Better than the non-strech Silver Ridge Convertibles, but their fit still sucks
936160
Same impression as the regular silver ridge convertible pants, their only saving grace is by virtue of the stretch weave, you don't feel as restricted when taking steps.. but they're still tapered way too tight around the thigh area..

Why would you take pants meant for hiking, or at least being outdoors, and design them with a tapered thigh section so narrow they pull against people's thighs with every step? Specifically, think of going up stairs (or climbing a hilly incline) when you have to lift your feet higher in order to ascend vertically.. these are the steps when the fabric of any pant will rub and catch most on your moist, sweaty legs.. in the context of a day-long hiking, it makes each step that much more tiring when you have to fight against your pants; in the context of these pants that problem is even worse as they get so thigh-narrow they maximize that pull... and I have normal-dude thighs.. I haven't seen leg day in the gym for years...

These pants have equally as small pockets as the regular silver ridge pants as well.. why? Why make pants meant to be outside and make the front pockets useless?
4048161
I got the Rigid Dragon - Stretch. they do not streach. i have a pair of 42s regular and they fall off my waist. so i wanted a pair of 40s with out the baggieness of the legs. Unfortunately they were tight. and they do not streach
1165594
Got this for my wifes 2015 Chrysler 200. Be aware, the front seat backs fit fine, the bottoms however are just a bit too short to fit well. They would need to be another 2 or 3 inches longer from front to back to fit well. We stretched them as far and as hard as we could and got them on, but I have the feeling they're going to rip in a short period of time. The backseat pieces are like most seat covers, you almost have to take the seats completely out to fasten the loops and the back piece has no where to attach the loops the back of the seat (the back of the seats are covered on the 200. All in all I would not purchase again for this application.
1526661
Not thrilled with how difficult it is to install these on the car, I don't leave the racks on unless I plan on carrying something - the cross bars make too much noise in the wind, so I was hoping I could put these on and off easily.

On my BMW 535, if you install the bolts into the roof rack receptacles, they stick out at an angle so it is almost impossible to get the feet over them without pulling pretty hard on the rack to get the rack onto the second bolt.  Installing the bolt through the feet after putting the rack on first is also a hit-or-miss proposition.  You can loosen the feet on the bar so it can slide a bit, but that involves yet another allen wrench and more fiddling around.  There just doesn't seem to be an easy way to get these things on the car.  Taking them off is easier.

There is a chance I am doing something wrong, so if anyone has figured out a quicker way to get the racks onto the car, please feel free to comment and I'll revise this review.

* * * * * * * * * *
UPDATE as of Dec. 5, 2015.  Practice makes perfect, after lots of trail and error, I've figured out a process to get the racks on that is not as frustrating as described in my original review.

First, once you do get your racks on the car, make sure you tighten the larger hex head screws in order to lock the position of the feet on the bars.  That way, you are not starting with a moving target.  To determine if you have the optimal position of the feet on the bar, remove the hold-down washers and nuts, and then loosen the hold-down screws (i.e. the ones that screw into the car attachment points) and see if you can remove them by hand without having to use the allen wrench.  If so, then you have the feet in the correct position.  If you can't get them out by hand, loosen the larger hex head screws to loosen one of the feet from the bar, and adjust accordingly.  Repeat the process until you get it right.  Lock the feet down to the bar so you don't lose the setup!

Now that the feet are in the right place on the bar, here is a suggested installation procedure that has worked well for me:

1.  Screw one of the hold-down screws into the car for each bar and tighten appropriately (one for the front bar, one for the rear bar)
2.  Put the bars on the car
3.  On the other end of the bar, install the remaining hold-down screw by leading it down through the hole, and hand-screwing it into the car.  If you locked the bars down in the correct position before taking them off the car, this should be relatively easy.  You may have to wiggle the bar end a little bit to find the correct alignment between the hole in the foot and the car screw hole.
4.  Now that the hardest part is over, install the curved washers and nuts onto the hold-down screws and tighten appropriately.

You should be good to go.  Still not the most straightforward process, but the only way I can put the racks on consistently and in a reasonable amount of time.

Oh, one more point in response to Nick's comment - the boot part of the foot will not align well with the roof, it is an annoyance, but doesn't impact the strength of the hold - is is more of an aesthetic issue.  I don't think there's anything you can do about it.
735568
Fitment is poor (2002 WRX).  The tube bends are incorrect for the application.  After installing it once, struggling with it, and finding it would not work at all, I remove it and compared it to the stock unit it was replacing.  The pipe bends were nowhere near matching.  I had to manually bend the pipes to get as close to the OEM unit as I could, reinstall (in a very awkard, uncomfortable to get to location), and still had to fiddle with it to get it to fit correctly.  It did eventually fit, and appears to be holding vacuum at least.

Also, this unit has no structural support along the bottom.  The OEM unit has additional support there.  This is important, because in the process of having to install, remove, reinstall, some of the vertical bars got bent right at the base of the unit.  The OEM piece is better designed and I think would have held up to multiple installations.

Also arrived with some bent fins, which I had to recover as best as possible with a small flathead screwdriver.

(Purchased from Amazon.com)
2678835
The fit is good (I'm a 32 or 34D or DD), and I like that the straps are convertible - the main reason I bought this one.  I love Maidenform bras, and expected this one to be super comfy like the others.  Because it can be strapless, there is a rubber/plastic strip on the inside to help it "adhere" to your skin and keep it up.  Its very uncomfortable.  It rubs and irritates my skin.  I can't wait to peel it off myself at the end of the day.  Its the only strapless/convertible bra I have right now, so it'll have to do.  Not terrible, but I'm not jumping up and down over it.
1419350
The standard LE version of this car has excellent handling, braking and interior quiet. Five stars!

But seat comfort is terrible, much worse than the previous edition. The fabric is rough, tight and padding is slight. The sidewall of the center console is rock-hard for you to bump your knee into while driving. You need a seat cushion and a sidewall bumper pad to make the front seat comfortable for long road trips, really.

The car is more showy and flashy than previous editions, especially in the grill- to match the imagination of some anonymous design "expert," but not quite obnoxious or pretentious. Camry buyers are not looking for that fluff.

Interior storage, an important, often overlooked part of car design, is good but could be better. Handily enough, the center console has two drink cup holders and a storage cubbin with a retracting door and a USB outlet inside. The flat surface on top of the USB outlet is not quite large enough to rest an iPhone on- it tips over. A small but important detail that was overlooked.

Storage compartments in the doors have round areas at the end but do not provide a way to separate items- smaller items just drop in and disappear. The glove compartment is one big, oddly-shaped cavern with one narrow shelf; it would benefit from two shelf surfaces so items are not just tossed into one messy pile. The two cupholders in the back seat middle armest are convenient.

The "technology" system is too complicated and not "smart." They removed one of the most useful features in a car, a clearly visible clock. It takes four steps to get the time. The backup camera starts with a long, rambling big print warning not to read it; the camera view easily blurs with water, and has poor video quality. Getting center console technology to do anything is more distracting than texting while driving.

There is LOTS of room in the trunk. If you get the right width trunk organizer, it will span across the back area of the trunk and leave plenty of room in the trunk forward for other items.

The gas tank holds more than the stated 17.0 gallons- one can squeeze in another gallon, at least. The fuel gauge stays stuck on "E" for about half an hour, then drops to measure consumption. I like that because on a road trip, with the overfill, one can drive all day, e.g. 550 miles, without having to stop for gas. This car does not get the EPA sticker mileage rating of 25city / 35highway (later revised to 25 /34); highway mileage is more like 30 or 31 mpg, not 34 or 35 mpg.

If the seating was merely equivalent to the 2011 edition this car would be 4.5 rounds to 5 stars.

Increase the mpg and tank size for a genuine 600-mile drive range between fill-ups, improve storage compartment usefulness and make the base version technology simpler and better quality and this would be even better.
2355744
I wanted to love this. my dogs are killing the console on my '15 X, I figured since they can't damage the neoprene seat covers (Wet Okole; the best, I think), this should be indestructible too. it might be, but the fit is, not to put too fine a point on it, sloppy. It's just a rectangle with the corners sewed up, which would be OK except it doesn't quite fit, the corners poke out in the back no matter which way it's installed,  and if it's tucked under the lid, the lid doesn't want to close so I had to be careful not to stretch it down too far. Ideally, the corners would be cut a little closer and the sides would be not quite as deep so it doesn't want to tuck under. Offhand, it looks like it was made based on measurements and never actually checked for good fit.
The color, grey, matches the seat fabric fairly well, and the neoprene seems to be good quality. It's a shame that the tailoring isn't up to the same standards. It's sewn well enough, just not a great fit.
3143498
I wore these pants to water, feed, and fill kiddie pools for my flock of ducks and geese.
The plus sizes are severely undersized and do not follow the sizing chart at all. I bought a size larger than I normally wear so that I could comfortably wear street clothes underneath these pants while I work on my microfarm, but I can barely squeeze into them. They did stretch a millimeter or two after a few hours, but there are so many other design flaws that they were not worth the money to me. For example, as mentioned in other reviews, the hook side of the Velcro is sewn around roughly half of the circumference of the leg cuffs. This is much more of a problem than I imagined - my cat's long hair, my long hair, and my socks were stuck in the velcro before I got them on. There are also many threads hanging from the inner seams which also get caught in the Velcro.
These pants are designed for women with no hips, posterior, or belly. If you are built like a tall boy, they will probably fit you well; if you have curves, or if you are long-waisted, don't bother. I cannot sit in these pants - there isn't enough fabric in the hips to bend that much. The crotch seam length is conservative - unless they are meant to be worn as hiphuggers - otherwise these pants are prone to wedgies, or would be if there were enough fabric in the seat to allow it.
They are also about four inches longer in the inseam than I was expecting. If I could trim off the extra length in the legs, and patch it into the hips or crotch, they would fit much better, but there's that Velcro to worry about.

Now for some good news.  They are straight legs, but very roomy straight legs, so I could easily pedal a bike in them - if only I could sit on the bike. The fabric *is* unusual, but it breaths and it keeps the water out. The pants kept me very dry and moisture didn't build up from the inside out. The fabric is the very best thing about these pants - it isn't chic, but it does its job well.

The flock's straw bedding however is stuck to the pants like glue - I have tried brushing and shaking out the pants, but so far I cannot remove the straw. I will say I have not tried washing the pants yet - I didn't want to mess up my washing machine.

However, since they were so inexpensive, I can't give them a one star, so I'll rate them at a two.
3097955
I bought these rugs to replace the worn out rugs that were original to my 2002 Ford Taurus. After 14 years, the rug on the driver's side was completely worn out. These are universal rugs designed to fit a wide variety of vehicles, so I wasn't expecting a perfect fit, but these fit terribly. There's all kinds of different angles in my car (like around the center console) that are raised and the original mats were cut to fit around those areas. These mats are not cut to fit, so it causes them to curl on those spots. Overall they are a nice improvement over the old stained mats, but I worry that they will wear out much quicker because of the poor fit. I might try cutting them to fit and hope that they don't fray or peel because of it. Also, the rugs are not as thick as the original rugs that came with the car. These are a bit thinner and were stapled together, so there's small holes where the staples punched through them. I hope this doesn't cause any issues with them in the future.
1298742
Purchased these Rigid Dragons after owning another pair of 541s that I love... But these don't flex the same.  I'm assuming these are 541 due to the extra room in the seat and thighs but there is no elastic/flexibility as the other styles.  If you don't mind stiff jeans and want this look, buy them.  If you want something that doesn't restrict your motion, avoid them.  I will be returning these.
3399945
I have one of these installed on a 2006 3mzfe v6 (in a v6 MR2) which is close to the same as any 3.0l camry v6 from 1994-2002, along with other cars too.

Two of the header tubes (cylinder 5on rear bank, and cylinder 6 on the front bank) have clearance issues with the header studs. The front can be beat in to fit, but on the rear you have to get creative. Cutting, beating, welding, can all be required.

The exhaust hangs way lower than the stock exhaust, so it is more likely to bottom out.
The o2 sensor bung placements don't make sense, they aren't in equal spots. I had to move mine anyway as they were in a bad spot.

I bought mine new from someone who didn't want to put all the labor in to make these fit. It makes me wish I bought a set that was well-fabricated when they were still made(they no longer exist). I'm waiting for the day I have an exhaust leak from the cheap collector pipe gaskets to replace the piping with better routed v-band flanges, flex section that doesnt scrape the ground, and exhaust merge that isn't good for flow. The merge isn't any better than the stock "t-pipe." Its just bigger. The headers are bigger than stock too, so flow is improved all-around, however the t-merge could have seen a simple upgrade.
833166
The fit for my Chevy Colorado is less than satisfactory.  I'm contemplating returning them.
4325347
I found my pair of Perl Izumi X-Alp Seek IV WRX shoes amazingly comfortable both on and off the bike, but unfortunately they had a flaw in the lace garage which made it fall apart within just a few months of purchase. (The Seek VI does not have a lace garage. Instead, it has an elastic strap across the laces to hold the loose ends in place. That seems to do the trick.) Unfortunately, the Seek IV was on clearance when I bought it, and I can't find anyone who still has my size in stock to buy an exact replacement. Given how much I liked the older model otherwise, the Seek VI seemed like an obvious choice.

Unfortunately, the Seek VI isn't quite living up to my hopes. The upper is stiffer than that on the older model, making them both more difficult to get on and off and less comfortable to wear. I often didn't bother taking my old shoes off when I got home, but always remember with the Seek VI. Hopefully they will break in, but I don't recall having to wait for the the older ones to soften up. This is a significant disappointment, since I bought these not just to bike in, but as a shoe that I could wear all day wherever I might be and still have the convenience of clipless cleats when I ride. They'll still do the job for that, but they aren't as nice as their predecessor.

This shoe also fits differently than the older model. It seems true to size, where the older model ran a bit small. I normally wear a size 42, and my size 43 Seek IV fit perfectly. In the Seek VI, 43 is a bit big. That's arguably an improvement, but anyone else looking to upgrade from older shoes in the line might want to be aware of the change.

On the bike, these shoes are fine. Cleat installation is simple and easy, and they are certainly stiff enough to keep me happy for commuting, errand running, and the like while still being ok to walk in off the bike. I can't speak to how they do in muddy trail conditions, since I'm really a roadie and a commuter, but they seem to do OK shedding snow. Off the bike, they are fine to walk around in if you have to wear shoes, but unlike the older model they don't overcome my general aversion to shoes.
4896593
they don't fit. simple. called them about the issue and what to they do--they blamed Buick and said we are not changing their design to fit better. laughable idiots.

this was a tag on one of the customer supports emails:

Meeting or exceeding customer requirements and expectations
Achieving continual improvement of products, processes, and quality metrics
Performing at world-class levels throughout the organization

100% BS. they could careless.

returning everything.
I wouldn't recommend them to anyone expecting a quality product.

now searching for a quality product.
3700286
Installed on Honda Civic 2007 LX sedan. While it is comfortable and aesthetically pleasing, putting it on is not so nice. The bucket seat covers go on fairly well but the top where the headrests go on could have been better. It was a wide opening lined with velcro with a simple "split apart the areas where the rest enters" concept. As much as I tried to make it work, it kept bunching up around the prongs. Back seat was better to put on but not by much. Back seat bench was much harder. Because the bench is wider than the back rest, the patterns don't line up well making it look "off". Headrest covers were all a pain. None fit well at all. Front headrests had bulging spots almost like horns. Back headrests covers were too big and all of them sag all around. On top of that, it is needed to cut areas into the product just to have the seat belt buckles come out and for the headrests to be put back. All in all, not a good product, at least not for my civic. Deciding to keep it as it is the closest thing to fit ok.
3061301
Decided to try MK for the first time. I was impressed by the quality of the fabric and the pants construction. They look great, very stylish and really built for the outdoors. Unfortunately I did not find a size that was a good fit. I normally wear a 32W34L on regular or slim fit on other brands. The Camber 104 is a Classic fit (same as regular fit on many other brands, which is between their slim fit and relaxed fit). Tried the 32W34L and it had a bulk of loose fabric form around the crotch, while the waist was a little tight for a 32.

I did not have any luck with the Camber 106 either (also a classic fit), as they basically have the same fit. I think these pants are worth checking out at a store where you can try them out in different styles and sizes.

I also tried the Commuter in 32W34L, which was super tight at the waist and thighs. Tried the 33W34L and it was still very tight on quads and thighs, but bulky and loose at the crotch.

I compare these pants to two pairs of Columbia that I recently bought, and while the fabric quality and construction seems better on the MKs, the Columbias have a much better fit for me. For about the same money, I wouldve chosen the MKs if they only fit well.