Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57

    Can't decide between Fox Ranger and Sergeant

    I know there are threads about shorts but most of them just ask what you're favorites are. This thread is for people that have experience with the Ranger and Sergeant. I'm new to mountain biking and clothing is the last thing before I hit a real trail. I want something that will fit good but not be too expensive. I tried on Rangers at REI yesterday and while I was wearing boxers while trying them out, they seemed to fit good. (Yes I know not to wear anything with a liner.) Anywho, I didn't buy them because they didn't have the gray ones so I figured I'd just order from home. Well after getting home I see they don't even have the gray ones available from the website.

    While I was at the store I didn't bother trying on Sergeants because I didn't feel like paying $30 more if the Rangers fit good. What is the advantages to the Sergeant over the Rangers? Another thing I'm wondering is about the inseam, seeing as the Sergeants are 2 inches longer and that Rangers and normal shorts I wear are 12 inches and fit great.

    Halp!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    No one?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnnyspoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    800
    If you like the Ranger's, get them. If you can try both, try the sergeants. I have both, and prefer the feel of the sergeants. You may not. I think the price difference is the little micro cleaning cloth, magnetic close pockets, more expensive chamois (better? your call) and the fact you can remove the chamois. The last is a nicety for me, if I'm packing light and can arrive at my destination, pull of the chamois and put the shorts back on for lounging around. They're a nice short for that but I don't like to be in a chamois if I'm not riding.
    I'm looking forward to regretting this.......

  4. #4
    Working Man's Toilet
    Reputation: D3DO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    834
    I have both. Rangers are shorter in length and a bit tighter in fit (size 36). They are made of a nylon material that is slippery. Seargents have a removable chamois so you can wear 'em around town and let the boys get some air. (I cut the chamois out of my Rangers). The Seargents also have more pockets and 2 zippered pockets- which I am not a fan of.

    In sum it is a toss up- if you like longer shorts (at the knee) and zippers go for the Seargents. If you like nylon and standard lenght shorts (just past mid thigh) then go with the Rangers.

    I got a pair of Jett Hornet shorts that are wicked.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    Well this hasn't really made it easier for me haha. Guess I might have to drive back to REI (45 minutes one way) and check out the Sergeants. Will probably be a while before I make it to the trail anyways so I don't need the clothing right now. For now I'm just riding on the roads/bike trail and while I do get a slight discomfort after riding for a while, I'm usually better after stopping for a few seconds.

    Another question.. which color do you have your Ranger/Sergeant in?

  6. #6
    Stucco Bucket
    Reputation: the_owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,525
    the rangers ride ass crack low. the sergeants are an awesome short with lots of pockets and magents instead of velcro. The first time I washed my sergeants I didnt take the chamois out and it ripped.
    Still my favorite shorts are the oakley ballistics

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ALS650L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    511
    I had rangers. They do ride really low, and they don't have belt loops. I've lost a fair amount of weight so having belt loops is nice. They are both knee length on me. The removeable chamios is nice too.

  8. #8
    Its got what plants crave
    Reputation: Jim311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,936
    I have the Rangers from last year I think and I like them alright. I'm not too sure if they've changed, but I like mine. Got several pairs on Chainlove for 20 bucks each.
    Ocala Mountain Bike Association - www.omba.org

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    Thanks for the info. Think I'll go try on the Sergeants tomorrow to see how they fit and then make my decision. I saw the Ventilators on the Fox website but $120 seems a lot, and with no way to try them on.

  10. #10
    Its got what plants crave
    Reputation: Jim311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,936
    The Sergeant is more freeride oriented and has heavier fabric. It's got a longer inseam as well. If you're looking for a tough short that can take a few diggers it's a better option. If you want lightweight comfort on XC rides, the Ranger is probably a better option.
    Ocala Mountain Bike Association - www.omba.org

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jason B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    882
    I own and use both.
    Like someone above, I cut the liner out of the Ranger.
    Really like the Sergeants but having some cotton in the fabric makes them hold moisture quite awhile where the Ranger dries more quickly.

    Style wise, i prefer the Sargeants.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    Well I'm new to mountain biking so I'm not really sure what discipline or whatever you want to call it I would be, but I would imagine just XC for now. I'll have to try out both of them again this week. Just wish I could try out the Ventilators as well.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    372
    They are both way too long, when they get sweat soaked or otherwise wet it is like having wet blankets on your legs. Stick with a short that is no longer than your knee. I wish I wouldn't have bought either short. The Fox chamois is a little thin for long rides too in my opinion, when I do wear them on long rides I wear a Pearl Izumi liner short in them.

  14. #14
    addicted to chunk
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by HSMITH
    They are both way too long, when they get sweat soaked or otherwise wet it is like having wet blankets on your legs. Stick with a short that is no longer than your knee. I wish I wouldn't have bought either short. The Fox chamois is a little thin for long rides too in my opinion, when I do wear them on long rides I wear a Pearl Izumi liner short in them.
    Same here.
    Riding.....

  15. #15
    Founder: Dirty3hirties
    Reputation: ddraewwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,958
    They are both way too long, when they get sweat soaked or otherwise wet it is like having wet blankets on your legs. Stick with a short that is no longer than your knee. I wish I wouldn't have bought either short. The Fox chamois is a little thin for long rides too in my opinion, when I do wear them on long rides I wear a Pearl Izumi liner short in them.
    Never experienced any of these issues. I can't even imagine the sergeants getting so soaked that they would bother you. I've been on 5 hour rides with them....not even remotely a problem.

    I've ridden Fox branded shorts for 7-8 years. Although they frequently change their designs (including the chamois), I don't think they are subpar compared to anything else out there.....especially when it comes to thinness. In fact, a chamois isn't for turning your seat into a couch....that'll never happen no matter what chamois you're using. The chamois's main purpose is to prevent chafing/rubbing. It's designed to be comfortable in regards to that. Not making your junk not go numb. Look to a better saddle for that.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jason B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by HSMITH
    They are both way too long, when they get sweat soaked or otherwise wet it is like having wet blankets on your legs. Stick with a short that is no longer than your knee. I wish I wouldn't have bought either short. The Fox chamois is a little thin for long rides too in my opinion, when I do wear them on long rides I wear a Pearl Izumi liner short in them.
    They do hold sweat (as I said earlier, they have cotton in them) but it does not collect below the knees so the length of the short has nothing to do with the issue.
    The waist band area is where the water collects.

    Personally, I really like the fox chamois.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    372
    I soak them in sweat in a couple hours, all the way to the bottom of the legs. 100* and humidity above 70% have them soaked to the bottom in 2 hours or less. On multi hour rides I get chafing using the Fox chamois that I do not get with Pearl Izumi chamois or a couple others for that matter. Junk numbness isn't an issue with any chamois I have tried. For more casual rides I like the Fox shorts just fine, well made, great pockets and pocket closures as well as the glasses cleaner built in. I just won't wear them on long rides, and that makes me wish the not insignificant cost of them had been applied to something else.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    457
    I have 4 different pairs of fox shorts. I like the chamois of the Sergeant better but like the feel and fit of the ranger better. So I wear the Sergeants most of the time.

    However I saw a pair of pearl izumi baggy shorts with the elite chamois in them at REI today...These will be worth a look at. My favorite set up for long rides is a pair of pearl izumi elite with my oakly shorts over them. Oakley has some nice MTB shorts too.

    I now only wear the fox, oakley and want to try the baggy style pearl izumi's.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    I ended up buying the Fox Ventilators. Expensive but they fit and feel great. Only question I have now is how do you clean them? Both my shorts and jersey are the same color so I was just going to clean them together with very little detergent on gentle wash using cold water and then air dry both of them. What I wasn't sure of was whether to clean the liner all by itself, with the shorts and jersey, or with other underwear.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    372
    Toss it all in with your regular laundry.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    It also says to use gentle detergent. Is there a brand you suggest for that?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    372
    That isn't my department, whatever the laundry department here uses I am completely OK with and I am quite sure that what is used is whatever is on sale at the time. If I start asking questions and offering advice in the laundry department I may end up with the job, know what I mean? I have a couple hundred washings on the Fox shell short and the Pearl liner I use most of the time and several dozen washings on the Fox liner, and all are in perfect condition other than the Fox shell short has faded a touch. It is all machine washed with dark clothes on normal cycle, the liners are hung to air dry and the shell is tumble dried with the rest of the load.

  23. #23
    Its got what plants crave
    Reputation: Jim311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,936
    Be careful using the dryer on shorts and gloves.. too much heat is not a good thing. I throw mine in with a bunch of other laundry. They dry much faster than the rest of the laundry, so I pull them out after they've been in there a few minutes.
    Ocala Mountain Bike Association - www.omba.org

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57
    Alright thanks for the tips.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •