Fox Ranger MTB Short Review
Awhile back, Fox Racing sent over their Ranger mountain biking shorts in for review. Fox Racing is known for providing baggy mountain biking shorts for recreational riders as well as the hardcore FR/DH crowd. The Rangers are geared towards recreational riders who are looking for a MTB short that performs well without completely breaking the bank.
For more information on the Fox Ranger MTB short, check out this preview post with pictures and manufacturers description.
Fit and Finish – Fox Racing Ranger MTB Short
The #1 most important thing about mountain biking baggy shorts is how they perform on the trail. You can try to be the coolest kid in school with the most stylish set of shorts you can find, but if they ruin your ride…they are worthless. So how did the Fox Rangers do in the dirt?
The first thing I noticed about the Ranger was the detachable chamois. This is a HUGE selling point for me as I like to have shorts with separate shells and chamois. The chamois are attachable to the outer Ranger shell via to small straps to prevent too much separate movement (keeps your shorts on while moving around the saddle and when you happen to slide across the ground during a fall.)
The chamois, as you can see by the picture, is not overly padded but still comfortable. I didn’t have any discomfort while riding and as any rider already knows…a bad chamois experience can really ruin a day. They also weren’t too long to keep the shorts breathable and this really came into play on the hotter days. Like most inner chamois to mountain bike baggies, you will not be wearing these by themselves. They are designed to always compliment the outer shell, so don’t go throwing them on and jump on the road bike.
Ranger Short Outer Shell
The overall fit of the outer shell was a little surprising. The upper part of the shorts were a little tight while the lower half seemed about perfect. My waist is about a perfect 33 and these 34′s were a little tight. If you are picking up a set of Rangers, I would recommend jumping up a size. They do have useful, Velcro adjustment straps for the waist, but I still felt like I needed a little bit more room. Even with the shorts at my perfect waist height, they were pulling on the front button when adjusted all the way out. You can see this a little bit on the rear picture below.
The material (100% Polyester 150D) breathes incredibly well. The lightweight construction provides an outer shell that does not weigh you down and is a great option for the hot days in the sun. I was not a huge fan of the brown style, but with gray and black available…you can find on that fits your personal style. The zipper and button on the front of the shorts worked well.
The side pockets on the Ranger MTB short are cut low to make them easier to use while wearing gloves and they are big enough to carry whatever you would need on the trail. The tight fit made them a little bit more difficult to use, but if you have a set that fits a little bit looser…they should be perfect. To compliment the side pockets, the Fox Ranger MTB shorts have a side pocket on each side that are fully functional as well.
After several wrecks and long rides, the Ranger MTB shorts showed to be durable enough for heavy trail use. After you beat them up on the trail, the wash easily and are ready for another beating.
Conclusions on the Fox Ranger MTB Short
Overall, the Fox Ranger MTB short is a great, lightweight, baggy alternative for mountain bikers. With a middle of the road price and good on trail performance, they are a great all around performer.
The Good – Fox Ranger MTB Short
- Multiple Colors and Sizes Available
- Descent Price
- Detachable Chamois
- Comfortable and Durable on the Trail
- Lightweight is Great for Hot Rides
- Functional Pockets
- Velcro Adjustment
The Bad – Fox Ranger MTB Short
- Tight Fit – Might need to jump up a size if purchasing
- Styles May Not be for Everyone
Buy the Fox Ranger MTB Short
Fox Racing – Ranger MTB Short – Front
Fox Racing – Ranger MTB Short – Rear
Fox Logo – Ranger MTB Shorts
What do you think?