Men's Rebel Roamer II Pant 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
Men's Rebel Roamer II Pant
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
nylon/polyester blend with water-repellent coating
Confidence
45%
LikelyPFAS in water-repellent coating
PossibleAntimony in polyester fiber
PossibleMicroplastic shedding during laundry
Our pick
Patagonia
Women's Torrentshell 3L Pants
PFAS grade
Poor 45/100
Overall grade
Poor 37/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Nylon with water-repellent coating water-repellent coating finish
Confidence
72%
Possiblewater-repellent coating finish composition (unstated chemistry)
PossibleVOC off-gassing from fabric and finish
Where these two actually differ
- We flag PFAS in DWR coating, Antimony in polyester fiber and Microplastic shedding during laundry on the Columbia and not on the Patagonia.
- We flag DWR finish composition (unstated chemistry) and VOC off-gassing from fabric and finish on the Patagonia and not on the Columbia.
- The Columbia is nylon/polyester blend with 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 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 rain pants, see the full ranking