5.11 Tactical Stryke Pants I’ve owned a 5.11 Tactical Taclite Pro pant in size 36x34 for a couple years. A 4” waist size reduction required me to repurchase a lot of clothing, including this style pant in 32x34 size. Rather than buy another Taclite Pro (its price has since increased by over $20), after some research, I decided on the 5.11 Stryker. During my research it was difficult to find a good analysis of the differences between these two 5.11 styles, which I will attempt to outline below. I have a specific application for these pants that requires me to frequently kneel, for which I want pants with interior kneepad pockets. Both pants have this feature. I feel both 5.11 styles fit me well and were roughly right-sized for my body at the time of purchase. A few years ago my typical jean size was 36x34 and in comparison to jeans, the Taclite Pro offered a roomier cut. Some criticize it as excessively baggy. I never found the silhouette to be that bad, but it was definitely a roomy cut. TLDR summary: I prefer the slimmer cut, stretchier material and better cargo pocket and sub-pocket configurations of the Stryker. It’s also somewhat more breathable than the Taclite Pro. However, it is not a summer-weight highly breathable pant. Far from it. In several high exertion situations in ~30 C, higher humidity weather, the Stryker was fairly soaked with sweat, particularly around my knees, lower legs and waistband. Its suboptimal kneepad pocket placement is also borderline acceptable and not ideal for my requirements. I’m 6’3” and the 34” inseam still seems slightly short. I would rebuy as 36” inseam and have it hemmed, if necessary. On balance, I prefer it over the Taclite Pro but would like to see 5.11 improve the knee pad pocket placement and release a similar pant in a much lighter weight, much more breathable fabric. Full (long) review: Cut: the Stryker is a slimmer, straight leg that is tighter around the butt and thighs but remains sufficiently wide at the hem to fit over boots. It’s a somewhat more fashionable cut, if that’s possible with a tactical pant. The Stryker is definitely more ‘form fitting’ around the butt with a lower rise to the waistband at the back (by about a couple inches compared to my larger Taclite Pros - not sure how much the difference is due to the cut/style vs sizing). When crouching the Stryker rides lower. Not to the point of plumber’s butt, but getting closer. A short-tailed tucked-in shirt could untuck more easily. Of note, neither pants have the ‘sticky’ silicone-like bead inside the waistband to hold tucked-in shirts in place. One are of concern is that while I’m usually good with a 34” inseam, the Stryker’s leg length still seems a bit short, particularly with ‘regular’ shoes rather than hikers or boots. If I was to rebuy, I would probably try the 36” inseam and have it hemmed, if necessary. My vote: I prefer the Stryker's more form-fitting cut, combined with the choice of material (see below). Fabric: while both pants feature a 65/35 polyester/cotton blend, the Stryker comes across as slightly lighter weight with markedly greater stretch, especially at diagonals to the fabric’s weave. Held up to a light source, more light is visible through the Stryker’s material and the weave is a more uniform grid-like pattern. This implies better breathability, which I felt the Taclite Pro lacked. However, the Stryker is not what I would define as breathable, relative to some lighter-weight hiking pants I enjoy, such as Outdoor Research’s very stretchy, light-feeling, but more delicate Ferrosi pant. I don’t consider either pant a good choice for high exertion summertime activities if other less feature-rich, but more breathable pants will suffice. Both 5.11 styles feel durable. So far the Taclite Pro has held up well and my impression after half a year is the Stryker should be similar, if slightly less robust (other reviews have stated it doesn’t hold up as nicely after many wash cycles). After several washes the Stryker still looks good but I’m noticing some some slight wear and discoloration of the fabric at the knees from kneeling on moderately abrasive surfaces such as FieldTurf. My vote: I prefer the Stryker’s stretchier fabric combined with its cut and better breathability relative to the Taclite Pro (though IMO it’s not very breathable). Waistband: the Stryker features a more complex, less noticeable ‘tunneled’ elastic that allows the pant to stretch out about another 2” from each side in the front. The Taclite Pro has a more conventional gathered elastic waistband at the sides that allows maybe another one inch of expansion on each sides. My vote: the Stryker. It’s more attractive in appearance while offering a lot more expansion around the waist, assuming this tunnel waistband design remains durable over a longer period. Kneepad pockets: the primary reason I purchased these pants. Both will fit a double layer of the 5.11 1/4” foam knee pads, which I find much more comfortable than a single layer. The Silverline pads will also fit, but it’s a bit of a struggle to get them in and I found their constant contact with and light pressure on my knees to be annoying compared to stacking the thinner 5.11 pads. But there is a difference between the two pants. The position of the Stryker’s kneepad pockets is about 1.5” higher up the leg than the Taclite Pro. This substantially affects kneepad placement when kneeling, to the point where if I don’t have time to pull the Stryker pants down a bit, I’m kneeling on just the bottom quarter of the pads and nearly on their bottom edge, practically negating the benefit of the kneepads. IMO, this is a serious flaw in the Stryker’s design and not sure if it’s specific just to my pants, the 32x34 cut, all 34” long inseams, or all Stryker pants. While it's usable, it’s not nearly as comfortable or out-of-mind as it should be. The pad pockets should really be about 2” lower. Not that the Taclite Pros were perfect. The wider cut of the leg meant the kneepads could move around more in the pocket and sometimes would not be optimally positioned. My vote: Taclite Pro despite some pad movement/migration. The higher positioning of the Stryker’s pocket almost negates the kneepad’s usefulness. Pockets: Similar number between the two, but with differences. Both feature a large, roughly 7x7” Velcro secured flapped cargo pocket on each thigh, which on the Stryker also features a split internal pocket against the leg. Apparently these are for ammunition magazines, but will fit a smartphone, music player, battery pack, etc. and keep it from bouncing around the main compartment when running. There’s also a 3/4” slit in the center top of the pocket flap through which one can feed cables, or insert a pen. The Taclite Pros I have lack the sub-pockets and slit in the flap. Above both cargo pockets are roughly 3.25” wide slit pockets that will hold a phone or similar item up to about 2.75x5.5”. The Taclite Pro has a similar slit pocket on the right leg, but an exterior cargo-style pocket of the same dimensions on the left leg, which expands out up to 1” for bulkier items. The top-most front pockets of the Stryker are more feature-rich. Both styles are reinforced around the lower pocket lip for knife clips, pens, radio clips, etc., but the Stryker’s cut is L-shaped to better accommodate 1” wide clips and let the item hang vertically rather than diagonally. Inside each of the Stryker’s front pockets, there’s a roughly 1” wide opening at the top through which one could pass wires, etc. under the waistband. The back inside face of the pockets are sewn with the main pant material for a double-layer of material between pocket contents and your body. Back pockets are considerably different. The Stryker is a more conventional Velcro-secured flap over slash pocket, about 6” deep and 6” wide with the internal pocket made of a lighter material than the pants. The Taclite Pro’s back pockets are diagonal Velcro-secured
