Why are they so poorly designed?
Or how about something like this:
Montane Terra Alpine Shorts
Edit: no back pocket apparently, just an extra silly leg pocket.
I too am a shortarse and need shorts with a shorter than normal inseam. I picked up a nice pair of shorts in Gap with a 10" inseam that are a perfect length for me.
They are not made from a technical material or have a fancy brand name but they are worth checking out.
Columbia make a zip off pair of trousers that may suit.
I'm a SA too, but the shorts part fit fine just above knee. Two cargo pockets, two front pockets, two rear pockets and a belt with fly.
I don't remember name, but made from "omni wick".
I actually bought some noth face zip off trousers that fitted that description. I think they are the "Horizon" "Pants"
They have a beltloop and drawcord for the waist, a zipped fly with a popper, not button.
They have the two "conventional" pockets and a zipped "phone" pocket just behind the right hand side - that takes a passport comfortably without getting in the way when sitting down. There is a rear zipped pocket and one with a velcro closure.
There are no cargo pockets, which as you say is usually a good thing.
I find the cut pretty good. In fact I have sometimes worn them as trousers, and appreciated the slight articulation at the knees - usually theyremain as shorts.
The downsides are that the fabric is ripstop nylon and feels like it, and the shorts do have that slightly annoying zip.
"SilverRidge" Convertable pants are the ones I have, 10" inseam.
I agree. I hate the stupid fashion for so called shorts that hover just above the knee. If you are baring legs why not do as much as decency allows. Rugby shorts, the more traditional ones with two pockets, a fly and a tie waist are good but hard to get in anything other than balck or white.
If I wanted to build empires modern shorts might suit but other wise what a waste of fabric.
One other thing to note about shorts, it's not a good idea to wear them in sheep or deer areas. Ticks can easily attach to you.
Given that we know ticks can infect Lyme's, long pants would be better where you could find ticks.
Orienteers often particulary keen to cover up because of the ticks while going cross-country. IIRC Roos' record on a recreational run through the woods was a dozen!
However, plenty of places where they're not an issue. If you want shorter shorts the Bags ones have a 5" inseam. If you can find an older pair on eBay (there's a reasonable turnover) they're a couple of inches shorter (my preferredflavour, unless I'm on the bike).
My biggist amount in one day, so far, was 17.
The little "nasty little b's", seem to like me.
Others get midges, I get ticks.
I omitted to mention that I like my shorts to be quick-drying but I suspect that most of you took that as read.
Bags (and their short cousins) are made of a high spec polycotton which dries quickly. If I've cycled to work in Proper Rain (TM) and my Bags are soaked through they'll generally dry out in around 15 minutes. They're the sort of thing you can pull on damp and have them dry from body-heat.
though I balk somewhat at the price.
It does seem on the high side, but my experience is they last very well. I reckon on about a decade of fairly regular use from a pair of Bags or Bags Shorts. And it is worth checking out eBay to see if there are any your size as there's quite a few on there when I look and quite cheap too.
I've just bought a pair of polycotton shorts that satisfy all my requirements for £15.30, including my Ramblers' discount, from Millets!
Thanks again for all the advice and help.
Ontario is a vast adventure playground just waiting to be explored and experienced
Minimal & lightweight footwear designed to enhance your outdoors experience
Become a fan of OutdoorsMagic
Follow us on twitter
Sign up to our free newsletter
Meet partners in our forum
Other Immediate Media Sites
Our eCommerce Platform
© Immediate Media Company Ltd 2012. This website is owned and published by Immediate Media Company Limited. www.immediatemedia.co.uk