# Mini-review of the Patagonia R3 Jacket



## js (Mar 11, 2005)

I have owned my Patagonia R3 Jacket for over a year now, and I wanted to share my opinions and experience of this excellent jacket.

The fleece is part of what Patagonia calls its "Regulator" system and is made by Polartec. They claim that it is more advanced than any other fleece, and one review I read on this stuff had the title "The end of fleece?" implying that this stuff was going to be replacing all the old type fleece, because it is lighter, thinner, warmer, and better at controlling moisture.

And I believe it. Before it got stolen in college, I owned one of the older Patagonia fleece pullovers, which was heavier, thicker, and not as warm as my R3 jacket. Also, I sometimes felt a bit clammy when wearing it. The regulator fleece, on the other hand, is just marvellous. It has become my favorite jacket, and that's saying a lot because I used to be a die-hard wool fan, specifically Filson products, and wore my Filson Double Mac for 10 winters in a row. Yet the R3 is almost as warm as the Filson (and warmer than it in windy conditions) and is only a fraction of its bulk and weight and breathes at least as well as the Filson, and probably better.

The fit and finish and detail work of the jacket are impeccable and it has stood up to a great deal of use. I even use it as a sweater in the house if it is cold inside (our heat is somewhat erratic). Unlike the fleece I have owned in the past, this material is still looking good after a year. There is some pilling, but it is not objectionable and is hardly noticeable. The jacket can be easily machine washed and dried and has not lost any performance over time.

I have only two very minor issues with the jacket, one of which I only had at the beginning. The collar when zipped up all the way will push against the bottom of your chin and/or neck when you look down. Either I got used to this and it no longer bothers me, or the collar softened up or both. And the stretch cord rig-up for cinching the bottom of the jacket around your waist is designed to be done by a single pull from inside the right front pocket. It works, but every now and then it gets in the way a little bit from the cord which travells from the pocket to the bottom of the jacket.

I bought this jacket to go along with my R2 vest (which is every bit as impressive) and my Patagonia and Marmot baselayers. When I wear my Patagonia baselayer, the R2 vest, the R3 jacket, and my Marmot hard shell, I am set for the most nasty bitter cold stormy weather imaginable, and the total weight and bulk is about the same as my Filson Double Mac. For a long while, I claimed that synthetics still had not surpassed wool, but I think that is no longer true. (Even so, I still love wool, and I still use my Double Mac from time to time, if I have to do some heavy, dirty, or rough work in the woods or outside, such as chopping, carrying and stacking wood, or heavy bush whacking in the forest. I never worry about thorns and twigs harming my Filson.)

Overall, I can't recommend this jacket highly enough. For most of the year, I pretty much live in it. The only times it is not sufficient is when a cold wind is blowing hard; being a fleece, it will not stop the wind very well. But during these times, I simply add on my hard shell, and that combination alone has been adequate for any but long term exposure. At around a $130 I think it is a great bargain and I just wanted to let people know about it.


----------



## KevinL (Mar 11, 2005)

Sounds nice. Would this jacket be suitable for 10-20degC? That's assuming you wear only the jacket and a t-shirt. I'm looking for something in the range of 0-15 or 10-20.


----------



## Joe Talmadge (Mar 11, 2005)

Thanks Jim, this jacket definitely does sound interesting.

Joe


----------



## greenLED (Mar 11, 2005)

can you zip it inside a breatheable hard shell?


----------



## js (Mar 11, 2005)

KevinL,

The R3 Jacket breathes so well that I can even wear it inside a cool (60 or so F) house and be very comfortable *if I am not doing any physical work*. So I would say it would work just fine in 10-20 C weather over a T-shirt unless you were hiking or chopping wood, or unless you were getting direct full sun, in which cases it would probably end up being too warm. 0-15 C over a long sleeved shirt is just perfect for this jacket, or even colder than that. Over my lunch break I walked across part of the campus to get some soup and it is about 0 C and lightly snowing and even though I didn't have my hat and mittens, I was just fine.

greenLED, yes, actually, I think there is a Patagonia breathable (Gortex, maybe?) hard shell into which this jacket will zip. IIRC, it is the "Liquid Sky" jacket or something? Not sure. And I'm not positive that it's not some other regulator garment which will zip into it, but I'm pretty sure that any of the R2, R3, or R4 jackets are compatible.

But why does it have to zip inside as a liner? It can just work like a pullover insulation layer in combination with any hard or soft shell of the right size.


----------



## greenLED (Mar 11, 2005)

Thanks, js. I agree about not having to zip to another layer, but sometimes it's nice not to worry about finding that extra zippper pull among all those layers (I get cold easily).


----------



## 03lab (Mar 12, 2005)

Ok, now we need a group buy. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


----------



## KevinL (Mar 12, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*03lab said:*
Ok, now we need a group buy. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif 

[/ QUOTE ]

_*sticks head out*_ GB? Where? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

(you know you are addicted when you start participating in most of these GBs)..

I took a look at the Patagonia website, the Synchilla micro looks very interesting. Looks like what I'm after.


----------



## moeman (Mar 14, 2005)

I've been wanting the R4 jacket for a while....
money's not there though.
i went to the Alpine shop and REI looking for a good spring/fall jacket this weekend and tried on the R3(on clearance) but wasn't happy with the fit/weight...
ended up getting the Core Skin jacket.
like it alot so far...
thanks for the review!
chris


----------



## GiveMeLight (Mar 14, 2005)

Thanks for the review. I may have to get one of those. I'm always looking for new fleecewear, high or low end. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif (wearing fleece right now at work actually)


----------



## js (Mar 14, 2005)

moeman,

Problem (or advantage) with the R4 is that it is a wind blocker fleece, which means that it doesn't breathe as well. The R3 may seem too light to be really warm, but appearances can (and in this case, ARE) deceiving. It's amazingly warm for its weight. Add an R2 vest underneath it, and you're talking serious insulation, with very little bulk.

Still, there are a lot of good choices out there, and depending on how makers do their sizing, one company's medium can be too small, while the large is too big, so even if you like the garment, you can't consider it.

Everyone else,

I forgot to mention that this fleece really does insulate even when wet and it dries very fast. I've worn it in the rain before to the point where it was soaked through, and it still kept me somewhat warm (but not as warm as before, of course). When I got back indoors, I simply hung it up on a hook and it dried in an hour or two (can't remember exactly, but it was fast). One review I read said that while hiking, your body heat alone would be enough to drive away all the moisture and dry it out--and I believe it, although I haven't tested that claim yet.


----------



## Mike Painter (Mar 14, 2005)

How does it compare when wet with wool?


----------



## js (Mar 15, 2005)

Mike,

Interesting question!

I have some experience wearing wet wool, and while it really does continue to keep you warm, it is highly unpleasant to wear cold wet wool. And it stays wet for a long time. And when it is wet, it is insanely heavy.

I don't know about relative insulation values of wet wool vs. wet fleece, but I would choose wet fleece over wet wool anyday, with one exception: for socks in warm weather hiking or field work, I prefer wool. I think I also prefer wool socks in cold weather, too, but I haven't tested the winter-use (i.e. thicker) fleece socks yet, and so I have nothing to compare against. In any case, wool is far less smelly than fleece. Although, the Marmot baselayers are treated with an antimicrobial that takes the edge off of the intensely bitter and pungent smell that synthetic underwear usually develops after a day or less of use, which helps, but only a little.


----------



## Mike Painter (Mar 16, 2005)

It might be unpleasant but it will keep you alive. 
I've not seen any recent comparisons but up until recently nothing was better at keeping you in this state. There was an expidition that traced what was believed to be an early irish trip to the US. They started wearing the latest high tech gear and within a week were wearing the same wool clothes the Irish seafarers wore 1000 years ago.

But that stuff had the lanolin left in...
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eeew.gif


----------



## js (Mar 16, 2005)

Mike,

As I mentioned, I am a big wool fan, and I would be happy if this were true, but I suspect it is merely annecdotal, although wet wool certainly may be a better insulator than wet fleece. I simply don't know.

But what I do know is that I have read on several outdoors type sites and in several magazines that the latest synthetics are superior to wool in almost every way, and most especially in terms of warmth to weight ratios.

Again, I have no favoritism to synthetics. If anything, I lean towards the natural, so I would have no problem with whatever the truth is.

But there are many reasons this historical retracing expedition may have switched to wool, the most important of which would be for historical reasons (!) They SHOULD be wearing what the original trekers were wearing. Isn't that the whole idea of these types of ventures?

Anyway, I can probably come up with plenty of extreme condition expeditions that relied entirely on synthetics, most significantly climbers and mountaineers.

And from personal experience, I can say that if I am doing hard outdoor work, such as running or hiking, in cold weather, I find that synthetics are just as good or better than wool and that they are significantly more comfortable and lighter weight. The only downside is the stench that developes.

Anyway, my point is just that the lastest generation of synthetics is surpassing wool, in some ways at least, if not most. This is a recent event, and rests somewhat on things like Scholler Dryskin 3X dry (sp?) on the soft shell garments, such as the Serendipity Jacket from CloudVeil.


----------



## js (Mar 16, 2005)

I found an interesting review of the CloudVeil Serendipity Jacket that bears upon the wool vs. synthetics discussion.

I have a Marmot "Membrain" waterproof-breathable hardshell, and I can tell you that to call this "breathable" is to very much stretch the truth. If I am working up a sweat at all, the hard shell will start to feel very much like a plastic garbage bag, just as this reviewer says. The best thing about this hard shell (I can't remember the exact model) is that it has massive, full length pit-zips so that I can add lots of venting and still retain a fair amount of shielding from the rain or snow.

But if I were out hiking or cross country skiing or climbing (which I don't do) and working hard, I would ditch the stupid thing and just suck it up and live wet. I'd rather be wet from the outside water than from the inside. In this situation, I'd go for a wool outerlayer instead of a fleece outer layer.

But fortunately, one doesn't have to choose bewteen a hard shell and a wool or fleece jacket. In between lies the soft-shells, which have really made incredible strides in the past years. The don't insulate like a wool or fleece jacket, they don't block the wind as well as a hard shell, and they don't block the rain as well as a hard shell, and they don't breathe as well as fleece or wool; instead they combine a little bit of everything in just the right proportions to make the best garment currently available for those who are doing aerobic work in cold, wet weather.

The Serendipity Jacket is actually going to be my next major purchase, but I was waiting for it to go on sale at a local store. Which it has--40 percent off!--but they no longer have my size in black, but only in a light bluish color, which I don't think I'm that keen on. Oh well.


----------



## Mike Painter (Mar 17, 2005)

I love wool and the fact that wool can keep you warm when wet is far from annecdotal. In the expidition story (which is annecdotal) they switched because the fancy stuff failed them, they were cold and wet using it. Thye were warm and wet with it.

However I am warmth loving far more than wool loving and ready to use what ever will keep me warm.

My 30 plus year old Mickey Mouse boots still keep my feet warm and they use the "plastic garbage bag" approach mentioned above.
There is at least one school that believes this method should be used more. The first layer would *not* breath.
The middle layers would insulate and the outer layer keep everything dry.
The main idea is to minimise heat loose by evaporation and the conduction of warm water away as it is wicked by material.

It works in my boots and probably would for the rest of me but i don't mind clammy warm feet.


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 17, 2005)

i love patagonia products i went snowboarding in colorado last week and it was bout 20 degrees and windy most days and i was warm as could be in just my marmot phoenix hardshell and patagonia silkweight baselayer this is the best cold weather setup i know of and both pieces together weight 15.25 oz for a size large in both and its about 2 mm thick in the thick spots but warm and light and very breathable i love it


----------

