I take a pair on every trip to serve as

1. pull over hiking pants to keep sleeping bag clean
2. warmth in camp
3. backup dry clothing

Interesting about the need for insulation on legs. The lower the temperature the more evenly spread over the whole body the need for insulation I find. At the coldest conditions the insulation is fairly constant over the whole body, vs warmer temps you'd more usually tune whole-body via just the torso.

Being active in cold is an interesting experience, the legs themselves do not feel cold but it can be impossible to get warm in your core, so actual uncontrollable shivering, as if the blood pumping through the legs comes back chilled and the core can't generate the heat to compensate. Interesting for active use, the typical protective body response of pulling blood to the core can't happen as the blood is needed to fuel the legs. Is that a typical experience?

However, at the sort of temperatures you're talking considering windpants, then yes, they are last to be added, more for just getting rid of a bit of smarting chill usually from rain, perhaps to help with rain keeping out of boots from run-off from the shins.

Lohnjohns - yes the closer the insulation to the skin the more the gain, but obviously if you overheat its a bit of an open striptease to de-layer. You can do quite a lot with cycling leg warmers, easier to add/remove, and indeed you can make a type of insulated trousers from shorts via cycling leg warmers and windpants over, this is more flexible and packs small. Challenging to get a decent fit so leg warmers don't fall down often.

nigel .... i pesonally consider the groin and thigh area to be "core" ... there a lot of heat loss through there ... im surprised on one has come upon the idea of a pair of insulated long shorts ... something synthetic with velcro/zips at the sides and a velcro/zip slit in the middle for a belay loop. should be fairly cheap ... that way you can just put it on at belays or stops/camp in winter as youll often have gaiters and boots anyways ...

basically a vest for the legs which is easy to get on/off .... maybe those down skirts sold at REI aint so yuppy after all, maybe ill wear one ;)

one of these days ill learn how to sew... oh well

Eric, totally agree the groin area is core but I say the whole area above the leg all-round including the rear is core. When cold wind from rear the shape of a healthy outdoors person sticks out there compressing any layer.

So I own some insulated primaloft full-length over-trousers, Paramo Torres trousers which cover inactive 40F down to active 0F.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NPTIv7hyPEw

The issue with baselayer longjohns is when the body becomes too hot, mine at least, is wanting to dump heat in the legs and the arms. Self-experimentation, I've tried under-insulating the core and leaving the legs over-insulated and its just a sweating nightmare, damp below cold above, so the body wants to have the legs underinsulated when it wants to lose heat. I suspect this is common for our species and why at the higher temps we all tend to overlayer the core first. For that reason wearing baselayer on legs when its warm enough to become a possiblity is not a good layering technique. That situation is when a windproof trousers comes in, add/remove as the last layer to handle the variability. So say a 10F situation I'd have regular polycotton trousers and add/remove windproof layer for wind and overlayer for stationary. Around 0F I'd have longjohns as no matter how active, that insulation is always required.

For "proper cold" (tm) absolutely, own longjohns and some 100wt synthetic trousers. Also my most recent most expensive purchase, happens to be a long 133wt synthetic jacket which the most difficult issue was getting one long enough to cover the core, as you say below groin and lower all away around, most synthetic jackets are too short and it is biologically impossible to get trousers warm enough to protect the rear due to the compression produced by the human shape when walking. I got a PHD Kappa.

This thread is about windproof trousers, yes I use them but its more a layering system either over trousers or bare legs in the 30F-60F situation, the higher temps if its raining to take the chill off bare legs.

nigel ... at that point i just use the rainpants i may be carrying if the conditions are bad enough to require overtrousers, but not enough for belay puffy pants ...

i believe that rain pants are superior as they are often full zip and fully seperating .... which means you can put it on/off at stops without taking off yr boots/crampons/snowshoes, etc ... and while not as breathable, they are fully ventilating with the full zip ... and who knows it may rain wet slush in those conditions ... that said i dont use em that often, i usually wear a heavier softshell pants or something like cap1 under my light softshells at that temp (0F-30F)

one thing i will generally do around 20-40F is wear thigh length underwear (if not wearing long johns) to prevent that area from getting too chillled, especially when raining ... i also often wear soft knee brace when climbing so that adds some warmth as well

all softshell pants and many hiking pants are windproof anyways these days ....

Edited by bearbreeder on 03/17/2012 09:03:00 MDT.

thought this thread on wind pants?

So for low enough temps when its possibility of rain, in a fairly narrow range, of 30F-40F, I'll be wearing some wear-all-day softshell waterproofs with side vents. Wore them this week for local short walking in heavy rain. However, it can't be much above 40F and active as simply too warm and where windpants kick on. Can't bike in them, too baggy. Very breathable and comfy and really wear-all-day contexts which requires it to be cool damp.

http://paramo.co.uk/en-gb/garments/detail/index.php?pgc=NIKWAXANALOGYLIGHTTROUSERSVELEZADVENTUREMENS

I don't know why some folks use meaningless terms like "shoulder season" in BPL. Its the temperature which is the only meaningful language. USA is huge, a cold winter in SoCal is nothing like a cold winter in say Chicago. If you were to ask my windpants when they'd be packed, its might be for a day in summer in San Francisco, when that afternoon ocean-cold wind kicks in and the shorts required at 90F in the sun of noon then aren't enough for the 56F at 5pm with damp fog blowing past.

eric said "all softshell pants and many hiking pants are windproof anyways these days ...."

exactly why my wind pants are seeing far less duty these day :)

Mike, hiking pants are very wind resistant but anything also waterproof aren't usually breathable enough. Often just adding a proofed Pertex overlayer is enough to shed a bit more rain and raise the temps of the layer under to keep them dry enough. So that's a few contexts windpants still have uses, to boost a little some hiking pants, to boost a little for shorts. My windpants are 4oz, and like you say mine aren't used much but they are packed many many times as a "just a bit more" layer.

The only softshell pants I have happen to be waterproof.

no official testing, but the DWR on my Rock Guides appears to be in the same ballpark as my Montbell windpants- so not much to gain, if I'm in shorts however than definitely some advantages to pants that shed some moisture

my wind pants are also in that 4 oz range (and pack VERY small) so I definitely see some potential in packing them when in shorts or conversely if I'm in tights snowshoeing or skiing

i think the OP was asking why people dont pack windpants ...

considering that many people wear hiking pants or softshell pants that are windproof and DWRed anyways, then you likely dont need em for wind protection unlike the upper body where people often wear a base layer and maybe a light fleece/shirt

some people as indicated may wear em for additional warmth in static/semi active situations ... but a pair of light rain paints will work as well and likely be more versatile

also while some people might find windpants durable enough for their own uses ... it all depends what you do ... i wouldnt want to scramble rough rock in em as the leg see quite a bit of abrasion, my 1.3 oz/yd windshirt developed pinholes after a few days out on the rock ...

Edited by bearbreeder on 03/17/2012 09:30:58 MDT.

Eric. It all depends on the context. I had posted earlier if the temperature conditions warrant bringing windproof pants, and if the context warrant tough-wearing, I have some very tough comfortable windproof pants, Paramo Fuera, full-length venting and boot-compatible.
http://paramo.co.uk/en-gb/garments/detail/index.php?pgc=NIKWAXWINDPROOFTROUSERSFUERAUNISEX

In the UK these are the only pants of that type - tough windproof. In USA I don't know the equivalent make. Its one of those buy-once-in-a-lifetime items.

Relative to much of my outdoor gear, quite low cost and appropriate to sacrifice to the rocks more than say my softshell pants which are roughly 3x the cost.

The weight of these, 10oz, due to the many zips and the tough fabric makes them never packed on multi-day hikes but just if I'm doing a day hike and conditions appropriate. Not waterproof but anything waterproof is too warm >60F, its just a protection booster. You could if you were describing them call them softshell but really its just thicker windpants.

Similarly for the upper body, if the context warrants a tough windshirt I actually own 3 all tough material, a smock, a jacket, and a venting jacket, the Paramo Fuera Smock, Paramo Fuera Peak (no longer made), and Paramo Fuera Ascent, bought of many years apart. The smock I found annoying, the Peak is lighter and the Ascent is more of a mountain all-day windshirt. The fabric is so thick and tough its absolutely what you'd use scrambling around rocks as in this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=smfCN1hoqfk

Some thread resurrection here, but I've been doing some thinking lately.

Like Eric, I normally wear light-colored softshells as long as the highs are lower than around 65-70 (often in the mountains). Any warmer, and I'm much more comfortable in shorts.

As such, when the weather patterns dictate that I'll usually be hiking in shorts, it'd be nice to have something warmer to wear in the early mornings, evenings and if bad weather moves in.

Typically, I'd just be carrying around softshells in my backpack, but that's a lot of unnecessary weight to be carrying, if the weather for the entire trip appears to have highs that dictate mostly hiking in shorts.

I think this is where wind pants are most useful, as Nigel has already stated. When you're typically preferring to hike in shorts, but need some insulation in the early mornings or late evenings (or unexpected large weather shifts). I'm often in more manageable terrain during these times (off ridgelines/talus fields/etc.), or even in camp, so wind pants durability isn't much of a drawback.

So, this would typically be, extended highs above 70 degrees (80s and 90s included) during the day, but in a mountain or marine climate, where cold winds/rain are quite possible in the early and late hours.

I'd like to experiment again with regular hiking pants used when hiking in these temperatures, but based on past experiences, I'll likely be more comfortable hiking in shorts and carrying the extra 3oz for windpants to prevent chills in the early/late hours, or in unexpected short-duration bad weather.

Edited by lindahlb on 05/18/2012 08:38:35 MDT.

"....65-70 ...." if it is dry then it about 40F-50F for me. My avatar image shows where my cold-feeling bits are, and its not my legs.

If its wet then raise the temps, the water is still at a temp it is 1000ft up and is conducting a cold temp to the skin than the local air temp so if its wet it might be say 50-60F for windpants. Even if its raining I sweat in anything other than bare legs above 60F. I tried about 3 winters back covering the legs and under-insulating the torso and I got sweaty legs and felt cold in the core at the same time.

When I grew up as a child in English school many decades ago, we had to wear shorts all year round til aged 12, so I think the cold sensors just got disabled. I was also brought up in the hills and so often active and I reckon a lot of heat is made in strong leg muscles. If I'm inactive then my legs will radiate heat out so I need warm pants for inactive.

The problem becomes somewhat reversed in the 0F-20F type range, when active the blood is pumping through the legs and makes my core shiver no matter what is on the core, and no matter how fast I move, but when inactive the blood flow in the legs reduces so I can get away with less insulation on the legs inactive than active.

Weird, but entirely evidence-based experience. Others the same?

Nigel, sounds like your experiences with softshells are with the heavier weight ones? Which models have you tried/owned? There's not a lot of them on the market, so they're not easy to find. The ones I've used tend to have a much higher temperature range. They weigh around 10-11oz in a medium-ish size.

I'll have to experiment with the warm legs, cold body thing. But I tend to have pretty warm legs as well. I could probably do shorts down to around 40-50 degrees in the wind as long as I'm on the move. But, the benefits of softshells, is that they're comfortable on the move up to around 65 degrees in the sun in calm weather, and you don't need to layer up when you stop or slow down in colder temperatures. Less hassle and fuss, messing with layers.

I also tend to wear shorts a little longer into the season (and a little earlier) than most folks. I also tend to sleep a little on the warmer side than most, my guess is the two are related (thermostat set a touch higher).

Adding wind pants w/ shorts (as I mention above) can be a useful strategy, but equally effective imo is using lighter soft shell pants- if the weather is conducive to pants.

Another consideration, for me anyways, is what is going to be more useful to carry when wearing shorts- my wind pants (4.8 oz) or my Cap 4 bottoms (6.2 oz)- usually the Cap 4's get the nod as they provide more warmth w/ just a small weight penalty

"I also tend to wear shorts a little longer into the season (and a little earlier) than most folks. I also tend to sleep a little on the warmer side than most, my guess is the two are related (thermostat set a touch higher)."

Goes to show how we're all different. I don't think awake and asleep thermostats run parallel for everyone. I need a lot more insulation when I sleep than others particularly on the legs.

"Another consideration, for me anyways, is what is going to be more useful to carry when wearing shorts- my wind pants (4.8 oz) or my Cap 4 bottoms (6.2 oz)- usually the Cap 4's get the nod as they provide more warmth w/ just a small weight penalty"

SO my legs are the most forgiving when active so i tend to give them the least gear attention, but I did a very successful multi-day outdoors trip in early cool damp spring using some Paramo Cambia longjohns which have a variable insulation, little/more due to a weave which has recesses on one side, smooth on the other side, if you have the holes facing skin it traps more heat than the smooth side. It works. I then layer with waterproofs for rain. A variation on that would be the longjohns under windpants if its not raining. I'd not combine rain with windpants over anything which soaked up water obviously so over bare legs which dry quickly or over non-absorbant trousers to give them a bit longer till wetting out is more common.

Softshell pants, I'd find them too inflexible, I'd be carrying them when active and yet when inactive they're not that warm? I've not tried an outdoors trip with this combination but my guess is the lightly insulated longjohns, a thin windpant and a shell will pack less on average?

Edited by nigelhealy on 05/19/2012 12:16:20 MDT.

yeah we're all different it sure seems :)

I don't pack rain pants anymore- they were rarely used, don't breathe very well and wet legs when on the move have never been a problem for me

I think wind pants w/ a good DWR would suffice in most instances, even if they wet out you'd still be warmer w/ them on- they also dry very quickly

> Softshell pants, I'd find them too inflexible, I'd be
> carrying them when active and yet when inactive they're
> not that warm? I've not tried an outdoors trip with this
> combination but my guess is the lightly insulated
> longjohns, a thin windpant and a shell will pack less on
> average?

I'd suggest giving the lightweight ones a try, Nigel. Anything in the 11oz range would be ideal. Definitely less than 14oz. As long as I can securely roll them up above the knee, I've never felt the need to remove them, as long as I gauge the trip's temperatures correctly.