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

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

Patagonia

Men's R2 TechFace Hoody

PFAS grade

Poor 45/100

Overall grade

Poor 27/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 3

Material

Polyester shell with water-repellent coating treatment

Confidence

78%

Possiblewater-repellent coating treatment chemistry (non-PFAS)

ReportedPolyester microfiber shedding

PossibleHeat sensitivity and thermal decomposition

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.
  • We flag DWR treatment chemistry (non-PFAS), Polyester microfiber shedding and Heat sensitivity and thermal decomposition on the Patagonia and not on the Columbia.
  • 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 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 35% confidence against 78%, 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 softshell jackets, see the full ranking