Marmot · Waterproof Outdoor Gear Bags
Marmot Men's Excursion Pack
water-repellent coating backpack, likely PFAS-treated. No disclosure available.
Marmot's Excursion Pack uses water-repellent coating typical of outdoor backpacks, which commonly rely on PFAS chemistry. Marmot provides no public PFAS disclosure or claims.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
Nylon with water-repellent coating water-repellent coating
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.
Category baseline
clothing is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
The Excursion Pack is constructed from nylon fabric with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish. Nylon itself is a synthetic polymer that does not leach concerning chemicals under normal use. However, water-repellent coating coatings on outdoor gear historically rely on PFAS "forever chemicals" (PFAS) to achieve water shedding, though some manufacturers have moved to fluorine-free alternatives. Marmot has not publicly disclosed whether this pack uses traditional PFAS-based water-repellent coating or a newer fluorine-free formulation.
The brand's record and disclosure
Marmot is owned by Amer Sports Corporation and maintains a general sustainability commitment, but has not issued specific public statements about PFAS phase-out in water-repellent coating treatments or provided material certifications (such as OEKO-TEX or Bluesign) that would rule out PFAS-treated coatings. The company does not list PFAS management in readily available product documentation or environmental policy summaries. This silence is typical of mid-range outdoor brands that have not yet committed to PFAS-free supply chains.
How it compares in its category
Most mid-range nylon backpacks (The North Face, Columbia, Osprey) use water-repellent coating treatments without public PFAS disclosure, placing Marmot at parity rather than ahead or behind. Brands with explicit fluorine-free water-repellent coating adoption or third-party certifications (e.g., Patagonia's commitment to PFAS phase-out, or packs certified Bluesign) represent a lower-risk alternative, though they typically cost more. This product sits in the uncertain middle: standard outdoor gear, no known controversies, but unverified chemical inputs.
If you buy it
Wash the pack by hand or machine on gentle cycle with cool water and mild detergent; water-repellent coating coatings can degrade with heat and harsh chemicals, but washing does not significantly strip residual PFAS. Air-dry completely and avoid prolonged heat (dishwasher, dryer). Store in a dry place to prevent mildew and unnecessary rewashing. If water resistance noticeably declines over years of use, a fluorine-free water-repellent coating spray reapplicant (available commercially) can refresh it without adding PFAS.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
Formaldehyde resins in synthetic textiles
Nylon does not inherently require formaldehyde-based finishes for durability or colorfastness. No recalls or warnings have been published for Marmot Excursion Pack formaldehyde content, and standard nylon backpacks are not identified as a formaldehyde risk category.
Azo dyes and restricted colorants
Marmot is a recognized brand with general quality control; azo dyes are not a documented concern in their product lines. No specific testing or recalls implicate this pack in heavy metal dye contamination.
Antimony in polyester components
The pack is described as nylon, not polyester; antimony is primarily a concern in polyester production. Minor polyester trim or thread may be present, but is not a hazard class focus for nylon-primary garments.
Microplastic shedding from synthetic textile
All nylon textiles shed microfibers during washing and wear, releasing them into water. This is not specific to Marmot but inherent to synthetic outdoor gear; using a washing machine filter or microfiber-catching laundry bag mitigates this.
PFAS in water-repellent coating (graded separately)
water-repellent coating on nylon backpacks typically relies on PFAS unless explicitly marketed otherwise. Marmot's silence on this input means legacy PFAS-based formulations cannot be ruled out; dermal exposure is low but prolonged contact and laundering may release trace amounts.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 35% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
Safer alternatives in Waterproof Outdoor Gear Bags
Marmot
Tool Box
Nylon, polyester, cotton blend; details unspecified
Toolbox, not garment. Check product specs for water-repellent coating.
⚠Risky category by default
More waterproof outdoor gear bags grades
How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.