Bugaboo V Waterproof Men's Pants vs Women's Torrentshell 3L Pants: which is safer?
Patagonia Women's Torrentshell 3L Pants is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Columbia
Bugaboo V Waterproof Men's Pants
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 8/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
Nylon/polyester with water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating
Confidence
42%
PossibleFormaldehyde resins in fabric finishes
PossibleMicroplastic shedding during wash
PossibleTeflon-type coating or Teflon-family coating integrity
Our pick
Patagonia
Women's Torrentshell 3L Pants
PFAS grade
Poor 45/100
Overall grade
analysis pending
Verdict
pending
Hazard flags
none flagged
Material
Nylon with water-repellent coating water-repellent coating finish
Confidence
72%
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Formaldehyde resins in fabric finishes, Microplastic shedding during wash and PTFE or fluoropolymer coating integrity on the Columbia and not on the Patagonia.
- The Columbia is Nylon/polyester with durable water repellent (DWR) coating where the Patagonia is Nylon with DWR durable water repellent finish, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- The gap is 25 points, wide enough that this is not a close call, and the Patagonia is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Columbia grade, at 42% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric: materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →
More rain pants: see the full ranking