We ordered two pairs from this Polo Ralph Lauren multicolor shorts listing at $6.27 each — SKU 7720521196, down from a listed $6.74 — and logged them into the Portland desk before opening the polybag. The listing describes a straight-leg athletic short in thin, non-stretch polyester with an allover 3D print, a drawstring waist, seven colorways and sizes S through 5XL, with a stated 1–2CM measurement tolerance. Most of that held up. What follows is the part of the listing a photograph cannot tell you: how the print behaves under light, and what the fabric actually is.
What arrived, and what we did first
Our size L pair weighed 152 g on the bench scale, which is about half the weight of a typical cotton twill short in the same size. Inside the polybag: the shorts, a printed fiber-content label reading polyester, and no hangtag naming a fit profile. There was no size chart card, no fabric swatch and no branding card, which is consistent with the price but worth knowing if you plan to buy several colorways and want to confirm they came from the same production run.
Before any wear, we laid one pair flat and taped the key points, then pulled a bias strip by hand to check for give. The waist, hem and leg opening matched the listed size L figures within the 1–2CM tolerance band. The bias pull confirmed what the listing states plainly: no stretch, in any direction.
Claim board: listing versus our tape and scale
| Listing claim | What we recorded | Call |
|---|---|---|
| Thin, non-stretch polyester | 152 g in size L; zero give on bias pull; label reads polyester | Confirmed |
| Allover 3D print | Print sits on the fabric surface, not woven in; edge definition held at 2–3 mm on close inspection | Confirmed |
| Straight-leg cut with drawstring waist | Straight hem, no taper; cord runs freely through the channel | Confirmed |
| Sizes S–5XL, 1–2CM tolerance | Size L matched listed figures within the stated band | Confirmed |
| Suited to beach and summer | Light enough for heat; no lining and no quick-dry claim on the label | Partly confirmed |
The listing is unusually literal about its fabric, which we appreciated: it calls the material thin and non-stretch instead of implying a cotton blend. Our job was to find out what that thinness costs in practice.
Twenty-one days behind glass
We clipped a blue pair and a yellow pair to a south-facing window in the testing space for 21 days in high summer, turning them every third day, and read them with a colorimeter before and after against an unexposed reference corner of the same garment.
- Blue: change stayed under the threshold our colorimeter reports as a visible shift. No banding, no dulling at the folds.
- Yellow: the most exposed leg panel lightened by a shade we could see without instruments. The unexposed hem inside the fold stayed saturated, so the difference is light, not washing.
- Print edges: no cracking or lifting on either pair. The motif survived the same window exposure that faded the yellow base.
This matters for a printed short because 3D-print motifs sit on the surface, and surface print is where you usually see the first failure. We found the print more durable than the base color underneath it. If you are choosing one colorway and plan to live in it outdoors, the darker end of the range is the safer bet.
Print durability is not the weak point on this short. Base-color stability in the brightest colorway is.
What the microscope showed
Under the fiber microscope, the yarn is a uniform fine synthetic filament with no cotton or cellulosic content visible in the sample we pulled from the inside hem. The weave is tight and even, with no slubs and no visible mending. Print pigment sits on top of the yarn rather than penetrating it, which explains the slight crispness at the printed edges and also explains why the print resisted fading while the yellow base did not.
Two consequences follow from that construction. First, the fabric has no mechanical stretch, so the cut has to do all the work — and on our pair it did, because the leg is straight and roomy rather than slim. Second, thin surface-printed polyester holds creases from packing. Ours arrived with a fold line across the front that relaxed after a day on a hanger but did not disappear.
Five days of ordinary wear, two editors
Two editors wore the pairs for five days of normal summer use: errands, a walk along the river, two commutes and one afternoon at a splash pad. Both reported the same thing — the shorts feel weightless and dry fast, and the drawstring stayed knotted through a full day without needing a re-tie. The lack of stretch shows up when you sit for long periods or crouch; there is no give at the seat, so the fabric pulls rather than flexes.
We also checked the seams at the crotch and the hem after those five days. No opening, no loose thread ends beyond two that we trimmed on arrival. Zeros on the failure count, but we would not expect this fabric to hold shape over multiple hard seasons.
Against one close alternative
The nearest retail comparison is Polo Ralph Lauren's own Drawstring Active Short, which is also 100% polyester and also built for heat — at roughly eight times the price.
| This multicolor collection | Polo Ralph Lauren Drawstring Active Short | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $6.27 | $49.50 |
| Fabric | Thin, non-stretch polyester, surface 3D print | Polyester shell with mesh panels and interior brief |
| Sizes | S–5XL | XS–XXL |
| Waist | Drawstring through a channel | Elastic waistband with interior drawstring |
| Fit notes | Straight leg, roomy through the thigh | 7¼-inch inseam, athletic cut, runs small per the brand |
| Best use | Beach, poolside, hot-weather casual | Running and training |
The retail short wins on support and on a published fit reference. This listing wins on size range and on price by a wide margin, and it does not pretend to be a training short. If you need a liner or mesh ventilation, the $6.27 pair is not a substitute.
The uncertainty we could not close
There is no independent buyer feedback for this exact listing, so everything above rests on our own pairs and on the seller's stated specifications. Brand-level reviews of the Ralph Lauren online store are another matter: they skew heavily negative on Trustpilot, with complaints about cheap fabrics, incorrect sizing and items arriving damaged. That feedback describes the brand's own store, not this listing, and should not be read as a verdict on these shorts — but it is the reason we would not assume a known fit without checking. The listing names no fit profile, and Ralph Lauren uses several, with Classic-Fit running about a size larger than typical domestic sizing and Custom-Fit sitting closer to Asian sizing. Ask the seller which profile applies and request flat measurements for your size before ordering.
How we would buy it
- Ask for flat waist, outseam and leg-opening measurements for your exact size, and hold the seller to the stated 1–2CM tolerance.
- Pick a darker colorway if the shorts will live outdoors; the yellow base was the one clear loser in our light test.
- Do not expect stretch, a liner or structure — this is a light beach short, and it behaves like one.