Bushwalk Australia

Bushwalking jackets used to be quite long. Deep in the archives I may have some that went to the knees or close. There seem to be three reasons for the length.
1 This protects the legs to a moderate extent without putting on overpants.
2 One can sit on a wet surface and not get a wet bum.
3 With a suitable pack, the jacket can be used as a bivvy, covering the top of the pack.
I've used all three.

Contemporary jackets are quite short, reaching the hips or a little lower. This saves weight but it means that overpants must be carried. Also, shorter jackets are probably colder - air can more easily get in.

I'm interested in views about jacket length. Which is better, longer or shorter? How long should a jacket be? If you had a choice, what length would you choose? TIA.

Longer.
Slightly above knee length to top of knee cap preferably.

Depends on how the 'clothing system' is configured. We now have convenient and comfortable waterproof and quick dry pants, waterproof packs etc, the requirements on the jacket are very different now than those years when rain and weather protection were largely dependent on the sole jacket.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Long.
Just above knees is right
The modern short jackets are useless in my opinion

I agree that new lightweight fabrics etc reduce the concern about weight involved with jacket and pants, but for those of us above average height, a shorter jacket is just too short. It leaves you vulnerable to the cold wet patches where jacket doesn't meet pants when moving and short jackets provide more avenues for stray cold wind gusts to get through the defences. My experience anyway.

I used a long jacket in my youth but I've got quite used to a short one now. If I'm guaranteed really wet cold weather I use waterproof pants which probably weigh as little as, or less than, the long bits on my old first generation goretex jacket anyway.

In saying that, a longer jacket is more versatile - but I the ones that i remember having were overengineered and overpocketed and weighed about a kilo.

Thanks for the posts, useful. I have several long jackets, two of which I use. The first has the brand name so faded it cannot be read. The material is Z-cote or similar, in the style of the very old oiled japara jackets. There's two patch pockets and an internal map pocket. This jacket goes to mid-thigh and weights 650 grams.

The second is a One Planet Cat and Dog, Gore-Tex. This jacket has two patch pockets and a big internal map pocket. It goes to mid-thigh and also weighs 650 grams.

Both jackets are at least 20 years old and still work. The first one is good in scrub, very tough. The second is best in snow and wet. Except in snow I've not worn overpants with either jacket for ages. Due to the long sleeves it's possible to leave over-mitts at home for most non-snow trips - just pull the hands into the sleeves.

Interesting. I have the latest incarnation of the Cat & Dog and there is no map pocket, but there is a bit of a weight saving, coming in at about 570g or so. I wonder why they deleted it?

Re: length. My experience extends only to waist length or 3/4 (mid-thigh). Ive never worn anything that comes down to the knee and am happy to wear overpants if the weather warrants it. With the cost of the kind of gear I'm not sure I would want to sit on it and risk wearing it out/loading the fabric with dirt anyway.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

I like a jacket that extends below the err...undercarriage.. .if you know what I mean.
This puts the drip line at a more suitable level if I don't want to wear overpants.

Strider wrote:Interesting. I have the latest incarnation of the Cat & Dog and there is no map pocket, but there is a bit of a weight saving, coming in at about 570g or so. I wonder why they deleted it?

Re: length. My experience extends only to waist length or 3/4 (mid-thigh). Ive never worn anything that comes down to the knee and am happy to wear overpants if the weather warrants it. With the cost of the kind of gear I'm not sure I would want to sit on it and risk wearing it out/loading the fabric with dirt anyway.

My Cat and Dog has big clunky zips that probably weigh more than the current ones. The map pocket is mesh, quite light. I suspect that the zips and fabric together make up the 70 grams difference. The map pocket may have been taken out to save costs, madness in my view. Except for my very early jackets, all have had map pockets, very handy for a map, compass, camera, GPS and sunnies. I like the fact that the map pockets are all inside the velcro flap. Mid-thigh is a good length for me.

neilmny wrote:I like a jacket that extends below the err...undercarriage.. .if you know what I mean.
This puts the drip line at a more suitable level if I don't want to wear overpants.

True. A shorter jacket means that too much of shorts will get wet, and it's colder.

At least below the bum would be nice. Women's jackets tend to be shorter than men's from many manufacturers... apparently we think looking fashionable and showing off our waistline is more important than staying warm and dry

If I'm taking shorts on a bushwalk, I like a rain jacket that ends at the top of my kneecap. If I'm taking long trousers then I prefer a short rain jacket plus overtrousers.

Shorter is fine for me, just over the hips is best as I like to feel unrestricted when moving. However ask my girlfriend and she would say that over the butt would be best, because who likes that getting cold??

Lophophaps wrote:My Cat and Dog has big clunky zips that probably weigh more than the current ones.

Latest version also has #8 YKK zips

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

Long. Mid-thigh at least. I do have a short OR jacket but only use it for fairly gentle rainforest type walking.
The length is even more important with the current fashion for hipster style rainpants. Even without a pack you get a draft up the back whenever you move, especially bending over.

I take a short jacket and couple it with a ultralight waterproof kilt (78g) for more concerted rain events. Lightweight and flexible (and uber fashionable (not)).

I've just purchased a Macpac [(incorrect) - Prophet] EDIT Resolution which is considerably longer than my other rain shells. It's got good coverage of my backside, which is unfortunately becoming more of a priority with age!
Hopefully this won't ride up at all.
The pockets are better placed than my other heavier jacket too, with better access while wearing a pack. Just a pity they didn't make them with pit zips

And I agree with NNW re stupid 'hipster' rainpants for hiking. Bring back 1980's high waisters!
I confess when it's really cold I tuck my thermal top into my undies to keep them down....tmi?!

It's like current trend in jodhpurs too - low waist. Bum cracks on horseback are NOT a good look (especially when some combine it with a muffin top and a short shirt)

I definitely like the longer style jacket too for all the reasons above. I have a Macpac Hollyford, heavy but good for cold wet blustery conditions.

Onestepmore wrote: Bring back 1980's high waisters!

no, no, No, No NO!!....



maybe its a bloke thing but before the mid 90s all pants and shorts for men came with this bizarre tubelike extension that covered the abdomen. How is one supposed to tighten your belt unless the belt sits on the hips?

Even now on some trousers I have to double the top of them over to sit on the hips. What's with wanting the belt to squeeze your stomach instead of the bones of the hips?

The best compromise is trousers that have a high posterior and lower front - I have some softshell ski pants built that way.

A belt does not need to be pulled gastric-band tight to hold your daks up. If the pants are appropriately shaped at the top they will cinch at the waist comfortably, without falling down and without excess material and seams and bands under the *&%$#! hipbelt, which is incredibly uncomfortable.

We aren't all built like Russ Hinze, you know.

Hi NNW.
The problem is not a gut - surely if I had a gut harry-highpants daks would be better ?- i could cinch it up between gut and moobs.

If I hike harry-highpants daks up to my abdomen i have insufficient gut to cinch the belt tight and it falls to my hips.... leaving me with a seam hanging betwixt crotch and knee. Unless I cinch the belt really tight or roll the top over a few times like a rolltop pack liner.

So i get a choice between squeezing my abdomen or chafing my thighs off. Or i get trousers that are athletically cut with a beltline at the hips...

i did state that this could be a bloke only problem.

Maybe it is a bloke thing. Many women tend to have a bit more in the way of hips and backside, and a little less in the way of waist, so the extra shaping and material of a waistband at the waist is a more natural and comfortable fit.

Long
The longer the better for bushwalking
Down to the knees in front and cut Artigi style in the back down to the calves
Short jackets are for climbers and downhill skiers who wear bib and brace pants

north-north-west wrote:We aren't all built like Russ Hinze, you know.

Thank goodness for that NNW


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

north-north-west wrote:We aren't all built like Russ Hinze, you know.

One hopes. He's dead.

in reality a lot of customers are only using the gear to walk in the park or around town because its now fashionable to wear those designs in the city. they arent cut for fit people but for the average well endowed westerner. if theres decent rain those people are less likely to be outside out, they are less likely to put up with their legs getting wet and will get matching rain pants when they get the jackets. some americans were talking to nzers in nz, they asked if they were NZer's , the NZers asked how did they know, the yanks said you're gear colour doesnt match, americans tend to buy matching colours in their opinion.
i think most jacket designs come from countries with different weather, either it doesnt rain that much when it does rain or its cold and they tend to have overtrousers on when it rains to keep warm, and designs for climbing gear have also penetrated outdoor gear designs, major brands advertise sponsored alpine and big wall climbers to the masses, most of whom will never do anything steeper than a walk or do all their climbing in a gym or at low altitude in good weather. it seems some down under companies have aped overseas designs,
short jackets used to be unknown in NZ brands. a lot of manufacturers just ape what each other are doing, often its hard to tell one companies design from another , look at colours, certain colours are popular in certain years...

In the last year I found a few old jackets that sufficed, but now they are at the end of their lives, and I'm getting serious about a jacket. I've narrowed it down to two jackets, both Mont, Austral and Tempest
Austral has a bigger map pocket and a smaller zip, which is fiddly and tends to catch on a storm flap. I was thinking of putting in a new zip and a stiffer storm flap, but everything is taped shut. $400

Tempest is a similar cut, smaller map pocket (too small in my view) and a bigger zip. $530

If the Tempest map pocket was bigger I would be tempted due to the bigger zip, which did not jam for me in the shop. Views on these two jackets would be valued. Also, are there any others in long?

Would you be interested in my old J&H CaneToad? It has plenty of years left in it and it is too small in the shoulders for me now

Moondog, thanks, but I'd need to put the jacket on, and you are at the outermost extremity of the known universe. Of course this is where I am to you. The only picture I can find is here
http://bushwalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=19105
Maybe I should save $4.00 and go to an op shop.

I'll put it in the post for you to try on, you can always cut off the Artigi extension if you don't want it