Customer Reviews Arc'teryx Palisade Pants

I do like these pants. I am normally a size 4-6, but I am glad I ordered a 6 (32 inch inseam) in these. (per reviews, they ran a little small) Love the two cargo pockets that are decent sized. When I was looking for new hiking pants recently, it appeared that all the outdoor clothing makers were removing cargo pockets from their women's hiking pants. I was not happy. I use the heck out of those pockets for my phone (pictures and GPS making software), light weight gloves, chapstick, snack, etc. I am about 5' 6'' and weigh about 127lbs. I have an athletic build with muscular thighs from cycling and hiking. The size 6 fit well, but I do wish they had a bit more room in the thighs. (I would prefer some bagginess in the thighs to allow for movements and large step ups that pull the back of the pants down if the legs are tight-think skinny jeans) So far, with a few hikes under my belt, they are not pulling down in the back. They really have a smooth waist area that will work well under a backpack hip belt. No belt loops to dig in.

These pants were purchased for hiking in Costa Rica next month and travel in Europe in July. I needed something that is comfortable, lightweight to wear and pack, and hopefully, dry fast when washed. I cannot comment on use yet since the Palisade pants probably aren't warm enough for freezing temperatures. The fit is more modern than other hiking pants I have bought previously. The rise is at the natural waist which is my preference for doing anything active. In my opinion, they are TTS. For reference, I wear size 27 in denims.

These pants were purchased for hiking in Costa Rica next month and travel in Europe in July. I needed something that is comfortable, lightweight to wear and pack, and hopefully, dry fast when washed. I cannot comment on use yet since the Palisade pants probably aren't warm enough for freezing temperatures. The fit is more modern than other hiking pants I have bought previously. The rise is at the natural waist which is my preference for doing anything active. In my opinion, they are TTS. For reference, I wear size 27 in denims.

I bought my pair of Palisades in Spring 2014, although the label states they are Fall, 2013. I've used them a handful of times. They are one of the better fitting pants I've found, and I've searched. The adjustable waist is great, does not gap or pull down (note: this is the Fall, 2013 fit...I don't know how much they have changed). They are flattering on (which I have trouble finding in a hiking pant). I am somewhat curvy, with a small waist, larger around the hips/thighs, so gapping at the waist is frequently a problem as is pants being too tight in the thighs (I am 5'5', 125 lbs, I have a size 8 in the Palisades). These fit, which is awesome. However, I wish they had back pockets. I always want pockets in my hiking pants to accommodate a cell phone, a lip balm, and a pocket knife at a minimum. The slash pockets on the pair I have are open - and I lost my map out of them. It appears that this has been fixed in the more recent version. Even though I've had the pants for a couple of years, they have only been worn a handful of times (since I have several other pair acquired in my never-ending search for the perfect hiking pants). In June, 2016, I wore the Palisades to hike Pikes Peak. They breathed well for nylon (they are a tan color, which is good in the high altitude sun). However, as with all nylon pants, they are noisy. I am still searching for the perfect, quiet hiking pant. The hike was 14 miles round trip, with approximately 4000' vertical. I put my trusty old Swiss army knife in one of the cargo pockets at the start of the trip. No blades were out, there are no sharp points on the exterior. At the end of the trip, there was a vertical rip in the cargo pocket, apparently just from the abrasion of the knife being in the pocket, since I hadn't done any type of rock climbing or even squeezed through tight spots. I've darned the rip, and will wear the pants again, but they aren't perfect. For summer hiking pants, I'm always looking for: 1. Lightweight/breathable (summer hiking in Colorado from 5,000-14,000'); 2. Quiet to walk in; 3. Pockets for lip balm, pocket knife, cell phone...and maybe car keys or map. Even better, a big enough leg pocket for sunglasses, since they are always on and off in the trees; 4. Flattering to wear; 5. Not black (black in high altitude summer sun is just too warm). The only reason I won't recommend is because the material is so fragile, and for the price of these pants, they need to stand up to a lot more wear than 14 miles. These are good, but just don't quite make it. I'm still searching.

First: THANK YOU Arc'teryx for making TALL pants!!!! I like the overall design of this pant: the many zippered pockets, the soft lining inside the waistband, the streamlined cut that still allows ease of movement. I have yet to test these pants on the trail, but based on my experience the fabric does feel like it will hold up and breathe well. The thin, breathable fabric is both a primary advantage and one of the main cons for me because the fabric (combined with the styling of this pant) shows almost any underwear seam underneath it. No one wants to wear a thong when hiking, especially me! So I tried several pairs of "no-show" underwear from well-regarded brands with limited success and almost returned these pants. After extensive shopping around, I finally found some athletic underwear that would not show. Seriously though, I suggest that AT take a cue from the yoga world and use thicker fabric in the bum area or just add some pockets like the Parapet pants. Those pants have a similarly thin fabric, but avoid VPL by having pockets. Otherwise, these are fantastic pants and I hope to log many, many miles with them!!!

J'en possde deux pairs (Umber (orange - plus disponible) et Blue Legion). Excellent compagnon de voyage, lger, sche rapidement, frais sous les journes chaudes et trs confortable. Prend peu de place dans vos valises ou sac dos. Seul inconvnient, c'est qu'ils sont bruyants en mouvement (squish-squish). Chose certaine, vous ne vous ferez pas attaquer par des ours en fort, car ils vous entendrons arriver !

Pleased with styling, fabric and fit. Lightweight and ideal fir carrying on marathon walks Great to have a nice colour instead of boring beige, khaki or grey!

While looking for a new pair of lightweigt warmer-weather trousers, I stumbled on this pair, seriously discounted. Without looking further I bought this pair as it would have been the cheapest option by far, plus Arc'teryx has a reputation to keep, so I knew It couldn't go wrong. The trousers have been pleasing me a lot past year. While I had low to no specific expectations of the pants, apart from simply working, the Palisade pants go further. First of all the wind resistance of these pants is incredibly good. I hike a lot in very windy conditions and these pants resist the wind far better than my compangion's pair. This has been a welcome surprise! Also, I started loving the very well designed pockets on these trousers. The front pockets are nice and deep, so nothing will fall out or get in the way while wearing a climbing harnass. The leg pockets also have exactly the right size and still feel very comfortable, even when packed. I narrowed the lower leg part of the trousers to improve the fit and as a result the pants do not only feel better, they also look better, perfectly blending in town if necessary. I actually tend to wear them on a daily basis. Only downside is that the pans are very noisy when walking around. Water repellency is good, and when they eventually get wet from day-long drizzle or a serious downpour, they dry nice and quickly.

Overall, good design but a bit high fitting on the waist. For what this pant caters to, it should fit just below the waist.

These fit me well, like the Ramparts. Material is light but just a touch heavier, so good for cool weather or low exertion. I have the Gamma LT with zip side pockets, and I can say that for this model which is more casual and not precipitation-oriented, I am glad the zips are only on the legs. (Rampart is the best, no zips on the legs, but overhung material keeps items securely without impeding access. Also looks less techy.) I can see why people would prefer zips in the side pockets, but for me, they would be cumbersome and look goofy, and I experience little risk of contents falling out when I sit, if it did, I would notice because the pants fit well. On the other hand, I don't climb in them. I miss back pockets, every day, however, and I'm not sure why this model lacks them. (Even one would help.) And yes, the zip pockets give a slightly techy look, as does the material. It's not bad, though, unlike the Stowe which has great material but pockets that stand out like pocket protectors. (And don't fit me.)

I anticipate the product has good wicking and quick-dry properties in heat and humidity. I chose to go with a snug fit rather than too large and sloppier fit.

In my opinion the changes made on the Palisade Pant for the new season are a prime example for hidden inflation. I assume, Arc'teryx did away with the rear pocket and the two zippers on the hand pockets to keep the retail price stabile despite hefty wage increases in China where those pants are made. According to studies I've read recently wages in the far east went up by more than 40 percent in 2011. One can argue the changes made on the Palisade Pant contradict the dead bird advertisement slogan of "evolution in action", since they didn't improve the product. However, I still bought an additional Palisade Pant for myself even though my now seven year old first pant of this type is still in great shape despite numerous adventures with it in the wild. The reason I did is because I can see a bonus in the changes made: Without the zippers on the hand pockets the Palisade looks and works great as a slack for a day in office, too. Plus, I actually doubt things will fall out of the hand pockets despite the missing zippers. These pockets are pretty deep. So far I took them on hikes of more than 70 miles and a couple of climning tours. Never once did my car keys or change fell out of them. However, in my opinion Arc'teryx should consider adding the rear pocket with a zipper again for the 2013 edition. Over here in Europe most men like to put their wallet in the rear pocket and secure it with a zipper.

I was deciding between these and the Lefroy pant. Ultimately, I went with the Lefroy for a couple reasons. The first is the material, the palisade is made out of a less-stretchy and less soft fabric; if it helps, it's the type of material that makes a swishing sound when you walk. The second reason is they have a very short rise from the waist to the crotch, which leaves a less than desirable amount of room in that area for yourequipment. They are a thicker material, so for those concerned about the lightweight fabric of the Lefroy, the palisade is a good step up. Lastly, and the main reason I'm returning my pair, is that they arrived with a large black smudge/stain on one of the legs that appears permanent. I'm sure it happened in shipping, so I'm not reducing stars for that issue.

The fabric feels comfortable against the skin and i can tell that is wind-resistant. Granted that its not advertised either, but still hoped water resistance would be better for the price. It does have some weak DWR treatment but if you're caught in the rain for more than 10 minutes your legs will get wet. I really appreciate the the zippered pockets (main reason why I picked it over the revised Lefroy). Finally, regarding fit I do wish the legs were less baggy and that the cuffs could be cinched.

The fabric feels comfortable against the skin and i can tell that is wind-resistant. Granted that its not advertised either, but still hoped water resistance would be better for the price. It does have some weak DWR treatment but if you're caught in the rain for more than 10 minutes your legs will get wet. I really appreciate the the zippered pockets (main reason why I picked it over the revised Lefroy). Finally, regarding fit I do wish the legs were less baggy and that the cuffs could be cinched.

These were recommended by Arc'teryx for backpacking, but the waist belt lies under my pack's hip belt, and especially with a new thicker belt closure, there is no way I would be able to comfortably carry my pack. I will be returning.

These pants fit well and with many zippered pockets are the perfect travel hiking pant I have a pair in black saphire but unfortunately the kaleden colour is darker than shown. Some major walking trails in Japan such as 88 temple route require white pants and they are extremely hard to find. Arc tec why won't you make a true summer hiking pant in white or cream so we can look fresh on the trails I am returning this pair because colour is just not attractive

These pants fit well and with many zippered pockets are the perfect travel hiking pant I have a pair in black saphire but unfortunately the kaleden colour is darker than shown. Some major walking trails in Japan such as 88 temple route require white pants and they are extremely hard to find. Arc tec why won't you make a true summer hiking pant in white or cream so we can look fresh on the trails I am returning this pair because colour is just not attractive

They're nicely made and look good. But they remind me of low low rise jeans I wore as a teen. Not really suitable for hiking.

I have easily purchased 10-12 pairs of Palisade Pants. Tested, tried and true. Tomorrow I leave for my thru-hike of the CDT and am down to the very last detail and decision. Which pair of Palisade Pants do I wear? The Pre-2017 version or the revised Post-2017 version. Have both and the decision is the Pre-2017 pant. Purchased the new design last year and they felt low around the waist on first field test. Always seeming to slip downwards. Yesterday I took some measurements. Both pre and post are the exact same size 34-30. All the dimensions are equivalent except for the anterior side, top of the pant to the first Y intersection. The new design is 9" compared to the prior design of 10+ inches. The short dimension makes the new version feel like a late 60's era hip hugger and does not quite grab the Greater Trochanter. When used on the trail, with a backpack the slippage is significant. I am not sure if your drawing, specification and tolerance changed, or variables such as new manufacturing supplier or first production batch.In the end the pre-2017 Palisade goes, the new version purchased specifically for this hike stays home. What is the specification for the dimension in question and what is the tolerance +/-? Does the one inch variance fall within your acceptance criteria. Note the same measurement on the posterior side is equivalent on both versions.

perfect pant to replace my patagonia go to - as soon as i decided to stock up they dropped the stone color and all that is available are pathetic "hey i'm a hipster" colors - make something for the rest of us guys - these are awesome but i CAN NOT wear these colors

The fit of the Palisade pant was excellent except for the inseam length. The size that I ordered was a waist 28", length 32". This is the size I order regularly (dress pants, jeans, slacks, etc.) from any brand and the fit is spot-on. The waist, hip, and thigh fit very well. The construction is great! However, with how the inseam was cut/measured, my ankles were not covered. I would have required an extra 1.5"-2" of inseam length. I had to return the pants, which is unfortunate because these were the first hiking pants that fit me so well in the waist, hip, and thigh and have such great movement with my body.

I'm willing to pay more for the old model. The small zippered pockets were perfect for my leatherman, Chapstick, etc. The fit was perfect, and they were super durable. Is there any back stock I can purchase?

Whoever designed these pants never wore a prototype. The fly is ridiculously short. The belt clip constantly comes undone. There is no way to secure the end of the belt, other than by stuffing it into the tiny slot in the waistband (from which it quickly dislodges) or by folding it over the top of the waistband. If you think that these are picky criticisms, go ahead and buy a pair and wear them on the trail for a few days. I expected better from Arteryx.

I'm a size 24 waist, 5'6, 115lb girl and I have a hard time finding pants that don't rise to my ankle. I measured my inseam before ordering the size 0/31 and thought it would just fit me. Unfortunately they are too short. It fits my waist and hips perfect but they look ridiculous with shoes on. Unfortunately the next size up is a 2/34. Please make tall sizes for skinny girls!!!