Battle of the Baggies
Patagonia 5” Baggies and L.L.Bean Supplex 6” shorts
Last summer, I finally relented and purchased more shorts in three months than I’d bought in the prior ten years. Because of my bowed legs, I’ve always preferred to wear trousers. But sitting at home lounging day after day, it didn’t feel right to wear proper pants. And for the first time in easily a decade I’m a convert to shorts.
I’m admittedly late to the Baggies trend, however, I feel this puts me in a unique position to be objective about this popular Patagonia product versus its imitator from Maine: the L.L.Bean Supplex shorts.
It’s about to get nerdy, in-depth and technical, but if you just want to know my favorite: I’d recommend the L.L.Bean variety. Cheaper, easier to buy, and I like the fabric better. Patagonia’s originals have their own positives that I’m sure others love, but YMMV.
Dimensions:
The elastic drawstring waist makes the fit of either short quite flexible to fit a wide range of true waist sizes. I suggest taking your regular alpha size (in my case, I took a size medium). There are a few slight differences in measurements as you can see below.
The Patagonia Baggies are 0.75” shorter in the inseam, less stretchy in the waist, have a shorter waistband height and outseam. The most noticeable difference will be inseam and the waistband stretch which might be a consideration depending on height or hip width. The slightly lower profile waistband of the Patagonia Baggies is a bit more comfortable, but to most it’ll be negligible.
What surprised me most was the actual measured inseams of both shorts came in shorter than the stated size. Not a deal breaker in either case to me, just goes to show real measurements don’t always reflect product copy.
Material:
Interior mesh liner, drawstring and mini key pocket of the L.L.Bean shorts
The Patagonia Baggies are made from 100% recycled nylon that’s been treated with a durable water repellant finish. The L.L.Bean shorts are also made from 100% nylon, but in the Supplex variety.
Supplex has an interesting history in nylon development, dating to 1985 when DuPont introduced the product as a way to offer a softer hand finish and to better mimic cotton and is up to 35% softer than traditional nylon fibers. And this is what give the L.L.Bean shorts a huge advantage for me. They do feel softer to wear and handle. The Patagonia shorts feel quite rigid and rough in comparison.
On the interior mesh liner, the L.L.Bean shorts also hold an advantage of being softer with smaller holes in the mesh. While they’re both comfortable to wear, the L.L.Bean shorts do have an advantage in this area as well.
Pocket Design:
Waistband and front pockets, left to right: Patagonia and L.L.Bean
How each company’s designers approached pockets presents the most divergent examples between their products. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.
First, both front pocket entrances are sewn with bartack stitching on the ends to increase long-term durability. Patagonia uses an on-seam pocket entrance versus the L.L.Bean slant pocket design. I’m preferential to slant pockets over on-seam pockets simply because it’s more comfortable and easy to put your hands in your pockets. But on-seam pockets do keep items in your pocket better, which might be what Patagonia is aiming for, especially if you’re using them in various athletic activities.
Shorts turned inside-out to show front pocket construction. Notice L.L.Bean (left) floats freely and is oval shaped. Patagonia (right) is stitched down and has a mitre edge.
Next, how the companies constructed the pockets is also quite different. L.L.Bean uses a typical pocket construction we’ve all seen in most of our pants, where the pocket is attached at the top to hang from the waistband and free floats on the leg. In contrast, Patagonia stitches the pocket to the leg of the pant itself along the side seams of the pocket, which is visible on the front of the shorts. This is somewhat familiar to what you’d see in fatigue pant construction for their pockets (except in this case the pockets are internally concealed). Both brands feature mesh at the end of the pocket to allow water drainage. I’m a fan of how Patagonia does their front pockets, for the simple fact that it keeps items in your pocket — especially heavier items like a phone — from flopping around. Also, the pockets down sag down past the hem of the shorts, which can happen with the L.L.Bean shorts.
In regards to rear pockets, Patagonia also has an advantage, because they secure it with a snap flap enclosure rather than L.L.Bean’s use of Velcro, which isn’t as secure and also pulls down on the waistband when you try to open and access it.
Extras:
Key loop on the Patagonia shorts
The Patagonia Baggies feature an internal bungie loop that you can attach your keys to on the inside of the right pocket. L.L.Bean offers a small interior pocket on the right side of the waistband for keys that’s secured by a Velcro flap. I don’t really utilize either of these features, but the Patagonia loop seems more accessible with a single hand.
My favorite:
Both are great shorts that aren’t too pricey and I’ve enjoyed wearing them during the warmer weather this year so far. But the L.L.Bean fabric feels more comfortable — inside and out. For a lifestyle “swim” short, they’re my go-to. However, if you’re more active and going to be using these shorts in certain contexts, I can see the Patagonia Baggies being the ones you put on. The fabric of the Baggies certainly feels more durable and hard-wearing.
At $35 for the L.L.Bean shorts and $55 for the Patagonia option, you can buy both and decide which is better for yourself. The issue is that throughout summer both go out of stock quite frequently. L.L.Bean allows you to pre-order and lists an actual estimated restock date, whereas Patagonia only allows you to sign up for a restock notification.
What colors should you buy? I’m a fan of black, as it’s an easy neutral that can go with wilder prints and pattern shirts. I also find a brighter and bolder blue to be an easy pick to wear with a wide variety of aloha prints. If you like retro-style “gorp” hiking colorways, teal and purple are great options.