Men's Stealth Spring Chino Pants vs Abisko Hike Trousers Men's: which is safer?
Columbia Men's Stealth Spring Chino Pants is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
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)
Fjallraven
Abisko Hike Trousers Men's
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 8/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
G-1000 HeavyDuty fabric (65% polyester, 35% cotton), water-repellent coating unspecified
Confidence
42%
Possiblewater-repellent coating leachability and unknown chemistry
PossibleAntimony residue in polyester fiber
PossibleMicroplastic shedding during washing
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Azo dyes (synthetic colorants) on the Columbia and not on the Fjallraven.
- We flag DWR coating leachability and unknown chemistry, Antimony residue in polyester fiber and Microplastic shedding during washing on the Fjallraven and not on the Columbia.
- The Columbia is cotton-blend chino twill (no water-repellent treatment noted) where the Fjallraven is G-1000 HeavyDuty fabric (65% polyester, 35% cotton), DWR coating unspecified, 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 Fjallraven grade, at 42% 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