Introduction

The LAUFBURSCHE huckePACK evolved steadily to reach its current design. Comparing the prototype pack and the commercial pack side by side, and looking at the early designs, I see that they have come a long way. The initial design was drawn up to suit the needs of Mateusz Szultk, the owner of LAUFBURSCHE, one of the early adopters of ultralight backpacking in Germany. As usual in UL circles, after using commercial lightweight packs but wanting to decrease his load further, Mateusz sat down to design and sew his own pack. He posted the original design on the BPL MYOG forum and the German Trekking Ultraleicht forum, and soon received a number of requests for his packs.

At that point Mateusz, an architect by education, decided to design the pack further and offer them in a limited series to interested people. The design went through four major evolution steps, which each had a dozen sub-steps, resulting in about fifty prototype packs until the final design was deemed good enough for retail. Every pack design was tested by friends and UL aficionados to gather feedback and further improve the design. The innovative lid of the pack, which makes water leaking in through the lid nearly impossible and is the characteristic feature of the pack, was developed during the third major step. It was hailed by those who used it as a breakthrough in pack design, and the interest in the packs started to further climb. At this point, Mateusz decided to make LAUFBURSCHE his main business – alas, establishing a cottage business is very difficult in the bureaucratic environment of Germany, so it took a while until his business was ready to hang its shingle.

Description

The LAUFBURSCHE huckePACK is designed for ultralight backpacking trips, able to comfortably carry gear and food ranging from an overnighter to trips of two or more weeks. It comes in two sizes – Small and Big – and four different back length sizes – S, M, L and XL – allowing people of all heights to find a suitable pack. The hipbelt is a one-size-fits-all design, which can be shortened to the appropriate personal length of the individual; caps to close the cut-off ends are included so that they can’t get frayed.

The internal volume ranges from 28 liters on the small pack in a S Torso Length to 57 liters on the big pack in a XL Torso Length, and both have the possibility of carrying an additional 9 to 11 liters with the extension collar fully extended. The lid has an elastic rim which stretches out when the extension collar is fully loaded, and will also then cover and protect the entry to the pack from rain, snow, and dust entering it.

The outside pockets and optional hipbelt pockets give additional space for the likes of camera, Platypus, rain gear, and tarp. Volumes range from 1.5 liters for the hipbelt pockets, 5.0 liters for the big rear pocket, 2.0 liters for the diagonal side pocket, and 3.0 liters for the high cut side pocket. The lid pocket is spacious, and I guesstimate that it has a conservative 1.0 liter of volume. Total maximum volume on my tested L Torso Length pack is 67 liters.

The huckePACK has a simple side compression system which helps to flatten the pack in the top part, and it works together with the lid, which also helps to compress the pack from the front and keeps the load close to the back. Having used an ULA Ohm and its excellent side-compression system, I found the huckePACK’s side compression slightly lacking when loaded with little gear. However, this is only of concern when one is not using a closed cell foam (CCF) pad as a burrito frame in the pack – the CCF pad helps to compress the pack more evenly. There are still plenty of gear loops on the pack which, in combination with the provided Dyneema or elastic cord, help with compressing the pack when lightly loaded.

The suspension system of the huckePACK consists of the hipbelt and the shoulder straps, including load lifters. The core element to transfer the load between shoulders and hips will be whatever pad you add as an internal form or an external backpad. The S-Shaped shoulder straps and the hipbelt are made of a 3D padded mesh.

The pack is completely modular with its extras, and users can modify them for their needs appropriately. This means sternum strap, trekking pole holders, bungie cord and backpad cord can be removed or attached as needed, making it versatile for the trip at hand. If you cut off straps to the “appropriate for you” length, it is possible to save another 20 to 30 grams (0.7 to 1.1 oz), pushing the pack close to the 400-gram (14.1-oz) line.

The huckePACK comes standard in Dyneema X Grid, the same currently used by Mountain Laurel Designs and ZPacks. Other materials, like X-Pac, Cuben and 70 denier silynlon, are available as a special option and make the pack up to 90 grams (3.2 oz) lighter with the same features. The mesh pockets are made from a light yet durable mesh.

Features

• Lid pocket with covered zipper
• Mesh pockets on both sides and front
• Hipbelt pockets (optional)
• Contoured shoulder straps
• Side compression straps
• Waterproof lid design
• Detachable sternum strap
• Load lifters
• Left and right hydration ports
• Internal hang clip for hydration system or keys and valuables
• Attachment system for back pad – fits up to six segments of a Therm-a-Rest Z Lite
• Three elastic bands on each shoulder strap for hydration hose, compass, or other gear that needs to be kept handy
• Trail pole/ice axe holders
• Haul loop

Field Testing

I tested the huckePACK on various trips, ranging from a nine-day trip in Russian Karelia to a three-day trip in the Swedish Fjells as well as countless trips in the Finnish forests and fjells. Weight carried was between 5 kg (11 lbs) for a weekend trip to 17 kg (37.5 lbs) for the nine-day expedition in Russia.

My initial impressions, which fortified themselves over continuous use, are as follows:

• Impeccable craftsmanship: no loose threads, the right stitches for different areas, and well made.
• Dyneema X Gridstop is used as the main fabric, ensuring a bombproof pack which also survives bushwhacking and off-trail walking for nine days straight.
• The shoulder straps are ideal, one barely feels them as they snuggle up comfortably against the body, never in the way and carrying the weight comfortably.
• The net pockets are an appropriate size and durable; they can comfortably carry a tarp, kuksa, sunglasses, and various other small stuff in the front pocket, while the side pockets hold a 1-liter Platypus and snacks which are easy to reach when wearing the pack.
• The hipbelt transfers and carries the weight satisfactorily, and like the shoulder straps, adapts well to the carrier’s body.
• Rectangular shape, which in combination with a Z Lite pad as a back padding, is comfortable against the body.
• Functions well as a summit or daypack.
• The lid pocket is nearly 100% waterproof and is big enough for map, compass, and book, as well as pen and paper with some room to spare.
• The lid itself is a true innovation, and is an improvement over the common roll-top and cinch lids of other frameless packs.
• It is easy to remove and re-attach the sternum strap and other modular parts one might not need for a particular trip.
• Trail pole holders are placed well. It’s easy to remove or attach poles, even with full front and side mesh pockets.
• Attachment for the back pad is convenient, making a pad easy and quick to insert/remove.
• Roomy enough for a UL base load and food, fuel, and water for up to twelve days.
• Different possibilities to pack/reinforce the rucksack: burrito style with a CCF pad; without any frame; a Therm-a-Rest Z Lite as a half frame inside; with a Z Lite as a backpad and nothing else; both a CCF pad and a Z Lite.

The heaviest load I carried with the huckePACK was 17 kg (37.5 lbs), which included food for ten days, water, and gear for an unsupported trip through Russian Karelia. Even with such a load, the huckePACK carried surprisingly well and comfortably despite the lack of stays; at no point did it feel as though the pack or material were overburdened. However, the recommended upper limit which should be carried with the huckePACK is 12 kg (26.5 lbs), which is in line with what other manufacturers recommend as a maximum load for their frameless packs.

As a summit pack, the huckePACK performs well. It can be compressed sufficiently to not have too much loose material and empty space, though I recommend to keep a CCF pad as a burrito frame in it to have the best load transfer and comfort. With a sub 4-kg (8.8-lb) load, it feels like one isn’t carrying anything, and with a normal load of around 8 kg (17.6 lb), mobility and comfort remained excellent, thanks to the more Alpine style of not being a deep pack.

For packrafting (anything longer than a day trip), I would recommend using another pack. Keep in mind that despite DXG being fairly water resistant, it is not waterproof – pack your gear in dry bags. I prefer to carry the rolled up packraft inside the pack, as this gives the best carry comfort – the weight being down in the pack and close to my back – with the minus that all other gear needs to go on top and needs to come out when you want to get the packraft out.

I also used the huckePACK for two weeks while ski and snowshoe guiding as a daypack, and I found it coped well with the extreme cold while granting me complete freedom of movement. It worked best in this case without using the hipbelt and relying on the shoulder straps and sternum strap to keep the sub-4-kg (8.8-lb) load in place. This allowed the most freedom of movement, and also ensured that I could take the pack quickly off when needed.

For the majority of users, a frameless pack still needs a frame of sorts. In the ultralight community, we tend to use our sleeping pads for this purpose, making them serve double duty. I use a Multimat Adventure CCF pad in a burrito style, and usually combine this with four to six sections of a Therm-a-Rest Z Lite for the back panel padding – the Z Lite also serves double duty and functions as a sit pad in breaks and at camp.

Comparison

The following table lists comparable frameless backpacks which are similar in volume and weight to the LAUFBURSCHE huckePACK. All weights are as stated by the manufacturer and, as far as possible, represent a “naked” weight of an Medium sized pack. Torso length of the huckePACK is M, the volume is without the extension collar.

Closest in this comparison, when looking at volume and weight, are the MLD Exodus and the Six Moon Designs Swift 2011, with the latter also being the most affordable one. The ZPacks Blast pack is the lightest option in this comparison, but is made of Cuben fibre – which might not be as durable as the Dyneema used by most others.

Assessment

I tested a finished product made of Dyneema X Grid, though I also have used a prototype silynlon pack before purchasing this pack. Besides the different material and the addition of the lid pocket in the DXG pack, and the silnylon being a size large, they are similar in construction. Both packs are of a quality I haven’t yet seen in comparison to other cottage manufacturers and bigger companies.

The LAUFBURSCHE huckePACK, like other frameless backpacks, can be packed in a variety of ways. My personal favourite is the burrito style frame, in which a Closed Cell Foam (CCF) pad or inflatable mat is used as a rolled frame in the backpack, with the pad giving the pack more structure and transferring the weight to the hipbelt. Together with a Z Lite backpad, this packing style makes the huckePACK a comfortable pack, carrying lightweight loads with ease. But even without any sort of frame, I used the pack to carry 17 kg (37.5 lbs) on an expedition in Russia, and it performed well. I have spoken and hiked with other huckePACK users who never use any kind of frame, packing the pack in a way which allows them to carry their load comfortably nevertheless. While this is possible, I do recommend using a burrito style frame in the huckePACK, as this gives the pack a good shape for packing and helps with optimal load transfer.

The use of Dyneema X Gridstop works well for this pack and follows the trend of other cottage manufacturers who also use the lightweight yet durable material. I agree with what Will said in a recent review, “Dyneema X is a superb fabric for backpacks, so purchasing a backpack made with this fabric is an investment in longevity.” However, it is not the lightest option available, and while some might claim that Cuben fibre is not very durable I yet have to see this being a problem in practice – there are plenty of thru-hikers which use Cuben fibre packs on the PCT and CDT, for example.

To get the best carry experience is it paramount that you choose the right size for your pack. Ryan Jordan’s Quantitative Analysis of Backpack Suspension Performance article still is the word to go by, and his recommendation of taking a pack with a slightly longer back is what you should keep in mind when you choose a pack. “The effective user torso length is the user torso length plus one inch” sums it up very well.

Specifications

What’s Good

• Excellent craftsmanship.
• Four different torso lengths and two sizes, as well as customization options allow for individual, customized packs.
• Durable, lightweight, and high-quality materials used.
• Comfortably carries loads between 5 and 12 kg.
• If a Z Lite is used as a back pad: comfy to carry and adds a bit of ventilation.
• Comfortable shoulder straps and hipbelt.
• Durable mesh pockets offer lots of space.

What’s Not So Good

• Hipbelt pockets not included.
• Users in humid and hot environments might lack good back ventilation.

Improvements

• The side compression system could be improved to allow the pack to become flatter when loaded with minimal gear.

Disclosure: The author and/or Backpacking Light purchased this product through normal retail channels with no obligation to the manufacturer for providing a review.

Introduction

The Tumalo line is GoLite’s most affordable WPB rain gear, yet only gives up a little weight on their top-of-the-line offerings. Using Pertex’s newest 2.5 material, Shield DS, it tries for a balance of breathability and good water protection. Upping the ante for interior moisture control, it uses pit-zips and mesh pockets for further venting options.

Design and Features

The GoLite Tumalo Storm Jacket and Storm Pants are the most affordable offerings of GoLite’s waterproof-breathable line of rain gear. Both are made with Pertex Sheild DS, a version of a 2.5-layer material.

A quick primer on 2.5-layer fabrics. In the past few years many companies have come out with 2.5 waterproof/breathable fabric. The two and a half layers are as follows: First is the shell material of the garment, usually some type of breathable nylon. Denier (think thickness) can vary greatly. A waterproof/breathable membrane (in this case the Pertex Shield DS) is laminated to one side (that will be the inside of the garment). Over the membrane the “half layer” is actually a raised pattern made by printing a polymer onto the membrane. This saves the weight of a true liner and is suppose to aid in transferring moisture away from the skin and to help alleviate the plastic clammy feeling of the membrane.

Here is what Pertex has to say about their Shield DS. “Pertex Shield DS combines a technically advanced face fabric with a proprietary bi-component polyurethane coating technology specifically engineered for unlined garments. This durable and extremely lightweight fabric has exceptional stretch and provides the optimum balance of waterproofness and breathability. The ‘dry touch’ hydrophilic PU coating reduces internal garment condensation and eliminates the sticky, clammy feel of other coatings.” (More on this later.)

The numbers as far as breathability and waterproofness (is that a word?) are as follows:

• Waterproof – Hydrostatic head – 10,000mm (JIS-L 1092)
• Breathability – MVTR – 7,000g/m/day (JIS L 1099/A1)

The outer shell is made of 15 x 15 denier mini-rip nylon (55 g s/m). To aid in water shedding, a DWR has been applied to the nylon’s outer surface. While not a soft-shell material, the nylon does have a noticeable amount of stretch to it.

Storm Jacket

Starting at the top, the Storm Jacket has a fixed hood with a small reinforced brim. Thin elastic shock cord runs around the hood and ends on either side with a plastic pull. When pulled close around the face, the cord is held by gasket-type cord locks.

The nylon YKK front zipper is a two-way style, allowing the zipper to be adjusted to a myriad of positions.

The sleeves are gusseted at the arm pits to give an unencumbered range of motion. The material there is grey in color, but does not seem to be any different than the black of the rest of the jacket. The sleeves end with elastic cuffs. The best part of the sleeves, for me, is what is found underneath them. Nine-inch (23-cm) zippers under armpit area open the jacket to the great outdoors, helping hot hikers like me ventilate the interior. The pit-zips are not waterproof but are protected by a small storm-flap.

Waterproof zippers are used on the hand pockets located on the lower sides of the body. These interesting pockets help with ventilation too, as they are made of mesh. Commonly, one layer of mesh is used inside, which is attached to the shell, creating the pocket. GoLite used two layers of mesh, making kind of an envelope. Then by not attaching it to the shell at the top, it makes a large inside pocket too. The inside pockets have no way to close them off, so care must be taken when bending over so as not to lose stuff.

Finally, at the bottom of the jacket there is another elastic shock-cord running through the hem and going through two tethered cord locks. This lets the jacket be cinched tight around the user when conditions call for it.

Storm Pants

The Tumalo Storm Pants are pretty basic in their design. The same thin elastic shock cord used on the jacket is run around the waist of the pants. A tethered cord-lock sits front and center. There is no fly, nor are there any front or hip pockets. There is a vertical waterproof zipper on the right thigh that accesses a small cargo pocket. A key clip resides inside. You can stuff the pants into the mesh-backed pocket for compact storage.

To facilitate easily getting into the pants, the legs have an 11-inch (28 cm) ankle zipper at the bottoms. The zippers are protected by a large storm flap with Velcro closures. The cuffs have a half section of elastic in them too.

Both the jacket and the pants are completely seam taped.

Performance

Spring of 2010 was the wettest I have ever seen. Hiking the southern sections of the Pacific Crest Trail, I saw my rain gear fail miserably, and I jumped at the chance to test the new GoLite Tumalo Storm Jacket and Pants with its highly touted Pertex Shield DS fabric. Unfortunately, by the time I received them it was summer and I hardly saw any more rain. I used them more as a wind block than rain gear, but here is my take on them.

Waterproofness

The only sustained rain that I was able to use them during was in Itasca State Park. I spent three hours hiking in solid rain. After having two other brands of 2.5-layer rain gear wet out and actually pass water through the membrane earlier in the year, I was expecting that this could happen with the Tumalos also. I didn’t need to worry. They did an excellent job shedding the water, and, examining them later in camp, I could find no spots that looked as if the fabric was wetting out.

The rest of the summer and fall I only had very short periods of rain during trips in California and Minnesota. This past winter I used them in snow storms in Minnesota where they worked fine too.

Breathability

I am a very hot hiker, and I sweat a lot. The idea of waterproof breathable fabrics has always been of great interest to me, and I have had many types and brands of them over the years. They have all left me less than awed. From my first use of the Tumalo, I could tell that it could not keep up with moisture transfer for me. I was wearing it on a very cold morning in Mississippi Headwaters State Forest as a wind-breaker. Within 30 minutes I was feeling moisture build up on the arms. The same happened on trips in the Sierra Nevada when I would have to don it because of imminent showers. BUT it was noticeably better than all the other rain gear I have used over the years.

While the numbers for vapor transfer are all well and good, it is very hard to actually notice it for me. But one instance made me take notice of the Tumalo’s Shield DS. I hiked an unmaintained and very poorly marked section of the North Country Trail near White Earth Indian Reservation. As it had rained earlier, the extremely overgrown trail had me soaked right away, my pants looked like I had waded through a pond. I belatedly put on my rain gear. I went back and forth with the jacket, only wearing it in the heaviest brush areas, but left the pants on for about five hours. When I did take off the Storm Pants, I found that my hiking pants were pretty much dry. That meant that my body heat while hiking was able to drive all the moisture from the soaked nylon through the Pertex Shield DS. I was amazed, and it really leant credence to the numbers for me.

The pit zips, of course, help a lot for venting the jacket and personally I won’t buy (or even test) a rain shell without them. To be honest, the Tumalo’s pit zips could be a little longer. They are the shortest ones of any of my shells.

Another thing that could help with venting the jacket is to replace the gathered elastic cuffs with a Velcro strap as that would let it be opened wide, allowing air to travel up my arm.

Comfort

I really like the slight stretch of Tumalo’s nylon outer layer. The give at the elbows and knees is quite noticeable, especially in the evenings when I wear them in camp as a warmth/wind block layer.

The hood fits well too. When pulled in to my face in heavy rain or snow it still allows good vision, and the brim, while only lightly reinforced, works well to keep my eyes protected.

Pertex mentions the inner layer, claiming it “eliminates the sticky, clammy feel of other coatings.” It does a very good job with this, but does still have the “plastic” feel of most 2.5-layer fabrics. Besides the Tumalo, I have four other brands of 2.5-layer rain jackets as I write this and it feels better than all but one brand. (Believe it or not, an OmniTech shell from Columbia.)

The only problem I have with the Tumalo’s comfort level is the drawstring of the pants. The thin shock-cord they use is very weak, and I found it difficult to get it tight. I would rather see a regular non-stretch line that will let the pants stay put.

Durability

I have been pretty impressed with the durability of the Shield DS fabric, considering its low weight. Two of my trips saw bushwhacking through some heavy brush. The pants especially have seen a lot of abuse but they have not shown any signs of wear from it.

Another instance in which damage could occur is from my shoes while putting the pants on in a hurry. The short ankle zippers are just long enough for me to get over my size 11 (US) trail runners, but I still catch the soles on the interior. I found that in winter there was no way I could fit them over my boots, so they only saw winter use on day-hikes that I put them on right from the start, leaving them on until I got back to the trailhead. A longer ankle zipper would make them more useful to me.

Assessment

I came away from this review with Tumalo becoming my favorite pieces of rain gear for three-season use. While still not breathable enough to keep me from getting wet inside, under exertion it does better than anything else I have used to date.

There is some room for improvement as far as my likes. Besides the aforementioned pants drawstring and jacket cuffs, I would like to see the jacket’s pockets placed a bit higher on the body. This would let them be much more usable and accessible when a pack’s hip belt is in play.

If GoLite were to offer the Storm Pant in a full-zip style, I would be all over it for winter use.

Specifications

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to review this product to the manufacturer under the terms of this agreement.

Hyperlite Mountain Gear, a new small company making gear for ultralight backpacking, likes to be on the cutting edge, which definitely attracts our attention. I previously reviewed their Echo Modular Shelter System, which is innovative and highly versatile. Their Windrider pack is likewise well designed and versatile. It’s made of a Cuben Fiber/ripstop nylon laminate, which is unique and something I didn’t know even existed. As you will see in our Frameless Backpacks State of the Market Report 2011, there are a growing number of backpacks for ultralight backpacking, and most of them are highly refined. How does the HMG Windrider compare with the competition?

Specifications

Description

The fabric used in the HMG Windrider is truly unique. It’s a Cuben Fiber/ripstop nylon hybrid weighing 2.75 oz/yd² (93 g/m²), and that’s all they will tell me about it. The Cuben Fiber is on the inside and ripstop nylon on the outside. The pack is sewn together like a conventional frameless pack, rather than using adhesives as in a Cuben Fiber pack. The construction is very high quality.

Performance

The measured pack torso length (size Large/Tall) by the BPL method (inside of shoulder strap to middle of the hipbelt) is 20.25 inches (51 cm), and 22.25 inches (57 cm) by the conventional manufacturer method (top of shoulder strap to bottom of the hipbelt). The Windrider is available in four torso lengths, and the tallest one (tested) ranks in the top three for long torso length; the Granite Gear Virga is the same, and the Gossamer Gear Mariposa and Six Moon Designs Traveler are slightly taller.

Our pack load carrying capacity tests show the Windrider will comfortably carry loads up to 20 pounds (9.1 kg) without stays and up to 30 pounds (13.6 kg) with stays. The Windrider ranked in the middle of six packs tested that have removable stays. Interestingly, the stays help support the pack quite well up to a 20 pound (9.1 kg) load, then collapse more beyond that weight (see Part 2B of this series for specific test results).

The aluminum stays in the Windrider weigh just 2.1 ounces/pair (60 g/pair), one of the lightest among the packs in our roundup that have removable stays. They are flat aluminum stays one-half inch wide and one-sixteenth inch thick (1.3 cm x 2 mm) that will hold a bend, but they are not rigid enough to resist deformation. In other words, they readily flex with the pack’s backpanel, and bend with heavier pack weights. In my opinion, the contoured tubular stay unit used in the Gossamer Gear, Elemental Horizons, and Six Moon Designs packs is better. Its contour can be customized and it’s more rigid to resist distortion with heavier loads.

In its defense, the Windrider is a smaller volume frameless backpack, which is not intended to carry heavy loads, so perhaps the stay system is adequate for the pack’s intended purpose. For the pack’s volume, a normal load of lightweight gear plus expendables would weigh between 15 and 25 pounds (6.8 to 11.3 kg), which is well within the pack’s comfortable carrying capacity. This agrees with my field testing, where I comfortably carried 22 pounds (10 kg) in the Windrider on a three-day backpack on the Boulder Mail Trail in Southwestern Utah.

Our pack volume measurement shows a close agreement with the pack’s specified volume; the specified volume is 2650 cubic inches (43 L), and our measurement is 2590 cubic inches (42 L).

The pack’s hydration sleeve appears to be too shallow, only 9.75 inches (25 cm) deep. However, when I put a filled 2.5-liter Platypus flask in the sleeve, the bottom of the flask is level with the shoulder strap seam, so it appears to be designed to place the weight as high as possible and make the flask as accessible as possible. The side mesh pockets are also tall enough to hold a hydration bladder.

Comparisons

Comparative specifications can be found in my Frameless Backpack State of the Market Report 2011 Part 3 (coming soon). The closest comparisons are the Mountain Laurel Designs Prophet, ZPacks Dyneema X 26, and Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) CDT. The first two are about 10 ounces (283 g) lighter, and the third is only slightly lighter.

Assessment

Although I managed to find a few flaws, I want to emphasize that the Windrider is a very nice pack. It’s cutting edge, as far as materials, design, and construction. The fact that it’s not waterproof as claimed is really a non-issue because no backpack is waterproof unless the seams are taped, and taping seams is tedious and adds weight. The stay system is simple and lightweight, but it is not as robust as some of the other packs. Actually, it’s encouraging to see a 2650 cubic inch (43 L) frameless pack come with removable stays, because it reinforces our finding that stays improve a pack’s comfortable load carrying capacity for loads heavier than 15 pounds (6.8 kg). The stays that come with the Windrider weigh only 2.1 ounces per pair (60 g), so they add minimal weight to the pack while providing multiple benefits.

The Windrider is a smaller volume frameless pack in the “sweet spot” for ultralight backpacking. With a lightweight and compact gear kit, the Windrider is a perfect size for shorter three-season backpacking trips up to about four days. On the plus side, the Windrider is durable and very well designed and constructed. The main downside is that the Windrider is on the heavy side at 25.5 ounces (723 g). Most of its competitors weigh in the 12 to 20 ounce (340 to 567 g) range. It gets down to a basic question of: “does the extra weight equal extra comfort?” The answer is basically yes, but the next question is: “do I want extra comfort features in an ‘ultralight’ frameless backpack, or do I want it Spartan and also comfortable?” That’s a question that you will need to answer for yourself. It’s like deciding between a Lexus and a Prius. If you don’t mind an extra 10 ounces (283 g) of pack weight and extra cost, then the Windrider is a pack that you will be proud to own, and it will perform as well or better than its peers of similar size.

What’s Good

• Excellent volume reduction system
• Durable fabric and mesh
• Removable stay system included, one of the lightest stay systems currently available
• Excellent suspension system for a frameless backpack
• Comfortably carries moderate loads
• Large mesh front and side pockets for convenient access to items needed on the trail
• Excellent construction, very sturdily built, with adequate reinforcements
• Fits well (if you choose the correct size); four torso lengths available
• Large hipbelt pockets included
• Bottom is flat so pack stands up by itself
• Hydration sleeve positions the weight higher and makes the reservoir more accessible

What’s Not So Good

• Pack is not waterproof as claimed
• Outer fabric absorbs water
• Stays less supportive with heavy loads
• At 25.5 ounces (723 g), the Windrider is on the heavy side compared to its competitors

Recommendations For Improvement

• Offer a contoured tubular stay
• Reduce the weight of the pack

Introduction

The CDT is a frameless backpack with durable fabric, lots of features and included accessories for a great value. It sounds like the perfect pack, and it almost is, but there’s one thing you really need to know.

Specifications

Description

The CDT is a likeable pack, but there is one thing you need to know right up front: although the specified volume of the CDT is 3610 cubic inches (59 L), the measured volume is only 2700 cubic inches (44 L). That’s 910 cubic inches/15 L (25%) smaller than specified. Both volumes include the extension collar and all pockets. The actual volume (2700 cubic inches/44 L) is a nice volume for many ultralight backpackers; but the key point is that the CDT is a smaller volume pack than specified.

Performance

Once I understood and accepted the fact that the CDT is a smaller volume pack than expected, (see previous section) I found it more likeable because I prefer a smaller volume pack. For a compact ultralight gear kit, the CDT has the right amount of room for a three- to five-day backpack.

The CDT has five outside pockets which hold a large amount of gear. The front and side pockets are stretch nylon, which is really nice, and hipbelt pockets are included. One drawback on my test pack is the side pockets are very angled – essentially a half pocket – so things can easily fall out. When I contacted ULA about the issue, they responded that many hikers had complained about that, so the pocket shape has been modified.

One other drawback of the CDT is its small extension collar. It doesn’t add much reserve volume to the pack for when you need it, and there is no extra length to roll the top down. Consequently there is a hole in the top where rain can enter (see top view above). The extension collar measures 8.5 inches (22 cm); 12 inches (30 cm) would be much better.

The CDT comes with a bunch of included accessories: removable elastic water bottle holders on both shoulder straps, handloops, removable hydration sleeve, and removable zippered mesh security pocket. Overall, the CDT is a great value considering its durable dyneema fabric, comfortable suspension, and included features and accessories.

The pack I tested is a size M/L; the pack torso length measures 18 inches (46 cm) by the BPL method (inside of a shoulder strap to the middle of the hipbelt) and 20.5 inches (52 cm) by the conventional manufacturer method (top of shoulder strap to bottom of hipbelt). This comes out to about a size Medium +, so the CDT is not a good choice for taller hikers. My torso length is 20.5 inches (52 cm), and the CDT is a bit short for me, as shown in the photos.

The CDT is designed to hug the back and it has a comfortable suspension system. The bottom of the shoulder straps connect to the bottom rear of the pack, which helps to lift the pack. Consequently, in my torso collapse tests to measure pack load carrying capacity, the CDT did better than many of its frameless competitors, carrying up to 25 pounds (11.3 kg) comfortably.

Comparisons

Comparative specifications can be found in my Frameless Backpack State of the Market Report 2011. The closest comparisons are the Zpacks Dyneema X 26, Gossamer Gear Gorilla, Hyperlite Mountain Gear Windrider, Six Moon Designs Swift, and GoLite Jam.

Assessment

With a few revisions, the CDT would be high on our list of favorite frameless packs. The sharply angled side pockets, needed compression straps, and short extension collar are easily corrected, and of course the volume needs to be accurately stated. Its actual volume (2700 cubic inches/44 L) is right in the sweet zone for ultralight backpacking, it has a comfortable suspension, it has a great feature set, it carries a decent load, and it’s a great value.

What’s Good

• Durable fabrics and mesh
• Comfortable suspension system
• Comfortably carries moderate loads
• Large stretch nylon front pocket and side pockets for convenient access to items needed on the trail
• Lots of features and included accessories
• Excellent construction, very sturdily built, with adequate reinforcements
• Fits well (if you choose the correct size)
• Excellent value

What’s Not So Good

• Volume is way under specification
• Gear falls out of side pockets (corrected in current version)
• Extension collar is too short
• Torso length for size M/L is on the short side, so this is not a good pack for taller people

Recommendations For Improvement

• Accurately state the pack volume
• Add 4 inches (10 cm) to the extension collar
• Add one more compression strap to each side
• Make the side pockets taller with a less angled opening (this has been implemented in the current version)
• Offer a true size Large

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to review this product to the manufacturer under the terms of this agreement.

Introduction

With a total listed weight of 2.79 lb (1.27 kg), the Evolution 2P is Big Sky International’s lightest freestanding double-wall two-person tent. It is very close to being the lightest tent of the ones we looked at for the latest State of the Market Report, yet still has two full doors and vestibules, something the very lightest models did not. What trade offs were made to achieve this weight and how did it do in the field? Read on.

Design and Features

The newest revision of the Evolution 2P from Big Sky International is quite different from last year. While still retaining the basic crossed-pole design, the nylon mesh body now attaches to the poles with 18 clips instead of pole sleeves. The poles go into grommets at the end of straps at the corners. The narrower foot end has red nylon at the grommets to quickly identify it. Set-up is very fast and easy.

The Evolution has a good sized D-shaped door on each side. As the tent is wider at the front, both doors open the same direction, and it is not meant for a head-to-foot sleeping configuration seen on many 2P tents. (And one I could never understand myself. I don’t like being kicked in the face all night.) Each door has a loop and toggle to keep it gathered and out of the way when so desired. Toward the head end of each door is a small gear pocket. On the other side of each door is a very large mesh pocket that Big Sky calls clothes hampers which are meant to be able to dry damp items.

One nice touch on the inner tent is the way the bathtub floor comes up higher at the head of the tent. The 13-inch (33-cm) high tub at that point protects the users’ heads from wind blown rain and dirt.

The fly that I received is their Ultralight SuprSil-UL version, the lightest option. It too has red nylon at the narrow end. The fly attaches to the tent by means of a plastic hook that clips to a plastic ring on a loop of elastic cord. There is no way to tension the fly any more than the elastic gives.

Now, about the fabric. I asked for any information that I could share and Big Sky said that at this point the material is proprietary. Here is what they have to say about it. “SuprSil-UL fabric: used in Big Sky’s ultralight fly/shell, weight compares with spinnaker fabric, but about 50% more waterproof than generic silnylon or 4x more waterproof than spinnaker, and has tear strength 50% more than generic silnylon or 4x more than spinnaker.”

A single stake is used to pull the fly out from each side to create the entry vestibules. The vestibules have plenty of room for a pack and shoes to one side while still allowing unhampered entry and exit. At the top of each vestibule is a vent that can be propped open with a strut or kept closed with a patch of hook-and-loop. The vents can be adjusted easily from inside. More ventilation can be had by pulling out the fly at the guy points centered at the bottom of each end. For added strength there are hook-and-loop attachment points inside the fly that wrap around the poles. A guy point is on the outside of the fly at these locations.

I only received the Evolution’s body, aluminum poles, and Ultralight fly. I used a small silnylon stuff sack to pack it and used titanium shepherd’s hook stakes. Later, I ordered a set of the company’s DuraLite carbon fiber poles that let me shave 3 ounces (85 g) from the weight.

Another way to cut weight when bug protection is not needed is to purchase the footprint with grommet kit, which is 5.3 ounces (150 g) and allows the 13.1-ounces (371-g) fly to be set up with just the poles for a total weight of 1.92 pounds (0.87 kg) plus stakes.

Performance

I was able to get quite a few trips in with the Evolution last summer and fall. Desert trips in the Sespe Wilderness and the Narrows of the San Gabriel River, plus a warm weekend in San Jacinto Wilderness let me use the Evolution with the fly off, my favorite way to enjoy the outdoors. Trips to the Sierra Nevada in the Pine Creek Pass/Piute Pass area and base camping on the east side required the fly for rain protection, and finally two trips in the Paul Bunyan Forest of Minnesota pushed the limits.

The tent is a breeze to set up. If the wind is blowing, I will stake one end first but I usually just set it up, then move it as I need to find the perfect (is there such a thing?) spot, and then stake the corners.

When weather or a desire for privacy dictated the fly being on, the ventilation was superb. In the Sierra we had rain on the hike in and while we set up camp. Keeping the vents open and the vestibule doors half unzipped allowed enough air movement that there was just minimal condensation on the fly and none on my quilt or the high end of the bathtub floor.

One night in the mountains saw some very heavy winds. While I did not use the Evolution there (I brought it for my son to use with Uncle Craig) I kept an eye on how it did over the three days we were there. I estimate the winds to have been gusting to 30 mph (48 km/h). The Evolution was solid while I was having some problems with the backpacking tent I was using, and other family members had their camping tent just about torn apart. The mesh inner did let in a lot of sand and dirt.

My first cold trip in Minnesota with the Evolution came five days after our first snowstorm of the year. Although the snow had melted, the ground was frozen enough for a lot of the moisture to be trapped on the surface. Because the wind was blowing, I kept the tent pretty buttoned up and still was fine with the condensation. But, I woke up to find that the wind had stopped and the temperature had fallen. The entire fly was coated with moisture. I opened up the doors and pulled out the fly at the ends and went back to sleep. The next morning it was 19 F (-7 C) at 7:30 am and the tent was ice inside and out. The fly really had a noticeable sag in it from the ice as may be seen in the picture to the right.

My last trip with it was in December where I used it on about a foot of snow at McCarty Lake off the Halverson Trail. There was just enough breeze to keep it dry inside while not blowing snow through the mesh. The only condensation I picked up was near my face even though I had to keep the tent buttoned up due to falling snow. One nice thing about the SuprSil-UL fabric: the snow just slides off.

Assessment

For the most part, I am very impressed with the Evolution 2P. I really liked the weight of it as delivered, and, once I bought the DuraLite poles, I decided that it is a keeper just because of the amount of room to weight.

The tent has been quite durable so far. All the zippers run freely and have seen no snags. I have mainly used it directly on the ground and the floor shows no signs of abrasion. On a couple of the wet trips I brought a piece of Tyvek to put under it just to keep it clean. I may purchase the footprint and grommet set because I like using fast-fly set-ups on spring snow.

The mesh is snag free. I have used some tents that got pulls by looking at them funny. No snags in the SuprSil-UL either. It is still looking good.

A couple things that bugged me about the Evolution had to do with the measurements. The stated size is off by nearly two inches (5 cm) everywhere. On the length, I hit the end with a winter bag. Thankfully, I never once encountered condensation on the inside of the bathtub walls or that could have been an issue. While the side measurements still have plenty of room for two pads, I wonder if the poles are figured for the width and length specified, and not what was delivered. Here is why I wonder.

The headroom is higher than stated. (I know, who would complain about that?) That, plus the fact that the sides do not sit completely flat when staked out, seems like the body’s footprint either needs to be bigger or the poles need to be shorter. This may be something Big Sky wants to look at.

Dare to Compare

While I should compare the Evolution to other dual door tents, quite frankly it blows them out of the water when comparing weight to room. But a tent that I can compare on a personal level is the Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2, a tent that impressed me so much last year that after reviewing it I kept it as my go-to shelter.

The Evolution weighs 3 oz (85 g) more than the Fly Creek with the aluminum poles and the same weight with the DuraLite poles, yet has 28% more protected space. Plus, with the pole design, it has more room and is stronger. The Evolution does cost quite a bit more, especially with the $110.00 DuraLite poles added.

Oh yeah, the Fly Creek? I gave it to my brother-in-law Dave. The Evo is now my go-to.

What’s Good

• Lightweight
• Excellent ventilation
• Usable for two
• Lots of headroom
• Plenty of storage

What’s Not So Good

• Measurements not correct
• A bit short for tall users

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The optional CF poles were later provided at a discounted rate for ownership by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to review this product to the manufacturer under the terms of this agreement. Addie provided the author this disclosure and he HAS an obligation to use it. ;-)

Introduction

re·flex

[adj., n. ree-fleks; v. ri-fleks]

–adjective

Physiology, noting or pertaining to an involuntary response to a stimulus.

When I was asked if I would like to test the new Carbon Reflex 3 with my children, I had an involuntary response. I yelled “heck yes!” Letting me drop 2 full pounds (0.91 kg) from my current tent weight to use a sub-5-pound three-person double-wall tent all summer sounded too good to be true. See how MSR’s lightest 3P shelter worked for the Estrella family.

Specifications

Design and Features

The Carbon Reflex 3 is Mountain Safety Research’s (MSR) lightest weight three-person tent. It gets its name from the Easton Carbon Fiber poles used to shave some weight, but it is how they use those poles that really make the tent stand out.

Many of my roomiest winter tents have been hoop or tunnel design tents with the poles bending side to side instead of crossing each other. MSR used this design with the Carbon Reflex 3, going top to bottom in its case. To make it freestanding they used a trick that they employed with the Fling, a 3-4 season tent I tested a few years ago. They added a crossing pole at the top. As the pole is wider than the main tent, it holds the sides out and, better yet, keeps the fly held further away from the inner body.

Set-up is very straight-forward. The polyester mesh inner attaches to the poles by means of reinforced pole clips. Once up, I stake it out before placing the fly on. The stake points have line tensioners to allow further adjustment later. The fly has grommets that attach to the top pole for strength and quick-disconnect buckles at the corners. Straps through the buckles allow fine tuning of the fly’s tension. There are plenty of guy points around the fly for added strength in windy conditions and two lower guy lines with tensioners to pull out the bottom for better ventilation.

A needle stake at each door pulls the fly out to provide two roomy vestibules. The vestibule doors close with waterproof zippers which hide in hooded covers when closed. As mentioned earlier, the center poles extend away from the sides of the inner tent. This keeps water from falling into the inner when the vestibule doors are open. As the Carbon Reflex does not have any upper vents, it also allows the vestibule doors to stay open at the top if needed to get airflow through the tent while still staying dry.

The inner tent has a bathtub floor which extends higher on the ends. Although MSR does not say it, I think that this is to protect the users’ heads from wind and wind-blown rain coming under the fly. A small pocket at each corner of the tent provides storage for flashlights and such.

As usual, MSR provides separate storage sacks for the poles and stakes, 0.7 and 0.3 ounces (20 and 8 g) respectively. The optional footprint protects the tent in dirty or rough spots and can be paired with just the poles and 23.4-ounce (663-g) fly to cut the trail weight down to 3.25 pounds (1.47 kg) with eight stakes.

Performance

The Carbon Reflex was first used by the kids and me in Maplewood State Park at Lida Lake. It got down to only 45 F (7 C) and had high humidity as a storm was rolling in. In fact, as I got up early to make coffee, I saw that the expected clouds had a freaky tornado-look and got the kids up and out. (Good thing too, as we got slammed not three minutes after leaving.)

Next, I used it with the kids at Itasca State Park where we backpacked in to McKay Lake. The temps were 74 to 47 F (23 to 8 C). It rained briefly in the early morning, was very humid, and the bugs were atrocious.

Our last trip with it was to Horseshoe Meadows in Inyo National Forest for three days of camping and day hiking. The first night was pleasant but the second was extremely windy. The wind was coming at one of the doors so I told the kids to use the other. It fended off the wind well but around 2:00 AM, a gust pulled the vestibule stake from the ground, slapping the fly against the door. The following gust really clobbered the tent as it was now presenting a flat face to the wind. I scurried out and re-staked it before the whole thing blew apart.

I used the Carbon Reflex with a friend (and fellow BPL member) on Durwood Creek in the Sequoia National Forest. The temps got down to 45 F (7 C). We again used it together the next month in Sierra National Forest in the Dinkey Lakes area. We camped near Island Lake where it was cool, humid, and quite buggy.

Assessment

I came away from this past summer’s trips with the children really liking the Carbon Reflex 3. The amount of room provided by the hooped pole design was instantly noticeable. While the stated dimensions are off, it was not by much. We had no problem fitting three standard width pads in it. On the trip to McKay Lake, I brought my large NeoAir which, when placed next to the kids Insulated Air Core pads, did take all the room across the floor.

What we all appreciated was the amount of room the hooped pole design gives. The trip to McKay Lake was the buggiest we have ever seen. Once the sun started going down enough to cool off, the mosquitoes came down from the trees in a buzzing cloud. As it does not get dark until after 9:00 PM in Minnesota in the summer time, we spent a few hours of quality time stuck inside. We used the MSR Mutha Hubba for the two previous years and a Big Agnes Copper Spur UL3 the year before that. The Carbon Reflex blows them away for interior space.

What Dad really appreciated was the weight. I sold the Mutha Hubba after the first trip with the Carbon Reflex because it let me drop 2.1 pounds (0.95 kg), while getting the extra room. The weight was low enough that I did not mind bringing it on a couple trips with one of our fellow BPL members. I don’t normally share tents with other adults who are not family, but since this one was a woman I decided to offer my tent in the sake of tent data gathering… The Carbon Reflex is a palace for two people.

I never really got to see how it handles rain. For the first time I can remember, we never had rain in Minnesota on our trips. Well, the first camping trip would have seen it, but it was far too dangerous to stay. We did get sprinkled on a few times, but not enough to make any evaluations. As the materials used are the same as the Hubba Hubba HP, which has seen plenty of weather, I figure the Carbon Reflex will prove to be pretty weatherproof.

Condensation was not as big of a problem as I thought it may be when I first saw that it did not have upper vents. I almost always kept the vestibule doors open to create air movement. There was build-up on the inside of the fly in humid Minnesota. In California the air was dry enough that there was no condensation, especially the night spent without the fly on.

One problem with the mesh inner was with dirt blowing in. The trip to Horseshoe Meadows saw heavy wind the second night. We got a lot of dirt blown in, coating our quilts and pads. I pulled the fly as low as possible and changed the angle of the side pull-outs to lessen exposure. The wind was hitting one of the doors, providing a better shape to shed it, so we instead used the other door. But, in the night a gust pulled the stake out and I woke to see Emma getting clobbered by the side of the tent. (She didn’t even wake up. Hiking is good for wearing kids out.) I reset the stake and set a good sized rock on it which held until we broke down the next morning.

All told I am very impressed with the Carbon Reflex 3. At this point, seeing as I gave away my Copper Spur and sold my Mutha Hubba, it is staying as my go-to family backpacking tent.

Dare to Compare

The best freestanding tent I can compare to the Carbon Reflex is one of the other 3P tents that the kids and I have used a lot, the Copper Spur UL3 from Big Agnes. The total weight of both tents is identical. The Copper Spur has more interior floor space but the Carbon Reflex has much more true room inside thanks to its pole design. The Carbon Reflex has a 2-inch (5-cm) higher peak height and slightly bigger vestibules. I like the door design of the Carbon Reflex much better than that of the Copper Spur too. Trust me. If you have kids you don’t want your doors dropping to the ground when open. (Love you guys…)

In the Copper Spur’s favor, for shoulder season use in snow its partial height solid walls are great, plus it has two high vents for added air movement. It is also $100.00 less expensive.

What’s Good

• Roomy
• Lightweight
• Fast set-up

What’s Not So Good

• Expensive
• Sizing is off

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author at no charge, and it is owned by the author. The author has no obligation to review this product to the manufacturer under the terms of this agreement.