Paramo Quito Jacket

The fabric works the same way as the original with the proofed outer shrugging off wind and the bulk of the rain while the liner, based on animal fur

 Jesus H Christ.  

Posted: 04/12/2009 at 22:00

I have a 7 year old Paramo and it still sheds the water. so to produce a lighter jacket is a bonus.

Posted: 04/12/2009 at 22:32

winhill wrote (see)

The fabric works the same way as the original with the proofed outer shrugging off wind and the bulk of the rain while the liner, based on animal fur

 Jesus H Christ.  

Posted: 05/12/2009 at 00:38

I realise that the Quito is supposedly to be used in more moderate temperatures, but was wondering whether anyone has yet used one in winter conditions?

I have an Alta II jacket which I find too hot and too heavy. I was hoping to be able to replace it with the Quito. I want to be able to go backpacking in very cold or very wet conditions.

 I like the full venting possibilities of this garment which seems to make it more versatile than the Velez Adventure Light.

Any comments?

Posted: 05/12/2009 at 17:09

Posted: 05/12/2009 at 21:32

For winter, you can't cover any of the face with the hood, it is not big enough to pull down above the forehead and can't pull up above the chin, and as Jon's review it is not long at the back. In cold conditions you will be colder than other Paramo jackets.

Obviously you can stretch into winter via warm trousers and can cover face in other ways, but my view is this is more a 3-season than a 4-season jacket, which actually probably makes it more versatile.

 Due to the thin fabric, it does roll up small, my Quito large its not much bigger rolled than my small Marmot Aegis shell which has comparable hood+venting.

Why on earth they made it short in the torso and so baggy in the middle is something that only makes sense to the pixies which skip and dance around the Paramo design team after their special lunchtime mushroom soop.

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 16:33

I only tried the Quito on in the shop, but I'd agree with Nigel in that for me the hood means that it's no way a jacket for full winter mountain conditions.

Whereas I've had my Velez Adventure Light since June (have had Aspira smock for 10 years and standard Velez for 4) and am becoming more and more satisfied through use that it'll provide winter levels of protection. I reckon the hood is as protective as the Aspira and better then the standard Velez. I'm going to test it out further as winter progresses but right now I'm thinking it'll go with me to Norway in March for ski-touring, which is the job the Aspira has served splendidly for the last 10 years.

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 17:30

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 17:50

So, the considered opinion seems to be that the Quito is probably more suited to everyday use, dog walking and three season outdoor use and the Velez Adventure Light more suited to full on harsh, cold or wet conditions - partly due to its hood providing more protection ?

 Is there suficient venting options with the Velez Adventure Light ? One of the major advantages (in my opinion) of the Quito is the huge underarm and torso vents - do people get too hot with the Velez Adventure Light - I know it is lighter than the "standard" analogy fabrics - and I like the versatility of the smock design for walking, backpacking, cycling and running - but is it still too hot ??

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 19:55

Hi C.O.M.  I've been using the VAL since it came out.  On a wintery, windy day today in the Cairngorms, with a Mountain Top underneath, we had to use the side vents on the walk in and in a sheltered area.

However, at the top of the hill we also put on Torres gilets to make it a bit cosier and kept them on on the way down until we got back to a more sheltered spot, where we ditched the gilets, but kept the smocks on.

So - to me and my wife, it's not too hot.

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 20:16

Thanks for that Eric.

I am now beginning to think that after all, the VAL may well be more of an all round garment than the Quito, as I originally said, my Alta II seems just too hot.

I have recently bought a Fuera smock, which is exceptionally versatile, and have a torres gillet also - so hopefully I can be prepared for all conditions.

I use Cascada trousers, but tend to be very warm again - hmm - surely I cannot justify new VAL trousers too ?

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 21:35

The Alta 2 was my first Paramo jacket a few years ago and I thought it was great at the time, if a bit heavy, voluminous and warm.  Since then, I bought the Vasco and original Velez Adventure.  The Adventure was good enough to make me sell the other two, as I didn't need anything else, but the VAL improves on that because of the weight, so the Adventure went as well.

I now only have the VAL, Fuera Smock, and Torres Gilet, which I reckon covers me year round.

I never found the Cascadas too hot because of the zips, but I wouldn't wear them on a dry summer's day.  If you wear them a lot, as I do, you don't need all the extra material of the Alta 2, as there's too much unnecessary overlap and weight.  That's where the relatively short VAL and Quito score, because you're well protected in rain, snow and wind as long as you wear Paramo trousers.

Someone said that the overlap between trousers and the new light jackets was too short, but I've found that the waistbelt on your rucksack helps to prevent wind and rain from blowing up there and haven't had a problem. 

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 22:00

Thank you again for your help and advice. I think your comments about cascada trousers combined with a lighter weight top do make sense, it is certainly overkill to combine them with the Alta II.

I have tried to research both lightweight tops (obviously the Quito is brand new, so has not really been tested yet). The reviews of the VAL are very good - assuming that the lightweight outer is robust enough (as it seems to be) to survive normal wear and tear (as opposed to wreckless abuse), then I think that the VAL will be my next purchase, and I may well try to sell the Alta II.

Posted: 06/12/2009 at 23:26

The VAL has more fabric at the front than the Quito. The VAL has the button-up over the zip at the top which provides more front-protection, and the VAL has the upper outer pouch and a lower inner full-width hand-warmer. The Quito has just a basic front zip and no insulation from pockets. When cycling or walking into wind, the Quito is cooler on the body than the VAL. Whilst I've not had leakage issues, I would expect the VAL to resist front heavy rain for longer than the the Quito due to the button-up front top and the lower smock.

Smocks are harder to take on/off in the urban environment but just dandy for many hours outdoors. Jackets unzip and off more easily and of you don't remove at least a full zip opens up for max ventilation. Horses-for-courses rather than "better" "worse" points.

So I'd say Quito suits more urban and warmer temperatures than the VAL. Many find Paramo too-warm and the Quito helps in that regard but I'd suggest not really a 4-season inclusive of winter altitude.

Whilst the Quito is shorter than the VAL (not sure how much by, I don't have side-by-side option) I don't think that particularly impacts insulation, so I suggest its really just the VAL has more fabric and layers on the front than the Quito to conduct less cold to the torso and resist rain better.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 01:45

To be fair, Paramo has never suggested that the Quito is anything other than a light-ish, multi-sport jacket, from their web site:

'This lightweight, close-fitting multi-activity jacket has been designed for high energy activities and warmer temperatures.'

The Velez Adventure Light is more of an all-rounder and as several posters have noted, has a slightly more protective hood. And, to be honest, although the Quito may in some ways be intended to work better on a bike, I still use a standard Velez Smock for winter mountain biking in preference.

Fit is a personal thing, but the Quito is cut on the loose side for this sort of jacket. As I understand it, Paramo kit works best when cut so there is some slack in the system, presumably so the fabric isn't under pressure from a tight fit. Unfortunately lightweight, fast-moving type jackets tend to work best with a snugger cut, which is a bit of a quandry for Paramo. As it stands, the Quito is too loose for, say, road cycling, where descending at speed leaves it billowing and lifting.

Obviously that's all relative to the wearer's build, but I'd love to see Paramo do a lightweight, slimmer-fitting jacket in addition to their current range. Incidentally, the Furtech kit is cut closer fitting and works on the same principles, so worth a look if you find Paramo generally too baggy.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 10:08

A couple of other things, yes, the main zip has a stormflap behind it, albeit quite a narrow one, as do the vents. Seems to be sufficient. On the cut front, it is quite short and a bit boxy - reminds me of some of the shorter-cut TNF jackets I've used in the past. I don't have any problems with the cut at the front for running, biking etc, but I'd prefer a more pronounced drop-tail at the back.

The insulation thing is open to debate. The pump liner in the Quito and the Velez Adventure Light is the same as with other current Paramo garments, the difference in fabric weight comes from the outer shell fabric which is a lighter weight fabric with micro-grid rip-stop.

Some users say that they find the lighter fabric less warm, but logically insulation levels should be very similar and that's how I find it, though psychologically, the garment maybe 'feels' less protective because it has a less substantial feel. Of course there's also less jacket in terms of length, so that may also be a factor

Our Velez Adventure Light is being hammered long-term by a mate of mine and, so far, has given no cause for concern in the durability stakes.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 10:20

COM, what Jon says applies to the Alta II as well, so not sure why you think you will be a lot cooler in one of the other Paramo jackets.

Out of interest what do you wear with your Alta II? I find mine is perfect in temps under around 12°C with just a baselayer. This weekend I wore mine with the Paramo Mountain Vent Pull-on and was fine in temperatures starting off around 3°C and probably getting as high as 7 or 8°C later on. It was also gusty and drizzly. I had the vents on the coat and baselayer open most of the day. I walk at a reasonable pace (did around 20km in four hours) and there were two ascents.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 14:05

Jon Doran wrote (see)

The insulation thing is open to debate. The pump liner in the Quito and the Velez Adventure Light is the same as with other current Paramo garments, the difference in fabric weight comes from the outer shell fabric which is a lighter weight fabric with micro-grid rip-stop.

Some users say that they find the lighter fabric less warm, but logically insulation levels should be very similar and that's how I find it, though psychologically, the garment maybe 'feels' less protective because it has a less substantial feel. Of course there's also less jacket in terms of length, so that may also be a factor

I'll repeat that there are issues other than the fabric weight, the Quito has less layers of fabric on the front torso, in use there is cooler from conduction than Velez.

I was out yesterday in changeable conditions, one other historical Paramo issue of weight has mean its more commonly a "wear all day" garment partly due to high breathability, good venting but also the weight. The lighter weight means its less volume and less weight to carry. Yesterday as sun came out, I didn't have backpack, I derobed and rolled and wore around the waist.

I'd agree lighter is better. It is better to have the weight saving and choose how you use that saving.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 17:18

Thanks guys. Very interesting comments about insulation levels between the garments. Ben, when using my AltaII, I only usually wear a wicking baselayer, although I now have a torres gillet to "play with" to mix and match as conditions dictate. As others have said, it is not a case of consciously sweating - as the liner does its job, it's just a case of feeling very warm (too warm). I accept that perhaps there will not be a large noticeable difference if wearing either the VAL or the Quito instead.

 However, there is a very noticeable weight and bulk difference. I guess it doesn't matter really whilst actually wearing the garment - but it would make a significant difference when removing the garment and carrying it in my backpack. Hence, part of the reason for trying to find a replacement for the heavier and bulkier Alta.

 Incidentally, I have tried both jackets on today in Ambleside - the VAL is indeed slightly longer at the front and does seem to be a more substantial "all rounder" than the Quito.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 17:26

"Incidentally, I have tried both jackets on today in Ambleside - the VAL is indeed slightly longer at the front and does seem to be a more substantial "all rounder" than the Quito."

 Is this an either/or decision? You can stretch a Quito into more winter situations by adding other items, but a VAL is not as convenient in urban situations due really to the smock problem of over-head-removal.  They are similar enough its not worth going for both VAL and Quito, pick one for your most common usage scenarios. There might be an argumen, say, for owning Quito and AltaII.

In my case with Quito, its better fitting my common needs, and I was just going to pack my Fuera smock to add over for the worst days at altitude, so at base I'd be vented-Quito, then zipped-Quito then layer with Fuera if it gets snarly. In snarly conditions last 2 weeks I've not found the Quito lacking, my concerns with the many zips hasn't manifested leaking.

I'd advise packing a windproof to anyone, because no jacket is perfect.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 18:34

You certainly wouldn't want the Alta II in your pack. That's why I only wear it when its colder.

Then long Paramo jacket + soft shell trousers or short Paramo jacket + Paramo trousers.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 19:57

The Alta II is longer than Velez right?

I was in brief blizzards and freezing temperatures in Houston last week, was unexpected but Quito did fine for the 20 minute walking I was doing.

Posted: 07/12/2009 at 22:46

So I went out my local hills for a 6 hour walk in very heavy rain with on my upper a thin baselayer and the Quito and on my legs my Cascadas.

 Temperatures were high around 60F, I was never too cold and when sun came out I just removed the Quito as I couldn't cool enough just with venting.

For most of the time the rain was very heavy, several inches of rain, very heavy at times. I found  I was ok overall apart from that a Quito is so short it was pouring rain onto the upper portion of the Cascadas finding any vulnerabilities which in particular are the Cascada's front pockets, they became full of water, quite a puddle and I discovered in time to pull my Cascadas as high up as I could manage. I had the pockets zipped.

Still, enough water had got in to make my underwear damp and fortunately once I'd given myself a Paramo wedgie my body heat and the pump liner did their bit and I dried out.

Conclusion: Quito short jacket + Cascadas pockets = weakness.

Really the short-cut of the Quito is a design mistake, they should add an inch to the length.

Also, and posssibly this is an issue Paramo can/should easily solve is the temperatures I was walking in was high and I was venting and I found the zips of the pit vents open only from the ends so exposing a low-down hole, I found I was getting quite a bit of rain coming and wished I could open from the middle and not from the end of the pit vents. Make sense?

I am going to clean my Cascadas this evening, possibly this might help with their vulnerabilities exposed by the short Quito. There was not the same beading off my Cascadas as my new Quito, but hardly dirty Cascadass

Posted: 13/12/2009 at 02:28

Posted: 13/12/2009 at 12:31

Here we go again on the same old subject. Thank you Nigel for your very detailed comments. The simple and obvious response to your discovery about the length of the front of the Quito would be to state that VAL is an inch or two longer at the front (it is still quite short) - once again attracting all the arguments/discussions about the merits of each respective garment.

Ultimately as you said yourself - both garments are different having "differences" which perhaps should not be viewed as better or worse, but more suited to the particular use the garment is going to be used for.

 The real problem is that we are ALL looking for one garment to do absolutely everything - and of course, it does not exist.

Posted: 13/12/2009 at 16:19

Parky Again wrote (see)

considering the long list of things you think are wrong with the quito i'm surprised you are persevering with it. i would have binned it ages ago.

well nothing perfect exists. I loved my Velez apart from the smock and urban situations. The issue is buying an item mailorder unseen is difficult.

I got a good price for it and you're correct, I may sell it, but I'm thinking the lighter fabric may trickle down through Paramo's range and I may go with something else in addition or replacement in a future season, a year+ from now, as I am in the cool+wet 4 month season I don't intend to "bin it" now.

For problem I encountered yesterday, now I know about that particular vulnerability I may fabricate some kind of skirt for the front, I have some old waterproofs from my kids I can butcher, and I have some Kamleicka with no vulnerability at the front I was stomping merrying across Yorkshire Moors 3 weeks ago.

If you want good points:

•  The hood is both light and moves with the head, the visor is sufficiently forward+stiffened it does a good job to keep rain out of the eyes.
• the hand-warmers work well.

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 05:35

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 08:45

Lol. I have jackets which don't The Velez couldn't turn with my head, and I have a Marmot Aegis which has a floppy hood which isn't that good.

 I was trying to make some positive statements.

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 16:17

My 2p worth...

Pt 1 of 2

I've always wanted to try a paramo but never really did anything about it as the waterproofs just never seemed suitable for what I wanted. The smocks which would've been a good fit for mtbing would have cooked me alive unless it was properly cold and the jkts - well, the less said about their asthetics the better!

So when I read that they were to produce a lightweight "high activity" jkt I decided to give it a look. Weightwise, it's noticeably lighter than the Velez light smock I had been mulling over and it feels even lighter when actually wearing it. The cut is exactly how I like my jkts (even for walking in) and it seemed relatively well featured. It also looks pretty smart although beauty is obviously in the eye of the beer-holder...

Anyway I bought one and took it out around the lakes this weekend. A weekend completely lacking in rain - which was slightly disappointing as far as waterproof jkt testing is concerned! So on Saturday I decided to wear it as a glorifed windproof and was blown away by the increase in comfort when compared to the paclite I've been using recently. Normally I'd only have the paclite on when it was actually raining and it'd come off as the last raindrop hit the ground but despite wearing a 200weight merino wool base layer under the jkt I was occasionally too warm but never uncomfortable, I didn't take the jkt off all day and just played around with the venting.

On Sunday I again wore it as a windproof whilst doing a quick circuit of the fairfield horseshoe. On this occasion the air was a bit more humid and I eventually decided to swap the quito for my hagloffs windshirt but was again impressed at how much more wearable it was than my paclite. The top of fairfield was very windy and quite cold so I swapped back and the quito did a fine job of keeping me comfortable, the hood remaining in place and taking the place of my buffhat with no real problems despite the wired hood being a bit floppy - a stiffened peak might have been better. I kept the jkt on for the descent as I wasn't working as hard as on the climb and felt no need to replace it with the windshirt even when off the top, in the sun and sheltered from the cold wind.

One thing which did impress me was the quietness of the fabric, strolling down from the summit I was struck by just how silent it was - not something I remember thinking about any other jkt before!

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 17:06

Pt 2 of 2

It's not a perfect jkt though and I feel that a few of the features could be improved for little cost. The cuffs are weak and poorly designed as outlined in my "broken quito" thread - in addition they are nearly impossible to use whilst on the bike, hard to use when running and average at best whilst walking. The pitzips have no tabs which makes these also nigh on impossible to grab whilst cycling and tricky if running - not ideal on an "adventure jkt" and these problems are obviously worsened when a rucsac is worn. Finally all the drawcords are untethered leading to lots of excess cord when tightened up which then blow around in an annoying fashion.

Obviously these could be rectified but paramo probably want to keep the overall weight down as far as possible. This is a mistake in my opinion as it always seems to be the weight and warmth of the fabric itself which puts people off paramo, not the total weight of the product. The jkt would feel just as light and fast with these alterations and be slightly more functional - I'm intending to fit tabs to the zips myself and to get the cuffs and drawcords professionally altered.

All told however this jkt has come much closer to being my perfect do-it-all jkt than anything else I've tried and would probably only be out of it's depth in true winter conditions.

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 17:07

... also coming to its defence (Parky needs me to)

• Packs small, not much bigger than my shell
• On a volume basis including its insulation, compared to packing fleece+shell, its unsurpassed.
• Wrapped and tied around the waist its comfortable.

I agree, the weaknesses, once you've discovered them are customizable away. I'm thinking about a Pertex skirt I can clip and drop when needed, either attached to the jacket or my Cascada's belt. I have a Montane Featherlite jacket which is slowly dying and I can butcher it....

The flappy sleeves can be fixed, I'm not sure any Paramo jacket has slim sleeves?

I am slowly converging on a Marmot Aegis (crap hood for cycling) with an eVent peak cap (cycling) for my warmer-weather top and the Quito for cooler with some customizations. I am not selling mine, not til there is a lightweight jacket alternative, e.g. the 3rd Element in a Lightweight. I care for my stuff and I'm sure when I sell it will get a reasonable price.

 Did I mention where I was wearing the jacket I was dry...  it does it's primary job very well, just a little miffed a company the age of Paramo makes such mistakes. I guess its the new design team.

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 17:21

One of the main reasons I actually bought this was the roomy sleeves, I hate not being able to push them up over the elbow. In addition I sometimes wear body armour when out on the bike so having space for that is a necessity.

I just got the impression that nobody in the design process had ever tried the jkt when cycling - more like they just completed a ticklist of features. Light fabric? Yep, Vents? Yep, Dropped rear? Yep, Drawcords? Yep etc etc

Still the most useful jkt I've ever bought though. Well, assuming it's waterproof anyway!

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 17:32

Mr Hoppy wrote (see)

Still the most useful jkt I've ever bought though. Well, assuming it's waterproof anyway!

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 17:56

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 18:07

standard paramo design criteria - sleeves will be roll uppable.

sounds like just a little tweak here and there for pull cords and zip tabs. will the lighter face fabric be as "waterproof" as the original fabric...??? (dramatic music)

people tend to just quote weights with paramo stuff and how terrible it all is. i've just acquired another viento jacket which has a LOT of zips - any "weight" provided by these zips and flaps is more than offset by enhanced functionality which means greater comfort; something i highly regard.

interesting about the furtech simon. it may have been "leaking". there was a "leaking" trouser thread a while back since which i've done a proper re-proof and have yet to test them in the shower - as they "leaked" i'm not going to use them until i'm satisfied that they don't "leak". i'll be posting the shower results...

Posted: 14/12/2009 at 18:27

I see Jon's done an update. Yes, they cut the Quito too short and placed an inch or so too much fabric all around. I'd also suggest small details like a chin guard tuft of fabric over top of the zip and some poppers to hold the jacket closed when unzipped would help. Overall, these changes would not affect the weight.

The Velez is probably better for cycling than the Quito, but there is also the Vista which doesn't mention pitzips has something looking them in the photo.

Posted: 03/02/2010 at 03:29

"I've only been using the jacket for a couple of weeks, but it is excellent so far, I particularly like the ventilation when I am cycling."

"However the one piece of equipment I keep coming back to is my Quito jacket, which I use more than any other item of clothing.

It's extremely comfortable to wear, doesn't sound like a bin liner and is reliably waterproof, but for me the biggest advantage is the huge amount of venting, which means I'm comfortable climbing up, skiing down, and everything in between."

from the paramo site it seems that some people are very happy with it.

Posted: 03/02/2010 at 08:40

Well I own the Quito and owned the Velez before. The issue when cycling is that the Quito has no poppers on the zips. To get a thru-ventilation you unzip from the waist-up the pitzips and the top of the front zip as much as needed for cooling, if it then rains, the lack of poppers on the front and the pitzip means a lot of rain comes in. The side-vents are more wing-like. The Velez had side zips which are not forward-facing so getting a thru-ventilation without as much rain incoming.

The post saying best item relates those the poster owned.

My posts are really that some small changes can make the Quito better, and not that its totally flawed and shouldn't be bought by anyone. The idea of a jacket, not smock, with long pitzips, is a winner in my view, just make it less expansive,longer, add some poppers so can pinch it and make it more comfortable around the top. I'm not sure I'd agree with Jon's updated review of a removable hood, but a tuck-away flap would be useful.

 The problem i had with the Velez was the smock and the challenge in adding/removing.

Posted: 03/02/2010 at 16:04

So I sold my large Orange Quito and bought a medium Black Quito. I still feel there is a missed opportunity to make it better (which simply are: longer, a few poppers on the zip, and a tuft of fabric over top of the zip). but the hood is excellent for pouring rain cycling and I've not found anything better for ventilation which is so light it also packs small.

Posted: 08/10/2010 at 03:42

Well some poppers behind the zip would presumably make the storm flap a bit more secure when the zip is done up too. Having seen that mentioned elsewhere I checked and iirc its a tiny bit scary at present.

(the other bits I checked had the very secure looking poppered storm flaps.).

Posted: 08/10/2010 at 10:05