i enjoy it. if that enjoyment isn't there, there isn't much to motivate me other than the knowledge that my reviews help people.
so, my choices about which items to review are purely subjective/based on whim. it's based on what i'm interested in at that time, and if i feel that i'd like the item. once i purchase or receive that item, the writeup is as objective as i can make it.
hope that answers your question.
Interesting discussion...........
Its funny how the trend over the years has been that if you use "cheap" gear (clothes, parts, etc..) that you were somehow less capable than those who buy the latest and greatest gucci gear.
Forums have perpetuated this to the point of being ridiculous like Rob said. Look at some of the AARs that folks post about classes and it seems like folks buy and wear all that stuff to just show off. Clearly in any shooting situation they are not going to have all that multicam gear on so whats the point?
The last point I want to make is this.......do all the folks that advocate buying all this gucci kit have a financial interest in doing so? Even if they were given the gear (or whatever) for free to evaluate? Is that really an objective assesment?
I am not sure what the defintion of "gucci gear" really is. 511? Woolrich? EOTAC?
I do not own anything multi-cam and really see no need for it, but a lot of guys think it is great.
When I select clothing, I am looking for quality. I need it to be durable, able to carry a knife, flashlight, gun, spare mag, wallet, etc comfortably.
I could care less if anyone is "impressed" with what I am wearing, shooting or driving. I am simply after gear that works for me.
C4
I actually think this makes my point all the more true. ;)
:eek:
I can't believe that you of all people would throw out an analogy like this. That sounds exactly like a gun buyer saying something like "Well, I don't need that MP barrel inspection; it's just smoke and mirrors anyway."
actually,that's kind of the point of the Chart and the E of F; to educate the buyer. If he says he doesn't need it, and really understands the process, then it's up to him to buy what he wants.
So far I'm not seeing an E of F for these (IMHO) over-priced cool-guy-pants, let alone a chart comparing one to another.
Some tactically oriented clothes are probably over-priced. I won't argue with that. But to say that a pair of $15 pair of Dickies work pants in the Walmart bargain bin are just as good as something like a pair of TAD Gear Force 10 trousers is insane. That's exactly analogous to saying that an Olympic Arms is the same as a Colt because it's working fine for you and you can't tell a difference. Surely you must see that?
But that's just it, I DON'T see it. When asked why some of these clothes cost so much all I get in return is that they are small companies so their costs are higher. Sorry, don't care. and while I agree that just because an Olympic works fine doesn't mean it's the equal of the Colt, I've been the guy advising people to keep a known running gun in favor of an unknown (no matter how good) for a long time.
There are LOTS of things that go into clothing that can increase the price. Fabric treatment and country of origin, design features, assembly (labor), and country of assembly just to name a few. The Crye and TAD clothing, for starters, is made in the USA out of US made materials with design features that make for a very comfortable and athletic fit.
Wasn't there just a few posts on LF that some of the TAD stuff is now from China or somewhere else? I suspect we'll see more and more of this as the bait-and-switch that exists in most industries spreads to this one. Start out making it here (even at a loss), get customers on board based on that fact, then make it somewhere else to start turning a profit.
If someone shows me that a seam has triple stitching where my Walmart pants have single, that I can see as a reason for increased cost. But personally I would have had to have that single-stitching fail on me in order for me to really see it as an advantage, and even then that single stitch would have to fail six times in order to make it worth the price of the $100+ pants.
There are two issues here:
1) I really don't see where the increased costs of these products = better product in my hands. Not when that increased cost is due to the company's small size or bad management or marketing. Triple stitched instead of single? Yes. Buying materials in small batches due to lack of buying power? No.
2) The product not only has to be better, but it has to be better enough to justify the cost. Pants that cost 5x as much need to last 5x as long. If that triple stitch makes for pants that only last 2x as long then the pants are not worth the added cost. To make the Oly:Colt analogy the cheap pants would have to have a failure that resulted in their complete ceasing to function, which a small section of busted seam or a loose belt loop aren't. Those failures would be more akin to a grip screw coming loose a little bit.
This ignores things like appearance, comfort, etc. Those are subjective and not worth arguing. I wouldn't begrudge someone their fashion sense or their comfort. I guess I'm just lucky that the cheap BDU pants always held up for me, looked good to me, and were comfortable for me, freeing up money to spend on other things.
99superduty - no worries at all even if it was directed at me.
if dickies (or any other company) contacted me, of course i'd consider it. if it performed on par or better than other stuff i reviewed, i'd say it.
bear in mind that it's never cut and dry when it comes to 'better' - everyone has different criteria. something might be more durable, but another one might have more features. it's not up to me to decide which one is better for someone else.
that's why i try to provide enough information in each writeup so it stands on its own, and people can compare the different features and decide for themselves.
i think the most common question i get emails on is 'which softshell should i get - which one is better - X or Y?' i'll always answer with 'list the features you're looking for and you intended usage', and the question usually answers itself. for example - this one guy said he wanted a hood. well, that automatically eliminated one of his choices because it wasn't available with a hood.
another thing i'd like to bring up is how i choose which items to review. i have a full time job and a toddler son, which leaves me very little time anymore. hence, i choose between spending time with my family on the weekends, and do a lot of writing late at night after i put him to bed. i've given up PAYING product photography jobs in favour of writing reviews, as i find that people get more benefit out of them. so, in other words, my time is precious (to me), so i pick items to review that i'm excited about. since i usually have more items to review than time, something has to give. it's usually products that i'm less interested in. they may be excellent products, but i just may not be able to accept them. writing is actually pretty difficult and requires motivation, if i'm not excited about a product, it really becomes a lot of work and i don't feel my time is well spent. i'd rather read or watch a movie with the wife. my site is a hobby, not a job, and i do it because i enjoy it. if that enjoyment isn't there, there isn't much to motivate me other than the knowledge that my reviews help people.
so, my choices about which items to review are purely subjective/based on whim. it's based on what i'm interested in at that time, and if i feel that i'd like the item. once i purchase or receive that item, the writeup is as objective as i can make it.
hope that answers your question.
I will also add that MM is one of the most respected guys in this industry. You cannot "buy" his opinion. If he thinks someething sucks or is worthless, he will tell you.
C4
I think some of the discussions are becoming a bit egocentric in that what applies to oneself does not necessarily apply to all and we all probably really agree about that.
Stateside I wear Carharts almost everyday. I have a nice home with a nice washer and changes of Carharts available. They are comfortable and perfect for a stateside carbine course. I work primarily in 3rd World countries and Carharts are usually not my first choice. I will sometimes where them in the savannah but usually I wear EXPENSIVE Patagonia's old synthetic "Stand Up Shorts" that are not your usual paper thin light weight synthetic shorts, but pretty burly with double layer seats, reasonably thorn proof and dry VERY fast (and expensive), but not as comfortable as a CHEAP, well worn, heavy, cotton, sponges in the rain pair of Carharts. Clothes are mission specific and Levis do better at the mall/office, etc. than 5-11s probably, but the Hi-Tec gear is worth the $ in the correct environment. IMHO
I would agree with you completely.
Something else...
I know my opinion isn't going to be popular, but those that know me also know I don't care.
I also don't care what someone else chooses to wear. If you say that the only pants that are comfortable enough for you to spend 3 days at the range cost $100/pair then I can't argue with that and wouldn't. It's your money and your business.
But just like I wouldn't tell a new shooter "go buy a $250 stock, a $300 rail system, and a $300 light for your new AR or it isn't worth a shit" I also wouldn't tell them they need to go out and by a dedicated $100/pair pants or they aren't going to be "comfortable" training. Especially not when my own experience for my own uses completely contradicts the idea that they need to spend that kind of money and when the person is unlikely to ever wear those pants off the range.
Maybe the ass-end will blow out of my britches in December at Pat's class and he'll put the picture in SWAT and I'll change my tune, but I doubt that is likely to happen. ;)
misanthropist
10-23-09, 11:36
MM....that wasnt directed at you, honestly.
Probably not directed at me either but just for the record, since I happened to appear in this thread shortly before that comment, I have no financial interest in promoting anybody's tac line of clothes...I am making my own mag pouches on a 40 year old Elna sewing machine that belonged to my mother-in-law, that's how bush league I am.
I definitely agree with some points made on either side of this argument...it is not worth anything to me to get special colours that cost more. It is not worth anything to me to get stuff made in a limited run, although it might be nice to support small businesses run by decent guys. But that's charity, not economics, for me.
It is also worth nothing to me to show up in "brand-appropriate" clothes to the range. Anyone that looks down on a guy for not wearing Eotac pants to the range is obviously not worth listening to - fortunately there doesn't seem to be anyone like that here but of course we've probably all seen it at one time or another.
However IF the TAD etc. stuff is made to a substantially higher spec (and I feel comfortable making the assumption that it is) then I would certainly consider paying a premium for that, in particular if they will last substantially longer than my walmart jeans. I am 100% in favour of superior performance.
But what criteria a person uses to judge the performance of clothing is possibly even more subjective than what criteria they use to judge the performance of a rifle, IMO...hence the debate.
Something else...
I know my opinion isn't going to be popular, but those that know me also know I don't care.
I also don't care what someone else chooses to wear. If you say that the only pants that are comfortable enough for you to spend 3 days at the range cost $100/pair then I can't argue with that and wouldn't. It's your money and your business.
But just like I wouldn't tell a new shooter "go buy a $250 stock, a $300 rail system, and a $300 light for your new AR or it isn't worth a shit" I also wouldn't tell them they need to go out and by a dedicated $100/pair pants or they aren't going to be "comfortable" training. Especially not when my own experience for my own uses completely contradicts the idea that they need to spend that kind of money and when the person is unlikely to ever wear those pants off the range.
Maybe the ass-end will blow out of my britches in December at Pat's class and he'll put the picture in SWAT and I'll change my tune, but I doubt that is likely to happen. ;)
I am not sure where everyone is getting these $100 dollar pants (have not seen them yet). Most of the stuff I wear retails for around $55.
I hope to God that no one is telling some new shooter that they have to go out and buy expensive clothing just to shoot in a class. :rolleyes: BDU's or something like that work perfectly.
Now when we go into clothing that works well for CCW, that can be a different story. Things that are cut certain ways to better hide guns is a big plus in my book. I still wouldn't tell anyone that they "had to have" them though.
C4
I am not sure where everyone is getting these $100 dollar pants (have not seen them yet).
http://www.tadgear.com/shop.php?id=648
http://www.tadgear.com/shop.php?id=591
and Crye is usually up there as well, but they have something to offer if you need that camo pattern.
Outlander Systems
10-23-09, 13:36
Geez all Pete. For that kind of scratch, I'd just as soon get some Combat Pants.
I am 100% tracking with Rob "The Destroyer".
The Chart™ illustrates manufacturing and QC/QA differences, that are evident within a range of products available. The disparity between the pricing of these products is negligible at best.
We're talking maybe, *maybe* a 10% difference in price, between a Daniel Defense and a Bushmaster. When you're talking BCM, you're looking at even less than that.
So, net, we're looking at a maximum of approximately a 10% price difference between two products, one of which is more than 10% a better performer.
When we're talking about britches...
I recently bought a pair of Tru-Spec 24/7 pants. My cheap ass didn't want to pay the $20-something bucks for 'em, since the only real gee-whizzery was a dedicated knife pouch.
After going to every "regular" clothing shop, I realised that cargo pants have apparently gone out of style. I still have some of my old ones, but after losing 70lbs to put my money where my apocalyptic mouth was, they're a no-go. So, for me, it was either the 24/7s or 5.11. I won't give 5.11 a nickel, after some of the rumours I've been hearing about the strong-arming of dealers.
That's just me. I wanted some cargo pants that WEREN'T BDUs. I wanted functional lederhosen that didn't look like "army pants".
I personally think the 24/7 pants are damned nice pants. For the price of the TAD or the CP pants, I can afford to blow out 3-4 pairs of the 24/7 pants.
Now, If you're telling me that the TAD and CP pants are 300-400% better than the 24/7s, I'll be shocked. Better? No doubt, but not with that level of disparity. I'd pay that for some custom-tailored, custom-configured pants, but that's a different bird. When I was 20, I hired a Chinese lady to make me a jacket, and she did for $60. Custom, dude. And it was, "Made in America". :rolleyes:
Rob's talking about a serious, radical difference in pricing. Hence, the calls of "hypocrisy" are mildly out of line. I've read it a thousand times on M4C about the massive difference in quality of top-tier brands for little to no difference in pricing from sub-par offerings.
For God's sake, I paid $1500 for a Bushmaster at the end of '06, beginning of '07.
For LESS money I could have had a BETTER weapon system. I could see the push to cool-guy pants if there was a BCM in the clothing-arena, offering better products at prices less than the competition. There's not, to the best of my knowledge.
A prime example would be Walls vs. Carhartt. I have a Carhartt jacket and a Walls jacket that's, for all intents and purposes, identical. One was less than the other by a significant margin, and neither one was manufactured in the US.
So, what am I paying for with Carhartt that justifies a 100% increase in price?
Since neither jacket has "failed" I'm not seeing a difference.
With firearms and components, when I have bought cheap, I've had my balls burned. The difference between one rail that was half the price of the DD Omega, and the DD Omega was huge. Thusly, the price difference was justifiable, to me.
When I see some pants that are comfortable enough to wear all day, and can last 3-4X longer than non-Wall-Street/Bankster priced versions, I might bite.
What's the difference between a Lorcin and a Glock?
Maybe I'm a clothes snob (probably more like design/quality snob), but if you can't tell the difference when you put a pair of $15 pants side by side with a $100 pair then I don't even know where to start.
I whole-heartedly agree that an old set of BDU's are awesome for use on the range or at a class (or cutting your lawn, hanging drywall, killing badguys, etc.).
Stephen
For pants, woolrich and EOTAC is what I wear almost dailey (have like 30 pairs of them).
For shirts, I tend to wear polo type shirts (something with a collar). UA heat line is one of my favorites for hot weather classes.
C4
Grant, you must not be hip to the fact that those clothes are "SHOOT ME FIRST" or target indicators.:rolleyes:
I find the Woolrich pants to be very comfortable, have ample pockets for everything I normally carry and can be found on sale for $20-30 regularly. I really doubt that most criminals key on the clothes a prospective target may be wearing. If they do it may give them reason to pick someone else.
Outlander Systems
10-23-09, 13:48
What's the difference between a Lorcin and a Glock?
Skynyrd hasn't done a song about Glock?
;)
misanthropist
10-23-09, 13:50
Geez all Pete. For that kind of scratch, I'd just as soon get some Combat Pants.
I am 100% tracking with Rob "The Destroyer".
The Chart™ illustrates manufacturing and QC/QA differences, that are evident within a range of products available. The disparity between the pricing of these products is negligible at best.
We're talking maybe, *maybe* a 10% difference in price, between a Daniel Defense and a Bushmaster. When you're talking BCM, you're looking at even less than that.
So, net, we're looking at a maximum of approximately a 10% price difference between two products, one of which is more than 10% a better performer.
When we're talking about britches...
I recently bought a pair of Tru-Spec 24/7 pants. My cheap ass didn't want to pay the $20-something bucks for 'em, since the only real gee-whizzery was a dedicated knife pouch.
After going to every "regular" clothing shop, I realised that cargo pants have apparently gone out of style. I still have some of my old ones, but after losing 70lbs to put my money where my apocalyptic mouth was, they're a no-go. So, for me, it was either the 24/7s or 5.11. I won't give 5.11 a nickel, after some of the rumours I've been hearing about the strong-arming of dealers.
That's just me. I wanted some cargo pants that WEREN'T BDUs. I wanted functional lederhosen that didn't look like "army pants".
I personally think the 24/7 pants are damned nice pants. For the price of the TAD or the CP pants, I can afford to blow out 3-4 pairs of the 24/7 pants.
Now, If you're telling me that the TAD and CP pants are 300-400% better than the 24/7s, I'll be shocked. Better? No doubt, but not with that level of disparity. I'd pay that for some custom-tailored, custom-configured pants, but that's a different bird. When I was 20, I hired a Chinese lady to make me a jacket, and she did for $60. Custom, dude. And it was, "Made in America". :rolleyes:
Rob's talking about a serious, radical difference in pricing. Hence, the calls of "hypocrisy" are mildly out of line. I've read it a thousand times on M4C about the massive difference in quality of top-tier brands for little to no difference in pricing from sub-par offerings.
For God's sake, I paid $1500 for a Bushmaster at the end of '06, beginning of '07.
For LESS money I could have had a BETTER weapon system. I could see the push to cool-guy pants if there was a BCM in the clothing-arena, offering better products at prices less than the competition. There's not, to the best of my knowledge.
A prime example would be Walls vs. Carhartt. I have a Carhartt jacket and a Walls jacket that's, for all intents and purposes, identical. One was less than the other by a significant margin, and neither one was manufactured in the US.
So, what am I paying for with Carhartt that justifies a 100% increase in price?
Since neither jacket has "failed" I'm not seeing a difference.
With firearms and components, when I have bought cheap, I've had my balls burned. The difference between one rail that was half the price of the DD Omega, and the DD Omega was huge. Thusly, the price difference was justifiable, to me.
When I see some pants that are comfortable enough to wear all day, and can last 3-4X longer than non-Wall-Street/Bankster priced versions, I might bite.
This is interesting to me and I tend to agree...
But I also note that in a recent thread I asked "at what price point would you start looking at lower tier ARs?"
Since the price spread is different in Canada, you could well pay 3X as much for a top tier as a lower tier.
So there is not always a 10% price variance.
But most people agreed that they would pay double, and some triple for a Colt.
So while I tend to agree with your approach - 3-4X the money should get you 3-4X the pants - maybe not everybody does!
But I would also tend to say that even if 3-4X the money in ARs only gets you 30% more AR, it's still probably more worthwhile than with pants. I am trying to imagine a situation in which my life would depend on elite pants performance and so far the scenarios have all been pretty improbable.
militarymoron
10-23-09, 16:17
Thusly, the price difference was justifiable, to me.
and there's where the difference lies - what people feel is a justifiable difference. if a guy is happy with $30 pants, that's great. if another guy likes his $100 pants and the difference is enough to make him want to pay that, great. that's a value judgement on both guys' parts.
i'm not going to tell you that a $100 pant is 4 times better than a $20 pant. it might not be - for you. hell, i'm not even sure how to quantify what 4 x better is.
durability? make 'em out of canvas. features? you may not have use for the same ones i do.
but if you ask 'why' is it 4 times more, i might be able to find that out.
if people want to spend $430 for a KAC triple tap brake, i'm not going to say "do you really get 8600% more performance than a $5 A2 comp at 86 times the price? hell, i can buy 86 A2 hiders for one TT and i haven't had an A2 hider fail yet."
there's more to 'value' than just numbers. there's perceived utility to the user, and it's different for everyone.
Outlander Systems
10-23-09, 16:43
there's more to 'value' than just numbers. there's perceived utility to the user, and it's different for everyone.
A wise statement, and I can respect that.
I do want to know what is on the TAD pants that makes them $100.
misanthropist
10-23-09, 17:29
Maybe the snap above the fly is made of KAC Inconel?
carshooter
10-23-09, 20:24
Maybe the ass-end will blow out of my britches in December at Pat's class and he'll put the picture in SWAT and I'll change my tune, but I doubt that is likely to happen. ;)
All joking aside, I blew a worn out pair of 5.11's out from crotch to knee doing an up down drill in a training course this summer.
Thankfully, I had a spare pair of shorts in my vehicle, or I'd have finished the course in my boxers.
I now definitely believe that wearing a pair of good fitting, reinforced seat pants that have ALSO been inspected to be in good condition is critical. :)
To answer the OP, I usually wear a polo and khakis to classes. It's how I dress most days at work or on the weekends, so why not. UA undershirts are great.
I heard a long time ago that you can't just look at the price tag on a piece of clothing,you have to think of the number of times you're going to wear it, and what it'll do for you each time. In that respect, some expensive clothing items become downright bargains. If I wore $100 TAD pants every day and they perfectly suited what I was doing, I'd be calling everyone who didn't have them suckers, because I'd know they're great.
The reality though, is that I do look at price tags and have limits on what I'll spend. More than $50? Those pants better come with a BJ and dinner. The hard part is finding something that'll meet the quality standard at the correct price point. Of course, the price point is unique to each individual.
You know what I'd like to see? Woolrich Elite bring back the Discreet pant, without the worthless zip up hideaway pocket on the outseam. Botach had these on sale multiple times, and I've got at least 10 pairs. I wear them nearly every day, along with their polo, simply because their polos last longer than the stuff I can get at Old Navy.
The Discreet pant is awesome. Good pocket setup. Good fabric. Good build quality. Comfortable. And without a zillion pockets all up and down the leg making you look like the tactical wunderkind.
Woolrich doesn't even list them on their site anymore, which is a shame. For $20 each, they were awesome.
I'm with Rob on this... I can not and will not spend that kind of money on clothes. And comparing firearms to clothes is not an apple to apple comparison... I rip out my pants and I can still win the fight vs, my cheap gun going down..
We have been fighting and winning major conflicts for hundreds of years with cloths that are made descent and not marketed as cool guy $100 pants. Prior to that folks were winning wars in sandals.....
I like to run plain jane BDU pants or pick up a good pair of used 5/11's for $25 .
Oh, you won't see me in a $300 TAD jacket made "In small batches" by the PRC.....
My Woodland Gen 1 Gortex jacket will keep me dry just like it did for many years working for Uncle Sugar.....:cool:
militarymoron
10-23-09, 23:58
And comparing firearms to clothes is not an apple to apple comparison... I rip out my pants and I can still win the fight vs, my cheap gun going down..
yes it is, if you read what the context of comparison in the discussion was. it wasn't about which is more important when winning a fight, it was simply about what makes some products cost more than others, whether it's additional features, better materials, quality, economy of scale, perceived value etc. we could be discussing any product, like why a rolex costs more than a casio g-shock when they both tell time.
no one in this thread has said that $100 pants are necessary for training or fighting wars, nor implied that anyone should buy what they don't want nor need. you're doing exactly what just about everyone has recommended in this thread - you're using what works for you, and choosing where you spend your money. i'm glad that we're all in agreement.
You and I will have to agree to disagree on the clothes vs firearms comparison.
militarymoron
10-24-09, 13:50
no prob harv - but what are we disagreeing about, though? please quote me so i know exactly what you disagree with. trying to understand here...
I just can't make the comparison that High end clothes are like High end guns..
No matter the design or the amount of stitching or the material, at the end of the day, there still a pair of pants. I can put a hole in a $100 pair as easily as a $25 pair... but can have 3 more brand new pairs as a backup. Clothes, unlike guns don't last forever... and I'm OK with that.. Just like gloves, I can go thru quite a few and have my finger poking out of them in a few months of hard use.. So I am not going to buy a $125 pair of super wonder gloves, when the issued pair of Nomex flight gloves still work for me, and I have 3 0r 4 new sets as back ups...
Sure there are wear items on guns, but it takes me years to reach that point along with a shit load of ammo. And I can replace those parts and go for a bunch more years... I rip the hell out of a pair of $100 TAD pants, and what are my options?? Sure I can have them sewn, but then they look like hell.
For me... I just cannot see the value in expensive clothing... I was at my local Fleet Farm (It's a WI thing..) and was looking at all the Carrhart clothes and the tags.... Assembled in Mexico with Components made in the US.
TAD is now having there stuff made in China... Yet the price is still up there because they claim there making them in small Batches to maintain QC.... That's a marketing tool... and Honestly.... Even if all these cloths were all that and a bag of cheese puffs......at the end of the day, I just don't need it.... I'm not working for Uncle Sugar anymore and I have a family and a mortgage and a 4 year college tuition to plan for in about 11 years. Me wearing a $300 TAD jacket to go hit my local range to practice or to take a class, is just a huge waste for me..
I would rather put that $300 towards the ammo and the tuition for the class then the Jacket.
LockenLoad
10-24-09, 20:04
I have 16 years in the utility business, I wore everything from Dickie's, Carhartt, wrangler, my point being that none of the cheaper jeans held up more than 6 months, I rather buy quality Levi's and Carharts and break them in, hell I would buy a 200.00 dollar pair of red wings every year, always top notch eye wear too. I guess I am saying everything has it's roll, if I am just sporting around my wally world Dickie's are great, if I am going to be on my feet 14 hours doing line work I want my red wings, Levi's, 200 Oakley's lot of looking into sun, under armour heat gear. on a side note not all carhartt is cheap my rain jacket was 2 bills. I don't look down at what the other guy wears, I could careless, when I go to the range I am to busy to worry about being the fashion police, or to worry about what people think about what I am wearing. I will admit too envying some peoples top notch eye wear:D, I have a pair of the expensive T.A.D Rocket shorts coming I will comment on them if any one cares, I am hoping they dry out quick in Florida's hot humid environment I sweat a lot.
militarymoron
10-24-09, 21:14
harv - thanks for that explanation - i think i understand which aspect you're talking about now. you aren't referring to the differences in manufacturing costs and why higher-end stuff costs more (which was one of my comparisons between clothes and firearms), but more about the disposable nature of clothing vs. the long-term investment of firearms.
i think the disagreement (not a bad thing at all) comes from the different background/frame of reference we come from. i'm a civvie, so my usage for pants is general every day use. 'tactical' use, much less often. i was wearing cargo pants before 'tactical' became a buzzword for just about everything (remember bugle boy cargo pants in the '80s? yup - had a couple of those. wouldn't be caught dead in them now). hell, i avoided BDUs because they 'looked' too military. all i was interested in was the extra utility the pockets gave me.
anyways, since i never worked in a job that tears up clothing on a daily basis, i haven't been conditioned to view them as disposable. i can definitely see where that will be different for other people. if i were in construction, i'd definitely be looking at durability as a more important factor than an extra feature or two, especially if i had to pay out of pocket from my own work clothes.
since i don't subject my clothing to daily hard use (on a job), it lasts a lot longer for me than it does for you. because of that, the factors which are more important to me are utility, fit, comfort.
durability is important to me as well, but only under the occasional range or hiking usage. so, for me, the added utility of certain features is worth the $20 or $30 more because my one pair of pants will last me quite a while. i ripped a pair of TAD pants on barbed wire two years ago, but because i didn't view them as throw-away pants, i patched and stitched them up, and they're still going strong.
now, if i were going through clothing on a frequent basis, then cost and durability would definitely take precedence, especially if i felt that the less expensive clothing would fit my needs just as well. even more so if i'm on a budget (who isn't nowadays?).
so harv, i understand your point of view once you explained the frame of reference and i defintely don't disagree with it - makes sense to me. everyone's going to have different value systems on how they view the products they purchase, or how they spend their money based on their background, experience, financial status, usage etc.
we don't all have to agree about things here - that's not what a good discussion forum is about. but coming to or gaining understanding of someone else's point of view/reference is to me, what makes for good discussion. harv, thanks again for taking the time to help me come to an understanding of your point of view.
Outlander Systems
10-24-09, 21:53
now, if i were going through clothing on a frequent basis, then cost and durability would definitely take precedence, especially if i felt that the less expensive clothing would fit my needs just as well.
Glad everyone's coming to terms with each others' perspectives.
My issue is similar to Harv's. As a Land Surveyor, I typically shoot for functional and durable pants.
I've blown out plenty of rip-stop pants, jeans, etc. When a seam gets torn, it's pretty much game over. With jackets, it seems like I can wear them until I'm ready to throw them away, solely due to being sick and tired of wearing/seeing them. I don't know why my shirts and jackets don't get blown out, when I burn through pants. I've blown out a pair of Carhartts, 1 pair of BDU pants, 1 pair of Levis, and one pair of ACU pants this year at work. The jeans, and don't ask me how, split from the cuff to the beltline vertically one day in the woods, and I had the joy of finishing the work day out with my boxers fully exposed. It was a 3' vertical slit in them.
All that being said, I'm still rocking the same nasty Carhartt jacket I got in 2006, only it's gone from black to light grey, and has orange spray-paint on it.
Off-topic, but when it comes to footwear, I've trashed both cheap and expensive boots at work. This leaves me feeling like, short of positive reviews from people I trust, like shooting in the dark, even on "quality" kit, since I've been failed by both "cheap" and "expensive". I've gone through several pair of Rockies that wouldn't hold their "waterproofing", and had to send them back to the manufacturer three times, for three different pairs. On the last pair, the sole started coming apart after a couple of months. Not cool for expensive, "high-quality" boots. The pair of Converse stealth that I am still wearing, look like absolute shit on a stick, but are still holding up after wearing them, without rotation, for over a year solid.
Seriously High-Mileage Kicks:
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2577/96913619.jpg
I bought 'em for comfort, not durability, and they haven't given me a single issue. The durability was a side-benefit of the cozy-factor. Now I'm a diehard Converse boot dude, when I initially had scoffed at them for being hideous.
Would I pay $100 for a pair of pants? Not likely. For the price tag, they would have to be a seriously durable pair of pants.
Would I pay $226.85 for a Combat Anorak? Yes, and I want one.
I have a different criteria for jackets and coats, than I do for pants. I've burned up and used up too many.
3CTactical
10-25-09, 00:51
I do find that the TAD jackets are worth the money as they do exactly what they say they'll do, so I have no reservations about purchasing thier jackets. And while I do like their pants for thier comfort and utility (and due to the fact that I hate the elastic waistbands that are so prevalent on tactical style pants), I don't see myself owning more than a pair or two. Like it's been said, if I tear up a pair of pants, they're trash to me. Thus I'd rather tear up a pair of Levis than the TAD pants at $100 a pop.
The pair of Converse stealth that I am still wearing, look like absolute shit on a stick, but are still holding up after wearing them, without rotation, for over a year solid.
+1 on the Converse Stealth. My boots take a beating not only from extensive walking but also from occasional chemical/acid splash so they usually don't last much more than 3-4 months tops and that gets expensive. For $80 I've been rockin the same pair of Converse Stealths for 6 months now and they are still holding strong and comfy. I actually like the way they look, the more beat-up the better :) Get um a little muddy and they start looking like faded coyote with grey splotches, unintentionally tacti-kewl. My only complaint so far is that they suck for traction on slick surfaces, they are just as unstable now as they were when they were new, bowling shoes might actually be a better option in that respect. As far as wet feet go, last weekend I was standing in a puddle up to my ankles for about a minute and never got my socks wet, I'm not sure if they could take much more than that without sno-seal or something. I'm wearing the non-safety-toe Stealths and on grass and urban terrain they run and move like sneakers, I prefer bare-feet but mine aren't glass/rock proof :( Can't comment on how they handle steep rocky terrain yet.
Alpha Sierra
10-25-09, 09:14
As for trousers, Carhartt brown duck carpenter jeans rule the roost.
As for shirts, any light cotton collared shirt, like those marketed for fishermen, make good sun/brass/strap chafe protection.
travistheone
10-25-09, 12:57
Debate of high priced clothes aside, I wear Diamond Gusset jeans for just about everything. Made in the US, durable, and allow for a lot of flexibility.
I live in jeans, a t-shirt, and tennis shoes(usually nike). I see no need to dress up like I am in the army when I take my first class, or when I go to the range. I think a more realistic idea would to be wearing what you would actually have on in a fight, so boxer/shorts no shoes and no shirt, is the way to go, quit being a sissy. Knee pads? Lmao.
Outlander Systems
10-25-09, 13:44
I live in jeans, a t-shirt, and tennis shoes(usually nike). I see no need to dress up like I am in the army when I take my first class, or when I go to the range. I think a more realistic idea would to be wearing what you would actually have on in a fight, so boxer/shorts no shoes and no shirt, is the way to go, quit being a sissy. Knee pads? Lmao.
Reminds me of my birthday, 2007. I answered the back door at 3AM with nothing on but an HK and a frown.
Iraq Ninja
10-25-09, 13:51
I live in jeans,
This brings up an interesting point. Many people train in what they wear in normal life and this is good. But, is your daily wear appropriate for your weapon and for fighting in?
I don't wear jeans because I don't like the pockets, or specifically the lack of "cargo style" pockets on the side. For me, these cargo pockets are more useful and important than the rear pockets. We typically carry more stuff today than we did 20 years ago. Cell phones, Ipods, etc.
I find jeans too limiting in design, fit, and form to wear with a weapon.
Reminds me of my birthday, 2007. I answered the back door at 3AM with nothing on but an HK and a frown.Must of been one helluva party. lol
Outlander Systems
10-25-09, 18:48
Must of been one helluva party. lol
;)
The dog scared 'em off before I opened the door. The beam of light from heaven, shining down upon my loin-regions and angels choir might've done the same. I probably didn't even need the piece.
I've been having good luck with the 30 dollar propper multicam ACU cut bdu pants...
I do have a couple of TAD jackets and one of their wool shirts, but I'll get years out of them.
I've had good luck with OTB boots, too.
That said, I wear khakis from Target and polos that I either get for free, or some Polo brand polos that I've had about 10 years (still in good shape).
On the other hand, I'm the guy who rarely ripped his BDUs when out in the field, even the ripstop ones.
GlockMasterG9
10-26-09, 19:22
I'm a bang for buck guy myself........No $100.00 crazy fan boy tad pant's for me.
I have 6 pair of these and where them almost every day.
I agree with this ............
As far as BDU/cargo style pants, I guess I am in the minority here. I can not stand not having cargo pockets. I always need to have room for my "stuff". LWO cargo pockets make great drop pouches.
Besides being functional, they are the most comfortable pants I own.
I have 6 pair of these and where them allmost every day. LA Operator Tactical pants rock in my opinion......... shoot I got some fubars for 14 bucks apiece.......you just cant beat that.
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/policestuff_2075_187185
I've got a couple of pairs of TAD Spartan pants. I like the cut and features, but I don't think they're worth $90 a pair. One developed a frayed hole at the corner of one of the back pockets after less than 5 washes. I patched it and wore them many times since, but it was disappointing.
I've got a couple of pairs of TAD Spartan pants. I like the cut and features, but I don't think they're worth $90 a pair. One developed a frayed hole at the corner of one of the back pockets after less than 5 washes. I patched it and wore them many times since, but it was disappointing.
And that illustrates my point nicely...
You paid $90 bucks and were able to get a hole in them,... I bought a pair of the True Spec TRU pants for around $25 bucks and they wear nicely... and have held up wear.
I have the Spartans as well. So far they are holding up as casual everyday pants
i was also considering the TAD Force 10 cargoes, until I tried on the Flying cross VERTX pants (designed by Arcteryx). Still a little steep at $50, but they fit really well while not being too baggy. I really like how the side cargo pockets are pretty slim and the inner pocket is sized for AR mags. The actual front pants pockets are nice and deep, perfect for my J Frame. The zippered pocket in the front right pants pocket is nice, but I don't know what I would put in there. I would have picked up a set but they did not have the color I wanted in my size.
The rep said there will be a matching BDU shirt. When that comes out, I'm going to push for them at work. Multicam is also available through special order.
I believe MilitaryMorons did a review of the pants as well.
LockenLoad
10-27-09, 08:04
And that illustrates my point nicely...
You paid $90 bucks and were able to get a hole in them,... I bought a pair of the True Spec TRU pants for around $25 bucks and they wear nicely... and have held up wear. china appreciates your support
what point is that, that tad pants can get a hole in them :rolleyes: , I have put holes in cheap shorts, and pants also expensive ones, it might make a point if he wore a whole in them because of use?( sounds like he got a bad pair if washing did it). I would rather have good pants, shorts and shoes, eye wear, that I can use when I am not shooting. I have seen people who are not LEO'S and Mil, with over a 1000.00 in battle belts, vest, gloves armor ect. that they will only use in class, nothing wrong with it. I just don't see training in gear I will never wear in real life.
LockenLoad
10-27-09, 08:30
I have the Spartans as well. So far they are holding up as casual everyday pants
i was also considering the TAD Force 10 cargoes, until I tried on the Flying cross VERTX pants (designed by Arcteryx). Still a little steep at $50, but they fit really well while not being too baggy. I really like how the side cargo pockets are pretty slim and the inner pocket is sized for AR mags. The actual front pants pockets are nice and deep, perfect for my J Frame. The zippered pocket in the front right pants pocket is nice, but I don't know what I would put in there. I would have picked up a set but they did not have the color I wanted in my size.
The rep said there will be a matching BDU shirt. When that comes out, I'm going to push for them at work. Multicam is also available through special order.
I believe MilitaryMorons did a review of the pants as well.
those look like a really nice pant for 50.00 bucks
LockenLoad
10-27-09, 08:38
I'm a bang for buck guy myself........No $100.00 crazy fan boy tad pant's for me.
I have 6 pair of these and where them almost every day.
I agree with this ............
I have 6 pair of these and where them allmost every day. LA Operator Tactical pants rock in my opinion......... shoot I got some fubars for 14 bucks apiece.......you just cant beat that.
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/policestuff_2075_187185
your right there stuff is good and you can steal some stuff in the close outs
I too have road the pants train from jeans to BDUs to Royal Robbins to 5.11 to Woolrich and back to jeans and less "tacticool" cargo pants.
My local hardware store (Sutherlands) sells a brand called "Key". They have a cargo pant in bark and brown for 19.00ish that feels just like the Carhartts at half the price. Sewing and bar tacking is as good or better as well. They have washed up nice and even hold a decent crease. I suspect I will be buying a few more pair as my others get retired as I wear them out/gain weight and use more AIWB carry and want a bit more room.
No doubt that the new Eotac and TAD offereings are quite cool and well made. I simply question whether they approach the intersection of quality and value. I have a pair of LAPG operator pants. They are certainly worth the 15-20 they charge for them. IMHO, the 5.11 line is at the edge of quality/value intersection at 39.00. Certainly any old Woolrich Elite stuff out there for the same price is a better buy.
YMMV Greatly
david of vcdgrips.com
militarymoron
10-27-09, 09:55
The zippered pocket in the front right pants pocket is nice, but I don't know what I would put in there...I believe MilitaryMorons did a review of the pants as well.
the hidden zippered pocket is for wallet, passport, ID etc - just a more secure option for that kind of stuff. items won't fall out, and it's much more difficult to pick-pocket.
the VERTX pants have the lowest profile side cargo pockets of any tactical pant i've seen (typical streamlined arc'teryx design) - at first glance, they don't really look much different from regular pants and 'dressier' than most others cargos. they're a good option if you want the added load-carrying capability without the visual 'bulkiness' of regular cargos.
here's a link to my writeup for those interested:
http://militarymorons.com/gear/garments.4.html#vertx
ColdDeadHands
10-29-09, 07:48
Grant, you must not be hip to the fact that those clothes are "SHOOT ME FIRST" or target indicators.:rolleyes:
I find the Woolrich pants to be very comfortable, have ample pockets for everything I normally carry and can be found on sale for $20-30 regularly. I really doubt that most criminals key on the clothes a prospective target may be wearing. If they do it may give them reason to pick someone else.
ditto! I don't believe wearing 5.11's or other cargo pants is painting a target on me. I don't believe that most criminals or "victims of society" as they are called nowadays know what 5.11's and the like are. I'm sure they are just cargo pants in their eyes....lots of people are wearing cargos around here. If I really wanted to blend in 100% I would have to wear baggy jeans hanging below my ass.
I wear 5.11's and 24/7's all the time. They are comfortable and last me a long time. My first 5.11 pair I retired to work pants have lasted me 2 years before they were too washed out but still no rips or stains. Jeans are too uncomfortable for me here in the houston heat. When I need new pants again I'll try some eotac's most likely as I have tried some on at gander mountain and the seem to be very comfortable.
CArhartt 5 pocket carpenter jeans for me, one size up for IWB wear. Could I get TAD or other tac cool pants sure but not my thing. It does not work for me, I would rather spend the $$ on another few P mags, get that T-1 etc.
Additionaly the Carhartt's are what I wear to work. I have not tried the Carhartt cargo's yet, but that is on the list.
The last class I was at there was a blend of Diamond Gussett jeans, 5 11's, Carhartts, outdoor cargo pants (rail riders maybe).
To each his own.
ditto! I don't believe wearing 5.11's or other cargo pants is painting a target on me. I don't believe that most criminals or "victims of society" as they are called nowadays know what 5.11's and the like are. I'm sure they are just cargo pants in their eyes....lots of people are wearing cargos around here. If I really wanted to blend in 100% I would have to wear baggy jeans hanging below my ass.
As I often post in these topics... The general public doesn't really notice, seeing only another pair of cargo pants. The problem comes when you want or need to avoid detection by LE, security folks, or those otherwise in tune to certain tells.
Don't anticipate that the pro who knows that those are 5.11s/EOTACs/Woolrich/ etc is going to be like minded, wants to be your friend, or will BS with you about guns and gear.
I've had good luck with the "Fire Hose" pants from Duluth Trading Company (http://www.duluthtrading.com/store/clothes-workwear/mens/mens-pants/85370.aspx?feature=product_11). I guess they would be considered mid-priced as they are around $40 bucks
wolverineSIERRA
10-30-09, 15:12
everyone needs to try relwen commando cargo pants, best damn pants youll ever find, 100% cotton m-51 style, thick utility belt, very rugges and well made, they are very pricy, average around 180 bucks but it will put all crye, 5.11 or whatever else to shame, the OD green looks really sharp, had them for about 2 years now, and thats all i wear, plenty of field time and they hold up great, the only bad thing is they are very hard to get
Cabelas Trail Hikers I have a dozen pair I wear all the time to work and out in woods and everything in between I like the weight and they are very rugged
everyone needs to try relwen commando cargo pants, best damn pants youll ever find, 100% cotton m-51 style, thick utility belt, very rugges and well made, they are very pricy, average around 180 bucks but it will put all crye, 5.11 or whatever else to shame, the OD green looks really sharp, had them for about 2 years now, and thats all i wear, plenty of field time and they hold up great, the only bad thing is they are very hard to get
OK I have to ask what makes these panst cost 180.00?
Why are they worth that price to you?
GlockMasterG9
10-31-09, 08:09
everyone needs to try relwen commando cargo pants, best damn pants youll ever find, 100% cotton m-51 style, thick utility belt, very rugges and well made, they are very pricy, average around 180 bucks but it will put all crye, 5.11 or whatever else to shame, the OD green looks really sharp, had them for about 2 years now, and thats all i wear, plenty of field time and they hold up great, the only bad thing is they are very hard to get
$180.00 BUCKS ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!:confused: NO THANKS!
Personalty I can find a better way to spend my money.
Plus Im just not that rich.
Iraq Ninja
10-31-09, 08:18
How about 18 bucks? LA police gear has a FUBAR sale on for their tactical pants.
http://www.lapolicegear.com/elastic-waistband-fubar-pants.html
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/policestuff_2077_753665596
How about 18 bucks? LA police gear has a FUBAR sale on for their tactical pants.
http://www.lapolicegear.com/elastic-waistband-fubar-pants.html
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/policestuff_2077_753665596
IR have you used these at all I have some 511 pants but they seem alittle to hot and dont beath all that well the trailhikers do and look alittle less tactical I do like the looks of these
How about 18 bucks? LA police gear has a FUBAR sale on for their tactical pants.
http://www.lapolicegear.com/elastic-waistband-fubar-pants.html
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/policestuff_2077_753665596
I have a pair of the non-fubar'd pants. For the price they are a decent pair of pants. The cargo pockets have straps and mini pockets sewn inside which I have found useless, and even lost items inside of them.
For $20, they are a great deal.
IR have you used these at all I have some 511 pants but they seem alittle to hot and dont beath all that well the trailhikers do and look alittle less tactical I do like the looks of these
These pants are made of light wgt ripstop cotton like the OD jungle fatigues & light wgt BDU's. I have used them for several months & really like them.
I recently got some of the FUBAR (they were $15, now up to $18). Mostly it was sloppy stitching. However, one came without a button & I had to get out the old sewing kit.
I have a pair of 5.11 Taclite Pro pants that are truly excellent for taking a course, maneuvering around when the zombies attack or whatever, and during the last pistol course that I took that Taclite material had an uncanny ability to keep me comfortable both when it was chilly in the early morning but also when it warmed up into the high 70s/low 80s, even though at first I was dubious of it as it felt a little too synthetic, but now I'm sold. Also I really like the 5.11 pocket layout as I like using them as dump pouches. I even use the weak side mag. pocket as storage for my 3rd mag. that I use to replenish my belt kydex holders. They are also not too baggy to make you feel like you are wearing clown pants. But having given that glowing review I wouldn't be caught dead wearing these around in a social situation or out in town as they do have ninja tactifool written all over them.
Is anyone aware of a multi-pocket durable pant available with a 38" inseam, or alternatively, one that is available uhemmed to that length, that isn't a special order?
5.11 TDU with the internal pockets in the cargos are nice... I can fit two Pmags in my left pocket, for when I don't want to walk back to the truck/bench. Also, they are comfortable as all hell, and they hold up well.
As far as shirts... I usually wear a short sleeve underarmor undershirt for moisture wicking, and an old, reliable, worn out t-shirt. I bring a waterproof shell and a hooded sweatshirt when I shoot in winter (never know what the PNW is gonna throw at you).
I wear either Oakley S.I Boots, or some older Nike x-trainers if I need the extra grip, as the S.I's are a little slick, and the x-trainers are almost like cleats.
As far as a cover goes... A beanie or a ballcap. I try and remove the little buttons on top of the hats because muffs push down on them, and it's uncomfotable as hell.
The nice thing about this stuff, is it's all relatively cheap if you already have it. You don't look like a total Tactitool when you're at wal-mart picking up that last box of .40 S&W, and it's comfortable for long periods of time. I'm stuck in BDU's for 10 hours when I work, and if they were at all uncomfortable, I would find something else. But I like the loose fit, when they wear out I can cut them into shorts, and they just plain work.
After reading about them in this thread and on militarymoron's site, I found a uniform store here in Richmond that carries the Fechheimer VERTX pants. Went out there today and picked up a pair for right around $40. So far all I've done in them is run a Cub Scout den meeting, but they're very comfortable and I like the relatively low profile look that they have. I wish the front pockets were just a little bit deeper, but overall it seems like a very well thought out design; the cargo pockets are easily accessible, and the pants have just the right amount of "give" when bending, kneeling, squatting, etc. Because of the design of the cargo pockets, I think I can get away with wearing these at work (business casual environment), unlike most other cargo pants. Definitely going to pick up another pair or two.
You can't beat the Duluth Trading Fire Hose work pants (http://www.duluthtrading.com/store/clothes-workwear/mens/mens-pants/work-pants-for-men/92204.aspx?feature=P7700-C64831-L2&processor=content). If you they rip, tear, fray, or just plain wear out they will send you a new pair no questions asked. They only cost $50, and no I don't work for them, but have several items from them that have held up forever.
wolverineSIERRA
11-07-09, 13:02
OK I have to ask what makes these panst cost 180.00?
Why are they worth that price to you?
they are built like a tank man, very rugged pants best ive had so far
Here is my personal take on things (of course YMMV and everyone has an opinion)
I wear whatever I can get on the cheap.
I have a pair of Bates M6s I got over 2 years ago (they have served EDW duty since purchase) on clearance for $30 bucks on LAPG, they're holding up better then my issued summer boots that lasted all of 6 months. I have a pair of Abercrombie & Fitch pants I got for $20 on clearance, they are one of the most comfortable pair of pants I have, and pretty damn durable for a "fashion" company. Mostly though, I wear Carhartt products, because they just hold up the best IMO. I have a jacket I bought 4 years ago that has gone through hell (lit on fire, welded in it, worn A LOT) that still looks new, less fading and some burn holes. Their pants are quite comfortable and have plenty of storage for mostly anything I need to carry on my person.
Now, all of that being said, I haven't worn a pair of TAD gear pants, I keep my clothing purchases under $50 generally, so I can't attest to the difference, but what I wear works. It works for just about anything, working on a vehicle, welding, training, range time, casual wear, etc.
I guess it all comes down to your AO, if you're happy, and if you have the coin to drop on that certain product. I wouldn't go as far as comparing an AR to clothing items, since they are a completely different all together.
wolverineSIERRA
11-23-09, 17:14
AF cargo pants are very good quality and comfortable pants, much better quality and looking than most blackhawk, tad or 5.11 stuff, but thats just my opinion, too bad they dont cater to tactical industries with all the cool pockets
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.