Men's Pitchstone Outdoor Pants vs Men's Stealth Spring Chino Pants: which is safer?
Columbia Men's Stealth Spring Chino Pants is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Columbia
Men's Pitchstone Outdoor Pants
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
Nylon with water-repellent coating water-repellent finish
Confidence
45%
LikelyFluorochemical water-repellent coating (PFAS precursors and analogs)
PossibleFormaldehyde resins (durable finish treatments)
PossibleMicroplastic shedding
Our pick
Columbia
Men's Stealth Spring Chino Pants
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Good 59/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 1
Material
cotton-blend chino twill (no water-repellent treatment noted)
Confidence
72%
PossibleAzo dyes (synthetic colorants)
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Fluorochemical DWR (PFAS precursors and analogs), Formaldehyde resins (durable finish treatments) and Microplastic shedding on the Columbia and not on the Columbia.
- We flag Azo dyes (synthetic colorants) on the Columbia and not on the Columbia.
- The Columbia is Nylon with DWR water-repellent finish where the Columbia is cotton-blend chino twill (no water-repellent treatment noted), 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 Columbia is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Columbia grade, at 45% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric, which covers 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 hiking pants, see the full ranking