Men's Tall Heights III Hooded 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 Tall Heights III Hooded Softshell Jacket
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 12/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Polyester shell with water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish
Confidence
35%
PossiblePFAS in water-repellent coating (fluorochemicals)
PossibleVOC off-gassing from coating and adhesives
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 coating (fluorochemicals) and VOC off-gassing from coating and adhesives on the Columbia and not on the Patagonia.
- The Columbia is Polyester shell with DWR (durable water repellent) 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 35% 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