Lowa Zephyr Mk2 GTX

Atlas 46 – 24/7 Comfort-Tuff Work Shorts

If you liked the 24/7 Comfort-Tuff Work Pants, you might want to check out their new shorts.

Features and Benefits
– 88/12 Cotton/Nylon construction for superior comfort
– 13″ inseam for longer coverage
– Gusset for comfort
– Rugged 330D Cordura® at high wear spots
– 1″ wide belt loops for belt stability
– Belt loops with 2.25″ opening for larger belts
– 330D Cordura® cargo pockets with two tool slots on backside for screwdrivers or pliers:
– Cargo pockets great for carrying wallet, no more sitting on wallet while driving
– Folding knife pocket lined with 330D Cordura® buffer
– Integrated cell phone pocket
– Twin, Cordura® lined hammer loops for preferential carry
– Deep well pockets for keeping items securely in the pocket
– Cordura® side buffers for clasp style suspenders
– Side and back loop attachments for Atlas 46® 3 Point Suspenders
– Back paracord loop for ease of hanging
– Coin Pocket
– Thirteen different pockets for organizing all your items
– Patent pending design
– Hand crafted in the USA
– 100% Satisfaction Guarantee

Sizes
W: 28” – 46”
L: 13” inseam

Colors
Black/Black
Caramel/Coyote
Khaki/Coyote

www.atlas46.com

Tags:

21 Responses to “Atlas 46 – 24/7 Comfort-Tuff Work Shorts”

  1. babola says:

    They may wok well and all, but the dork-o-meter has just hit the red.

    • babola says:

      Work not wok.

    • SSD says:

      You obviously don’t do any form of manual labor.

      • babola says:

        Quite a lot of it actually.
        The one which doesn’t require over-the-top, post-apocalyptic EDC cargo shorts.

        What’s your point?

        • Kirk says:

          Same one that I’d make–You’re an idiot.

          And, the reason why US workers are lightyears behind in workplace safety and health considerations, compared to countries in Europe and Japan. Lackwits sucha as yourself are more concerned with looking fashionable than with wearing work clothes that are simultaneously more protective and more ergonomic than street clothes. It’s a hell of a lot safer to be working in gear that’s been properly designed, and which has proper accommodations for tool carriage than to try to stuff everything you need into a pair of jeans that was state-of-the-art in the 1870s.

          Work clothing should be treated as a tool, not a fashion statement. Unless, of course, you’re more interested in showing your ass to your fellow workers…

          • babola says:

            You are being an ass, Kirky…once again, but what’s new there.
            I said what i thought about the product presented here. And i didn’t call anyone any names especially not you, you pretend know-it-all arogant dimwit.

            • Kirk says:

              Aww… Hurt your feewings? So sorry…

              You made a ridiculous comment, and you got what you deserved. You’re obviously a shallow dimwit who is more concerned with appearances than with anything else, so for you to expect respect from people who are more concerned with functionality than looks? Not happening.

              I don’t care what things “look like”, I care if they provide functionality and utility. Appearance is something for fashion designers to worry about, which seems more your forte. Perhaps you’re on the wrong blog, with your concerns about looks and your immature approach to life? I think the Kardashians have one you might like.

              People like you are how we wound up with UCP, and all the other useless crap someone thought “looked good”. Were you by chance a general officer, about that time frame? Kinda sounds like it, with your “dork-o-meter” comments.

              • babola says:

                So judging by his post below, it appeaes our Kirky is either an employee or a business associate of the company which just came out with a product like this, a limited use garment of dubious applicability to real life work situations.

                It hurts when someone says something against your product, doesn’t it. How about next time starting with a market research to derive out if there’s a real need for “safety work shorts” or not?

                By your statement below about 20″ verison it’s clear they’ve missed a mark and will try to rectify it. Then tou can have your workwear capris, you bozo. And your UCP comments…how old are you, like 12. Idiot.

        • D.B. says:

          My issue with this type of garment is that it’s afterall a shorts. While it provides protection where it might matter the most, the lower part of the legs is still unprotected.
          Thus, for any work tasks that require extra safety and protection, I chose to wear pants.

  2. TreehouseLumberjack says:

    Just got a pair of their pants. The lead time is longer than normal but well worth the wait. Also their customer service is very responsive and accommodating. I’m not sure if they will change this but the sizes are “true-fit” meaning a 32 inch waist is not a diameter but 16 inches across, then doubled, no pi about it. If you’re a size 36 in Levis…get a 42, if your a 30 in Levis, get a 34.

  3. T says:

    What’s the point of all the pockets and hammer loop and whatnot? If I’m going to be doing the type of work these shorts were built for, I’m going to have my tool belt on, which takes away the need for all of that.
    I do like the practical application of reinforced fabric.

  4. james says:

    I do not have a need for their shorts… but I cam tell you that their tool pouches and other storage is exceptionally well built and well thought out. Big fan!

  5. defensor fortismo says:

    I don’t have a problem with the pocket layoutu I’m just not sure how I feel about the contrasting colors. Maybe the other color layouts look better.

  6. D.B. says:

    Umm, not sure about these, though.

    I tend to wear and rotate between Atlas, Blacklader and Duluth pants when safety is important, but again these are pants, not shorts.

    I will allow myself wearing shorts only, and only when the safety and my own protection mightn’t be compromised in a particular work or manual labor situation. That means light and non safety-critical tasks.

    So not for me, sorry. The shorts shown above would potentially give a wearer that ‘false’ sense of work safety – while over-engineered at the top, squat a little and your knees are exposed too much for comfort, not to mention unprotected under-knee and shin area.

    • Kirk says:

      FWIW, they’re working on a 20″ inseam version, that should be long enough to accept their kneepads.

      I’m actually enthused for these, as I’m always glad to buy American where I can, and the dearth of good work gear like this is a bit of a problem. Blaklader and all the Euro companies are good, but pricey as all hell.

  7. Riceball says:

    Not a bad looking design, and I’m sure might be handy for those who like working in shorts but I have to ask, why the duo-ton fabric? These would much better, in my opinion, if they made them from just one color of fabric.

    • SSD says:

      That likely has more to do with dip minimums than anything else.

      • Riceball says:

        Dip minimums? I’m not familiar with that term. Could you please elaborate, does it have something to do with a minimum number of dips in a dye vat or something?

        • SSD says:

          Sort of, the term does in fact relate to vat dying. But it means the minimum number of yards you’ll need to buy for them to go ahead and get fabric to color match.

  8. JKifer says:

    holy shit the amount of BS comments on this page are amazing!