Search thousands of fashion stores in one place
US - US$

Be inspired

More product details

Built for performance, the UA Men's Original Boxerjock® Boxer Briefs support your active lifestyle. Constructed out of HeatGear® fabrication, these Under Armour® underwear stretch and recover for total mobility and a stay-put fit. Moisture-wicking materials keep you dry, antimicrobial technology prevents the growth of odor-causing bacteria, and flatlock seam construction prevents chafing. Step up your game with the UA Boxerjock. FEATURES: Fitted Boxerjock® boxer briefs. Lightweight, HeatGear® fabrication for performance. 4-Way Stretch fabrication allows great mobility and maintains shape. Signature Moisture Transport System wicks sweat away so you stay cool, dry, and light. Anti-odor technology prevents the growth of odor-causing microbes so your gear stays fresher, longer. Smooth, flatlock seam construction prevents chafing and irritation. Updated performance waistband for a secure, comfortable fit. Articulated mesh fly panel for comfort and ventilation. Designed with a working fly. 6" inseam reduces chafing. Under Armour. Proposition 65 warning icon. WARNING: California Proposition 65. California Proposition 65. Proposition 65 warning icon. Fabric Content: 90% polyester/10% elastane. I bought my first pair of these 3 years ago and bought many more pairs afterwards because I liked them so much. I've always worn Larges and they were great but the last couple of times I've ordered I've had to return because the Larges are too tight on my legs now. This last time I saw them in the Outlet I decided to buy a few Large and a few X-Large. I'm still returning all of them because the Larges are still too tight in the legs and while the X-Larges fit my legs, the waist is super loose. This is so frustrating because I've absolutely loved these since I found them but it looks like I'm going to have to find another brand as a replacement if there is one. 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! I, too, have been deeply disappointed with the feel and comfort of the apparent new design. Over the years, I went from telling everyone how great the underwear was to recently not wanting to buy another pair. I am 6'1", 180 lbs. And in relatively decent shape. Your underwear used to fit perfectly and was so comfortable. I probably have 10 pair. But my most recent purchases are so disappointing. They are too loose in the waist and too tight in the thighs. They are also more of a low rise. It's really weird that someone in your company made the decision to change the design from being so good to being so bad. I actually threw away the 4 pair I bought at Christmas. They were that uncomfortable. I have been wearing the Under Armour 6" Boxerjock for years now. It was great for hiking. They stopped chaffing and dried quickly. The issue is over the last few years they have changed. They feel tighter in the legs and looser in the waist. My size has not changed and the old ones still fit great. I have purchased several pairs hoping to find the older ones but no luck. They seem to be made "low rise" as they don't come up the waist far enough. They constantly slide down now causing "plumbers butt". If there are any old ones available I would like to find them. Why the change in design? I've tried lots of different $20 pairs of underwear and still come back to these again and again. I have about a dozen of these now. About the tags, I would appreciate if Under Armour would just get rid of the tags all together. Tip: Don't cut the tag! Tear it off. However, I agree that when tearing the tags off, you run the risk of tearing a seam. I would like it if they didn't sew in the tag into the integrity of the material and even used a different color thread just for the tag so you can just cut the thread. I've ripped a seam on one of my UA shirts tearing the tag off. As others have previously reviewed, these come with a enormous tag on them that you must cut off, but as I have said about the shirts recently, even once the tag is off, it is on the hem and still leaves the edge of the tag. It scratches and is very uncomfortable and quite unnecessary! Why not just go tagless like all the other major underwear companies? I don't get it! I gave an extra star because other than the tag, they would be 5 star comfortable. They fit true to size. If they were tagless, I would have already cleaned out my underwear drawer and replaced with a pair of these in all colors. UA, please stop putting these tags on the hems of all your clothing, but if you must, please figure out a way the tags can completely rip off!!! 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? Color: black

Gallery