Ways to Travel
The Best Men’s Travel Pants of 2025
Have your flights booked? We’ve got your backside covered with the best men’s travel pants on the market for 2025.
From the Andean cloud forests to deep desert canyons, to long backcountry road trips and Parisian markets, these pants have been tested to tackle any adventure and do it all in style. Our travel-worn team has beaten paths around the globe in these slacks, and we’ve tested over 150 different pairs for almost a decade now. If it’s got the right stuff, we’ve saddled up in a pair.
Guide author Steve Graepel leads our efforts, and he’s hot-footed it around the globe a not-small number of times for this line-up. His eye for functional fashion is dialed in, and we consider all facets of these pants, down to the stitch lines, pocket placement, and button style.
Whether space in your carry on is slim and you need a one-and-done perfect pair, like our top choice Bluffworks Envoy Lightweights, or want to pad out your travel closet with a few more spend-wise options like the UNIONBAY Rainier Travel Chinos to get you through trips without a stop to the laundromat, we think our recommendations are right on the money.
Editor’s Note: We updated our Travel Pants guide on May 17, 2025, with an eye toward summer, and have added three additional travel pants that we think deserve a spot in your luggage: The RHONE Commuter, KUIU Bridger, and Stio Vallis.
The Best Men’s Travel Pants of 2025
Best Overall Men’s Travel Pants
9.0/10 Rating
Best Budget Men’s Travel Pants
6.5/10 Rating
Best Travel Pants for Adventuring In
7.8/10 Rating
Best Travel 5-Pocket Style Pant
8.4/10 Rating
Most Fashion-Forward Travel Pants
8.2/10 Rating
Best Overall Men’s Travel Pants
-
Lightweight fabric dries quickly -
Wrinkle resistant -
Looks and feels more recreational than the Ascenders -
Anti-UV properties -
More comfortable than most pants on the list
-
The rear device pocket is hard to access when seated -
Lacks a DWR
Best Budget Men’s Travel Pants
-
Comfortable -
Security options -
Well priced
-
Pants run long -
Material tends to collect lint
Best Travel Pants for Adventuring In
-
Form and function meet the apex pant -
Bomber hardware -
Tons of pockets with versatile security options
-
DWR is negligible -
Styling is less formal
Best Travel 5-Pocket Style Pant
-
Lightweight material breathes just as well as the first -
More durability than the first iteration -
Fantastic fit and construction -
Better mobility than the first iteration
-
New fabric feels slightly stiffer (breaks in over time) -
Single security pocket is limiting for some travelers
Most Fashion-Forward Travel Pants
-
Very comfortable -
Good pocket layout with clean storage options -
Fashionably cut -
Phone sleeve is easy to use and stays out of the way of the hip joint when seated -
Stretchiness is achieved without weaving in spandex -
Robust DWR
-
Polyester can hold smell and isn’t as durable as nylon -
Pocket flaps make it harder to access rear zippered contents -
Bunched elastic waist hem takes away from the clean lines of the pant
Other Travel Pants to Take You There
We think that the five pants above are perfect for cycling through the week on your travels, but there’s certainly other options we’ve tested and enjoyed as well. Check out the eight alternates below to help diversify your travel closet.
-
Pre-treated with an insect repellant -
Stain resistant -
Internal drawstring for extra waist security -
Three zipper-closed pockets -
Lightweight -
SPF 50 -
Tanto-style pocket to clip your EDC
-
Magnetic closure catches on anything metal -
No durable water repellant finish
-
Stretchy waistband -
4-way stretch -
Closes with two buttons -
Best-in-class coin pocket -
7 functional pockets
-
Zippered slash pocket is small -
Runs small and has limited waist sizes (32, 34, 36, 38) -
“Casual fit” runs slim -
Inseam is short and somewhat restrictive
-
Overstitched and oversewn seams are durable and minimal -
Three mesh lined pockets zip shut for security -
Comes with the clean and functional design Arc’teryx is known for -
Wind and water resistant
-
Expensive -
Thigh pocket has too much room to prevent a phone from bouncing around -
No rear pockets (common in joggers)
-
Great updated fit -
Minimal design -
Best rear pocket zipper pull in the business
-
Coin pocket is uselessly small; We’d like to see this sized up, following the general trend in travel pants
-
Merino wool! -
Stylish -
Gusseted crotch -
Good fit and stretch -
Available in odd and even waist sizes, in lengths 30-34
-
Pricey — No longer $200, the pants are still expensive at $170 -
Weighs an ounce or two more than other similar pants -
Lacks a dedicated device pocket -
After a year of use, the seat is beginning to pill
-
Light and packable -
Durable and stretchy -
KÜHL drop in style pockets are fantastic
-
Fabric is noisy -
No button-no fly minimalism may not appeal to everyone -
Only one zippered pocket on the backside
-
Gusseted design gives a great fit -
Reflective details on cuffs -
Made in USA
-
Not many; an extra pocket or a drop-in phone sleeve, and these would be our top choice for travel pants
-
Good stretch -
Comfortable fit -
Drawstring and belt loops
-
Only available in a 32 inseam -
Pants stretch and lightly pill over time -
Front occasionally unbuttons too easily
-
Nice balance of cotton, nylon, spandex for soft durable fabric that drapes well -
Love the utility pocket -
Good DWR -
Nice device pocket on the right thigh holds the phone securely -
At 10 ounces, they are the lightest pants on the list
-
Size is slightly off most pants -
Rides high in the crotch -
Tight in quads -
Rear zippered pocket is smallish
-
Light -
Breathable -
Strong pocket layout -
Great fit -
PFAS-free DWR
-
Unstructured material allows phone to flop in device pocket -
While Stio is known for durable outdoor clothes, 100% polyester may be less durable than nylon pants on the list
-
Clean styling -
Traditional 5-pocket design has a zippered security and functional coin pocket that can sleeve a phone -
Flex-nit polyester is comfortable a quiet
-
Not as durable as other pants on the list -
No DWR but dries very quickly
Men’s Travel Pants Comparison Chart
Travel Pants | Price | Fabric | Fabric Weight | Weight | DWR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bluffworks Envoy Lightweight Travel Pants |
$125 | 57% recycled polyester, 33% polyester, 10% spandex | 210 gsm | 15 oz. | No |
UNIONBAY Rainier Travel Chinos | $40 | 94% nylon, 6% spandex | 173 gsm | 13 oz. | Yes |
LIVSN Ecotrek Trail Pants | $129 | 70% Blue Ocean nylon, 25% nylon, 5% spandex | 173 gsm | 13 oz. | Yes |
Western Rise Evolution 2 Pants | $128 | 90% nylon, 10% elastane | 107 gsm | 11 oz. | Yes |
Jack Archer Jetsetter Tech Pant |
$89 | 100% PTT polyester fibers | 178 gsm | 12 oz. | No |
Teren Lightweight Traveler Pants |
$130 | 88% nylon, 12% spandex | 154 gsm | 11 oz. | No |
Nomatic Outset Pants | $130 | 100% polyester warp knit | Unknown | 14 oz. | Yes |
Arc’teryx Gamma Jogger | $200 | Fortius DW 2.0 (nylon) softshell | Unknown | 12 oz. | Yes |
Public Rec Dealmaker Pants | $128 | 100% polyester | Unknown | 11 oz. | Yes |
Proof 72-Hour Merino Travel Pant | $198 | 47% merino wool, 33% nylon, 14% polyester, 6% elastane | 247 gsm | 1 lb., 0.5 oz. | No |
KÜHL Suppressor Jogger | $99 | 85% nylon, 15% spandex | 165 gsm | 12 oz. | Yes |
Ornot Mission Pants | $148 | 95% nylon, 5% elastane | 232 gsm | 14 oz. | Yes |
Jetty Acadia 2.0 Utility Pant | $100 | 100% polyester | 240 gsm | 16 oz. | No |
KUIU Bridger Pants | $109 | 66% cotton, 30% nylon, 4% spandex | Unknown | 10 oz. | Yes |
Stio Vallis Pants | $130 | 100% polyester | 155 gsm | 11 oz. | Yes |
RHONE Commuter Pants | $138 | Flex-knit fabric with polyester | Unknown | 13 oz. | No |
How We Tested the Best Men’s Travel Pants
There are few other products we test at GearJunkie that are considered non-negotiable in society. Outside the house, you gotta wear pants (or shorts). And if you’re choosing shorts, you’re probably not looking at the right pants.
Travel pants are part of our everyday uniform, allowing us to test them daily. We test pants for the office grind, after-school errands, dispatching weekend chores, and yes, of course, travel, constantly logging test hours to find the best travel pants on the market.
Our Testing Process and Testing Grounds
Cozy in coach, capable of tackling adventure, but formal enough to wear to dinner, travel pants span the use case spectrum. We’ve worn them on intercontinental flights to Europe, Asia, and South America, as well as transcontinental flights from Jacksonville to the Intermountain States.
In warmer climates, we’ve pulled them out of our bikepacking bags on cool nights in Nicaragua and high up on the Colombian Coffee Triangle. One tester even wore his pair to the top of the Grand Teton.
When we get our hands on a new pant, we first take a look at the materials. We gauge the fabric weight, breathability, and the material’s ability to resist wrinkling. Synthetics with a DWR will pack down smaller, bounce back from being jammed in luggage on an overnight flight, and resist stains (and spills) better than cotton.
A touch of spandex affords some stretch and nylon tends to be more durable. We then turn them inside out to look at the seams joining the pants together, looking at where costs were cut and potential quality issues might cause a blowout on the road.
To be considered for our list, pants need at least one pocket that can be zipped shut to safely secure a passport or wallet. The hand pockets should be deep enough to keep keys and change from accidentally spilling out, or have zippers that prevent mishaps. No joke, one pair of pants we tested (not on this list) spit a wallet out at work without us even knowing it.
We then evaluated each pant’s fit, durability, packability, ability to bounce back from repeated wash and wear, and unpacking. We want to find out if a pair of pants can be washed in the sink in the evening and be ready to wear the following morning.
We want to see if the material resists wrinkling. And we want to know if the pants are cut too large, too small, or hike up the legs. The best material and construction alone can’t fake a good fit. We test pants for mobility and proper length. Does the pant bind in the crotch? Are the gussets appropriate? Are the legs cut at a proper length or do they ride up when walking?
Our testing focuses primarily on comfort, versatility, and functionality when in transit, so if you’re looking for something more durable for active pursuits, check out our picks for the best hiking pants. We also have a guide for the best women’s travel pants to get your travel companion ready for the long haul.
Our Expert Testers
Steve Graepel has been leading the men’s travel pant buyer guide since 2015. Over the span of 8 years, Graepel has seen over 240 pairs of travel pants, rigorously testing 155 pants. Graepel has worked at GearJunkie as a contributing editor since 2009, testing everything from packrafts, to bike bags, sleeping bags, winter boots, and trail runners.
His latest beat is travel pants, flannels, and men’s wallets. Before his time as a “fashion blogger,” he wrote for Travel Idaho, National Geographic Adventure, Patagonia’s Tin Shed, Trail Runner, and Gear Patrol.
Graepel has researched and tested travel pants extensively — traveling, working, and camping in the high alpine desert of Idaho, Montana, and Utah, and traveling abroad in a variety of environments including Europe, Asia, Central, and South America. He continues to test travel pants year-round and searches for anyone who will listen to his yarns about the best travel trousers.
In 2020, we tried 27 pairs and listed 15 pants on our men’s buyers guide. In 2021, we tested an additional 35 pairs, highlighting nine new pants on our list. In 2022, we saw an additional 23 pairs, adding six new pants.
In 2023 we looked at 38 pairs, adding seven new pants to the men’s travel pant buyer’s guide. In 2024, we reviewed 30 pants, updating our Men’s Travel Pants buyer guide with nine new pants. And finally, for 2025, we tested 16 new pants, adding six pants to our latest buyer’s guide.
Each year introduces new styles and materials, and we try to reflect the best on the market of that year. Many trousers remain on the list, year after year. They are either so good, or so good of a deal, that they are tough to topple.
To keep a finger on the pulse of pants, we read reviews from top sites and contact manufacturers directly. Steve Graepel has regular conversations with pant brand owners and representatives in the travel pant space. These relationships allow us to stay up to date on what makes pants better every year, and keep an eye on sleeper pants that just don’t have the marketing budget to get mass attention.
Buyer’s Guide: How to Choose Travel Pants
Fit
Regardless of whether the pants are straight-leg or slim, a good pair is one that follows the human form and doesn’t bag out after repeated washings, or bloat when packed with your phone and keys. The length should fit your inseam or run longer so you can roll them up or get them tailored.
Almost every pant on our list has a great fit. If they didn’t, we’ve shared the cons. Both Jetty’s and UNIONBAY’s pants run a little long. Nomatic’s Outset is a touch slim. Proof, Jack Archer, Rhone, and Public Rec offer a variety of inseams for a dialed fit (from 30″ to 36″). To dial in the fit of the waist for models with belt loops, we typically try to find a travel and adventure-friendly belt that allows us to get through TSA without needing to remove it.
Function
We scored each pant for both its ability to adventure, wear in coach, and hit the streets. Some pants, like Arc’teryx , have a bias for stout use. The Gamma Joggers are coated with a solid DWR and are our choice for adventure trips where you can’t sacrifice durability.
If traveling by plane, we prefer comfortable pants with accessible pockets. While five-pocket styled jeans or chinos wear well on the street, their pockets are harder to access when sitting on the plane. So we usually prefer a comfortable jogger or cargo pant that has vertical zippered pockets and drop-in device pockets on the legs.
KÜHL and KUIU both have accessible pockets while seated in the plane. Nomatic has a clever slash-style coin pocket that works better than most. The angled entry is forgiving when trying to extract the phone. Arc’teryx has a large map pocket that rides over the leg.
For comfort in coach, you don’t need to look past Bluffworks Envoy. They look great and have plenty of pockets to stay organized. KÜHL’s Suppressor Jogger dialed the drop-in pockets and is lightweight and durable, but the material isn’t nearly as soft as KUIU’s soft cotton blend. It’s always a trade-off.
Style Matters
While comfort is key, we also need to be able to show ourselves in public (no washed-out gray sweatpants on this list). The most versatile travel clothes should be able to tackle a hike without getting roughed up, or walk into town looking sharp enough to peruse a museum, and duck in for fine dining afterward.
Unfortunately, the cargo pockets take away some formality while out on the town. With its jogger styling, neither Arc’teryx nor KÜHL designed around Michelin stars. They prioritize function and durability, mapping to utility. KÜHL, KUIU, and Stio each have unique cargo styling that brings a touch of modernity to the military-inspired side-pocket pants. In general, we love cargo-style pants and joggers while sitting on the plane. It keeps all your essentials within reach.
On the other hand, Western Rise’s Evolution 2, Rhone, Public Rec, and Proof’s 72-Hour Merino are fantastically styled everyday pants with a single security pocket to maintain that sleek look. They are our go-to choice for travels to big cities where we want to kick up the look and feel at home while traveling abroad. For equal fashion-forward looks with more security pockets, we were thrilled to see Jack Archer’s Jetsetter Tech Chino, and we look forward to testing them more on future trips.
Clean lines, darker colors, and traditional styling help you blend into crowds and stave off the would-be pickpocket’s radar. The best men’s travel pants should look as good as they feel without shouting “tourist.”
The material should be lightweight and, in our preference, darker to minimize showing the dirt collected along the way. That said, we were astounded by how well a fresh DWR can resist stains on even the fairest beige pants.
Fabric Weight
Lightweight performance fabrics can withstand repeated washings in a sink, line dry overnight, and stay wrinkle-free after weeks on the go. Today’s fabrics offer advanced sun protection and moisture-wicking properties and are often water-resistant or water-repellent, and can even repel insects.
Fabric weight is measured in grams per square meter (GSM). A heavier GSM will take up more room in your bag and take longer to dry. We find a 200-ish GSM fabric weight, like on our top pick from Bluffworks, light and breezy, and dries out quickly.
A welterweight fabric will disappear in the bag and dry out insanely fast, but going too light sacrifices durability. All the pants we tested are durable enough to venture off the pavement.
If you want the lightest pant you can find, give KUIU’s a look. The cotton-nylon-spandex blend is comfortable, water resistant, breathes well, and rolls up tight and is exceptionally durable. Western Rise also uses a lighter-weight GSM fabric, but the pants weigh more overall.
Fabric Type
A cotton blend fabric adds breathability and a cooling effect, which is great for warmer climates, but can also sacrifice durability. And, unless treated with a DWR, cotton can wet out more easily and hold water longer.
Some pants weave cotton into their blend. To beef up the durability, the natural fiber is woven with a synthetic like polyester or nylon and an elastic component for stretch. KUIU does a great job of finding the sweet spot.
If you choose to go with denim or cotton, consider a stretchy fabric with a bit of spandex or elastane for comfort and flexibility while on the road. It will resist wear longer, dry faster, and feel much more comfortable. While not on this year’s list, Aviator’s The Best Travel Jeans in the World are very comfortable and weave in some stretch, but they weigh nearly twice as much as every other pant on the list. Our cotton choices keep the weight down.
Most of the pants on this list are woven from synthetic fibers. Synthetics tend to stand up to more abuse than their natural counterparts. For example, Ornot’s Mission Pant is incredibly durable and is built for men who abuse pants while in the saddle. This is because Ornot weaves the pants from mostly Nylon.
When you think of nylon in outdoor application, you might think of ropes or mountaineering shells — gear that stands up to abuse. It is no surprise that Arc’teryx’s Gamma is constructed from a nylon fabric. Nylon is more durable than polyester but typically doesn’t wick as well.
The downside of poly is that the fibers are porous and can trap bacterial waste, which eventually can cause our workout shirts to stink. This seems to be less of an issue in pants, but if you are looking for durability, we still recommend a nylon material.
Unique to our lists, Proof’s 72-Hour Travel Pant uses a merino wool synthetic blend. Wool is known for its odor-resistant and insulative qualities. Contrary to what you might think, they stay surprisingly cool and breathe well in hot climates. For durability and stretch, Proof weaves nylon, polyester, and a touch of elastane. We wore these pants on a 12-hour flight to Japan, and they were notably cooler.
Weaving in spandex or elastic adds mobility, but can also give the pants a polished, slick finish. KÜHL weaves in a whopping 15% spandex into the material, but most pants will have 2-6% for a combination of durability and mobility. Bluffworks, Unionbay, and Jetty feel more formal with their smooth-faced fabric finishes. Material finishes are more of a personal preference and don’t affect their water resistance, which is added with a DWR wash.
Our favorite pants come from Bluffworks. While the fit is fantastic, they don’t have a DWR. This makes them less desirable if you are traveling to places that rain a lot. However, they excel in so many other ways that they still stand out as our top choice. We noticed the same with our Jack Archer Jetsetter Techs. Water spills off without a DWR.
On the flip side, Western Rise’s DWR not only deflects dirt and grime on the road, but liters of beer simply rolled off them at Oktoberfest. We really took one for the team while testing.
Performance fabrics are standing up to heavy use like never before. Shelling out a few more bucks for quality generally gets you into a more durable pant that should hold up to more extensive use. We’ve put in countless hours testing the pants on this list, so you’re starting in the right place.
Seam Construction
Seams are often overlooked. Out of sight, out of mind, seams bring two patches of fabric together and are crucial for durability and comfort. But this is where we can differentiate the good from the great, and this is where we get passionately nerdy.
Flat-felled seams are best for joining heavy fabrics together. Think denim. The material doesn’t stretch and the fabric is woven from heavy cotton yarn. You want a solid seam to join the pants together. The fabric is joined, then rolled over itself and double stitched for a clean, bomber fasten.
None of the pants on our list are joined entirely from flat-felled seams, though LIVSN and Proof incorporate a flat-fell seam on at least one leg seam. In general, we find it more important to flat-fell the inseam of the pants (which is what Proof does).
Too much material tacked together with a flat-fell seam can cause rubbing against the legs. And most travel pants are constructed from lighter-weight fabrics, so pants don’t always need this extra durable seam construction. It can cause tension on lighter, more fragile material, and eventually wear out adjacent to the seams
Many pants can get away with a less expensive, and more comfortable overlocked seam. An overlocking stitch, or welt-seam, has a lower profile, leaving the raw edge exposed but sewn down to the pant. Plus they are nearly as durable as the venerable flat-felled stitch, but can feel more comfortable (it’s less bulky).
Some overlocked stitches aren’t tacked down. That is, the seam isn’t sewn down flat with a second row of stitching, leaving the surged seam exposed on the inside. This usually isn’t a big deal.
Our main concern would be that the stitching could get caught on something and start to unravel. But we haven’t ever had this experience and it’s a fine option to use when binding two lightweight materials together. Ornot and Bluffworks use a combination of overlocked and welted overlocked seams and both pants are holding strong after a few seasons of wear.
The simplest seam, or plain seam, joins the two sides together with a simple, single stitch. Often the cut material is finished with a surger that overstitches the end material, reducing the chances of fraying, but the joining seam itself is sewn together with a single stitch, and the exposed edges butterfly on the inside of the pant.
This is often used for lightweight material where want to reduce the bulk as much as possible. We see this used on Western Rise’s Evolution 2. In theory, this is not a highly durable seam construction. And we’ve seen this kind of seam unravel on a few pants we’ve tested. We’ve also been beating our Western Rise’s for years now and have yet to see their plain seam blow out.
Price & Value
They say you shouldn’t skimp on the things you touch the ground with, and while pants aren’t quite there, they aren’t far off either. Long days in the saddle of international travel can have you in a seated position for hours on end, and that’s when investing in a good pair of travel pants can make the difference. But not every flight is a long haul, and every trip is different — so considering just how much to spend on a pair of pants is wise.
Budget
If hostel hopping is more your speed, saving a buck or two on your travel pants can make a lot of sense. You can easily snag two pairs of budget-minded trousers for the price of some of the higher-end options in our review. Expect to pay less than $100 for these pants, and for them to use larger percentages of nylon in their weaves. Pocket layouts are typically fairly simple with five-pocket styles.
The UNIONBAY Rainier Travel Pants ($40) have been our budget go-to for a few years running now, and it’s seemingly not going anywhere. A simple construction otherwise keeps the overhead on these pants low, and while they tend to show stains a bit more than other pants we’ve tested, they’re cheap enough to keep as a backup pair.
The Jack Archer Jetsetter Tech Pant ($89) raids high-end Japanese textile mills for its Rebound fabric, and was easily one of the most fashion-forward slacks in our review that we felt equally at home in on the jetway or while dressing up.
Mid-Tier
On another level, the construction of mid-tier travel pants is likely where you will notice the largest difference. And it’s where we see overlocked seams, added gusset panels in the crotch, and higher percentages of elastane to add mechanical stretch. All of these design details take more time and material to build into these pants. As such, you should expect to pay between $100 and $150 to slide into a pair.
Check out the Bluffworks Envoy Lightweight Travel Pants ($125), which cranks the dial up from budget pants with a total of nine separate pockets (essential during travel) and are constructed with all overlocked seams, as well as a double seam to keep them from rubbing on the skin.
The LIVSN Ecotrek Trail Pants ($129) also lean into the upgraded materials. They use an Oceanflex fabric that is 70% recycled fishing buoys, while stitching the whole affair together with a smartly tailored cut.
Premium
If you’re paying north of $150 for a pair of travel pants, there’s likely a good reason: either you’re the darling of airline travel mile programs or intensely serious about seeing all 195 countries. Either way, pants in this price range should be thought of as investment pieces, as their durability will long outlast lesser options. Or their comfort is far outside the norm.
The Jack Archer Jetsetter Tech Pant ($89) raids high-end Japanese textile mills for its Rebound fabric, and was easily one of the most fashion-forward slacks in our review that we felt equally at home in on the jetway or while dressing up.
The Proof 72-Hour Merino Travel Pant ($170) is now $30 cheaper, but still approaching an eye-wincing price. The high-percentage merino wool content is to thank here and makes these some of the coziest pants we’ve kicked around in.
Frequently Asked Questions
We like a pant that doesn’t ride up or bind when seated, and moves with you when active. Public Rec, Arc’teryx, and Jack Archer are very close at the top, for pure comfort, you can’t beat Bluffworks Envoy. Beyond the fantastic material, the pant is is available in slim and regular fit, so there’s truly a comfortable pant for everyone’s preference.
We’ve tested Western Rise’s Evolution lineup standing outside in Bogota monsoon season, climbing snow and ice on the Grand, and prosting over beers at Oktoberfest. The DWR not only sheds spills, but it deflects dirt and grime too.
After a week of wearing them across the Alps, including a day sitting in the stairwell of an overbooked train to Munich, we were shocked at how clean our light khaki Evolution 2.0s walked off the return flight.
Though it does not employ a formal DWR, Jack Archer has a unique helically woven PTT that impressively sheds water with the best.
If you’re bringing one pair of pants, you’ll eventually have to wash them while on the road. A lightweight synthetic pant is your best bet for a comfortable morning. Here again, Western Rise’s Evolutions rose to the top. They are lightweight, durable, and dry out quicker than most. They also remain cool and breezy in hot climates and wear supremely well.
We don’t have a true cargo pant on this years list and are looking to find a functional fashionable pant that meets the demands of travel. For an impressive pocket game, but a more polished look, we recommend looking at Bluffworks Envoy, which stealthily hides nine pockets in the otherwise casual-looking chino.
Stio’s Vallis and KUIU’s Bridger, with six practical and accessible pockets each, are close. LIVSN distributes a variety of pocket in usable configuration. These pants are really the evolution of the cargo pant, elevating functionality with more fashionable style.
Ornot’s Mission pants weaves a high Nylon count, and wear fantastic both in style and durability. If you are OK with a jogger, we recommend looking at Arc’teryx’s Gamma. The Fortius fabric is made from a Nylon-elastane blend that they use in their rock climbing softshells. It’s bomber, but wears less street friendly.
For long flights on the plane, we like comfortable, casual look with easy pocket access. With the variation of easy-to-access pocket configuration, we give the nod to LIVSN’s Ecotrek Trail Pant. The device pocket is great in the seat.
For comfort and pocket configuration, we appreciate a jogger and recommend Kühls suppressor jogger.
KÜHL’s Suppressor Joggers have the highest spandex count on the list at 15%. They are super flexible, light, durable, and have a good DWR. For a more formal look, Bluffworks has an equally impressive spandex weave (10%) and is by far the most comfortable pant on our list.
For a good combination of flexibility, durability, and all-around wearability, we recommend Western Rise’s Evolution 2. If you want to splurge, we also liked Proof’s 72-Hour Merino Travel Pant, which blends 6% elastane into the wool-synthetic base.
Proof’s pants are nearly a one-and-done purchase. We wore ours for 2 weeks in Japan. They are durable and stay stench-free on the road, making them the only pants you may need to bring.
For travel with flexible itineraries, give Teren. Their Traveler is the only pant infused with bug repellant and makes a great option if you are taking side diversions into tick country. If you prefer the same style but want a DWR, give their Daily Driver a look. Using different material, it’s warmer and treated with DWR.
Ways to Travel
Pursuit of entertainment or self-expression? Research on adventure tourism
Data collection
The study focused on domestic and foreign tourists aged 18 and above participating in rafting at Antalya Köprülü Canyon. The questionnaires were applied immediately after rafting in-person, and it was thought that the tourists’ experiences were reflected. In order to accurately measure tourist motivations, the literature was reviewed and scales were selected from the literature. In the process of selecting the scales, previously experienced ready-made scales were used, however, the scales were preferred from ready-made scales with high values in terms of validity and reliability. The aim here is to measure the constructs measured in the study in the most reliable way and in a way that can be distinguished from other constructs. For this purpose, scales with high Cronbach α or composite reliability values and AVE (average variance extracted) values were preferred. Then the convenience sampling method was used as the sampling method because there was no random selection. It is a statistical fact that the convenience sampling method does not represent the whole population because it is not random. However, it is easier to apply than random sampling in terms of reaching individuals with new experiences. In addition, as a result of studies that can be carried out in other countries or regions, although it is not a random sample, new literature becomes more debatable and converges to a scientific reality with the literature obtained with the convenience sampling method together with the developing literature.
Participants voluntarily participated in the survey after the rafting experience. Thus, it can be stated that the participants’ responses to the questionnaire were not influenced by any incentives. This situation causes the participants’ views on the subject to be more sincere. The questionnaires were collected in 2021. From 327 questionnaires, 31 were excluded for incomplete data, leaving 296 for analysis. The demographics included 68.1% Russian, 21.5% EU citizens, 9.5% Turkish, and 1% from other nationalities, reflecting general tourism trends in Turkey as reported by the World Travel and Tourism Council (2021). According to the World Travel and Tourism Council (2021) report, 12% of those who came to Turkey in 2019 were Russian, and 8% were German tourists, while in 2020, this rate was 13% for Russians and 7% for Bulgaria, Germany and Ukraine. In this case, it is predicted that the data and results obtained from the target audience will provide correct inferences. Therefore, bias in the study poses as much risk as bias that can occur in real life.
Although 50% of the participants have visited Antalya before, the rate of those who have visited Köprülü Canyon before is 24.3%. In this case, it can be said that individuals who have visited before have returned home without rafting in Köprülü Canyon. The rate of those who have rafted before is 29.7%. The fact that the rates of those who have visited Köprülü Canyon and those who have rafted are close may indicate that individuals tend to do it again after the first experience. While 62.4% of the participants were female, 37.6% were male. In this case, it can be stated that women are more oriented towards adventure tourism. 12.2% of the participants are high school graduates, 21.3% are associate degree graduates, 57.4% are bachelor’s degree graduates, and 9.1% are master’s and doctorate graduates. The average age of the participants was 33.36, while the median was 33.
Measures
Five-point Likert-type scales assessed all constructs. The scales covered “experiencing nature” (Perić et al., 2019), “escape” (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019), and “joy” (Pestana et al., 2020). The “WOM” influence (Sirakaya-Turk et al., 2015) and “self-image congruence” (Sirgy et al., 1997) were also measured, along with “revisit intention” (Zhang et al., 2018).
Data analysis and results
The data analysis validated the measurement model and evaluated relationships between the constructs.
Measurement model
The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated a satisfactory fit, with chi-square/df at 2.81, CFI at 0.92, SRMR at 0.059, and RMSEA at 0.078 (Hu and Bentler, 1999), as detailed in Table 1.
Construct validity was confirmed, with convergent and discriminant validity assessed and meeting established thresholds (Hair et al., 2014) as shown in Table 2.
According to Tables 1 and 2, the AVE values are greater than 0.50 and the correlation between the variables. Therefore, convergent and discriminant validity is provided. After this stage of the analysis, common method bias (CMB) or common method variance (CMV) was examined. According to Podsakoff et al. (2003), CMB analysis refers to the bias that emerges from external factors on the data set and occurs when the majority of the variance is explained by a single factor (Podsakoff et al., 2003; Gaskin and Lim, 2016). To measure whether the majority of the variance was gathered under a single factor, the single factor Harman test was performed, and the explained variance rate was calculated as 43%. Since the single factor Harman test is a weak analysis, CMB was re-examined using the Controlling for the effects of an unmeasured latent methods factor analysis suggested by Podsakoff et al. (2003), and each regression path was calculated as 0.64, and the explained variance rate was found to be 41%. Since CMB does not exceed 50% (Eichhorn, 2014: p. 8), it can be said that CMB does not exist or is insignificant (Büyükdağ and Kitapci, 2021).
Structural model
The structural model’s evaluation produced the following results: chi-square/df value at 2.81, CFI value at 0.92, SRMR value at 0.059, and RMSEA value at 0.078. These indices satisfy the criteria set by Hu and Bentler (1999), indicating a good fit between the theoretical model and the observed data.
Table 3 shows that push factors significantly and positively influence self-image congruence (β = 0.66), WOM (β = 0.55), and revisit intention (β = 0.32). Self-image congruity also significantly enhances WOM (β = 0.35) and revisit intention (β = 0.30), while WOM positively impacts revisit intention (β = 0.28). The model explains 44% of the variance in self-image congruity, 68% in WOM, and 66% in revisit intention (Fig. 2).
This figure shows the tested structural model with standardized regression weights, reflecting direct and indirect effects among variables. This figure illustrates the structural model with standardized path coefficients, examining the relationships between push factors, self-image congruity, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth. The push factors are measured through three dimensions: experience nature, escape, and joy. The arrows represent the hypothesized paths, and the numerical values indicate the standardized regression weights. The model shows that push factors significantly influence self-image congruity, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth, both directly and indirectly.
Multi-group structural equation modeling (SEM) and analysis results
Multi-group structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to compare the regression paths between two variables based on socio-demographic and field-specific characteristics. Various studies have utilized this approach: Yada et al. (2018) to understand teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy, Al-Swidi and Al Yahya (2017) to examine educational intention and work behavior differences by gender, and Babin et al. (2016), Huang and Ge (2019), Murray et al. (2017), and Aka and Buyukdag (2021) to analyze factors such as culture, household characteristics, store design, and marital status. In this study, multi-group SEM was applied to explore the effects of rafting experience (first-time vs. repeated) and gender (female vs. male model).
According to the multi-group SEM related to rafting experience, the model showed good fit indices with a chi-square/df value of 2.19, a CFI of 0.90, an RMSEA of 0.064, a GFI of 0.79, and an AGFI of 0.73. The comparative analysis between unconstrained and constrained models revealed a chi-square difference of 35.06 and a df difference of 25, indicating no significant variation between the effects of rafting experiences (p = 0.087). Consequently, the research model is applicable to both first-time and repeated rafters. The significance of each path’s rafting experience was further analyzed and is detailed in Table 4.
According to the multi-group structural equation modeling focused on gender, the model demonstrated good fit indices with a chi-square/df value of 2.17, a CFI of 0.90, an RMSEA of 0.063, a GFI of 0.79, and an AGFI of 0.73. This suggests that the multi-group SEM adequately represents the gender-based differences in the data. Comparative analysis between unconstrained and constrained models showed a chi-square difference of 24.83 and a df difference of 25, indicating no significant variance in gender effects (p = 0.472). Therefore, the research model is equally applicable to both female and male categories. Further analysis was conducted to determine if significant differences exist in local paths based on gender, with detailed results presented in Table 4.
Table 4 shows that push factors affect self-congruence differently for first-time versus repeated rafters. Rafting experience moderates how these factors influence self-image congruence, with a more pronounced effect on first-timers. While push factors significantly impact WOM for both groups, the effect is stronger for newcomers, but rafting experience doesn’t moderate this relationship. Similarly, push factors notably influence revisit intention for first-time rafters, but less so for experienced rafters, where experience doesn’t act as a moderator (Fig. 3).
This figure illustrates differences in structural paths across first-time and repeat visitors, as well as male and female participants, using varying line styles. This figure presents the multi-group analysis results based on visit frequency (first-time vs. repeated) and gender (female vs. male). The structural paths between push factors, self-image congruity, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth are illustrated with different line styles. Solid lines represent first-time visitors, dotted lines indicate repeat visitors, dash-dot lines show female participants, and dashed lines represent male participants. Path coefficients are shown along each arrow. The figure highlights how these variables interact differently across groups, revealing variations in motivational and behavioral responses based on experience and gender.
The influence of self-congruence on WOM is significant for both novice and seasoned rafters, more so for the latter. This suggests that rafters with prior experience, and with higher self-image congruity, are likelier to share their experiences. Self-congruence significantly affects intention to revisit among experienced rafters, but not for newcomers. However, rafting experience does not moderate these relationships in either case.
The impact of WOM on revisit intention was significant for first-time rafters but not for repeat rafters, with rafting experience not moderating this relationship. Table 4 shows variance differences between these groups. For first-timers, the explained variance is 51%, while only 26.9% for repeat rafters. For WOM, the variance is 70.5% for first-time users and 66.5% for repeat rafters. Regarding revisit intention, the variance is 65.3% for novices and slightly higher at 66.1% for experienced rafters.
The model showed no significant gender-based moderating effects, but coefficients highlight important relationship nuances. Both genders experience a positive, significant effect of push factors on self-image congruence, with males showing a higher coefficient. The impact of push factors on WOM is significant for both, yet stronger for males. Females, however, demonstrate a greater influence of push factors on revisit intention. The effects of self-congruence on WOM are similar across genders. Males exhibit a more substantial influence of self-image congruence on revisit intention. WOM’s impact on revisit intention is marginally higher in males. While gender doesn’t significantly moderate these paths, the data suggest males typically have higher values in consumer experiences involving adventure and risk-taking.
Self-congruence significantly influences WOM for both first-time and repeat rafters, more so for the latter. This suggests experienced rafters, likely with higher self-image congruity, are more prone to sharing their experiences. Self-congruence also impacts revisit intention significantly among experienced rafters, but less for novices. In both cases, rafting experience does not moderate these relationships.
The study shows gender differences in variance rates for self-image congruity, WOM, and revisit intention. Self-image congruity explains 49.3% of the variance in males and 38% in females. For WOM, the variance is 81.6% in males and 57.7% in females. Regarding revisit intention, males have a variance rate of 68.1% compared to 65.7% in females. These results imply that self-image congruence is more prominent in male first-time rafters, who also tend to discuss their adventurous experiences more, indicating higher communication about risk-taking and adventure among males.
Study 2
A multiple correspondence analysis examined relationships between push factors, self-image congruence, and demographics in adventure tourism for greater insight into consumer behavior dynamics.
Multiple correspondence analysis
Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) is a robust multivariate technique used to examine relationships among nominal data. This method allows researchers to analyze data, interpret findings, and develop perceptual maps, facilitating a deeper understanding of the data structure (Hair et al., 2010; Hair et al., 2014). In this study, MCA was employed to analyze the relationships between individuals’ perceptions of push factors, self-image congruence, WOM, and revisit intentions, alongside demographic or social factors such as gender, nationality, rafting experience, and visiting status. The objective was to conduct in-depth research and derive meaningful inferences. The graphical representation from the Multiple Correspondence Analysis is provided in Fig. 4.
This plot visualizes the associations between categorical variables, such as nationality, gender, experience, loyalty, and satisfaction. Spatial proximity indicates stronger relationships. This joint plot of category points illustrates the relationships among categorical variables based on their positions along two dimensions extracted through correspondence analysis. The plot visualizes associations between destination-related experiences (e.g., visit status, experiential satisfaction, loyalty), demographic variables (e.g., nationality, gender), and motivational/behavioral outcomes (e.g., push/pull factors, revisit intention, WOM). For example, high revisit intention, high congruity, and high WOM cluster on the right side of Dimension 1, while variables like low satisfaction and low loyalty appear on the left. The spatial proximity between categories indicates stronger associations.
According to the multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) results, repeat visitors to Köprülü Canyon are predominantly Turkish, male, and have prior visits to Antalya and rafting experience. These individuals are notably influenced by push and pull factors and demonstrate high self-image congruity, WOM, loyalty, and satisfaction, indicating a strong intention to revisit. Conversely, first-time visitors to Antalya and Köprülü Canyon are primarily Russian and female tourists, characterized by their pursuit of excitement, unique experiences, and experiential pleasure in adventure and risk-taking activities. Despite showing a high intention to revisit, the likelihood of Russian and female tourists returning is relatively low. This pattern suggests that while tourists enjoy adventure tourism as part of their sea, sun, and sand vacation, it is not the primary purpose of their visit. The findings imply that although tourists have significant rafting experiences and entertainment, they are more inclined to explore different geographical regions rather than revisit the same location. Consequently, it is expected that these tourists will likely choose alternative destinations for their next vacation.
Therefore, emphasizing promotions targeting first-time visitors in rafting or adventure tourism is anticipated to yield significant benefits. Consequently, catering to the preferences of Russian and female tourists with diverse adventure and risk-taking tourism options is projected to create a vital market segment. However, the analysis indicates that European tourists exhibit lower levels of self-image congruity, WOM, revisit intention, and satisfaction with push and pull factors related to rafting. As such, understanding the specific expectations of tourists from the European Union and offering varied tourism alternatives could become a significant source of revenue. Addressing these preferences may lead to enhanced tourist experiences and increased revisit rates.
Ways to Travel
Departure Lounge: Take a small-ship trip to Antarctica – Irish Examiner
Ways to Travel
Make your travels a real adventure – nrtoday.com
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week ago
Amazon weighs further investment in Anthropic to deepen AI alliance
-
Brand Stories2 weeks ago
Voice AI Startup ElevenLabs Plans to Add Hubs Around the World
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week ago
How Elon Musk’s rogue Grok chatbot became a cautionary AI tale
-
Asia Travel Pulse2 weeks ago
Looking For Adventure In Asia? Here Are 7 Epic Destinations You Need To Experience At Least Once – Zee News
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week ago
UK crime agency arrests 4 people over cyber attacks on retailers
-
AI in Travel2 weeks ago
‘Will AI take my job?’ A trip to a Beijing fortune-telling bar to see what lies ahead | China
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week ago
EU pushes ahead with AI code of practice
-
Mergers & Acquisitions2 weeks ago
ChatGPT — the last of the great romantics
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week ago
Humans must remain at the heart of the AI story
-
The Travel Revolution of Our Era1 month ago
CheQin.ai Redefines Hotel Booking with Zero-Commission Model