Articles (2020)

Overview

At 2.7 ounces (75.6 g) and wrist wearable the Suunto X9 may be the lightest, most compact and most easily carried GPS receiver on the market. In the hands of an experienced navigator who is comfortable operating complex electronics, the Suunto X9 will handle backcountry navigation at half the weight of handheld units like the Garmin eTrex series. Compared to a handheld, the wrist mounted X9 provides continuously readable navigation functions such as a magnetic compass, barometric altimeter, and GPS functions.

Despite its 2.0 x 2.5 inch (5.1 x 6.4 cm) size, the Suunto X9 is a full featured, 12 parallel channel GPS with an integrated loop antenna, waypoint storage and management features for backcountry applications including: following routes, marking waypoints, calculating speed and distance traveled as well as recording elevation profiles. However, the Suunto X9’s functions are generally more basic and difficult to use than those on a handheld GPS. In addition to the GPS functions, the Suunto X9 has the magnetic compass, barometric altimeter (which can be auto corrected by the GPS), temperature, barometer, and time/stopwatch functions of the Suunto X6, which has already achieved status as the standard of excellence in backcountry navigation watches.

With good sky view and good satellite configuration, the X9’s GPS receiver locates position as accurately as larger and heavier handheld units. The X9 will accurately navigate a route or to an individual waypoint, normally acquiring GPS positions within a reasonable amount of time. The X9 has more difficulty acquiring GPS positions and is not as reliable as the Geko 301 in less than optimal GPS reception conditions.

The X9 has good battery life for its size and weight. A proficient navigator using the GPS function sparingly in Manual Fix mode will probably have enough battery life for a week-long trip. However, the X9 has a much shorter battery life than the Geko 301 and batteries are not field replaceable.

A highlight of the X9 is its ‘Position’ screen. It succinctly presents essential satellite status and GPS position information on a single screen – an accomplishment in 74 x 84 pixels. It takes two screens and working through the menus to get the same information on the Geko 301. The X9 also has a tri-axial compass that will operate at up to a 30° angle, eliminating the difficult task of holding a wrist mounted unit level. The X9 even has sophisticated functions like a cross track error alarm.

The main performance differences between the X9 and a handheld GPS are:

1. Compared to a handheld GPS, the X9 takes longer to acquire GPS positions and sometimes has difficulty acquiring GPS positions with limited sky view and/or poor satellite configurations.
2. The X9 has limited GPS battery life and the batteries can’t be replaced or recharged in the field. When its batteries run down, you are without a GPS.
3. The X9’s operation is not intuitive and due to its small screen, is deeply menued. Even with practice, it is more difficult and time consuming to operate than handheld units with larger screens.

When compared to the Geko 301, a lightweight handheld GPS with comparable functions:

• The X9 took consistently longer to get a GPS fix. This was more pronounced in difficult situations such as limited sky view, poor satellite configurations, long time between fixes, significant position changes between fixes, etc. In favorable GPS reception conditions, and used exactly per Suunto’s instructions (more below), the X9 acquired most GPS fixes in reasonable time.
• The X9 had less reliable GPS fix acquisition in difficult situations than the Geko 301. In extreme circumstances, the X9 failed to acquire a GPS fix (we stopped trying after 7 minutes) while the Geko 301 acquired in a minute with an accuracy of 15 meters. In even moderately limited sky view the X9 would often timeout before acquiring a manual GPS fix. Many times the X9 found fewer satellites it could use for positioning than the Geko 301.
• The X9 did not acquire well when in motion. Many times we had to stop moving to get a GPS fix. On some trips it seemed as if getting a good GPS fix with the X9 was dictating our stops and schedule. Sometime we’d have to leave the X9 on a rock or log and wait two to five minutes to get a GPS fix. In comparison, the Geko 301 seemed to work well whether we were moving or not, and did not impede the schedule or progress of our trips. We would pull it out of a pocket while walking and get a good fix in 15 seconds or so.
• The X9 had limited battery life (between 4.4 and 10.0 hours of GPS operation depending on mode) and the batteries are not field replaceable. This is significantly less than the Geko 301’s 10.8 to 25.8 hours of operation. In addition, the X9’s more difficult and time consuming operation with slower fix times increased the time to retrieve the same information over a handheld GPS. If you need to leave a bread crumb trail to track back on, or if there is a possibility of whiteout, night navigation, or difficult situation where you may need to navigate with your GPS receiver continually on, the X9 may not have enough battery power.
• The X9 had a long initial setup period when first entering the backcountry. It could take 15 minutes or longer until the X9’s GPS receiver was ready to reliably operate. During that initial setup period, the X9 needed to be stationary. The Geko 301 was good to operate in just a few minutes and could usually set itself up while we walked.
• The X9 erroneously reports your position 0.14 miles (220 m) too far north for almost all USGS topographic maps when you use UTM coordinates. If you are willing to use a degree based coordinate system the X9 will honor your NAD 27 datum selection and accurately report your position. The Geko 301 accurately reported both UTM and degree based positions for USGS topographic maps.
• The X9 has a complex, hard to use interface. Its sometimes deeply nested menus are time consuming and confusing to navigate. For example, with the Geko 301, marking a waypoint is a two button press operation from any screen. On the X9 marking the same waypoint is five menus down, takes 19 button presses and can only be accessed from the Navigation screen. The buttons on the X9 are very hard to push – an inconvenience as you work your way through the menus. The X9’s operation is not intuitive and you can’t hack you way into functions. You’ll spend a lot of time with your nose in the X9’s 97-page manual.
• The X9’s complicated interface increases GPS use and increases the likelihood that you’ll accidentally leave the GPS receiver on and unintentionally drain the batteries. Be careful to operate the X9 in Manual Fix GPS mode and activate the GPS receiver sparingly.
• The X9 has limited software and map support. The only software that exchanges data with the X9 is Suunto’s Trek Manager, a Windows PC only product. As of our testing, there are no maps to easily use with the Trek Manager. The only way to get a map into the Trek Manager is to import bitmapped (or scanned) maps and manually calibrate them (a huge pain). Currently, there is no data exchange interface between the X9 unit and mapping software with good North American maps like National Geographic’s Topo!
• There are still some bugs in the X9’s firmware. One of the most annoying of these is highly erratic readings on its battery life indicator bar. These can jump up or down by 50% in the space of a few minutes. The X9 lists the wrong distances to waypoints in some screens.
• The X9 lists for $769 which is $523 more than the Geko 301 which has more functionality and weighs only 0.7 ounce (20 g) more.
• While our reviewer didn’t find it a problem, some users complain that the X9 is a bit too bulky and heavy to wear comfortably on the wrist.

All this is not to say that the X9 doesn’t work. It does. In skilled hands, with careful operation, reasonable sky view and some patience to wait for it to acquire a GPS fix, the X9 will handle the navigation for a week-long trip into the backcountry. In keeping with the philosophy of using the lightest equipment that will do the job, the Suunto X9 may be a good choice for some backcountry trips. We consider it a significant feat of engineering that Suunto managed to get a functional GPS with this level of performance and battery life into a wrist mounted unit. We know of more than a few minimalist trekkers who rushed out to buy an X9 as soon as it went on the market.

Specifications

GPS Field Performance

With good sky view and good satellite configuration, the X9’s GPS receiver was as accurate in locating GPS position as larger and heavier handheld units. The X9 will accurately navigate a route or to a waypoint.

In all situations, the X9 was slower to get a GPS fix than the Geko 301. From our field testing, the X9’s loop antenna does not appear to be as sensitive as the patch antennas used in handheld units like the Geko 301.

The X9’s slower GPS fix acquisition was the least pronounced with 1) good sky view, 2) good satellite configuration, 3) a position change of less than 3.1 miles (5 km), and 4) a GPS fix within the last hour. It was most pronounced with 1) limited sky view, 2) poor satellite configuration, 3) a position change as little as 3.7 miles (6 km), or 4) over an hour since the last GPS fix.

In extreme cases with limited sky view, the Geko 301 acquired a fix with 15 meter accuracy in 67 seconds while the X9 failed to acquire a GPS fix after 7 minutes. (The X9 started losing visible satellites so we ended the test.)

In another field condition, this time with poor satellite configuration (but with reasonably clear sky view), the Geko 301 acquired a 5 satellite 3D fix in 32 seconds while the X9 acquired only a 3 satellite fix in 7 minutes 42 seconds. The X9 was also the first unit to lose a GPS fix when entering a limited sky view area and the last to regain a GPS fix when coming back into an open area. In heavily forested areas, tight canyons and other limited sky view areas, the Geko 301 had a clear performance advantage.

The X9 tended to find fewer satellites for positioning than the Geko 301. For example, when the Geko 301 had 6 satellites visible and could use 5 of those for position calculations, the X9 had 5 satellites visible and could only use 3 of those for position calculations.

The X9 erroneously reports your position 0.14 miles (220 m) too far north for almost all USGS topographic maps when you use UTM coordinates. If you are willing to use a degree based coordinate system, the X9 will honor your NAD 27 datum selection and accurately report your position. The Geko 301 accurately reported both UTM and degree based positions for USGS topographic maps.

Why is this? Almost all USGS topographic maps use a North American Datum 27 (NAD 27). For some inexplicable reason the X9 is designed to ignore your datum selection when you select UTM coordinates. In this case the X9 ignores your ‘Datum 99’ selection (the X9 datum that most closely corresponds to NAD 27) and reverts to another datum, WGS 84. The difference between the NAD 27 and WGS 84 is the 220 meters northing error.

Suunto claims that the X9’s loop antenna is less directionally sensitive than patch antennas (which are designed to be pointing up) and therefore it is suited to wrist mounting. From our testing, the added sensitivity of the Geko 301’s patch antenna seems to outperform the X9’s loop antenna even when the Geko 301 was operated upside down. The Geko 301 acquired more satellites and got a position fix sooner, 48 seconds, than the X9, 1 minute 30 seconds, when both were operated upside down. (Measurements were made just a few minutes after acquiring a good position fix with both units upright.) The Geko 301’s patch antenna had no performance degradation pointing to the side and at a large wall (90 degrees from vertical) and acquired a fix in 8 seconds while the X9 required 38 seconds when held in the same position.

The X9 has a long initial setup period when first entering the backcountry. It can take 15 minutes or longer until the X9’s GPS receiver is ready to reliably operate. The Geko 301 was generally ready to operate in 3 to 5 minutes and had little trouble quickly acquiring subsequent GPS fixes.

We missed having a ‘satellite view’ screen on the X9. Knowing the position of the satellites in the sky, which satellites are visible to the GPS, and which it can use for positioning (available on the Geko 301) allows one to maximize satellite reception in difficult locations such as Utah canyons or a forest clearing. We’ve used this information to intelligently reposition the GPS unit for best reception with good success – e.g. upgrading a couple of visible satellites to positioning status. With the X9, you are left to guess where to relocate to improve satellite reception.

The X9 does not use WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System). We do not consider WAAS accuracy necessary or even desirable for backcountry use. WAAS drains more power from GPS units, and its increased accuracy does virtually nothing to improve backcountry navigation. We always turn WAAS off for backcountry trips.

GPS Operation

For multi-day trips, the trick to operating the X9 is to use it in Manual Fix mode as much as possible. This conserves battery power while still acquiring good GPS information when needed. At times, this is complicated by the X9 timing out in Manual Fix mode before acquiring a GPS position.

We would add one more step: Immediately set GPS Fix to Manual mode to preserve battery power.

Suunto recommends you set up the X9’s GPS in a specific way when entering the backcountry. This is so important that Suunto stuffs in each X9 box a separate 8 x 11 inch sheet of paper titled, “Attention Critical Reading Before You Start,” which explains this procedure. This setup will always take over 12 minutes and can easily take longer than 15 minutes. The X9’s initial setup does not work while the unit is in motion. If you want to move around during this period, you’ll need to put the X9 on a rock, log or fencepost during the setup.

A nice shortcut for Manual GPS Fix: In most screens, you can update your position manually by holding down the Stop-Back button for 2 seconds. The X9 will acquire and mark your position in the ‘hidden’ track log and then turn GPS reception off to conserve battery life. Unfortunately, these manually updated positions become part of a track log which can only be viewed via a computer (although the individual positions can be viewed in the position screen until you get another GPS fix). If you want to edit or navigate to this position in the field, or view it after taking another manual fix in the field, you’ll need to menu down further and use the Mark Waypoint function.

To quickly get a screen viewable GPS location: We found the X9’s Position screen one of the most useful screens when used in conjunction with the Manual Fix mode. In the Position screen, we used the Stop-Back button to activate the GPS so that at anytime we could acquire (into the ‘hidden’ track log) and view a GPS position. This strategy of using the Stop-Back button to acquire a position worked equally well in the Route or Waypoint Navigation screens. Again, you can only view your GPS position in the Position screen until the next time you get a GPS fix. You’ll need to menu down further and use the Mark Waypoint function to name and save this position in a field retrievable format.

An alternative to manual fix mode (if you think you have enough battery life) is to put the GPS fix in 1 minute mode. The X9 will automatically update your position and store it every minute.

While the X9 has all the standard functions of a small GPS receiver, the functions often have fewer options and are more difficult to use than similar functions in handheld units. The X9’s small display forces information to be displayed in small chunks on many screens. Because of this, essential functions are sometimes deeply nested down in the X9’s menus. If you thought it was difficult to master your Suunto Vector or X6, this is a whole other league of complexity. The X9’s hard to push buttons make this information all the more difficult to retrieve. The interface is far from intuitive. You won’t hack your way into the X9. Instead, you’ll spend a long time with your nose in the X9’s 97-page manual.

We found it time consuming to perform many basic GPS functions. Marking a waypoint on the X9 is difficult and deeply nested in menus compared to the ease of marking a waypoint with the Geko 301. With the Geko 301, it takes two button presses to mark a waypoint from any screen. On the X9 marking the same waypoint takes you five menu levels down and takes a minimum of 19 button presses. The mark waypoint function can only be accessed from the Navigation screen.

Another example is selecting waypoints. On the Geko 301, you can quickly find waypoints by listing those nearest to your current location (five per screen with direction and distance) or listing them grouped in alphanumeric order (eight entries per screen with locator tabs). On the X9, you are limited to scrolling through waypoints one at a time with only three visible on the screen at any time. There is no information other than the waypoint name which is limited to a format of number, date and time or using one of 19 preset names like “hill,” “coast,” “forest,” and “rock.” It’s difficult to associate these ‘names’ with a specific place in the field. The Geko 301 allows you to choose names for waypoints (via the computer or in the field) that have personal relevance to their position, like “jc-mcr,” which you’ll at least have some chance of recognizing as the junction to Miller Creek. The X9’s field created waypoints, “3.24.6/16:40” or “hill,” don’t provide enough information to remind you of the specific place. You can add your own 19 preset waypoint names to the X9 via the computer. But there is no way to change them or add custom alphanumeric names to waypoints once you’re in the field. Many times we’ve added waypoints from scaled map positions at night for the next day’s hiking. The X9’s limited waypoint creation and naming are considerably less useful than the Geko 301’s.

Some important functions in the X9 are interconnected to other functions and won’t operate unless those functions are set properly. For instance, you can’t run/start an Activity Log until you activate the GPS unit and get an accurate position fix (even if you aren’t planning on using the GPS functions). This can be irritating if you’re late to the trail head and have to wait 15 or more minutes there for the X9 to get a GPS fix. In addition there are X9 functions like Mark Memory Point that won’t operate without an Activity Log running.

In summary, be prepared for a steep learning curve before you can reliably and efficiently operate the X9. Even then, the X9 will have more limited functions and take longer to operate than a handheld unit such as the Geko 301. However, with some patience and ingenuity one can manage most backcountry navigational chores.

Battery Life and Power Management

The X9 has remarkable battery life given its size and weight. We estimate that the Suunto X9 can handle about a week in the backcountry navigating primarily with the GPS in Manual Fix mode. With sparing use of Manual only GPS fixes, a skilled navigator who needs minimal GPS updates might extend this up to two weeks. We do not think that the X9 will achieve its 500 waypoint acquisition in a two week period.

For multi-day trips in the backcountry, the X9’s short battery life and non-field replaceable batteries are a serious challenge to the navigator. The X9’s slower fix times and complicated time consuming operation increase GPS use over a handheld GPS. In addition, the complexity of operations increases the likelihood that you’ll unintentionally leave the GPS on without realizing it. We did this on more than one occasion.

We are confused as to why the X9, with its limited battery life, has no capacity for installing new batteries in the field. If you make a power management mistake with a handheld unit and it goes dead, you have the option of putting fresh batteries in it and completing your trip with a GPS. With the X9, if you unintentionally leave the GPS on or just use it more than you planned, you risk having no GPS in the backcountry. To complicate this, the X9’s battery level indicator does not accurately report battery life. It can jump 50% up or down in just a few minutes. Fortunately, when the X9’s batteries get critically low it automatically shuts off the GPS receiver to reserve enough power to operate time, altimeter/barometer, and compass functions. The X9 won’t let you reactivate the GPS again until the battery is charged so you will be without a GPS for the duration of the trip.

You can use a cigarette lighter adapter or put a 9-volt battery in the charging cradle to charge the X9 just prior to going into the field. This at least gives you the maximum charge before venturing forth. You might even want to top off the battery after completing its initial setup at the trail head.

Finally, if you absolutely need to leave a bread crumb trail to track back on, or if there is a possibility of whiteout, night navigation, or similar difficult situation where you may need to navigate with your unit continually on, the X9 may not be a good choice for your trip.

Compass and Altimeter/Barometer Performance

No surprises here. Suunto has been producing top quality wrist mounted compass and altimeter units for years. They are standard issue equipment for adventure racers. The X9 improves on this level of performance with a new tri-axial compass. You calibrate the compass in two planes, horizontal and vertical. When done, the tri-axial compass will operate at up to a 30° angle, eliminating the task of holding older wrist mounted units exactly level to get an accurate compass reading.

Computer Interface and Software

Stand-alone data manipulation on the X9 is time consuming and difficult. Most data manipulation of the unit is best done via computer. For the time being, data transfer to and from the X9 is limited to Suunto’s proprietary Trek Manager Software. The Trek Manager Software will allow you to download and view field data (altitude, time, distance, etc.) stored in the X9 and therefore would be a good training aid to adventure racers or others who want detailed outdoor performance data for a day’s outing.

In our estimation, Suunto’s Trek Manager is not a serious piece of backcountry mapping software. The Trek Manager Software does not have good North American maps, or any sort of easily loaded maps for that matter. The only way you can import maps is as a scanned file (e.g. Bit Map, JPEG, or GIF files) that you manually calibrate. This is a time consuming pain. To date, major mapping software like National Geographic’s Topo! does not support data exchange with the X9. According to Suunto, the only solution is to create routes and waypoints in third party mapping software (e.g. Topo!), export this as an intermediate text file, and import the text file into Sunnto’s Trek Manager software before finally downloading route and waypoint data to the X9. We called National Geographic and they estimate a beta Topo! to X9 data interface sometime late summer to early fall 2004.

Display

The X9 has a black and white, 74 x 84 pixel, LCD display. The pixel based display is much more flexible for presenting varied types of information, large characters, small characters and even graphics, than the fixed bar displays used on most watches and wrist navigation units like the Suunto Vector. The X9 displays much of its information in large, easily read characters. We found the contrast and viewing angles were reasonable to read the display from full daylight to dusk. The backlight is very bright and can be viewed even in the shade.

The X9’s LCD has more contrast and is sharper than Suunto Vector’s bar character display. This and the large characters make the X9’s display more pleasant to view and easier to read than the Vector’s. Compared to the Vector, the X9’s pixel based display presents more information in a more easily read format. As mentioned before, the X9’s display is smaller than handheld GPS units and shows less information per screen.

Value

The X9 can hardly be considered a bargain. It is an elite piece of gear for the committed minimalist who is an expert navigator and can spare $700 dollars for a GPS. The X9 is lighter than handhelds, and being wrist mounted it provides continuously readable navigation information. The X9 lists for $523 more than Garmin’s Geko 301 which is easier to use, has more functionality, and weights only 0.7 oz (20 g) more. One could even argue that if you want many of your features wrist mounted, the combination of a Geko 201 along with a wrist mounted navigation unit like a Suunto Vector provides more functionality for a lot less money. This combination while a bit heavier provides more function, battery life, and usability.

Recommendations for Improvement:

We think the X9 is a remarkable step forward in outdoor navigation. It took some superb engineering to get a functional GPS down to this size. Nonetheless, we’d like to see some improvements.

• The most important step is to improve battery life for extended backcountry trips where you can’t recharge the batteries. The most obvious solution is to allow for in-field battery replacement. In our estimation, the X9 does not have enough battery power for situations like whiteout or emergency night navigation, one of the primary reasons you’d bring a GPS.
• We’d also like to see acquisition times improved on the X9. We don’t know how Suunto would go about improving this – antenna performance, receiver performance and/or firmware improvements? But for the time being, the X9 is slower than handheld units especially in poor reception areas or when it has been off for a while.
• Any improvements to GPS acquisition in difficult reception areas would be useful too. Hikers in dense woods or those of us addicted to the canyons of the Southwest would be grateful.
• Suunto should upgrade their firmware to recognize the user selected datum when in UTM mode and not revert to WGS 84 datum as the unit currently does. Not supporting both UTM coordinates and the NAS 27 datum is a significant problem with almost all USGS topographic maps. For the time being you’re stuck using a less useful degree based coordinate system or making the mental 0.14 miles (220 m) adjustment in you head. Or you could just scale your UTM grid marks 0.14 miles (220 m) to the north.
• Unlink the Activity Log from needing to get a GPS fix. Right now it is irritating to wait 15+ minutes to get an initial GPS fix so you can start an Activity Log, especially when you aren’t planning on using the GPS functions of the X9.
• Anything Suunto can do to make the X9’s menus more intuitive and easier to navigate would be a huge boon to users. It would be nice to mark a waypoint without having to menu down five levels and press 19 buttons. Managing and editing waypoints could be a lot easier.
• The X9’s buttons are hard to push. While you’re certainly not going to activate a button by accident, buttons which depress with 1/3 to 1/2 half the effort would be appreciated.

Overview

The Starlite is a standout with the highest comfortable load carrying capacity of any backpack tested by Backpacking Light. The pack comes very close to the performance of an internal frame pack at a fraction of the weight. The Starlite is engineered so that a virtual frame is created by inserting a folded sleeping pad into an exterior zippered pocket that locks the pad to the harness. This creates a frame much stiffer than is possible with a rolled-up ground pad inside the main pack bag. In our load testing of the Starlite’s predecessor, which used the same design to create a virtual frame, the Moonlite was the only pack capable of carrying 35 pounds without a frame collapse. (Frameless Backpacks: Engineering Analysis of the Load Carrying Performance of Selected Lightweight Packs). In our field-testing, the Starlite outperformed its predecessor.

Designed with long distance hikers in mind, the Starlite is a large volume pack with multiple exterior pockets, a hydration port, and a tool loop. On the downside, the Starlite does not contain smaller loads well. There are few compression straps and these are concentrated at the top of the pack. In addition, the folded sleeping pad puts the main pack bag some distance from your back. You must correctly pack the Starlite to prevent heavy items from being too far from your torso and throwing you off balance. However, for its intended purpose (heavy loads and long trail distances), the Starlite offers a good balance between weight, durability, features, and cost. For those with tender shoulders who intend to carry more than 30 pounds, it may be the only 1½-pound pack to do the job.

Specifications

• Backpack Style – frameless, top loading, roll-top pack. Optional 6061 aluminum stays are available to convert the Starlite to an internal frame pack.
• Fabric Description – the pack body is constructed with 6.5 oz 420 denier ripstop packcloth (tested in this review). This can be upgraded to a 4.5 oz 1/8 inch Spectra Gridstop (a 210 denier high-tenacity nylon with 215 denier spectra ripstop reinforcement). The other fabrics used in this pack include a 2.3 oz silnylon for the extension collar, 4.5 oz DriGlide wicking fabric (used on the backpanel, hipbelt, and shoulder straps), and a 4.5 oz 210 denier ripstop nylon for the harness.
• Sizes – one size adjustable to fit torsos from 18 to 24 inches (46 to 61 cm).
• Volume – 4100 ci, 67 L (2600 ci main + 600 ci pockets + 450 ci pad pocket + 450 ci extension collar). As an option, a pocketed vest harness can replace the hipbelt and shoulder straps, adding 200 ci via four additional pockets located on the front of the vest.
• Weight – 25.4 oz (720 g) as measured, without stays and heavier packcloth fabric option (manufacturer claims a weight of 27 oz). Expect to save about 4 oz (113 g) for Spectra Gridstop fabric option. Aluminum stays add an additional 4.8 oz (verses a claimed 5 oz).
• Volume to Weight Ratio – 161 ci/oz without stays (based on 4100 ci and Backpacking Light measured weight of 25.4 oz).
• Load Carrying Capacity – 35 lbs as claimed by Six Moon Designs and confirmed by Backpacking light.
• Carry Load to Pack Weight Performance Ratio – 22 (based on 35 lbs and Backpacking Light measured weight of 25.4 oz).
• MSRP – $135.00 without stays ($125 with webbing belt and $165 with vest harness; add $25 for Spectra and $10 for aluminum stays).

Manufacturer’s Contact Information – Six Moon Designs, (503) 430-2303, www.sixmoondesigns.com.

Features

Numerical ratings follow on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = poor, 5 = excellent).

Frame and Suspension – 4.5

At first glance, the Starlite may appear like any other frameless rucksack. However, Six Moon Designs incorporated a unique, technically advanced “virtual frame” in their design; the zippered pad pocket. Aside from conveniently storing your sleeping pad, the pad pocket locks the harness and hipbelt to the tightly folded sleeping pad forming a much improved “virtual frame,” as compared to the loosely rolled or folded pad methods. This greatly extends the load carrying capacity of the Starlite. At 35 pounds, the Starlite had the highest load carrying capacity of any pack tested.

The full-featured suspension includes shoulder straps, padded hipbelt, sternum strap, load lifters, and hipbelt stabilizers. Both the shoulder straps and hipbelt are padded with identical ½-inch thick closed cell foam. Our reviewer found that the shoulder straps were too narrow to comfortably distribute heavier loads. (Six Moon Designs is currently testing a wider prototype that should alleviate this problem.) The shoulder straps attach to the bottom of the pack rather than the lower backpanel seams. While this is a better design for durability, they criss-cross over, and often obstruct, the hipbelt stabilizers. Exacerbating this problem, the webbing for the hipbelt stabilizers is so short that the user may have difficulty getting a good enough grip to pull them tight.

The Starlite is offered in one size which adjusts to fit torsos from 18 to 24 inches. The torso height adjusts by individually raising or lowering the shoulder strap attachment points. The shoulder straps are attached to the pack along two daisy chains running up from the top of the pad pocket to the top of the main body (where the load lifters are sewn in).

Usable Features and Ease of Use – 4.5

The Starlite has three exterior mesh pockets trimmed with non-adjustable ¾-inch flat elastic at the top and bellowed at the bottom. The largest pocket on the back measures 12 inches wide by 13 inches high and provides 280 cubic inches of volume for storing wet or often needed gear. A shock cord across the back of the largest pocket provides some minimal pack compression and an additional place to store gear outside of that pocket. The other two mesh pockets, located on each side of the pack, measure 8 inches wide and 10 or 16 inches high. The smaller 10-inch high pocket (120 ci) on the right side provides a difficult but accessible while hiking water bottle pocket. Our reviewer found the larger 16-inch high pocket (200 ci) just right for storing multiple items such as a fuel bottle and ground sheet.

Another benefit of the exterior pad pocket is that the pad can be easily removed to make practical use of it at extended rest stops (no need to unpack and re-pack the main pack bag!). The pad pocket is accessed from the back of the pack via two YKK #4 coil zippers that open away from each other from the top left corner. Measuring 20 inches high, 11 inches wide, and 2-½ inches deep, the pocket will accommodate a ¾ length closed cell foam pad or up to a full length Therm-a-Rest or equivalent self-inflating pad. Six Moon Designs suggests the neatly folding ¾ length Z-Rest, but our reviewer found the thicker-when-folded ¾ length Ridge Rest to work as well or better. A Ridge Rest is probably the thickest pad that will fit.

The roll top closes like a dry bag with a Velcro closure along its top edge. There is no implication that it will prevent water entry though, as none of the seams are sealed. The Velcro helps in securing the top of the bag and makes rolling the top closed easier. However, take care when placing polyester knit and similar Velcro-loving fabrics through the opening as they will adhere and snag on the hook strip. To get around this, roll the top of the bag down a few times to hide the Velcro. A single compression strap completes the top closure and provides vertical compression of the total pack contents.

Two side compression straps along the top of the Starlite improve the function of the stabilizer straps by tightening the top of the pack. They also offer a means to secure the tops of long items like trekking or fishing poles that are sticking out from the side pockets. Although lacking a water bladder sleeve, there is a hydration port that would allow internal storage of a water bladder packed among the rest of the gear. We like this: it eliminates the extra weight of the hydration sleeve (we don’t like unloading a pack to refill the bladder anyway), but still provides a means to store water inside the pack, but in a more accessible location than a sleeve provides. Finally, of interest to mountaineers, there is a single ice axe loop, and a climbing rope could easily be secured using the top and side panel compression straps.

Load Volume Flexibility – 3.0

The Starlite does not adjust well to smaller volumes. The pack is compressed by the roll top’s single compression strap and the two upper side panel compression straps. There are no options for compressing the mid and lower portions of the pack. The lightweight shock cord over the outside pocket might provide some additional compression for lighter and softer loads; but heavier loads force it to stretch open. The best way to work around the issue of adjusting the pack during a trip is to transfer gear from the exterior pockets to the interior as food and water are consumed.

Options

Six Moon Designs offers the Starlite with several options. Two aluminum stays can be added to increase the pack’s comfortable carrying capacity above 35 pounds. Weight savings can be achieved by replacing the padded hipbelt with a webbing belt, by leaving the hipbelt off all together, or by switching to 1/8 inch Spectra Gridstop for the body fabric (this fabric saves about 4 oz, 113 g). Finally, Six Moon Designs claims that switching the hipbelt and shoulder harness for a vest harness does a better job of distributing the pack’s weight over the torso. This option was not tested.

Field Performance

Pack Load Carrying – 4.5

On extended backpacking trips, we tested the Starlite at various weights. We started with the pack loaded above the manufacturer’s recommended weight (without frame stays) and observed the pack’s performance as the weight reduced during the trip. The pack was tested at an initial weight of 42 pounds with and without the stays.

The following observations were made using a ¾-length Ridge Rest pad stored in the pad pocket. With the stays in, the pack carried very well at 42 pounds and could be pushed to 45 pounds easily enough for most backpackers. Upon removal of the stays and at 40 plus pounds, some degradation in load carrying performance was noted, primarily at the shoulders (due to the extra weight on narrow shoulder straps). Little pack torso compression occurred at these upper weights and the load stabilizer straps were taut and effective at transferring weight to the hipbelt – a result of the pad pocket/ground pad maintaining rigidity throughout the backpanel. As weight reduced from 42 pounds down to 15 pounds comfort only improved.

Six Moon Designs claims the maximum comfortable load for the Starlite is 35 pounds. We agree, provided pack volume is high enough to stiffen the pack. Heavy, dense (low volume) loads do not carry as well due to the pack’s limited compression. Without compression, we found the load stabilizers ineffective which prevented the effective transfer of weight to the hips. Bottom line: this pack was designed for big volume trips for long distance through-hikers. It does this well. Smaller volumes did not carry as well.

A final concern to note is the thickness of the pad pocket which puts the pack’s load 2-½ inches away from your back. When nearing the pack’s 35-pound (frameless) limit, take care to load heavier items close to the frame and higher up. Weight placed in other areas will make the pack uncomfortable and throw off your center of gravity (balance).

Durability – 4.0

In the era of delicate ultralight silicone-impregnated nylons and expensive ultralight fabrics, the Starlite is almost unique in offering a durable and inexpensive packcloth option while still keeping the pack’s weight around 1½ pounds. The tough 6.5 ounce 420 denier packcloth has ripstop running horizontally, vertically, and diagonally. We tested this fabric in Southern Utah’s slot canyon country and subjected it to countless bumps and scrapes with coarse sandstone. During the testing period, the pack fabric showed no signs of abrasion or weakness due to wear. Of potential concern are the mesh pockets which are prominently attached and surround the outside of the pack. However, they proved durable enough to handle abrasion and brush encounters as both were frequently encountered.

Options

According to Six Moon Designs, the Spectra Gridstop upgrade option can shave 4 ounces (113 g) off the total pack weight. Although the Spectra Gridstop was not tested in this review another member of our review staff tested it in the Moonlite, this pack’s predecessor. He found it to have strong tensile strength but not be as resistant to abrasion. Our reviewer put a good-sized hole in it on an unintentional backslide down a scree gully. As such, the Spectra Gridstop may not be a good choice for climbers, canyoneers or anyone who is hard on equipment.

The Starlite is finished with double stitching and bar tacking in appropriate areas. However, several raw fabric edges were visible and required searing to prevent fraying. None of these presented more than a cosmetic problem.

Value – 4.5

The pack is feature rich, reasonably light, extremely durable for a 1½-pound pack, and a good deal at $135. Of course, the Starlite’s best feature is that it carries like an internal frame pack but weighs much less. If you need to carry heavy loads, we know of no other frameless pack that can match its performance, especially at around 21 ounces for the Spectra Gridstop version.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Starlite is an exceptional pack when used for its designed purpose – heavy loads and long distance backpacking. However, we do see some room for improvement. We suggest adding compression straps to improve compression of smaller loads, especially in the mid and lower portions of the pack. As mentioned above, there were several places on the pack that our reviewer had to trim and melt webbing to prevent fraying. Finally, the hipbelt stabilizers need longer webbing straps so there is enough strap free to get a good grip.

Overview

The Osprey Aether 45 is a lightweight pack built to take abuse. This pack has no frame but uses a high-density foam back pad and laced compression cords to create a virtual frame. In our estimation, it comfortably carries up to 25 pounds (11.3 kg) for the average user. Our reviewer, who uses packs without hipbelts and admittedly has considerable tolerance for weight on his shoulders, found he could carry up to 35 pounds (15.9 kg) in the pack. The use of a roll-top with plastic reinforcements makes accessing gear easy. The Aether’s unique compression, in addition to shrinking the pack down for smaller loads, allows you to carry medium-sized items outside the pack. This is a solid and durable pack with reinforced seams, bar tacked webbing, abrasion resistant fabrics, and heavy-duty buckles. This durability comes at a price; at 2 pounds 4 ounces (1.02 kg) it is far from the lightest in its class. Further, its two side pockets, designed to be reached while wearing the pack, are difficult to reach and do not securely hold larger items like 1-liter water bottles.

Specifications

• Backpack Style – frameless, top loading, roll top
• Fabric Description – 210 denier double ripstop used in main pack body and pockets. Heavier 420 denier “chainlink” fabric used on bottom, sides, and center of compression panel.
• Sizes – S (14-18.5″), M (16-20.5″), L (20-22+”); size L tested
• Volume – S = 2600 ci (43L), M = 2800 ci (46L), L = 3000 ci (49L)
• Weight – 36.1 oz (1023 g) as measured, size L (Manufacturer claims weights of 28 oz for S, 30 oz for M, and 32 oz for L.)
• Volume to Weight Ratio – 83 ci/oz (Based on 3000 ci, size L, and Backpacking Light measured weight of 36.1 oz)
• Load Carrying Capacity – 25 pounds (BackpackingLight.com estimate)
• Carry Load to Pack Weight Performance Ratio – 11.1 (based on 25 lbs and BPL measured weight of 36.1 oz)
• MSRP – $99
• Manufacturer’s Contact Information – Osprey Packs, 970-564-5900, www.ospreypacks.com

Features

Numerical ratings follow on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = poor, 5 = excellent).

Frame and Suspension – 3.5

The Aether 45 has a stiff, double foam backpanel but no stays. (While the addition of a foam sleeping pad would improve the “virtual frame,” our reviewer, who tolerates weight well on his shoulders, found that the backpanel was stiff enough to handle well-packed loads up to 25 to 30 pounds.) It has shoulder straps padded with high-density foam. The Aether 45 features a comfortable wicking backpanel that made hiking with a shirt off a joy. It wicked sweat away from the skin and toward the bottom of the panel. The hipbelt is also padded and features Osprey’s ErgoPull closure system. This system makes tightening the hipbelt easier and creates a V tensioning system on each side that improves the shape of the padded hipbelt. This pack has an adjustable sternum strap and shoulder lifter/stabilizers. All adjustments are easily made with the pack on. The waistbelt can adjust to fit approximately a 40 inch waist. The torso length is non-adjustable and the waistbelt is non-removable and non-replaceable.

Usable Features and Ease of Use – 3.0

The roll-top of the Aether 45 pack is stiffened by a sewn-in plastic rim, permitting the top to open like a clamshell to allow easy packing and access to items inside the pack. The Aether 45 does an excellent job of carrying a climbing rope. The climbing rope can be looped through the top of the roll-top and held in place with the side roll-top connections attached across the back of the pack. One ice axe/tool loop is included.

The unique laced rear compression cords adjusted quickly and easily with a single cord lock (it may occasionally require re-tightening). In addition, the laces offer the user an external place to stash a jacket, shovel, or small tent. A small fabric center panel hides a pocket for the extra lacing cord, which also worked well for stowing a small item such as sunglasses.

The Aether 45 has triangular-shaped mesh side pockets that may or may not be accessible while hiking, depending on the user. One tester found that because the pockets are mid-way up the side panels of the pack, it was a struggle to remove anything but smaller items. Further, the triangular design allowed medium-sized items such as a 1-liter Platypus, a Nalgene bottle, or a large paperback book to fall out during technical sections or running (we didn’t ask him why he was running with a book). Don’t plan to carry long items such as trekking or tent poles in the side pockets. The side roll-top connections force the poles forward at an angle that puts the poles disagreeably near the wearer’s face. Our reviewer had better success weaving these items into the compression panel for a simple and secure solution.

The Aether 45 has an upper right side water bladder port with a convenient hose clip integrated into the sternum attachment. Despite having no internal or external hydration bladder pocket, our tester found that bladders remained stable in the pack when the compression panel was tightened and a few items were loaded in the pack to fill out the volume. While this pack has a sleeve between the backpanel and the pack body that could allow a hydration bladder to be inserted, the suspension design makes this very uncomfortable in practice and it is not recommended.

While it is possible to remove the padded back panel to use as a sit pad, our reviewer found this to be very difficult, especially with the pack full. The panel can, however, be removed and left at home to save a bit of weight.

Load Volume Flexibility (Compression) – 4.0

The Aether 45 has limited flexibility in handling larger volume loads. It does not have an extension collar and the compression panel is only able to handle one mid-size item (e.g., a small tent or a closed cell pad). It does a much better job with smaller loads; the compression panel is more effective at shrinking the space than the industry standard side panel compression straps. During one test in desert canyon country, the Aether 45 was loaded with only an insulated jacket and approximately 30 pounds of water; the pack carried this small, dense load very comfortably. Our tester found similar success with pack volume compression when using the pack as a daypack.

Field Performance

Pack Load Carrying – 3.5

The Aether 45 was quite comfortable with loads of 25 pounds (11kg). This was with the weight located in the center of the pack and the compression panel tensioned to create a “virtual frame” against the padded backpanel. As we increased the pack to 35 pounds (16 kg), the pack experienced torso length collapse that forced an increasing amount of weight onto the shoulders. Some users (those who can tolerate weight on their shoulders) will find the pack tolerable carrying up to 35 pounds. Even at these higher weights, the ErgoPull hipbelt kept loads evenly distributed on the hips, and the shoulder load lifters kept the pack riding close into the back. Because the Aether 45 rides close to the back, our testers felt agile and balanced when hiking or climbing.

When loads crept above 35 pounds (16 kg), the waistbelt started to slip and the pack became uncomfortable (and tolerable only for short stints even by a reviewer with some tolerance for weight on his shoulders).

While carrying small, dense loads such as when making water trips in the desert, the Aether 45 was able to consolidate the load effectively through tightening of its compression panel. This would also be true when using the pack with other low volume, high-density loads such as climbing or canyoneering equipment.

Osprey posted no suggested load carrying capacity; we suggest a maximum comfortable load carrying capacity of 25 pounds, though some will find it tolerable up to 35 pounds.

Durability – 5.0

The Aether 45 is constructed of durable materials that increase the pack’s weight but create a tough product. After a couple of weeks in Utah canyons in which the pack was lowered down pour offs, scraped through narrow slot canyons, and dropped off rocks, it shows very little wear. The only area that scuffing is visible is where the logo stitching on the back frayed a bit after sliding against narrow sandstone canyon walls. In addition, the plastic reinforcements for the roll-top opening wore small, insignificant holes in the fabric at their ends.

All seams in this pack are reinforced internally with webbing, and a tough Cordura is used at the bottom of the pack. Strap attachments are bar tacked for further durability. The high-density foam used in the waistbelt, shoulder straps, and back panel also showed no indication of compression fatigue. Buckles are heavy-duty Duratex models that didn’t crack, even when stepped on (which happened while standing on rock). This pack is built to last.

The material used on this pack, while durable, is not waterproof. Although the pack is somewhat water resistant, during both shower tests and a heavy rainstorm, items inside the pack got wet, as did the pack fabrics. Use of a pack cover is necessary with this Osprey pack.

Value – 3.5

At under $100, the Osprey Aether 45 is a good value. While a lightweight pack, it offers a comfortable suspension system, quality construction, durability for the long run, and usable options that many backpackers will find sufficient for their adventures. For its load carrying capacity and features it is on the heavy side for ultralight packs. Add some value points if you need a lightweight and durable pack.

Recommendations for Improvement

According to Osprey, the side pockets were designed with easy, pack-on access in mind. However, they are too high to allow easy access and too small to hold larger items well. Because these are the only exterior pockets, we would recommend redesigning the pockets to be deeper and rectangular to allow for carrying larger items more securely. Design changes that would allow the user to slip a hydration bladder between the backpanel and pack body would be both convenient and welcomed. This may require a more rigid backpanel or looser fabric behind the backpanel. Given the weight of the pack’s fabric, it would be nice if it were waterproof.

Overview

The GoLite Jam received the highest overall score and was the second highest rated pack for load carrying capacity, at 30 pounds (13.6 kg), in Backpacking Light’s 2004 Frameless Pack Review. The key to the Jam’s load carrying performance is not any one feature but a combination of many things done well. It has wide side fins on the hipbelt that contour around the hips to prevent slippage. There are five compression straps to compact the pack contents into the virtual frame. The Jam has an internal foam backpad which supplements the rigidity of a ground pad that is rolled in the pack and a narrower/taller pack profile that forms the pack contents into a stable, vertical cylinder conducive to forming a virtual frame.

The GoLite Jam had one of the best balances of load carrying capacity, pack weight (21 oz size L), and features of the packs we tested. With three external pockets, including a large fabric rear pocket, the GoLite Jam provides quick access to your most needed items during the day. With some care (e.g. if you’re not planning on dragging it across granite) the Jam is one of the lightest packs suitable for aggressive off-trail-travel, winter ski trips and mountaineering or climbing. Climbers and skiers will appreciate the Jam’s taller, narrower pack profile for good balance and arm swing clearance. The pack’s climbing features include: the ability to carry two tools (including shaft holders), a climbing rope, and/or skis and poles. The Jam’s major weaknesses are under-padded shoulder straps that dug into our shoulders at higher pack weights, and while the Jam’s Dyneema® Gridstop fabric is plenty durable for trail use, a lack of fabric reinforcements in high wear areas may present a problem for abusive off-trail-travel and climbing.

Specifications

• Backpack Style – frameless, top loading with roll top closure (no top pocket or flap)
• Fabric Description – Pack body: 140 g/sq m (4.13 oz/sq yd) 215 denier nylon with Dyneema® gridstop reinforcements. Rear pocket: Arrowhead Cordura™ ripstop nylon. Side pockets: Nylon mesh
• Sizes – S (16-18″), M (18-20″), L (20-22″); size L used for our reviewer’s 19.5 inch torso
• Volume – Size L = 2950 ci, 48 liters (main packbag 2300 ci, pockets 200 ci, extension collar 450 ci)
• Weight – 21.1 oz (598 g) as measured size L (manufacturer claims 23 oz size L)
• Volume-to-Weight Ratio – 140 ci/oz for size L (based on 2950 ci, size L, and a measured weight of 21.1 oz)
• Load Carrying Capacity – Manufacturer-reported at 30 lbs; we agree, as long as the pack is packed with some skill and degree of rigidity. Limiting factor in load carrying capacity is harness collapse and resulting strain on shoulder straps, which are not able to bear much weight; we estimate that the GoLite Jam’s upper limit will be somewhere between 25 to 30 pounds depending on user skill and level of tolerance for discomfort.
• Carry Load to Pack Weight Performance Ratio – 22.7 (based on 30 lbs and a measured weight of 21.1 oz)
• MSRP – $89.00

Features

Numerical ratings follow a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = poor, 5 = excellent).

Frame and Suspension – 4.0

The GoLite Jam uses a 1.5-inch webbing hipbelt in conjunction with wide, triangular side fins that contour well around the hips and waist to prevent belt slippage. The main pack bag has four side compression straps and one top compression strap. These combined with a ground pad rolled as a cylinder inside the packbag create a relatively rigid virtual frame to comfortably transfer pack loads of up to 30 pounds to the hipbelt. Without the rolled up pad, the Jam’s load carrying capacity is lower but the pack’s internal backpad and compression straps still make a virtual frame capable of carrying up to 15, possibly 20 pounds. The taller and narrower profile of the Jam helps to form a virtual frame. This shape forms the pack contents into a stable vertical cylinder more conducive to forming a virtual frame than wider packs which do not control loads well. Finally, at 38 liters un-extended capacity, the GoLite Jam is a good volume for most lightweight backpacking loads (neither too large nor too small). That is, once you put an ‘average’ set of lightweight backpacking gear in the pack, the main pack bag will do much of the load control, leaving the compression system to do the final touches on the virtual frame. Our major gripe with the Jam’s suspension is that the padding in the shoulder straps is poorly resilient to load compression. With heavy loads, the straps dug into our shoulders on 16 to 20 plus mile trail days. We’d like to see more substantial shoulder straps similar to the thermo-molded Brock™ foam ones used in GoLite’s new Unlimited Series packs.

Usable Features and Ease of Use – 4.5

While the Jam is a bit heavier than the lightest packs in its capacity range, it is also more versatile. The Jam’s design and features make it suitable for all of the following activities: short overnights, mid to long distance backpacking trips, winter ski trips, and climbing. There is enough exterior pocket storage that one should not have to delve into the main pack bag much during the day. The pack loads easily and, using the compression straps, it is not difficult to create a decent virtual frame with varying load volumes. Some of the Jam’s main features are:

• Five compression straps, four side and one top for good load control and creating a virtual frame.
• Internal foam back pad to protect your back from lumpy loads, this also improves the virtual frame by adding some rigidity to a rolled up ground pad in creating a virtual frame. (The pack with internal pad also works well to put under your legs at night as an adjunct to a short (e.g. 30 inch) ground pad.)
• Mesh side pockets that easily hold a 1-liter water bottle or Platypus and are nice for seeing what’s in the pockets and drying wet gear. Depending on how high you wear your hipbelt, access to the side pockets (e.g. grabbing a windbreaker or water bottle) without taking the pack off was difficult but not impossible. Our reviewer was able to remove and replace water bottles while hiking.
• Large rear pocket of Arrowhead Cordura™ ripstop nylon fabric with a large curved zipper for easy access.
• Dual Tool loops and Velcro shaft-holders attached to mini-daisy chains. Also a central mini-daisy chain at the top of the pack. Plenty of options to lash additional backpacking and climbing gear.
• Top, and top side compression straps work well for holding a climbing rope or additional ground pad and easily secure tent poles, fishing rods, and trekking poles placed in the side pockets.
• Internal Hydration pocket that will handle a 3-liter hydration system along with left and right hydration tube ports and all the necessary tube mounting hardware on the shoulder straps. (Note: we aren’t huge fans of internal hydration pockets due to the inconvenience of unloading the main pack bag to refill them on the trail.)

Load Volume Flexibility (Compression) – 4.5

With five compression straps, the Jam has one of the better compression systems among lightweight frameless packs. This compression system was a contributor to the pack’s high ratings for load carrying capacity. In addition, the compression system kept low volume loads under control. The Jam has four compression straps on the sides of the main body, two about mid pack just above the side pockets, two at the top of the side panels, and finally one compression strap on the top of the pack that doubles as the closure for the roll top/extension collar.

For even better load control we’d like to see another pair of compression straps in the lower portion of the pack. To compensate for the lack of compression straps in the lower portion of the pack we put our sleeping bag, extra food and extra clothing into the lower portion of the pack (or anything you don’t need immediate access to that combined has enough volume to reasonably fill the lower section) and locked it down with the mid-pack compression straps. This better maintained the pack’s virtual frame and provided a solid structure to transfer load to the hipbelt fins.

Field Performance

Pack Load Carrying – 4.0

In the field, with a well-packed and compressed main bag, the Jam did well carrying loads of up to 30 pounds. The data collected on the Jam in our “Frameless Backpacks: Engineering Analysis of the Load Carrying Performance of Selected Lightweight Packs” article supports this performance. To achieve this level of performance we used a ¾ length Ridge Rest pad rolled up as cylinder inside the pack. We then placed the rest of the pack contents inside this cylinder and correctly tightened all five compressions straps. We liked the taller and thinner profile of the Jam. This profile is more resilient to collapsing and creates a better virtual frame. The narrow profile also gave the pack good balance for off-trail scrambling and climbing and free arm swing for both trekking poles and climbing tools.

At 25 to 30 pounds the pack’s virtual frame begins to collapse and the torso length shortens. When this happens, more weight transfers to the pack’s shoulder straps. As noted earlier, the air mesh shoulder straps are under-padded, have little structure, and do not distribute loads comfortably. At 30 plus pounds they dug into our shoulders on 16 to 20 plus mile days when we were carrying substantial amounts of water on a long, dry stretch of trail. One shoulder strap edge even caused a small abrasion. Stiffer and more padded shoulder straps would distribute weight more evenly and smoother strap edges would prevent abrasions. For those who like to carry a bit of weight on their shoulders, more comfortable shoulder straps would increase the comfortable load carrying capacity of the Jam.

Durability Field Observations – 3.5

The Jam’s 4.13 ounce per square yard, 215 denier, Dyneema® Gridstop nylon suffered no serious damage (other than some scuffs) from the trail backpacking, off-trail travel and scrambling we subjected it to. The Jam is designed with features that clearly appeal to climbers and rigorous off-trail travelers (e.g. dual tool holders). In our estimation, the Dyneema® Gridstop will not handle a back slide down a scree slope, or heavy duty bushwhacks. (In the past, we ripped a large hole in the bottom of another pack that used a similar weight of Spectra Gridstop fabric.) Climbers and serious cross-country travelers will need to exercise care to not overly abuse the Jam in their more aggressive pursuits.

Value – 5.0

The Jam may be the most feature rich $89 pack on the market. It can carry up to 30 pounds (13.6 kg), weighs only 21 ounces (590 g), has good volume compression, plenty of pockets and external storage options, and climbing amenities. If abrasion is not a major concern, it is one of the lightest packs suitable for aggressive off-trail-travel, winter ski trips, and light and fast mountaineering or climbing.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Jam’s shoulder straps are under padded, have little structure and do not distribute load well to the shoulders. We’d like to see more padded and firmer shoulder straps similar to the thermo-molded Brock™ foam straps used in GoLite’s new Unlimited Series packs or possibly the shoulder straps used on the Breeze or Gust packs. Since the Jam has all the features to make a great off-trail and climbing pack, it’s a pity that it doesn’t have fabric reinforcements. We’d like to see some x-Pac™ or Cordura fabric to reinforce the bottom of the pack and the rear pocket. Also, a pair of lower compression straps would improve the pack’s virtual frame and content control with low volume loads. Finally, we’re not fans of internal hydration pockets. They are okay when you first load up the pack in the morning. But re-filling internal hydration bladders during the hiking day is a pain as you have to unload and reload most of the main pack bag to put the re-filled bladder back in. We would rather have seen the hydration pocket located on the outside of the pack, or a pack design that does not include such a specifically designed pocket.

Introduction

The Katahdin and its smaller but otherwise identical counterpart, the Pamola (not tested), have a shoulder strap, hipbelt combination that are more highly padded, with a greater range of adjustability, than found in most ultralight frameless packs.This suspension system combined with top, middle, and bottom compression straps create a pack capable of comfortably carrying 20 pounds (9.1 kg) for the average user. The three compression straps are the keys to the pack’s versatility and to creating a virtual frame. Unlike the side panel only compression straps on most packs, the Katahdin’s compression straps wrap all the way around the back of the pack giving them a much greater range of compression. The Katahdin is one of a few ultralight packs to use a bottom compression strap, giving it an advantage in creating a virtual frame with very low volume loads. As load weight and volume shrink during a trip, or when the pack is used for a day hike from camp, the compression straps collapse pack volume into a small solid unit retaining both fit and carry comfort. The pack has a number of harness adjustments including an adjustable hipbelt height to fine-tune it for torso length.

The Katahdin could use more outside pocket storage space. Its two wing pockets are small and usable for only small items, and the lower mesh pockets are normally occupied by water bottles. Users may find themselves delving into the main pack bag during the day for commonly used items.

While the Katahdin is durable enough for typical trail hiking, it is not suitable for abusive off-trail travel or climbing. It lacks axe loops, durable fabric, and a top compression strap to stow a rope.

Specifications

• Backpack Style – frameless, top loading, drawstring closure, no top compression strap
• Fabric Description – body is 1.3 oz/yd² (44 g/m²) silicone impregnated ripstop nylon; bottom and wings are 200 denier PU coated ripstop nylon; back panel is stiff nylon mesh; water bottle pockets are nylon mesh.
• Sizes – size large (tested) is the Katahdin, and fits torsos 19-22 inches (48-56 cm); size medium is the Pamola, and fits torsos 15-19 inches (38-48 cm).
• Volume – Katahdin 3350 ci (55 L); Pamola 2475 ci (40.6 L).
• Weight – 26.1 oz (740 g) as measured for the Katahdin (manufacturer claims weight is 26 oz (737 g) for the Katahdin and 24 oz (680 g) for the Pamola)
• Volume to Weight Ratio – 128 ci/oz (based on 3350 ci Katahdin and a measured weight of 26.1 oz)
• Load Carrying Capacity – 20 lb (9.1 kg) maximum comfortable load carrying capacity with 25 lb (11.4 kg) maximum tolerable. Equinox claims maximum load for the Katahdin is 35 lb (15.9 kg), and comfortable load is 25-30 lb (11.4-13.6 kg).
• Carry Load to Pack Weight Performance Ratio – 12.3 (based on 20 lbs and a measured weight of 26.1 oz)
• MSRP – $110 US

Features

Frame and Suspension – 3.0

The Katahdin’s three full-wrap compression straps and padded, adjustable harness extend its load carrying capabilities without the use of stays. The top, bottom, and middle compression straps are the keys to the pack’s versatility and to creating a virtual frame. Unlike the side panel only compression straps on most packs, the Katahdin’s compression straps wrap all the way around the back of the pack giving them a much greater range of compression. The Katahdin is one of a few ultralight packs to use a bottom compression strap, giving it an advantage in creating a virtual frame with very low volume loads. The “framesheet” is no more than a piece of stiff nylon mesh that is also the back of the pack’s main compartment and adds little if anything to the pack’s rigidity and virtual frame. The wearer creates a “virtual frame” with a ground pad rolled into a cylinder inside the pack, and by tightening the three prominent compression straps to compress and stiffen the pack’s contents. Alternatively, you can place a folded ground pad inside the pack against the back panel to increase the stiffness of the pack.

The Katahdin’s shoulder straps and hipbelt have more padding than is typically found on frameless ultralight packs. The shoulder harness consists of 0.5 inch (13 mm) EVA foam contoured shoulder straps with load lifter straps at the top, an adjustable sternum strap, and length adjuster straps at the bottom. Without a top compression strap on the pack, we found it difficult to get enough compression in the top of the pack to effectively use the load lifter straps.

The hipbelt is wide and well padded (4 in/10 cm wide by 0.75 in/19 mm thick EVA foam with a softer padding on the outer surface). The hipbelt has a hook and loop attachment to the pack, making it adjustable for torso length (a nice feature not seem in many ultralight packs). It’s also removable. Removing the hipbelt reduces pack weight by 7 ounces (198 g) bringing the total weight of the pack to 19.1 oz (541 g). Since we received our pack for review, Equinox has upgraded the hipbelt and lower back panel on the Katahdin and Pamola to CoolMax fabric. Equinox claims that this reduces hipbelt slip and improves moisture management.

Usable Features and Ease of Use – 2.5

This pack has a limited amount of outside pocket space for frequently used items. There are a total of four pockets: two upper zippered pockets on the compression strap wings, and two mesh pockets on the lower side panels. The wing pockets are small, oddly-shaped, and useful only for small items. They are not easily accessed when under tension by the compression straps and not accessible while wearing the pack. The water bottle pockets are large enough to accommodate a 2-liter round bottle. It’s difficult to insert a flexible bottle like a Platypus because the corners catch on the mesh (trimming the sharp edges of the bladder at a light angle fixes this). With the pack on, our long-armed tester could barely remove and replace a 1-liter bottle from the side pockets. The Katahdin lacks a large rear mesh pocket for drying gear and/or miscellaneous items. It’s possible to store wet gear under the compression straps, but there is still no place to put miscellaneous items to which you need ready access.

The compression straps have fast-snap connectors in the middle for easy release. The dangling strap ends look untidy, but are very functional for securely tightening the compression straps from two directions. The Katahdin’s flat bottom creates a more stable base than is normally found with frameless packs helping it to remain upright when placed on the ground. There is no top pocket. Access to the pack’s contents is through a top drawstring opening. There is no compression strap going over the top of the pack. This both makes compressing the upper pack impossible, and eliminates the ability to store additional items on top of the pack. There is no hydration sleeve or tube port. The pack has a haul loop, but no ice axe loop or daisy chain. Our tester found that back perspiration was quickly transmitted through the stiff nylon mesh to the interior of the pack. For this reason, the gear selected to go against this mesh back panel should be either packed in a water resistant stuff sack or capable of tolerating moisture from sweat.

The Katahdin is suited for on-trail hiking, but is less suitable for peak bagging and climbing. It does not have ice axe/tool loops; there are minimal attachment points on the outside to attach climbing hardware or ropes; and the 1.3 oz/yd² (44g/m²) silicone impregnated ripstop nylon used in much of the pack is not up to abusive off-trail travel and climbing.

Load Volume Flexibility – 4.5

The Katahdin’s three compression straps wrap all the way around the pack, giving it a much greater range of compression than most ultralight backpacks. Furthermore, the Katahdin is one of only a few ultralight packs to use a bottom compression strap, giving it an advantage over most packs to control very low volume loads. The compression system effectively keeps the pack collapsed and solid as load volume decreases during a trip. It also maintains the pack’s virtual frame, allowing it to transfer weight to the hips even with very low volume loads. The Katahdin also works well as a “day hike from camp” pack because of the compression system’s ability to keep the pack solid (we placed a sleeping pad inside to provide some stiffness). Our only complaint is the pack’s lack of a top compression strap.

Field Performance

Pack Load Carrying – 3.0

We tested the Katahdin with loads ranging from 40 pounds (18.1 kg) down to 10 pounds (4.5 kg) in 5-pound (2.3 kg) increments. We used both a Therm-a-Rest Prolite ¾ inflatable (folded into four layers) and a ¾ Ridge Rest (folded into five layers). In both cases the sleeping pad was placed inside the main pack bag, against the back panel. The folded Ridge Rest pad gave the pack more rigidity and better weight transfer than the folded Therm-a-Rest.

Equinox claims that this pack will carry a maximum load of 35 pounds (15.9 kg). In our estimation, 20 pounds (9.1 kg) is the maximum comfortable load and 25 pounds (11.4 kg) is the maximum tolerable load for the Katahdin.

With the Therm-a-Rest pad, torso collapse occurred around 20 to 25 pounds (9.1 to 11.3 kg). With a folded ¾ Ridge Rest pad against the back panel our reviewer found 25 pounds (11.3 kg) was a reasonable load if he carefully packed the Katahdin. In this mode the pack transferred about 75% of the weight to his hips and about 25% of the weight to his shoulders and chest. The Katahdin showed similar performance in our “Frameless Backpacks: Engineering Analysis of the Load Carrying Performance of Selected Lightweight Packs” article.

Overall, we found that for the average user, a 20 pound (9.1 kg) load is an honest comfortable load rating for the Katahdin when properly packed with a rolled or folded foam ground pad inside the pack. Going beyond the 20 pound (9 kg) maximum load capacity depends on: 1) packing the pack properly by using a very rigid ground pad like a Ridge Rest, and sufficiently compressing the pack; and 2) how much weight you can comfortably tolerate on your shoulders. Those who tolerate some weight on their shoulders may find our 20-pound rating conservative, as the well-padded shoulder straps on the Katahdin ameliorate some discomfort of increased shoulder weight.

Durability – 3.0

In our testing the Katahdin withstood the normal scrapes and dings of trail backpacking although we did get some minor abrasions on the silnylon. While the main compartment is 1.3 ounce silnylon and is vulnerable to abrasion and punctures, it is protected on the bottom and sides by 200 denier ripstop nylon. Still, the bottom sides, and the entire rear and top of the pack are unprotected silnylon. As such, the Katahdin is probably not up to aggressive off-trail use, peak bagging or climbing. All seams are double stitched with a webbing seam binding, and all stress points are bar-tacked. The side pockets are made of a heavy nylon mesh that should survive moderate bushwhacking.

Value – 3.0

At $110, the Katahdin is a slightly better than average value for a lightweight frameless backpack. Its greatest strength is its versatility of handling different volume loads from daypack size to maximum capacity for long distance trips and cold weather trips. It has a large number of adjustments to properly fit the user and above average padded shoulder straps and hipbelt. If the pack had adequate outside pocket space for convenient access to frequently used gear, and if it were a bit more durable, it would earn a higher rating.

Recommendations for Improvement

A feature we really missed when testing this pack is a large outside mesh pocket to dry gear or to keep maps, rainwear, and other routinely accessed items handy. Overall the pack needs more outside pocket space. A full height mesh pocket on one side would help. Also, the compression strap wings could double as stay pockets, where tent poles or trekking poles could be inserted to create a rigid suspension. This would involve removing the somewhat unusable top zippered pockets, and adding an entry point at the top of the compression strap wings to accept the longer items. We’d also like to see a compression strap over the top of the pack for a more secure top closure, to improve the load lifter strap performance, to allow storage of bulky items, and of course to facilitate better compression at the top of the pack.

Overview

The Granite Gear Virga combines an innovative compression system (with eight separately adjustable compression straps) with a well-padded harness to create a frameless pack capable of comfortably carrying 25 pounds. When packed properly, the compression system, harness design, and load lifter straps work well together – an impressive feat for a frameless pack. While testing the Granite Gear Virga along the Uinta and Wind River High Routes, which required difficult off-trail travel over rock, ice, and snow, the Granite Gear Virga offered a level of fit and stability that we have not commonly found in frameless backpacks.

The Granite Gear Virga’s suspension system is built on shoulder straps that are more comfortable than those used in most ultralight frameless backpacks, and a light webbing hipbelt. The anatomically curved and padded shoulder straps are a boon as pack weight increases and more weight inevitably gets transferred to the shoulders. The Granite Gear Virga is made with more rugged fabrics than many packs in its weight class, with substantial fabric reinforcements in abrasion-prone areas of the pack’s bottom panel, lower sides, and rear panel. All of the pack’s high stress areas, like the shoulder strap and compression strap attachment points, are also reinforced with Cordura. The Granite Gear Virga is suitable for backpacking, off-trail scrambling, and alpine climbing. The pack’s major weaknesses include shoulder strap attachment points that are too low in relation to a hiker’s shoulder crest resulting in poor load transfer when the pack is under packed, and lack of external pocket storage for commonly accessed items. (Admittedly, climbers and minimalists may love the pack’s current pocket configuration.)

Specifications

• Backpack Style – frameless top-loading backpack with roll-top closure
• Fabric Description – 210 denier, 6.1 oz Cordura in high stress (shoulder strap and compression strap attachments) and high wear (rear pack panel, bottom of the pack) areas; 70 denier 2.4 oz silicone coated nylon in the packbag. Durastretch (four way stretch nylon) side pockets.
• Sizes – Short, regular, and long, to fit torsos from 14 to 22 inches. As tested: size M fit our reviewers with 18 – 20 inch torso lengths.
• Volume – 4800 ci, 56 L (3200 ci main + 200 ci pockets); extension collar adds 1400 ci
• Weight – 20.5 oz (580 g) as measured, size M (manufacturer claims a weight of 21 oz)
• Volume to Weight Ratio – 234 ci/oz (based on 4800 ci and a measured weight of 20.5 oz)
• Load Carrying Capacity – 25 lb (13.6 kg) as estimated by BackpackingLight.com (20 lbs as rated by manufacturer)
• Carry Load to Pack Weight Performance Ratio – 19.5 (based on 25 lbs and a measured weight of 20.5 oz)
• MSRP – $100

Features

Numerical ratings follow on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = poor, 5 = excellent).

Frame and Suspension – 4.0

The compression system is at the heart of the Granite Gear Virga’s virtual frame. Two catenary cut compression panels, combined with eight compression straps (two straps on each side panel, two on the back, and two that cross the rolled top), when tightened down, combine with a ground pad rolled as a cylinder inside the packbag to create a relatively rigid virtual frame. By comparison, most frameless packs lack compression systems as substantial as that of the Virga, and thus, are more sensitive to load distribution anomalies. With the Virga, even an under-volume load can be sufficiently stabilized.

Virtual Frame: The catalog picture shows the pack with good vertical stability.

The Virga’s anatomically curved shoulder straps are more padded (0.5 in / 1.2 cm thick) than those found on most lightweight frameless backpacks. With the pack properly loaded and compressed, the load lifter straps pull the pack close to your back for optimal pack stability and balance while hiking or scrambling on rough terrain. Shoulders straps are attached to a hinged, reinforced fabric yoke on the back of the pack. Granite Gear claims that the yoke construction offers more durability than the standard bar tack attachment method for securing shoulder straps that is used in most backpacks.

In our opinion, the shoulder straps are attached too low, as evidenced by our observation that the pack’s torso length (and virtual frame) collapses with low-volume pack loads, which negate the ability of the load lifter straps to maintain stability (tension) in the yoke. This collapse is more pronounced if you do not use a rolled up ground pad inside the pack – a vital component of the frame and compression system. Fortunately, this problem can be alleviated in large part by properly adjusting the pack’s volume with its compression system to create a tall, narrow cylinder that forces load distribution evenly throughout the pack’s vertical length, rather than allowing the load to droop to the bottom of the pack.

We found the 1.5-inch (3.8 cm) webbing hip belt to provide acceptable load transfer for loads of up to 25 pounds. For those ultralight hikers used to carrying backpacks with minimal, or no, hip belts, such as the GoLite Breeze, you will appreciate the richly padded shoulder straps while having the flexibility to take some load off the shoulders with a lightweight hip belt.

Usable Features and Ease of Use – 3.0

The Granite Gear Virga has a hipbelt, elastic side pockets, sternum strap, load lifters, and rear compression straps to hold bulky and large items like a wet tarp, or additional sleeping mat (e.g., on a snow trip). The side pockets and side compression straps are suitable for long, skinny items like tent poles, a fishing rod, trekking poles, or snow anchors. The Virga’s dual crossing top compression straps compress the top of the pack better than most of the top closure systems we’ve used. One gripe: the lower side compression straps cross over the top of the side pockets, making it difficult to remove and replace a water bottle or other items while hiking.

The Virga has most of the features one would want in an off-trail and alpine climbing backpack – durable fabric in high wear areas, dual tool loops, a reasonably slim profile for good balance and arm swing clearance, large capacity, a versatile compression system, and easy climbing rope attachment using the top and side compression system. When the Virga was properly packed with a full load, its load control and pack stability were among the best tested for off-trail scrambling, bushwhacking, and climbing.

For some trail hikers, the Granite Gear Virga is a bit minimalist and may not have enough external storage options to organize gear effectively. While the compression straps on the center of the pack are useful for storing soft goods (tent and poles, a rolled up sleeping pad, or raingear), you’ll have to use the side pockets for small items that you want close at hand while hiking.

Load Volume Flexibility (Compression) – 5.0

The Granite Gear Virga’s effective compression system allows it to carry a load greater than the manufacturer’s rated capacity. In addition, the careful backpacker can utilize the compression system to keep even day-sized small loads stable and under control. The Granite Gear Virga’s eight compression straps and two catenary compression panels result in the ability to stabilize a load that cannot be matched by any other frameless backpack on the market. The dual top closure straps compress the top of the pack effectively, which plays an important role in maximizing the effectiveness of the shoulder strap load lifters.

Field Performance

Pack Load Carrying – 3.5

When using a standard sized sleeping pad rolled inside the packbag as a cylinder, and packed at least to its non-extended capacity, the Granite Gear Virga gets high marks for the ability of its virtual frame to provide load carrying comfort. The Virga’s compression system can compress the packbag to form a nearly rigid pack that efficiently transfers the load between shoulders and hips. The pack remains rigid enough that the load lifters on the shoulder straps work similarly to load lifters on internal frame packs, pulling the pack tight to the back.

Granite Gear rates the Virga’s load carrying capacity at 20 pounds (9 kg). They admit that this is a conservative number, designed to compensate for people who randomly throw stuff in the pack without taking the time to make a proper virtual frame. When properly packed the Virga’s effective virtual frame and comfortable harness resulted in our ability to carry loads up to 30 pounds (14 kg) with no severe consequences (with some of that weight on the shoulders). As such, we feel that properly packed, the Granite Gear Virga will provide acceptable load carrying comfort up to 25 pounds (11 kg) for most hikers, with the ability to carry 30 pounds (14 kg) in a pinch for those long, waterless stretches of trail.

Unlike Granite Gear, however, we feel that the hiker that randomly throws gear into the pack, failing to properly use the load compression system or take advantage of the virtual frame support provided by a rolled sleeping pad, will not achieve comfort even at loads as low as 15 pounds (7 kg) – for any frameless backpack, and the Virga is no exception. In fact, the Virga may suffer more than other frameless packs because of the need to maintain a rigid virtual frame through the shoulder strap yoke and load lifter area to prevent frame collapse and properly keep the pack weight’s moment arm from exerting excessive torque on the shoulders.

Durability – 4.0

The only thing holding the Granite Gear Virga back from a higher durability rating is the use of silicone coated nylon fabric in the pack body. Even so, fabric reinforcements in key areas make the Virga suitable for alpine scrambling and bushwhacking where you won’t constantly drag your pack against sharp rock or plow pack first into groves of slide alder. The Granite Gear Virga uses a more tear and abrasion resistant 2.4 ounce silnylon as compared to the more common 1.3 to 1.7 ounce fabrics used by other manufacturers. Cordura (6.1 oz) is used in high wear areas, such as the bottom, back panel, and much of the rear panel. The Durastretch side pockets protect the silnylon on the lower side panels. Still, the pack has some of the lighter fabric exposed, and as strong as it is relative to lighter silicone coated nylons, it won’t withstand long-term abuse by repeated abrasion against granite or lengthy bushwhacks through slide alder or brambles.

Value – 4.0

At only $100 we think the Granite Gear Virga is a good value. For its weight, the Virga creates an effective virtual frame, offers a comfortable harness, is durably constructed, and offers a versatile compression system suitable for a wide range of load sizes. The Virga’s durability, climbing friendly amenities, stability, and minimalist design will appeal to aggressive off-trail travelers and fast and light climbers who don’t overly abuse their packs.

Recommendations for Improvement

• The Virga’s lower compression straps run over the top of the side pockets. If the compression straps are tightened down, they need to be loosened to access pocket contents, a nearly impossible task to perform while hiking. We suggest moving these straps up to clear the top of the pockets.
• The lower portion of the pack is prone to abrasion (e.g., sliding down a steep slope) and would benefit from tougher fabric in the region below the lowest compression straps.
• While adaptable to a wider range of torso sizes than other frameless packs, the Granite Gear Virga’s shoulder yoke-and-load-lifter system is quite sensitive to torso collapse when the pack is under-loaded or improperly packed, making the Virga more appropriate for intermediate and advanced lightweight hikers who pay a reasonable amount of attention to packing their pack. Eliminating the yoke and load lifter system in favor of shoulder straps that attach slightly higher than a hiker’s shoulder crest would be the optimal situation, but it would also require a greater range of pack sizes that would likely increase the cost for the manufacturer and for the retailer who is required to stock more packs.

Overview

The Moonstone Nitro Jacket is a minimalist jacket designed for the alpinist, backcountry skier, and adventure runner. Specialized features of the Nitro include a sculpted hood that fits over a helmet and a shortened body to accommodate a climbing harness. The Moonstone Nitro offers a water-resistant front zipper and side pocket zippers, a long sleeve length, an inside zippered mesh pocket, and an extended tail. At 14.2 oz, the Moonstone Nitro weighs about 2 oz (57 g) more than the “sweet spot” for lightweight nylon shell jackets that appeal most to backpackers. Overall, for someone who participates in “helmet sports”, the Nitro Jacket is a good value for a helmet-compatible shell, and would serve well for backpacking. However, for people who have no particular need for a helmet- and harness-compatible shell, there are other, lighter, and more backpacker-friendly (longer) shell jackets available.

Specifications

• Garment Style – Hooded shell jacket.
• Fabric Class – Waterproof-breathable.
• Fabric Description – 40D Storm Flight 2.5 Layer Ripstop (Nylon ripstop face fabric with a DWR microporous polyurethane coating and a second polymer applied in a diamond matrix pattern). Finished weight is 2.3 oz/yd² (77 g/m²).
• Weight – Men’s size Large: 14.2 oz (403 g)
• MSRP – $150

Features

Ventilation (4.0)

Depending on weather conditions, ventilation is accomplished by opening a combination of: extra long (15 in/38 cm) pit zips, full-length front zipper, hood drawcords, cuffs, and waist drawcord. The front pockets are not mesh-backed to provide additional ventilation.

Usability (3.5)

The specialized features of this jacket are its sculpted and adjustable hood that fits over a climbing helmet, and slightly shorter body to avoid interference with a climbing harness. The tab for adjusting the back of the hood is too small and is difficult to locate with your fingers. Also, there is no provision for stowing the hood, or securing it out of the way in wind, when it is not needed. The two zippered side pockets have an enormous capacity, but are more useful when not carrying a pack (they are not quite high enough to provide easy access while wearing a hip belt). The low-profile neoprene/Velcro cuff tabs are easy to adjust, and the inside zippered mesh pocket is very handy.

Front and side zippers are of the so-called “water-resistant” type. While these zippers are a nice feature, they are stiffer and require two hands to operate the zipper. Pit zips are easy to open and close while wearing the jacket.

Sizing (3.5)

The Moonstone Nitro Jacket layers easily over a high-loft synthetic or thin down insulating jacket. The body is dropped 3 in (8 cm) in the back to help compensate for its shorter length in the front. For heavy rain, the Nitro is not long enough to protect the trunk, so rain pants are necessary.

Fit (4.5)

The sculptured hood has three drawcord adjustments (two on the front and one on the back) to produce a snug fit around a helmet, insulated hat, billed cap, or bare head (see photo). The articulation of this jacket is superb. With the hood snugged, head-turning mobility with or without a helmet or pack is excellent. The sleeves are long enough to withdraw the hands. Sleeve and torso articulation are sufficient to allow the hands to be lifted above the head without exposing wrists or waist. When layered over midweight insulation, there is plenty of shoulder freedom to cross the arms.

Field Performance

Storm Resistance (4.5)

We subjected the Nitro to inclement conditions with and without a helmet, and with and without a pack, and found no leakage problems. The front full-length zipper and side pocket zippers are water-resistant, but did not leak. Pit zippers are not water-resistant and have a protective storm flap. All seams are taped. The cuffs are elastic with neoprene/Velcro tabs. The hood’s three drawcord adjustments and flexible brim provide face protection with or without a helmet and with the hood open or snugged. A waist drawcord on one side snugs the bottom hem around the butt to help seal out rain and wind.

Breathability (2.5)

Hiking at a pace of 3 mph (4.8 kph) on fairly level ground at cooler 32-45 deg F (0-7 deg C) temperatures in rainy and snowy weather with all vents closed, we found the jacket to be quite comfortable over a base layer. Carrying a pack under the same conditions resulted, unsurprisingly, in a gradual warmup inside the jacket. However, more strenuous activity in the form of carrying a 20-pound (9.1 kg) pack at 1-2 mph (1.6-3.2 kph) on a steady 10-20% uphill grade created wet and humid conditions in the jacket. With all of the vents closed, heat and moisture built up inside the jacket to the point that the activity could not be maintained without some ventilation. After this test, the inside of the jacket was thoroughly wet with condensation and the base layer worn underneath was very damp. We note that the level of breathability exhibited by the Nitro Jacket may be sufficient for less strenuous climbing and backcountry skiing, but it is not adequate for more strenuous backpacking and adventure running. In general, the perceived breathability of the Nitro is on par with other polyurethane-coated jackets in this price class.

Ventilation (3.5)

Thanks to the pit zips, this jacket provides some relief for overheating. Carrying a pack at cooler temperatures at 3 mph (4.8 kph) on fairly level ground was comfortable with the pit zips open. However, during the higher exertion level test, opening the pit zips only provided partial relief. At the end of the test, the inside of the jacket was again wet and base layer damp, but not as much as the “vents-closed” breathability test. Some benefit is realized with the pit zips, but inability to provide cross flow ventilation between the pit zips and other torso vents (e.g., mesh backed torso pockets) limits their effectiveness. Thus, the Nitro needs more ventilation if it is to be used for higher exertion activities, perhaps in the form of mesh-backed pockets. However, because the torso pockets are low on the jacket, wearing a pack would reduce the effectiveness of pocket-based ventilation (see photo), and the stiff water-resistant zippers tend to hold the pockets closed, limiting air exchange.

Durability (3.5)

We found the Moonstone Nitro Jacket to be sufficiently durable for general outdoor use, including off-trail hiking and scrambling. Its 40 denier nylon fabric face provides middle-ground durability for lightweight rainwear. Although the complex construction of a shell jacket provides some reinforcement owing to its numerous seams, pockets, and zippers, there are no heavier fabrics used in high wear areas. Overall, we would be comfortable using this jacket for off-trail bushwhacking, mountaineering, and backcountry skiing, but we would be hesitant to subject it to excessive abuse. In summary, we felt that its durability-to-weight ratio wasn’t particularly unique, especially when compared to other rain jackets in the 12-14 oz weight class.

Value (3.5)

With an MSRP of $150, the Nitro Jacket is one of the more expensive rain shells reviewed. However, it is somewhat unique in that it is designed to accommodate (successfully) a helmet and climbing harness, and at the same time be suitable for backpacking and backcountry skiing. For alpinists who have a need for the Nitro’s helmet and harness compatibility features, and want one jacket that can “do it all” the Moonstone Nitro is a reasonable value.

Recommendations for Improvement

The drawcord adjustment on the back of the hood needs a larger tab so it can be located and operated more easily, especially while wearing gloves or mitts. The jacket could use a bit more ventilation. Adding mesh backing to the torso pockets, and raising them upward by an inch, would certainly help. Finally, while the Nitro Jacket offers some nice features, at 14.2 oz (403 g), it is also 2-4 oz (57-113 g) heavier than some other ripstop nylon rain jackets on the market with similar features.

Overview

The Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket is a stylish, athletically cut rain jacket. It is built with Entrant DT – one of the more breathable of the lightweight waterproof PU-coated fabrics on the market. This fabric is textured on the interior face for improved comfort against bare skin. For times when the fabric cannot breathe sufficiently for the workout, the Tempest has a variety of easy-to-use ventilation options to keep air circulating. This jacket has a simple, usable hood and one-handed cordlocks at the neck and waist. The downfall of the DT Tech Jacket, however, is in its waterproof zippers; after a short period of time, the polyurethane coating began to delaminate and peel, allowing water to enter the jacket and making the jacket appear worn out before its time. A poor DWR finish appears to inhibit breathability in wet conditions.

Specifications

• Garment Style – hooded jacket
• Fabric Class – waterproof-breathable
• Fabric Description – Entrant DT: 2.5 layer W/B with a printing on a nylon face fabric, weight= 2.3 oz/sq yard
• Weight – 13.2 oz
• MSRP – $129

Features

Ventilation (4.0)

The Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket features unique 14.5” forearm zippers that run from just below the armpit to the wrist. It has Velcro cuffs at the wrists and a one-handed elastic drawcord at the waist. It also features vented front pockets to provide frontal ventilation.

Usability (3.5)

The Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket has several useful features. In addition to the vented front pockets on each side, it also has a small left breast pocket protected by a waterproof zipper, as well as vertical inner pockets for an energy bar or sunglasses. The forearm zips of the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket, while not allowing for torso ventilation like full pit zips, are extremely easy to use with one hand. Its hood rolls up nicely when not in use and it has a one handed drawcord for sealing the jacket around the neck. The hood cords have neoprene sliders in place of plastic cordlocks and require two hands to use. The hood also has a Velcro adjustement in the rear to control hood volume (there is not enough room for a climbing helmet). It has stylish reflective piping along each arm for safety in the city.

Sizing (4.0)

The Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket has an average and athletic cut – it fits more like a running jacket than a backpacking parka. Its shorter hem ends just below the waist. It layered over well enough over a Golite Coal (although the Coal stuck out the bottom a bit) without compressing the Coal’s insulation markedly (it won’t layer over an Integral Designs Dolomitti without compressing its insulation, however). The arms of the tempest are cut long enough to withdraw your hands in the rain.

Fit (4.5)

This jacket fits like a running jacket and moves like a high-motion shell. It offers a full range of motion in any direction – the fit is excellent for a medium build. The hood offers approximately 80% of the full range of motion, moving with the head better than some jackets we’ve used but not as well as the MEC Aquanator or other hoods with a rear cinch. This jacket seals up nicely at the wrists, waist, and neck and has a comfy bit of soft fabric at the neck. Sierra Designs paid a lot of attention to designing the fit of the DT Tech Jacket.

Field Performance

Storm Resistance (2.5)

The Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket features fully taped seams and keeps the majority of the water out. However, after 2 months of heavy use, the brittle PU coating of the waterproof zippers started to crack, allowing some moisture to enter the jacket in a downpour in the front zipper and at the breast pocket.

Breathability (2.0)

With all vents closed, the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket was perceived to be more breathable than the MEC Aquanator jacket but quite a bit less breathable than other products, including Gore-Tex XCR, Gore-Tex Pac-Lite III, and eVENT. When hiking on flat ground, it breathed reasonably well. Because of the printed inner face fabric, this jacket was more comfortable to wear with bare skin than other garments with unprinted polyurethane face coatings. While wearing a 20 pound pack, the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket became pretty moist inside on moderate grade trails. Predictably, the inside became wetter when exerting more energy on the uphills with the vents closed.

The Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket also performs below average in the area of water resistance because of a DWR finish that didn’t match up with other jackets we tried. The DWR wore off after little use, resulting in its outer face fabric becoming damp instead of beading water off. The resilience of the DWR appears to be a problem, as this was most noticeable after a couple of washes (following manufacturer washing guidelines). The loss of DWR didn’t result in leakage of external water through the fabric, but it certainly inhibited its breathability in wet conditions: the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket often felt clammy and damp on the inside in wet weather.

Ventilation (4.5)

While somewhat breathable and lightweight, polyurethane-type fabrics like Entrant DT require ventilation options for times when the fabric’s permeability rate is exceeded. When things get warm inside the Sierra Designs Tempest, you have many options. By opening the forearm zips, loosening the wrist cuffs, loosening the drawcords at the neck and waist, and opening the front vented pockets, this jacket allows a lot of moist air to escape. When snowshoeing uphill with a 20 pound pack in slushing rain, this jacket allowed us to stay relatively cool and dry, even with the front zipper closed.

Durability (1.5)

Water resistant zippers that cracked after only a few months (see photo), and a DWR finish that was impressively anti-D have serious implications for the jacket’s ability to remain breathable and storm resistant.

Value (2.5)

$129 is certainly not an outrageous price to pay for a jacket with the features and styling of the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket, but Sierra Designs must address durability issues with the DWR and waterproof zippers before we can recommend this jacket as a “Good Buy”.

Recommendations for Improvement

We really liked the design of the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket – it was an instant favorite for its fit and ventilation. However, waterproof zipper cracking and DWR failure indicate some material sourcing deficiencies that need to be addressed. One handed cordlocks at the hood would also be nice for ease of use, although the neoprene sliders work fine and save weight. With a slightly longer cut, the Sierra Designs DT Tech Jacket would appeal to more backpackers.

Introduction

The Montane eVENT Superfly is the most breathable shell we’ve tested. At an honest 15 oz (425 g) the Montane eVENT Superfly is also the lightest hooded jacket using the new, ultra breathable eVENT fabric. With its design focus on total waterproofness, the Superfly excels at keeping you dry in unimaginably wet conditions.

The hood, with its generous brim, wire stiffener and excellent adjustability, was one of the few that kept water off our glasses. The Montane eVENT Superfly’s 3-layer shell fabric is tough and well suited for off-trail travel, scrambling and even light alpine mountaineering. The jacket has an excellent fit and nice touches like a wire stiffened brim and a double storm flapped front zipper. The jacket uses all eVENT fabric in contrast to other manufacturer who use panels of less breathable and heavier stretch fabric and a trim fit to reduce their use of the expensive eVENT fabric. It has a roomy cut and good mobility. The main weakness of the eVENT Superfly, given our US bias against moisture accumulation (which contrasts a UK bias towards uncompromised weather protection), is its lack of ventilation. The jacket has no pit zips, core vents or vented pockets. Even so, the ultra breathable eVENT fabric does an admirable job of compensating for the Montane eVENT Superfly’s lack of vents.

Note: We reviewed a pre-production sample. The eVENT Super-Fly should be available to US Markets sometime in late spring of 2004.

Specifications

• Garment Style – Hooded Jacket
• Fabric Class – Waterproof breathable – Oleophobic, air permeable, hydrophobic PTFE (non polyurethane laminated)
• Fabric Description – 3-layer eVENT eV130 SL Storm, 3.4 oz/yd2 (115 g/m2). Outer shell, 40×40 denier high tenacity mini-ripstop nylon. Inner shell, nylon tricot.
• Breathability Specification – 21,000 g/m2/24hrs MVTR, JIS B2 (inverted cup with desiccant)
• Weight – 15.1 oz (428 g) BPL measured men’s large, 15.0 oz (425 g) manufacturer spec.
• MSRP – £175

Features

Ventilation Options (2.5)

There are no pit-zips, core vents, or mesh backed pockets on the eVENT Superfly. Montane engineers decided to rely on the high breathability of the eVENT fabric to move moisture out of the jacket. As such, they focused most of their design efforts on waterproofing the garment and reducing weight. The jacket does have a full length front zipper and adjustable, elastic and Velcro cuffs which provide some ventilation. The roomy fit and drawcord hem also aid in ventilation.

Usability (4.0)

The Montane eVENT Superfly has a roomy hood with an elastic face aperture draw-cord and single-hand operated cord locks on either side. The brim is large with a nice wire stiffener. A Velcro tab on the rear of the hood adjusts the brim to the right height and keeps it there. Another Velcro tab stows the rolled hood at the back of the jacket’s collar. The hood is cut a bit snug and barely fits over a low profile climbing helmet. The Montane eVENT Superfly has three pockets with water-resistant zippers: two hand-warmer pockets and a large napoleon pocket.

The Superfly is designed to minimize leaks. Montane backs all the pockets with eVENT fabric to prevent the minimal leakage from the water-resistant pocket zippers from entering the layers under the jacket. The napoleon pocket’s water-resistant zipper has an additional storm flap. To protect the single slider, uncoated, #3 front zipper, Montane uses a double overlapping storm flap that closes with Velcro and snaps. We liked the ease of operation of the non coated zipper but found that the Velcro on the storm flaps had a mind of its own and occasionally fastened itself when we didn’t want it to.

The jacket’s hem has an elastic draw-cord with single-hand operated cord locks on either side. For safety, the Montane eVENT Super-Fly has reflective strips on the sleeves, sides and chest. Finally, the eVENT fabric was surprisingly quiet, supple and pleasant to wear.

Sizing (4.5)

The eVENT Super-Fly has a roomy fit suitable for layering over a high-loft synthetic insulating jacket with 1” of loft without compressing that loft in either the body or sleeves (our reviewer is 5’8″ and 150 lbs and was testing a size M jacket). The jacket is cut a bit long and provides more coverage than many ultralight rain jackets. In the front, it came down to just below the crotch of our 5’8” reviewer and in the rear its drop tail extended to mid thigh. The hood layers well over a balaclava or insulated jacket hood but is a bit snug for all but a low profile climbing helmet.

Fit (4.5)

The eVENT Super-Fly has good head-turning mobility while wearing a pack. Its sleeves are a long and the hem did not lift, nor were our wrist exposed, when raising our arms above our head. There is ample room to withdraw the hands into the sleeves. There was no binding in the shoulders when crossing our arms across the chest while layered over a mid-weight fleece jacket.

Field Performance

Storm Resistance (5.0)

The Montane eVENT Superfly is designed to be stormproof, consistent with a UK bias towards total elemental protection. It’s no surprise, then, that the jacket kept us dry, even in torrential rain. The front zipper has a double storm flap, the pocket zippers are water resistant, and the pockets are backed by eVENT fabric. There are no vent zippers, mesh lined pockets, or other leak-prone areas. The hood, with its generous brim, wire stiffener and excellent adjustability, actually kept water off our glasses. (For most rain jackets the only way we can keep our glasses dry is to wear a 3 oz (100g) ball cap under their minimal and floppy hoods.)

Breathability (5.0)

With all zippers and vents closed, the Montane eVENT Superfly is the most breathable jacket our reviewers have tested. This is due to the high breathability of the eVENT fabric. We hiked uphill with a pack on for an hour at 40 deg F (5 deg C) in windy conditions. Our heart rate was above 80% of our max HR for most of the hike. At the end, our baselayer was damp, even wet in a few places, but not soaked. Our previous experience with non-vented WP/B jackets under similar conditions is a completely soaked baselayer. At moderate exertion levels, hiking with a 20 lb pack on level ground at 3 mph at 40 deg F (5 deg C), we stayed comfortable, with moisture only building up underneath the pack and its shoulder straps. Most of this was due to the limited breathability of the pack and not that of the eVENT fabric. Bottom line: eVENT breathes.

Ventilation (4.0)

The Montane eVENT Superfly surprised us. At high exertion levels we expected to get pretty sweaty with its limited ventilation. We didn’t. As mentioned above, we got damp but not soaked. To be fair, eVENT, even though it is arguably the most breathable waterproof fabric on the market, is not the Holy Grail of moisture transport. Nor is any other waterproof breathable fabric. Per previous tests performed by Backpacking Light, given similar fabric breathability, a better vented shell will always keep you drier. This also held true when comparing the Superfly to shells with more ventilation options. At high exertion levels, our clothing retained more moisture when worn under an unvented Montane eVENT Superfly than we would in well-vented jacket with a similarly breathable fabric. At moderate exertion levels the lack of vents was not a problem. The breathability of the eVENT fabric was sufficient to keep us comfortable. This is in comparison to our experience with other WB/B fabrics where need to open vents to maintain the same level of comfort at a moderate exertion level.

Durability (4.5)

With its 3.4 oz/yd² 3-layer fabric, the Montane eVENT Superfly is tougher than most jackets we test. It’s abrasion resistance to granite and puncture resistance against thorny brush gives the jacket a level of durability that we come to expect from a garment that weighs close to a pound. It is well suited for the abuses of rock scrambling, serious bushwacking, or alpine climbing.

Value (3.5)

At £175 (about USD$350) the Montane eVENT Superfly is not cheap. Nonetheless, it currently sets the weight standard for a hooded rain jacket using the ultra breathable eVENT fabric. It is extremely waterproof, and quite breathable for a jacket without pit-zips, core vents, or mesh-backed pockets. At 15 oz (425 g) it is reasonably light for a full zip, full featured jacket with a shell fabric tough enough for serious climbing. Competitor’s eVENT jackets are similar in price and weigh more. Lighter Gore-Tex Pac-Lite jackets shave a few ounces and are a bit less expensive than the Montane eVENT Super-Fly.

Recommendations for Improvement

We realize that UK and US garment designers differ on the relative importance of complete and total waterproofness vs. ventilation. Your standard UK hill “walker” thinks nothing of starting a hike in 36 degree (2 C) sleet, sitting down on the summit in horizontal rain and having relaxed lunch of tea and sandwiches as if they were in their own living room. They even enjoy doing it! Americans, on the other hand (and yes, we are making generalizations) are more prone to wait for “weather windows” so they can climb in fair conditions, and skip their raingear altogether. The Montane eVENT Superfly is true to its UK roots by focusing on keeping its wearer warm and dry in severely foul conditions. One of our reviewers, who has experienced the inclemency of Scottish hillwalking, is certainly sympathetic to this design philosophy.

On the other hand, we are Yanks at heart, and we like the cooling and moisture transport of mesh backed front pockets, core vents and pit-zips. We’d be thrilled if the Montane eVENT Superfly incorporated some of these ventilation options and used less rigorous storm protection (read: more user friendly) on the front zipper. We’d even suffer a bit of leakage for the changes. It would also be a nice touch to add a double slider on the front zipper which would help with ventilation and also with harness compatibility.