Ventra Mainframe – A standalone frame and ventilation system.

Just another solution to a non-existent problem. The only thing it does is offset _ANY_ pack from the wearer's back. Which most would agree is detrimental. At the cost of extra 332 g and $75 + S&H. It provides no feasible means of backpack suspension, although the verbiage on the web site aims to make you think it does. It is simply a useless add-on. Heed the advice of Antoine de Saint Exupéry: "It seems that perfection is attained not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to remove…"

Another way to look at it is that the weight of 332 gm (11.7 oz) does not include the shoulder straps, and more importantly, a hip belt, the key in any suspension. The hip belt must achieve a certain amount of stiffness, or the load will pull the front of the belt down and against the front of the abdomen – very uncomfortable. That stiffness requires weight – look at the new Osprey packs where to achieve stiffness, they have added pounds, not ounces, to prevent just this type of discomfort. For any reasonable degree of comfort, there must be a fair amount of foam padding to the belt also, and that also adds weight. Thus the approx. 3/4 lb is going to peak at a much higher weight when shoulder straps and a good hip belt are added. And don't forget the weight of the empty pack sack. All totaling enough to take the pack well out of the BPL range. Other concerns are that we aren't told enough about what the frame is made of in order to get some idea of its durability, and the frame looks rather small in the photo that includes people, thus allowing a rough idea of the frame's size. It appears about the size of a day pack, hardly a long distance hauler. Don't agree that adding a little air space behind the back is necessarily a bad thing, especially if the suspended mesh back panel is designed to be flexible enough to allow the back to come close to the contents, but also to bend forward without causing the contents to press against the back. But the lack of advanced design is really academic when the weight is going to be up there regardless. When the product is being sold as a separate frame, it should include the shoulder straps and hip belt designed to work with that frame. That also provides a much better idea of what the pack's weight will be when a sack is added.

To be extremely harsh, it does sound a bit like 'Yet Another Kickstarter Idea' (TM) Cheers

The Zpacks website describes their arc frame as "patented" (utility or design? what features?), so there might be some infringement and/or prior art issues there. Looks as if there are some very strong headwinds for this project.

Well…it certainly doesn't offer anything in which I'm interested. It's ~12 oz is nearly 1/2 the total weight of my current backpack that already has a great frame. I will admit that it looks like a decent idea for attempting to make money.

Just what I've been looking for! A trampoline for my hamster.

Hello everyone, I saw this thread and wanted to respond to some concerns voiced here. No product will be perfect for every user, and the Ventra Mainframe is no exception. For the lightweight backpacking and hiking community, there are definitely strikes against the mainframe, namely weight. One of the central aspects of the Mainframe is its removable nature. Backpack design presents a spectrum of functionality. A pack can exchange comfort for weight savings, or ventilation for weight savings, or support for weight savings, or durability for weight savings, and cost also becomes a factor for each of those features. With the Mainframe, an ultralight backpacker can cater their backpack for the trip at hand. On a trip where you'll be hiking through the foothills in mid July, you might determine that the 11oz is worth the ability to ventilate your sweat. On other trips, you might determine that you'd rather have the weight savings. The bottom line is that it allows you to choose, and at a fraction of the cost of owning an integrated ventilated backpack as well as an ultralight backpack. It also allows you to not cut any corners when choosing your ultralight backpack. You can choose an ultralight backpack that runs entirely down the weight savings direction in exchange for comfort, ventilation, support etc. Because when you want those features, you can choose to add the Mainframe. To address the concern that this product does not add support to the backpack, it adds support in two ways. The first is that it provides rigidity for the entire length of the pack. This prevents the pack from bending, and causes it to move as one unit about the wearer's hips. This is related to the second item which is the 3D contour of the frame. The suspension has a 3D contour that matches the shape of a wearer's back. This allows the pack to transfer load to the wearer's lumbar, even without wearing a hip belt. The use of the backpack's hip belt only increases this load transfer to the wearer's hips. I know this will be preaching to the choir, but the more weight that can be transferred to the hips, the less the core muscles have to work and the more efficiently a user can carry a load. Another concern expressed was regarding the center of gravity. The way that the frame is designed allows the gap to decrease with pack load. This means that with light packs, you have industry leading ventilation, and the center of gravity effect from the large air gap is not very noticeable to the user. As load increases, the air gap decreases, and the center of gravity self corrects. Having any air gap will yield a less desirable center of gravity than no air gap, so if that is a central concern, then the pack should be worn without the Mainframe. Another concern is the frame's size. The frame is sized to the person, not the backpack. So the frame will fit your body, regardless of how voluminous the pack you're using is. Pictures of use with larger volume packs are available on the website. Z-packs utilize an integrated ventilated suspension with variable ventilation. Many other companies utilize integrated ventilated suspensions which do not conflict with the patent pending nature of the Mainframe which is a universal ventilated frame that can be integrated with any backpack. Like I said earlier, no product will be a fit for every consumer, and I have no delusions about the fact that there are reasons why an ultralight packer might not want the Mainframe, but I figured I would at least give feedback on these points to help clarify. -Mike

@ Mike (Ventra): I have been playing the Engineering game for some 30+ years now and am quite clear on the function of your product which is obvious to me from its photograph. As to backpacks, I started wearing those back in 1965, which I think does qualify me to share an opinion. Regardless of your claims, this product does not transfer backpack load to wearer's lumbar region in any manner useful for the wearer. However, its nature of providing offset between backpack and wearer's back hides two easy to spot ergonomic detriments which were not yet mentioned in this discussion: 1. It runs the risk of either insufficient shoulder strap length (as it uses the original backpack's shoulder straps) – or the risk of misalignment between the padded portion of the shoulder straps and the target contact areas for these on the user's body, due to the extended length of the strap in use with your product. Shoulder straps have built-in curvature for improved ergonomics where they wrap around user's shoulders, and using your product results in said curvature landing in a completely different place on the wearer's body, negating the mentioned ergonomics of the original backpack design. 2. It ruins the correct contact zone between the hipbelt (on pack furnished with one) and wearer's hips, as the result is a flat contact zone with the lower back, augmented by 2 half-moon-like (or is that a 1/4-moon?) contact zones with the remainder of the hipbelt "wings" – even on packs specifically designed with a good full-wrap hipbelt. The "wings" are bound to contact the wearer's hips not in the fashion as originally intended by the backpack maker since a portion of their length is now "eaten" by your product. It also runs the risk of insufficient net hipbelt length once your product is applied, provided that the original backpack had a hipbelt properly sized for the wearer. This is precisely why I came close to calling it a gimmick in my previous post, and am openly calling it a gimmick in this one. Cheers!

//

I don't think I would call it a gimmick: that would be going too far in my opinion. It's an interesting idea all right, but as we all know, not all ideas work out in practice. In this case, again in my personal opinion, the fact that the frame does not have its own shoulder straps and waist belt is the big problem. If you were to add those and work from there, you might have something. Of course, the weight is a huge problem, as you can make similar frames at a much lower weight. Yes, it's been done. Cheers

Does anyone know what pack on the market today would benefit by adding this? Has anyone trail tested it? No doubt, BPL is perhaps the toughest sell one could imagine for a product such as this, but even beyond BPL I just don't see where it fits in.

If the product works well, I could see this being useful for frameless packs. For example, if you own a 15 oz frameless pack that works great for loads < 20lbs (say an MLD Exodus or something), but you want to go on a trip that requires carrying 30+lbs, then maybe you could stick this Venta Mainframe on your pack, and carry that load in relative comfort. If it works, then that would be great. It looks kind of goofy to me, but I'd like to see more feedback before dismissing it. Assuming Ventra is confident in their product, then sending the product to a trusted pack tester for an honest review would help.

One thing to take into account with strap fit is that every backpack manufacturer has to guess what an average wearer of a given height will require in terms of hip belt/shoulder strap fit. Are straps designed for skinny or heavyset wearers? Is the curvature in a shoulder strap designed for someone with broad or narrow shoulders? The bottom line is that there is already variation in how straps on any mass produced backpack will fit various customers even if they are the exact same height. Additionally, most packs come in different sizes to accommodate customers of different heights. Generally each size accommodates a 2” range of torso lengths. Two inches of torso length alone can produce the equivalent of a 4” difference in how the shoulder straps sit on a person's shoulders. So with a given backpack size, the shortest wearer will wear the straps very differently than the tallest wearer in that size range, even though they're both wearing the correct size pack. Most people don't even notice these variations in strap fit because packs generally wear very comfortably regardless of these fit differences. Additionally, many packs have straps that are adjustable from both ends to help accommodate these fit differences. The Mainframe does use some of a pack's strap length, but in almost all cases still provides a very comfortable strap fit. A version of the Mainframe with an attachable hip belt is coming, but shortly after the standard unit. This will provide increased support to packs that lack a hip belt altogether With all aspects of how this product performs; strap fit, lumbar load transfer, load support, comfort, ventilation, weight, center of gravity etc, trail use is always going to be the best judge. Below is a link to a review from a 3rd party gear tester who performed a blind test of the product. His background is in long haul thru-hiking and he has thru-hiked the entire 2168 mile Appalachian trail. http://appalachiantrials.com/a-review-of-the-ventra-mainframe/

I read your 3rd party review. Maybe I am a bit to skeptical but it does not seem very independant. It reads more like a copy and paste ad, I mean review, from your website.

"So with a given backpack size, the shortest wearer will wear the straps very differently than the tallest wearer in that size range, even though they're both wearing the correct size pack." again, really? there are any number of packs available in the market that allow the end user to adjust and fine tune the distance/back length between the hip belt and shoulder strap yoke; therefore, the shortest wearer will wear the straps the same as the tallest wearer in that size range.

Hi Ventra I think you may be missing the point people are making here. Yes, bodies vary in size, and pack manufacturers do generally manage to handle that. No reason why you could not do so as well. But that has nothing to do with whether a frame without any shoulder straps or hip belt is a good idea. Potential customers here at BPL seem to be saying they do not like the idea. Cheers

@ Mike (Ventra): You either lack understanding of how backpack fit actually works, or spin your yarn while underestimating the level of knowledge of the folks frequenting these forums. As Roger C subtly hinted, most of the forum mates who commented in this thread "seem to be saying they do not like the idea"… You have picked the wrong audience here Mike. We are unlikely to fit your target audience demographics (i.e. gullible backpackers). I doubt you would get any endorsement of your product on BPL.com, no matter how much you try. This may sound to you as a dare, but is not intended as one. I'm afraid you need to seek your potential customers elsewhere….

I certainly am not UL all the time. UL gear is not usually cost-effective for daily urban use. I'm not likely to take it backpacking, but I see it as being handy on heavier-duty day packs I use on a daily basis. I bike to work and I don't need the ventilation when it's cold out, but in the summer it'd do a lot for comfort.

I saw one at the OR show. I thought it was a refreshing idea, even if certain problems may exist with fit as have been mentioned. I applaud the new ideas to problems approach rather than rehashing old concepts. I could see it being used for additional support for larger day pack loads (say you are taking photo equipment etc). While this is a very weight conscious community, a lot of times it doesn't matter so much.

Guys,

Settle down. It’s horses for courses. I love going ultralight but I sweat like a horse, refuse to wear polys, nylons & unnatural materials. I absolutely hate my packs touching & sweating my back. Australian summers don’t help at all. I’m sweating profusely after about 1km walking & often sling my backpack on one shoulder & then swap over to the other shoulder to cool down the former. I don’t believe using a Ventra Mainframe is less comfortable, safer & energy efficient than what I currently do.

I intend to buy the product. Would I attach it to any of my 3 bugout bags? (2 cars & home prep) If it’s in that particular car, yes I would. They are light anyway. Hopefully I won’t have to use them. ;-) Will I use it on longer hikes, probably.

I go ultralight so I can carry whatever I deem essential. Will I use it all the time, who knows.

It’s been almost 1.75 years since the last comment so it’s safe to assume they’ve gotten over it.  ;^)

However in the meantime it appears this product hasn’t ‘caught fire’ among the UL crowd. What is for most a redundant pack add-on that weighs 350g isn’t going to generate a lot of interest.

Zpacks Arc Blast weighs 595g including frame