Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel
Take a look at the Patagonia PowderBowl pants....
Just retired my 12 year old Patagonia pants. I felt like a king every time I put them on (they were pretty much the only brand I could try on at the time that came in a short/small and they fit perfectly). They were bomb-proof, but, alas it was time to move them on (from these cold, dead hands...). I would have bought Patagonia's again but they no longer offered a short/small with suspenders so I got a new pair of $150 TNF pants - they are pretty much are POS's compared with the Patagonia's (heed this: consider making sure that the scuff guards are some sort of Kevlar - I'm slicing through the TNF's cordura scuff guards like butter).
Anyway, I'd 2nd the Patagonia's but word has it that your list of three are pretty damn bombproof too and:
- the Flylow appears especially beefy, has four pockets though none at the thighs, and a new-school fit, only has a 10k/8k waterproof technology (good enough for, say, CO/UT in-bounds), and and four vent zips.
- the Cloudveil is lighter, with suspenders, three pockets (one thigh), 7/8th side zips, and with a stretchy Dermizax-based (20k/20k waterproofing) material.
- the Westcomb is the lightest weight (more BC/mountaineering focused) with fewest pockets, two vent zips, and with the uber-breathable eVent fabric (20k/20k waterproofing).
Anyway, these pants and the Patagonia's are all at a similar price point (vs. the nose-bleed prices of Arc'teryx), so it all depends on where you want to strike the balance between features (i.e., # of pockets, suspenders, type/# of vent zips), weight, waterproofness, beathability, heavy-dutiness and fit. Have you had a chance to look at or try on any of these pants?