Shorts

Why are they so poorly designed?

20 messages
23/06/2012 at 18:55
Has anyone else experienced this problem?

I want to buy a pair shorts with this specification. The leg length must be above the knee, they must have belt loops, a zip fly, two side pockets and at least one rear pocket.

Most shorts seem to have cargo pockets which require them to be too long in the leg for me. I have short legs and find that shorts that cover my nobbly knees ride up in an irritating manner.

I've been offered flimsy running shorts, usually supported with a piece of string and with only the minutest of pockets and without a fly, but these don't suit me.

Where have all the good shorts gone?

Hugh
23/06/2012 at 19:35
Rohan Bags Shorts do everything your spec calls for, Hugh.
23/06/2012 at 19:41
What pete says plus rohan fusion shorts which are very slightly longer in the leg. Both are excellent shorts.
23/06/2012 at 20:56

Or how about something like this:

Montane Terra Alpine Shorts

Roos

Edit: no back pocket apparently, just an extra silly leg pocket.

Edited: 23/06/2012 at 20:57
23/06/2012 at 21:28

Hey Hugh,

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.

 http://www.gap.eu/browse/product.do?cid=80242&vid=1&pid=851165&scid=851165017

23/06/2012 at 21:48

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".

23/06/2012 at 23:30

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.   

24/06/2012 at 02:01

 "SilverRidge" Convertable pants are the ones I have, 10" inseam.

24/06/2012 at 08:09
Montane Terra Shorts would work pretty well for you
24/06/2012 at 09:19
These might fit the bill but they are 100% cotton.
24/06/2012 at 12:08
24/06/2012 at 17:01
I'd add another vote for Rohan. They don't always look great but they're incredibly robustly made and pockets loops zips and stuff you use tend to be very well designed.
24/06/2012 at 20:03

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.

24/06/2012 at 21:05

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.

24/06/2012 at 21:26

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).

Pete.

24/06/2012 at 22:27

 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.

24/06/2012 at 22:42
The other week I was wandering around in long heather and growing bracken where Red Deer had been for 8 hrs and picked up 2 ticks, once when woodcutting where deer were ( a lot of the time in mature bracken ) some of the boys would get 6 ticks a night but I only got 1 or 2, perhaps they prefer some people over others, but I couldnt say for sure .
25/06/2012 at 19:49
Thanks for all your helpful advice. I omitted to mention that I like my shorts to be quick-drying but I suspect that most of you took that as read. I have an inside leg measurement of only 28" and I'm looking for shorts with an inside seam of no more than 8" so the Rohan Bags sound ideal though I balk somewhat at the price. I don't believe I've ever spent more than £20 on a pair of shorts.

I'm aware of the tick problem and carry a tick removal gadget but I've yet to be bitten.

I'm also painfully aware of the need for a modest leg length. Many years ago when living in Texas, my wife and I were invited to breakfast at the LBJ Ranch by Ladybird Johnston, the widow of the former President. She wanted to discuss the possibility of my arranging a wildflower tour of England. I was was expected to take she and some of her friends on a short walk around the ranch to see the display of spring flowers.

Unfortunately, it poured with rain so instead we were taken into the hangar that used to house Airforce 1. We were supplied with exercise mats and conducted on a course of vigorous exercises by Mrs Johnston's personal trainer. I was wearing shortish shorts and as we were lying on our backs kicking furiously, my wife whispered to me 'Clap the cymbals darling, your shorts aren't decent!'

That may have been the reason why Mrs Johnston never came to see England's wildflowers.

Hugh
25/06/2012 at 21:35

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.

Pete.

26/06/2012 at 14:28

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.

Hugh

Your say
email image
20 messages
Forum Jump  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter
Sign up to our twitter feed

Promotions