Topic

Boreas Buttermilks 55 Review


Forum Posting

A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!

Home Forums Campfire Editor’s Roundtable Boreas Buttermilks 55 Review

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1296726
    Stephanie Jordan
    Spectator

    @maia

    Locale: Rocky Mountains

    Companion forum thread to:

    Boreas Buttermilks 55 Review

    #1933271
    Steve K
    BPL Member

    @skomae

    Locale: northeastern US

    I've put roughly 200 miles on mine and I love it, although I agree some things could be improved. I'd like to throw in my impressions as well.

    After you put in about 40-50 miles on it, the foam back pad softens up a bit and forms better to your back. I had an issue when "breaking in" my pack where it would really press into my lower back but the problem has corrected itself.

    I've never had the sternum strap slide around. Maybe I use it a bit differently, or its resting position is the correct one for me, but I haven't had any problems.

    I too would be thrilled with a Granite Gear hip belt, although I feel the current hipbelt is adequate, especially under 30 lbs.

    I am still debating whether I like this or the AC Blaze better, but that little zippered pocket towards the top has me hooked: it's plenty of space to store the little things I need access to easily.

    I've seen very little wear despite scraping on a lot of rocks and branches.

    The zippered hipbelt pockets are *awesome*. I usually stuff them full of snacks for easy access. This is the other thing keeping me using my Boreas instead of my Granite Gear.

    This pack feels a bit awkward with a Garcia bear canister fit horizontally inside the pack. I don't know if it's wrecking the weight distribution or if it's simply causing the pack to shape a little differently, but if you carry a Garcia on 100% of your trips you might steer clear.

    The simplicity of the design is super refreshing, although I hate carrying my foam pad on top of the pack. Bottom straps in this case, would be much appreciated.

    The pack compresses down well enough to carry daypack loads without looking awkward or floppy.

    #1933316
    Aubrey Biscoe
    Member

    @aubothogmail-com

    Locale: Upper Midwest

    Have about 100+ trail miles with this pack and more than that through the air. You've heard from the above how great it is on the trail and I support all of if. But also is a great all around travel pack due to the fact there isn't 'stuff' hanging all over it and packs up nice and tight.

    Happy to see a good review on my pack from the pros at BPL!

    #1933317
    Jeff McWilliams
    BPL Member

    @jjmcwill

    Locale: Midwest

    My lower back is a bit problematic.

    I tried on both the Buttermilks 55 and the GG Blaze AC 60 at REI. Due to the pressure and discomfort that I, too, felt in the lower back, I went with the Granite Gear pack.

    The lower back discomfort on the Boreas was reminiscent of my first pack, a used Eureka! that never got comfortable to me, no matter how hard I tried.

    The lack of hip-belt pockets on the GG Blaze was solved by purchasing two add-on pockets from Zimmerbuilt.

    #1933367
    Brian UL
    Member

    @maynard76

    Locale: New England

    I asked about these a long time ago and no one had any experience with them. They are nothing impressive in terms of weight but they caught my eye in the simple streamlined design. Thanks for the review.

    #1933469
    MFR
    Spectator

    @bigriverangler

    Locale: West

    I guess I don't get it. For me, a three-pound pack with all the nitpicks you listed would be a deal-breaker. As I understand the review, it sounds like the Buttermilks does a lot of things okay, but nothing really well. Given the ability of packs a pound or so lighter to provide the same or better benefits but without the little disappointments(e.g., a ULA Catalyst or Ohm 2.0), what place does the Buttermilks have in the quiver? I see it as a pack without an identity or a niche to fill. If I need more, I would go heavier with something that offered me more. If I need what it offers, why not go significantly lighter?

    Maybe I'm misreading things, but I just don't get it. The pack doesn't look bad, but all of it looks done before–and done better and lighter.

    #1933666
    Green Thumb
    Member

    @greenthumb

    It has a cool name going for it :)

    #1936883
    Raymond Estrella
    Member

    @rayestrella

    Locale: Northern Minnesota

    Nice review Brad.

    How much use did you get with the pack? I can't tell from the review and all the pics look like they are from the same trip.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Forum Posting

A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!

Get the Newsletter

Get our free Handbook and Receive our weekly newsletter to see what's new at Backpacking Light!

Gear Research & Discovery Tools


Loading...