日本
just now
Mens Under Armour The Original 6" Boxer Jock Brief Black/Red
Amazon
Outdoor Supply Co.
| Manufacturer | - |
|---|---|
| Brand | Under Armour |
| Item model number | - |
| Color | Red |
| Weight | - |
| Height | - |
| Depth | - |
| Product Id | 1527253 |
|---|---|
| User Reviews and Ratings | 3.9 (95 ratings) 3.9 out of 5 stars |
| UPC | 886091660114 |
| # | Title | Reviews | User Ratings | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Search on Amazon
Price:
Search
on
|
Search
on
|
||
| 2 |
Men's Original Series 6Ó Boxerjock, Black/Red
Reviews: 95
Ratings:
(95)
Price:
$20
on
|
95 | (3.9) |
$20
on
|
I have worn these for several years now and I never will wear regular underwear again. These are truly the most comfortable underwear that I have ever owned. They are perfect for everyday wear and transition perfectly from work to crossfit / gym. I have also worn them traveling around Europe and the US and they are perfect for traveling because they are lightweight, supportive, and quick drying. They provide perfect support and provide ventilation with the mesh fly area and do not ride up. My wife actually also wore some of these to prevent chafing on a hot day walking around Italy. Its weird to say- but I truly do love these underwear!
These boxerjocks are fantastic. The fit is snug, stays in place, and does not require re-adjusting. The length is perfect since they go half-way down your thigh, so they cover your upper thigh but aren't visible when you sit down wearing shorts. Best of all, they're incredibly comfortable. You will forget you're wearing them!
I have been wearing these for about 10 years (give or take) and I wear them 24/7/365. I am a full time, professional EMT for a 911 service in Central West Virginia where in the summer it is extremely hot & humid and in the winter it can be very cold and nasty. I have never had a problem wearing these, I have not chaffed or any other problems. I have also worn them hiking here in the mountains in WV as well with no problems. I also wear them doing CrossFit and never a problem. They hold their shape, their size and don't get stretched out. Even after wearing them for 24 hours and being busy with almost non-stop runs in some of the most rural parts of WV, they have been amazing! I have tried other UA underwear and came back to the originals. I started to look at other tech underwear and merino wool underwear & decided to stay with what has worked for me now for all these years.
Hey UA, what's up with the aggressive tags on new underwear? Even cheapo brands have figured out tagless underwear are the way to go. Sure, these are tear away but not completely. Very annoying! Tags aside, this product is awesome. I'm a fan of the mesh pouch, comfortable and cool. I have worn this style exclusively for years. My older pairs are still the best, with my most recent pairs not holding up as well. The website says these are new so hopefully these will throwback to the "originals". Either way, product is great and I highly recommend.
I bought these because the Mesh/IsoChill Mesh BoxerJock do not come in white, despite the fact these have a fly which I do not need or want in my sports underwear. Surprisingly, the presence of the fly doesn't really bother me while working out, but I did notice these are not as breathable as the mesh ones, since only the pouch area is mesh. Fit is as expected.
I bought many of these and in different years all of which are small(SM) in size. the first two was a bit loose and the following four are a bit tight. this time I bought some and find that though they are all in SM some are shown as sm 180/76A and some are 165/70A. so obviously, this tells us the size scale is keeping changing? since they are private cloth I won't make any return. the tight ones would only be used when do some highly tense activity, and loose ones will be used as leisure daily gear.....
I was hoping since UA gave these boxerjocks a relaunch of sorts, that there would have been an improvement on the quality. That is not the case with these. What is up with the giant tags on underwear that you have to pull off? I'm afraid I'm going to tear the actual material trying to get them off. I've been buying UA Gear for over 15 years, probably longer. I have the first run of boxerjocks that are holding up better from 15 years ago compared to ones from 6 months ago. The material is very thin, the waistband still rolls, and the seams feel weak. UA's quality appears to be in a tailspin and it's incredibly disappointing, especially for long-term fans of their apparel. It's not all bad, however. There are some new color combinations, and I like the white with light gray waistband. I'd love to see more color choices on the 3" trunk and maybe a remake of classic briefs as well.
I have had many pairs of these over the years, even going back to old briefs. I received three new pair for Father's Day this year. I was surprised to see the same big tags that are normally on shirts and pants on what used to be tag-less underwear. I carefully cut all of them off and did not give it another thought. However, when wearing them and exercising, I kept feeling the light scratch from where the tag was cut. It was annoying. I usually never give underwear a second thought during the day which is why I like it so much. Now, I will not put the new ones on unless they are the last ones in the drawer. The rest of the underwear world has gone to tag-less (even the cheap brands) and UA, the innovators and leaders in the field of high performance underwear have gone backwards and added tags and in the worst possible spot. Why have you added tags? Unfortunately, unless I find some other UA boxer jocks without tags, these are the last ones I will own. I would return the three I got if I had not cut the tags off. There are many days I wear UA head to toe, including underwear, but the discomfort from the tags outweighs all the other benefits. There are other high end performance underwear options that do not have tags. Sorry!
I've been wearing the Original 6inch exclusively for 7+ years. Until now. The last four pair I purchased are too small in every way. My size hasn't changed – maybe a slightly smaller waist. The 30 or so pair I have from before the **DIS-improvements** all still fit great. I used to buy these for people as gifts – I was a veritable UA evangelist. But thanks for **UN-fixing** what was never broken in the first place. So incredibly stupid to suddenly shrink the size and redesign a market-leading product that it boggles the mind. Perhaps someone needs to go back to business school. You've lost me forever because you've proven to me that, not only is the product inferior now, you simply don't care about your loyal customers. So much for the Maryland guys that made products about the athletes, and not the corporations. Bummmm-Errrrrr.
Honestly, what are you guys doing, do your bosses read these reviews? I have worn both the original boxer jock 9" underwear and the polyester blend t shirts under my work uniform (police officer) for well, years and It has become part of my daily gear as much as my radio, badge, and firearm. But in an attempt to replace worn underwear and t shirts due to heavy Velcro straps from ballistic vests etc. that wear them out. I have discovered the replacements are completely inferior to the originals. The waists on the new underwear versions are so loose that they bunch up and are basically useless to me although my waist has remained the same size. The legs remain tight but the waist bands are so flimsy and are made with very poor quality materials its awful. I have read numerous reviews here and your responses are pre written automatic replies. Here is the question is Product development going to actually fix the ridiculous antiquated paper tag issue and the lose fit along with the poor quality materials or is this the evolution of the product forcing many to seek another company to send our money to?