- Home
- Women's Clothing
- Women’s Pants and Denim
- Women's Snowboard Pants
- Special Blend 5 Pocket Pant - Women's - 2011
Special Blend 5 Pocket Pant - Women's - 2011
2011 Model No Longer Available
Image
Be the first to upload your photo of the 5 Pocket Pant - Women's. >
Special Blend 5 Pocket Pant - Women's - 2011
We understand your uncontrollable urge to sport your favorite jeans on the hill, but it's just not a good idea. Keep your streetwear clean and safe at home when you sport the Special Blend Women's 5 Pocket Pant. This 15k waterproof pant has the styling you want with the protection from the elements that you need in the deeps.
Bottom Line: Street looks with mountain protection.
Leave your mark on The Wall.
how's the iron lung corduroy's waterproofness? haha
how's the iron lung corduroy's waterproofness? haha
By: redeyejedi716
November 11, 2012
Looks like pants I would wear anywhere
By:
Four Horsemen
December 14, 2011
These pants are cut and styled just like any pair of jeans. I like to keep it stylish on the hill and dress like I regularly do, just with a little extra snow style. These pants are perfect for that. Love em. Super cute with my red Special Blend Flasher jacket.
Most of the brands sizing charts put me in a large, but special
Most of the brands sizing charts put me in a large, but special blend sizing chart looks like I would be a xs or s. there is no hip measurement listed. My hips measure 38 and my waist 29. What size would I fit best in?
By: candice kline
June 21, 2012
Change me.
Tech Specs:
- Material:
- [shell] polyester, waterproof breathable membrane; [lining] closed-cell mesh, printed taffeta
- Fabric Waterproof Rating:
- 15,000 mm
- Fabric Breathability Rating:
- 10,000 g/m²
- Insulation:
- none
- Fit:
- Liberty (relaxed)
- Venting:
- inseam
- Side Zips:
- yes
- Gaiters:
- yes, with boot hooks
- Seams:
- fully taped
- Waist:
- adjustable waistband, belt loops
- Pockets:
- 2 hand, 2 back
- RECCO:
- no
- Recommended Use:
- snowboarding, winter activities
- Manufacturer Warranty:
- 1 year
Comment on Four Horsemen's review >