[kimchijajonshim]

We debate this a lot on ezlounging. 686's GLCR line and AK are both great build qualities with lifetime warranties. The HH/Haglofs/TNF/Norronna/Arcteryx/whatever are typically made in the same factories as tons of other brands. Those brands' stitching and seam sealing don't have any magical properties going on haha. I mean sure, if you're comparing a top-of-the-line HH jacket to a bottom tier Quiksilver jacket or something, there will be a difference. But if I'm gonna shell out the cash for a 2L or 3L jacket, I'd rather buy from a snowboard brand.

Just picked up this season's Cyclic jacket. The entire AK line recently trimmed up a bit in their fit, it's not as baggy as it used to be but still keeps the length (which I like).
View attachment 164695

The bolded is basically regurgitating one particularly toxic, vocal asshole's opinion, one I don't bother engaging because I have better shit to do with my time than yell into the void at argumentative jackasses on the internet (note: I am not calling you the toxic asshole, you know who I'm talking about). But I'll address it here.

Even if the garments are built in the same factory, Arc'teryx demands a high spec and tighter tolerances, and charges a premium for it-- e.g. an Arc'teryx Rush retails for 10% more than the roughly equivalent Hover jacket. Talked at length over how they use a narrower and lighter seam tape... we can debate as to how much that design choice actually matters, but pretty incontrovertible that the material is harder to work with and requires additional time and cost.

My impression is that Helly Hansen isn't built to the same spec as Arc'teryx and Norrøna, and is in a lower tier probably more comparable to AK and Patagonia. The only snowboard company I know of that plays in that super, super high-end range is the Burton AK457 stuff and the most expensive 686 pieces. Haven't seen the highest end stuff, but I keep eyeballing 686 stuff and I'm just... really unimpressed. I want to like that company because they're snowboarder-owned but the fits and insistence on using insulation in everything turns me off.

That said, the new [ak] release looks promising. I just warrantied a crap ton of Burton outerwear and have a bunch of credits to use. I've tried on the new Cyclic jacket and the new fit seems pretty dope. I'm leaning towards the same Limeade shade color top and the Jake Blue Ossicone bib.

I still like my Arc'teryx stuff, but I'll probably save it for splitboarding, days I'm planning on hiking a lot, or traveling when I want to minimize luggage bulk.

 

[kimchijajonshim]

Can confirm, the Cyclic fits reallllllly well. It’s slightly longer and narrower than my 686 stuff which always seems to be shorter and wider.

Yep. I lifted my arm and the bottom hem basically did not move. Only jackets I've ever experienced that is Arc jackets. If I can get the same out of an endemic company, I will. Maybe Burton is stepping up game with the ice axe company muscling in on their turf lol.

 

[kimchijajonshim]

I had a Helly Hansen rain jacket (nothing to do with snowboarding) years ago and it didn't last long at all.... I had the same problem with one from Marmot. I am not sure I have enough data to make a statement about the company based on that.

Most of the big ice axe brands build some entry-level crap, same as most ski and snowboard brands. TNF, Marmot, Helly Hansen, Outdoor Research, Mountain Hardwear, etc. all build some good stuff on the high-end, but most of them also make some lower tier garbage.

Flipside is you can get those brands at serious discount compared to the companies that are more protective of their branding (Arc'teryx, Norrøna, Patagonia namely). I've gotten 3L Goretex Pro jackets from the TNF Outlet for like $70. You can routinely find all those brands from the first paragraph on Sierra, Camp Saver, and various other outlet sites for dirt cheap.