Men's Stealth Spring Chino Pants vs Abisko Lite Trekking 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

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 Lite Trekking Trousers Men's

Fjallraven

Abisko Lite Trekking Trousers Men's

PFAS grade

Bad 20/100

Overall grade

Bad 0/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 3

Material

G-1000 fabric (65% polyester/35% cotton blend) with water-repellent coating finish

Confidence

65%

PossibleAzo dyes and colorfast heavy metals

LikelyMicrofiber shedding during laundering

Possiblewater-repellent coating durability and reapplication hazard

Where these two actually differ

  • We flag Azo dyes (synthetic colorants) on the Columbia and not on the Fjallraven.
  • We flag Azo dyes and colorfast heavy metals, Microfiber shedding during laundering and DWR coating durability and reapplication hazard 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 fabric (65% polyester/35% cotton blend) with DWR finish, 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.

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