Men's Ascender Softshell Jacket vs Men's R2 TechFace Hoody: which is safer?
Patagonia Men's R2 TechFace Hoody is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Columbia
Men's Ascender Softshell Jacket
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
Softshell fabric with water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish
Confidence
45%
LikelyPFAS in water-repellent coating finish (reported separately)
PossibleFragrance or skin irritants from water-repellent coating application
Reportedwater-repellent coating degradation and reapplication necessity
Our pick
Patagonia
Men's R2 TechFace Hoody
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
analysis pending
Verdict
pending
Hazard flags
none flagged
Material
Polyester shell with water-repellent coating treatment
Confidence
78%
Where these two actually differ
- We flag PFAS in DWR finish (reported separately), Fragrance or skin irritants from DWR application and DWR coating degradation and reapplication necessity on the Columbia and not on the Patagonia.
- The Columbia is Softshell fabric with durable water-repellent (DWR) finish where the Patagonia is Polyester shell with DWR treatment, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- The gap is 45 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 45% confidence against 78%, 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 softshell jackets: see the full ranking