is arc'teryx stuff worth the money, or is it standard quality

>>9119091

There is a slight brand premium. You can get technically equivalent gear for cheaper, in other brands.

File: image.jpg (43KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 640x640px

>>9119091
veilance is worth every cent

mainline is north face / columbia tier garbage

>>9119102
any alternative brand recommendations??

>>9119194
north face, columbia, patagonia, mountain equipment coop (only if you live in the best country in the world), penfield

>>9119198

I have a GTX-pro Mountain Equipment shell and it's excellent. It is the brand that the mountain rescue use in the UK.

>>9119111
>mainline is north face / columbia tier garbage

You mean actually useful for outdoor use.

>>9119224
i meant garbage in the fashion sense

of course it's functional dude isn't that already implied?

would the align shell keep me warm in 10-30 degree weather? i would probably layer a bit.

>>9119091
that stupid logo gets me every time

>>9119364
NODE IS or bust
if you want to layer, get a hoody from veilance and then an outer shell

>>9119210
>mountain rescue
>uk

pick1

>>9119364

Is that in American or Rest of the World degrees?

If the lateral a shell will be fine.

>>9119385

*latter

I'm a fuckin' dyslexic at times - I swear.

>>9119390
i don't think you know the meaning of dyslexic

probably should add "uneducated" to your post

>>9119381

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-30049319

>>9119194

http://www.phdesigns.co.uk/

>>9119486
he's obviously european, so being uneducated comes with the turf

Yes, you do pay a. It for the brand, but you're getting high quality gear that's incredibly functional. I have 5 coats/sweaters from them. They make my life much easier when the weather turns to shit.

>>9119091

anything like the veilance stuff but cheaper?

>>9119374
it *really* is one of the worst logos i have ever seen...

I have a dri-fit shirt from them, and my friend has a jacket. Both really are amazingly well made. The actual technical qualities of the material dont seem to be any better than the premium north face(summit) or MEC/REI stuff you can find for about 80% the price.

I personally think columbia's omnitech stuff is the sweet spot for value. Not too fashionable, and the brand has a pretty poor reputation because of how cheap their lowest grade stuff is... but if you have $150 to spend on a soft-shell, you'll be better off with their grade max than you would with the shit you can get from northface.

>>9119646
arcteryx mainline

lol

stupid question dude

>>9119091
great if you want functional/technical clothes. design, durability and overall quality is actually better than just about any other 'outdoor apparel' brand i can think of, but it costs more than a lot of them too - it's not like you can claim you can get a north face jacket that's "just as good for 100$ less" because even if it's similar it's just not as good. you're getting premium but also paying for it, i suppose the law of diminishing returns may put it above some peoples' price ranges but i honestly think gear you expect to perform is worth buying the best. i may be biased cause i work at an outdoors store and get to handle the brands.

all that said; i don't regard it as being very fashionable. no more so than any of the other brands. it looks fucking cool and fits perfectly, they do their due diligence and design great garments but at the end of the day it's meant to be outdoor gear.

>>9119952

mainline doesn't look like veilance

>>9120129

I work in an outdoor store too and wouldn't buy Arc'teryx.
I'd buy a Mammut or Mountain Equipment top-end jacket.

>>9120142
outlier chinos

lol

>>9120142
we used to carry a brand called 'nau'. a couple guys from patagonia broke off and started it iirc. it doesn't look as sleek as veilance but it had a similar 'outdoors-tech-meets-urban-lifestyle' idea. previous seasons used to be kind of hit or miss but looking at their website now is kind of disappointing. maybe there's a gem in the current collection, but most of it looks over-designed imo.

>>9120202
>I'd buy a Mammut or Mountain Equipment top-end jacket.
i would too, but i'd also put arc'tryx on the same 'plateau' as at least ME - probably all 3 if explaining to a customer. we don't carry either of those tho, so i've less experience w/both.

also i own a few arc pieces and have no complaints with it for the prodeal costs; it's all 5/5 breddy good as far as i'm concerned...

>>9120202
do you work chain or retail, btw?

>>9120902
>chain or retail
shit, sorry i'm getting a little tipsy. chain or local?

>>9119512
those aren't mountains m8

>>9121063
They ain't tall but there some places in UK that can offer some of the most technical climbs available.

>>9119364
I have that jacket. If you mean Fahrenheit, absolutely not.

>>9119091
find the fabric you want
then find the jacket with the best finishing work.

IE you want gore-tex for some odd reason
go on gore-tex website then look at brands that produce clothing with it and look on their site

the brand with tech wear is more about cut, fit/finish and warranty rather than flat out measurement of quality

techwear that does not have a no questions asked replacement policy is going to be on average lower end than brands that do with the obvious exception of the retail chains like REI that warranty everything