Under Armour M Series Mesh Boxer Jock 3" 1208117 Reviews

Excellent quality and fit. I have heard UA has now discontinued the M Series 3" Boxer Jock and hope that is not the case. Thomas from Virginia Beach

• Height: Height 6'0" and over
• Age: 50's
• Posted: September, 2012

22, 6'4", 215 lbs, weight room addict. Went with the small due to a 29" waist. This was a smart choice because the 'mesh' material works best when it is next to the skin. Is a firm fit, but I work it. Looks nice as well. Just wish they weren't killin' off the 3" inseam lineup. Go UA! ... Roll Tide! (Sorry, just had to do it!) Dixie from Overhere/Sakerliner/USA

• Height: Height 6'0" and over
• Age: 20's
• Posted: June, 2012

Best fit and feel underwear I have tried.. SHANE from KANSAS CITY

• Height: Height 5'6"-5'11"
• Age: 30's
• Posted: September, 2011

Best pair of underwear I have gotten. UA has pulled me away from CK now. Clay from USA

• Height: Height 5'6"-5'11"
• Age: 20's
• Posted: April, 2011

I work out hard six days a week, and put a high value on comfortable support. Although a little expensive, the Under Armour M Series is outstanding. For anyone who puts in serious gym time, they're worth the price. HR service was excellent, too. I'll be back. abthree from Oak Park, IL

• Height: Height 5'6"-5'11"
• Age: 50's
• Posted: January, 2011

Appears to be a comfortable material but was unable to wear the garment for any length of time. As I have experienced with underwear from so many other manufacturers, the waistband was ample enough but the amount of material in the seat was inadequate. One would think that it would be a given that if someone required underwear in size xxx that they probably have a fat ash along with the big waistline. You can get this kind of misfit with a much cheaper garment. Don't waste your money! Michael from Las Vegas / Nevada / USA

• Height: Height 6'0" and over
• Age: 50's
• Posted: August, 2010