Pants: dorky or uncomfortable?

[gavvin]

I would be very interested to see what kind of response you get to that letter. In my (very) limited experience with National, I got the impression that the people making the decisions are almost completely out of touch with the things that happen at the unit level.

[csfunder]

I see that FScouter is attacking the person rather than discussing the topic.

 

The topic was the comfort, cut, design, durability, and cost of the Official Scout Pants. Personally, I am very easy on my clothes so for the pants to be knitting up with the limited number of hours of wear and with less than 10-washes, these pants are not as durable as less expensive pants from commercial camping stores.

 

As for the price, I remember the price tag of $55, but whether it was $55.00, $56.60, $59.55, or whether it was $66.55 (Venture Pants), the cost is rather steep.

 

No, FScouter, I was not trying to bolster my case by padding the numbers. Would "padding the numbers" be a form of lying? If I were lying, would I be breaking the first Scout Law?

 

You discourage input if you attack the individual rather than the issue. Whether it is me or the numerous others who have written giving feedback about the quality and cost of the uniform pants, stay focused on the issue. Your attack on the individual is reminiscent of the elementary school bully.

 

I had not read the Satisfaction Guaranteed, but I will take the pants back and attempt an exchange for the All Cotton Trousers even though they are $56.60. Yes, I would like to wear the Official Uniform. But, I'd like the Official Uniform to be a value both in price, function, comfort, and appearance. All of these characteristics are available from commercial manufacturers. And yes, my input through this forum with letters to BSA Supply have been efforts to follow channels to improve Scouting.

 

 

 

 

[FScouter]

Sorry if my post came across badly. When I see comments posted that I disagree with, or that are misleading, I feel obligated to post my personal experience, only for the benefit of the hundreds of other readers. The purpose is not to attack, but rather to post a challenging viewpoint.

 

The fact is that Boy Scout pants in normal adult sizes up to waist 50", and in the standard cotton/poly blend fabric currently cost $45.80. Boy sizes cost $37.35. That is the price anyone in the country will pay at any national Scout Shop, or through the catalog. It is inflamatory and misleading to publicy post that the price is "$55.00, $56.60, $59.55", when that is not correct.

 

The price for tall sizes, extra stout sizes >50" waist, wool fabric, or custom fit are more. If they are bought at a licensed retailer like the local sporting goods shop or hardware store, the price will be whatever that particular retailer wants to charge. So maybe you bought a something non-standard.

 

If pants wore out after 54 hours of wear, take them back and ask for a replacement. My personal experience is that I'm into the 7th year on one pair of pants and the 5th year on a second pair. And neither is worn out yet.

 

My personal experience is that the fit is perfect for my body. My personal experience is that everything I normally carry in pockets fit just fine into uniform pants pockets.

 

One more comment is that the Boy Scout uniform was not designed for hiking, backpacking, or 10-day 65 mile Philmont treks. It is not reasonable to expect that uniform pants fulfill that function. BSA does not make such an animal and it's not fair to complain that the pants don't work for those activities as well as a high-tech product from Columbia or elsewhere.

 

You'll be happier with hiking and climbing and backpacking clothes that are designed for those purposes.

[csfunder]

FScouter wrote: "It is inflamatory and misleading to publicy post that the price is "$55.00, $56.60, $59.55", when that is not correct.

 

2005 Boy Scouts of Americ Official Retail Catalog, Page 1 of Leaders' Section lists the above prices:

Item C582 $45.80

Item C992 $56.60

Item C960 $59.55

 

Since I purchased my pants from the District Scout Shop, I did not buy something "non-standard." This week I will see if they will honor the Satisfaction Guarantee.

 

FScouter wrote: "One more comment is that the Boy Scout uniform was not designed for hiking, backpacking, or 10-day 65 mile Philmont treks. It is not reasonable to expect that uniform pants fulfill that function. BSA does not make such an animal and it's not fair to complain that the pants don't work for those activities as well as a high-tech product from Columbia or elsewhere."

 

I've been involved with Scouting since the 60's. During my two trips to Philmont, the entire crew wore the Official Uniform throughout the trip. At that time, the shirts and pants were all cotton. Today, more versatile materials are available which. As for complaining that the pants don't work for activities like "hiking, backpacking, or 10-day 65 mile Philmont treks," I find the Official pants uncomfortable to wear when I'm attending the Scoutmaster's Round Table.

 

In contrast, there are many commercial brands that look as nice or nicer than the Official Pants, are available in varying weights of material, are available as trousers, shorts, or convertible pants, are less expensive, and would serve the many Scout functions which by your own admission, the Official Pants don't serve.

 

Stay focused on the issue and stop trying to attack me.

[Hunt]

I don't think fscouter is attacking you exactly, csfunder. However, my experience in discussing this topic is that some people have trouble accepting that complaints about the pants are JUST about the pants. Complaints about the pants tend to be interpreted as an attack on the uniform method as a whole. It's kind of a domino theory. Personally, I like the (cotton) shirt. I like the socks. I have no beef with the belt. I just don't like the pants, primarly because of the fabric. I think they could be at least a little more versatile (although I agree with the inevitable comment that they can't serve every purpose). I also think that it's too bad that currently about the only time scouts are seen in uniform is when only other scouts are around--they don't wear them when hiking, camping, climbing, etc.

[csfunder]

Hello, Hunt,

 

Thank you for the support that fscouter was not attacking me exactly. He stated: "It is inflammatory and misleading to publicly post that the price is "$55.00, $56.60, $59.55", when that is not correct. But if you go to the 2005 catalog, those are the exact prices listed so how was I being misleading to the public?

 

Thank you for presenting that nothing has been said criticizing a uniform, merely positive feedback to offer a better uniform. No complaint has been made about wearing the uniform.

 

With regard to when Scouts are seen in uniform, when we have Scout Night at an activity, all Scouts wear Class A uniforms. When we are involved in an activity, we all wear Class B uniforms. When I look back on my years in the military, for Fscouter to have anything to say to me about uniforms is a joke.

 

Ive seen many Scouts wearing the Official Shirt and commercial pants on hiking, camping, and climbing trips, and they feel comfortable in the uniform, the uniform satisfies the needs of the activity, and they look like Scouts.

 

So thank you for your support.

 

[csfunder]

LISTEN UP EVERYONE!!!!

 

Someone suggested taking the pants back to the Scout Shop and getting a refund. Thanks for the suggestion. They honored the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and I got a refund.

 

I'm still waiting to hear from the Supply Center regarding any possible uniform change.

 

Here's a question to ponder: "Does the Official Scout Uniform supercede the Scout Law?" How would Baden Powell feel about purchasing Official Scout Pants at an inflated price in comparison to other commercial hiking/camping pants or other uniform pants? Are we communicating contradictory concepts to the Scouts when we say "Be Prepared" but wear pants that are not comfortable for Scouting?

 

I'm all for a uniform, I'd just like it to be comfortable.

 

Thanks.

[SWScouter]

I'm sure Baden-Powell wouldn't buy the pants. He'd buy the shorts. Personally, I have no problem with the pants or the shorts. I find both of them comfortable.

[dan]

Pants and shorts are lightweight, fast drying. I have had the same pair of pants now for 9 years. they have held up well. I have even wore them on campouts. One pair of shorts I have, are 6 years old, no problem with them either.

If you want to know what the worst part of the uniform is it is the socks, Yes I know they have new socks made with better material, but I have 5 pair of BSA socks already.

[Hunt]

"Pants and shorts are lightweight, fast drying."

 

Has the fabric changed? My pants are a very heavy material.

[jr56]

Just my 2 cents worth. The fabric looks ok and fits ok, it is just not very durable. The fabric on my long pants starts wearing thin on the inside of my thighs after only a few months of wearing them to meetings. I gave up on wearing them on campouts a long time ago because they are just not durable enough. I also think the price is excessive. I jave only worn the poly blend style, so I can't comment on the durability of the other fabrics.

[csfunder]

Hello, JR,

 

Someone else suggested returning the pants to the Scout Shop since they have a Satisfaction Guarantee. I took mine back on Saturday and got a full refund.

 

What does "Thrifty" mean in the Scout Law?

If it means getting value for your money, then the current Official Pants violates the Scout Law. Maybe if enough people attempt to return the pants, the Supply Division will hear our efforts to get a functional pair of Official Uniform Pants that satisfy the requirements of:

1. Comfort

2. Fit

3. Design

4. Durability

5. Cost

 

On this thread, I've read others complain about the durability of the pants, the cut of the legs being too tight, pockets too small, and the high cost.

 

Hello, Supply, Do you hear our request?

 

Thank you.

 

Just my 2 cents worth. The fabric looks ok and fits ok, it is just not very durable. The fabric on my long pants starts wearing thin on the inside of my thighs after only a few months of wearing them to meetings. I gave up on wearing them on campouts a long time ago because they are just not durable enough. I also think the price is excessive

 

 

[hendrickms24]

"Scout pants cheap!" I don't think so since I have never had a pair ware out on me. I lloked at my sons pants and they are just as durable as they where when I was a scout. My son will be a great test for these pants because he ware out his jeans knees faster then we can patch them up.

 

 

Mark

[rjcluvvt]

I have read a lot of posts saying that the scout uniform was not intended for outings, treks, or hikes, and should only be worn for parlour scouting. But should the uniform be scrapped just because people are outside. Is it not importnat that people are in uniform when they go to places like Philmont? Wouldn't we want to bolster a sense of belonging at camporees and at other outings. The uniform should be designed to be durable for such outings. Summer camp staff wear out so many pairs of pants because the current pants are not suitable for the outdoors. There should be some emphasis in making the uniform more durable. It seems that if troops can wear their uniforms anywhere without immediate wear, then I feel the uniform would be more popular.

[IN scouter]

When I was a Scout, I had both the pants and shorts, and they were comfortable and durable. I wore them to every patrol and troop meeting,as well as four summer camp weeks and eight or nine Camporees (our troop said at those events, the full uniform was required). I outgrew them before I could wear them out. That was back in the early '80's. As a Scouter, I do have the shorts, but I went to Wal-Mart and found a pair of olive casual pants to wear in the winter months. In our pack, I'm the only DL with uniform shorts, or even anything close to uniform-looking pants, but does that affect our program? I'm heading to our Scout Shop for Wolf rank book, etc., so I may have to try on the pants. I personally would like to see a cargo-style pants that are nice enough for formal events and rugged and functional enough for camping. That's just my two cents.