Oakley XXL.....a rant.

MLB

MLB

Active member
Ok so here is the story. I see these kids on this site trying to buy xxl oakley puffy pants, jackets, etc on this site. Now i want to clear up some stuff because i just got some oakley xl stuff. First up, oakley is the nicest ski gear out there, and im never going back to any other brand of stuff. Second:ANY KID WHO IS UNDER 6 FEET, and LIGHTER THEN 170 LBS SCHOULD NOT....I REPEAT NOT get oakley xxl. I just got my oakley puffy jacket, and oakley troop pants in xl....and they are HUGE on me. Im 6 1, 185 lbs, and my crotch was literaly to my knees. This shit is huge. If tanner does rock the xxl, and is smaller then me, he must look like a real shit bag man cause oakley xxl is made so that fat people can look steezy. Seriously....people are on this site saying : Why is that guy selling his xxl oakley puffy3.5 pants?

To answer that question, there is a point in which this stuff is just way way too huge to physically wear ( belt or not). This is soo huge it will literaly get in the way of skiing. I was just trying to do my truckers and my jacket made it a hell of alot harder to do them. Im not saying that i don't like this stuff. Like i said, this is the best ski gear i have ever warn in my life, and i can pull off the xl, but any kid who thinks he can pull off the xxl and is under the sizes that i said is going to be piss when his pants falls to his knees every where he goes. Hate on me or not......once it gets too huge you look like a shithead and it just takes away from your skiing.
 
i agree utfor me im alittle over 6' 170ish and i get xl jacket and xxl pants not ganster baggy just the way i like it. I find that my HH francis 7 pants in xl are bigger then my oakley xxl
 
Agree on a few levels. However your title makes it look like you are going to personally hate on Oakley.. its misleading.
 
totally agree about situations where the crotch comes down past your knees, but in some other cases its not true. for instance, i just bought a XXL Helix jacket on here from Henry and im 5'11" and it barely reaches down to my butt. it is kinda baggy around the chest but not huge (im 175 lbs.) Its not nearly as long as say an Anorak in a Large or XL

it all depends on the model and how it fits on you individually. thats why i highly recommend either trying one on first and making sure you can move around in it or sellers posting pics of how it fits on them (most people do, thanks)
 
i dont like too baggy stuff

but not tight, like ill buy one size bigger then suggested for me
 
yeah...well i think its different for their shells, and different models of stuff. Im pretty sure they are made with different fits, but i have had the opportunity to try: Link Jacket, Paratrooper Jacket, Link Pant, Puffy Pant ( 3.5, 3.6)Evolution Lite jacket, and the Cohort.

I found the jackets had all a different fit. But i found that the pants were all similiar. Like i think that xxl is just overkill to me, but thats just my opinion. The size thing though is pretty much just a fact. Like this stuff is fuckin HUGE. Like there is a limit in my mind to just how big you can go before it takes from the skiing.
 
well im 5'11", 145 and i just bought xl puffys, so hopefully they arent gangster baggy, i like mine baggy, but still to have form around my leg.. hopefully they wont be gangster huge
 
its just opinion, i have L oakley pants and wish they were XL, and would deff rock XXL. and i am 5'8
 
im 5'11" 160 and the large is perfect for me. i used to wear medium helly hansens so that might make a difference in comparing. but they are dope pants
 
I agree with you kinda but I just got brand new puffy pants (antifreeze nigga) for $90 and the only size the Oakley store had left was xxl (I'm 5'10, 145 lbs.) and they are massive on me but I'm gonna wear them anyway.
 
ya, xxl is huge. like i think my friend got xl and he usualy wears medium, and they are feaking huge and he needs a belt to at least keep them above his knees.
 
ya I need a belt on mine too, otherwise they just go to my ankles (my waist is 31 and they are like 45). I gotta ski with them and see how it is.
 
im like 5"8 and wear oakley XL pants and jacket, and there not that big? maybe ur just mad skinny
 
Ok here is the thing....i wore all my stuff. I wore it skiing, with boots on, and everything, and it does not help the fit. It does not help you keep your pants on. Of course shit is going to rip....nobody gets that we have razor edges on our skis, and shit is going to rip. The only gear that would not rip is stuff that would be made out of canvas( Carhart, Dickees, Big Bill.....etc). Out of sessions, HH, orage, North Face.....this is the best stuff ive ever owned. Its just a comparison to everything else that i have tryed before. Im not saying im hating on oakley i love their stuff, but these kids who are like 5,4 buying this huge shit...and then get pissed off because the pants go up to their eyes.
 
funny...

i got oakley troop pants in a med and they are HUGE! im 5'11 and 150. i agree that oakley makes some of the best stuff
 
im still happy i bought em haha. if they are too baggy ill just put them up here, but i love the pants and oakley is the warmest..
 
I'm 6'2, I have xxl, it's not that big, or baggy, and it's not long at all, and I'm pissed. I want a fucking long jacket.... that's all I want. I hate jackets that sit above my butt. I want my butt to be well covered, so I am warm and toasy, and I want it to be covered all the time. FUCK OAKLEY XXL
 
Im happy with clothes that fit, Im 5'7 150lbs and I wear pretty much a standard Large. m is too small and xl is too baggy for my tastes.
 
XL pants are pretty money for me, im 5'10" and for jackets i can wear L to XXL depending on how baggy it is and how baggy i want it. (L being a more standard technical fit, XXL being extra steeze)
 
i have the storm 1-piece in XL. i'm 5'11" it's perfect bagginess but i could go to XXL no problem. only problem would probably be the crotch because the XL goes like 3 inches past my knees in the first place.
 
as long as the pants fit my waist and they are baggy around my ankles and shit, i wont mind em.
 
I've had lots of XXL stuff, and I decided that the jackets were to big to ski in, but the pants are perfect. I'm 6'1' and 170lbs and I find that Large jacket and XXL pants is perfect. They aren't that baggy, but they still look steezy. I wouldn't mind them being longer though.
 
dude, I don't know how you rock your stuff, but for my xxl is the only way to go. xl is not big enough when you rock xxxl tall t's. know what I mean?
 
I tried on some xl oakley pants, just for kicks and giggles, and they were quite long enough, im short, but i like to wear my pants on my ass so they were kinda tight i thought, but my xl north face pants are huge around the waist compared to oakley. But my xxl oakley cohort is pretty long and baggy but i find it comfy as hell.
 
Word man, you're my size. I wouldn't say Xl is too small but whatever is the most comfortable is where its at. I got my XXl pants an a L jacket because that was all they had left. I'll be skiing with it tomorrow to see how it is, so far it looks ill and hopefully it will be pretty dank shit.
 
whatever. im 6' 3" so the XL doesnt look very baggy. the XXL is a little but better but i cant always get what i want in XXL cuz its hard to find. i wont ever achieve the steeze that some of the smaller guys can. if i was 5 inches shorter i would still get XXL.
 
Thanks for the input, your a fucking moron. First off with out getting to technical people can wera whatever they want. HOw would you feel if I posted a thread calling out Blake nyman and tight pants steeze skiers for wearing jeans with a smaller waist then they really have. Skiing is about having fun, part of that is an image and how people obtain it is no tup for you to judge. NExt, i am 5'9 175 and wear oakley xxl pants. I also play sports and lift constantly so they fit jsut fine. Fuck you you homo stop calling out people online and go take advantage of what the internet was made for...porn. Or in your case gay porn
 
Oakley does not necessarily mean quality, there are plenty of brands that are comparable. The fact that a product has an O on it does not mean it is lightyears better than other outerwear on the market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top