Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review

[Mark Verber]

> why the Ohm was not included in the comparisons

send email to will… he is the only one who knows for certain. But I don't think it was a conspiracy :-) Until David asked about the ohm, I hadn't noticed that it was missing from the table. The reason I didn't notice it missing was that all the other comparative packs were designed to be used both frameless and with the stays. As far as I could tell, the Ohm's design is built around the stays being in all the time so it didn't come into my mind when reading the review.

–Mark

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

This pack seems to be quite nice. I like how versatile it is, although I would likely use it WITHOUT the frame most of the time.

I was a bit surprised to read that Will would use this WITH the frame most of the time, since he acknowledges frameless packs are comfortable to 20 lbs and all but one of this trips was 21 lbs or less. Maybe the frame is that good.

The lack of a comparison to the Ohm surprised me too. My guess is that it was just an oversight. At 21oz, the 3500 cu in Ohm is a compelling pack although it seems that it isn't quite as versatile. I like how the Gorilla lets you remove the frame and some straps. Then again, the Ohm's "suspension hoop" does only weigh 1.2oz.

I was surprised there were no 'recommendations for improvement' since 4 cons were listed. All of the 'cons' seem like they could be areas for improvement.

[James Gealy]

I agree with that, Dan. It does look like at least one thing could be changed (Grosgrain Loop).

On the other hand, the others may not be, now that I think about it. The back panel uses a foam pad as a way to go multi-use. Putting a ventilation system would move the weight even further away from the body.

As for the hip belt and the suspension system, perhaps the lack of a connection between the two is so the hip belt is more easily removable. It may also allow for the hips to move more freely and naturally than otherwise. I don't have this pack, but maybe GG could put small sleeves for the frame into the hipbelt, somehow giving the option between connected and not.

The shoulder straps seem a matter of personal preference with some people loving them and others not so much. Perhaps there could be a recommendation here to have two strap width options?

Finally, speaking of recommendations for improvements, in looking at the Mariposa Plus, now that it is available with the same aluminum stay as the Gorilla as opposed to the old carbon fiber stays, would it now receive a 'Highly Recommended' rating? Also, do they have similar weight carrying capacities? The GG website says no and I was curious as to why.

-jim

[CW]

I've been biting my tongue every time I see the mention of back ventilation but I can't take it anymore. When you exercise you sweat. Get over it or don't exercise. No pack you wear is going to prevent your back from sweating, I don't care how fancy it is or what it's made out of.

[Dean F.]

But, few people CHOOSE to exercise while cocooned in plastic wrap. Most wear breathable clothing. Similarly, having a backpack back that vents is desirable. (Though we often willingly compromise this one.) That's a large evaporative body area that is lost to you if it isn't vented- at least theoretically leading to easier overheating.

And, a lot of people hiking hard in cool conditions WON'T sweat. I just spent three days in Great Sand Dunes National Park this weekend and generally didn't sweat. It was nice not to be clammy for a change. (But, I was also using an Exos…)

I propose that saying "suck it up" is pointless. Indeed, most of us do choose to suck it up and accept that trade-off, but it isn't a trivial issue.

[CW]

Bah. Do I wear breathable clothing? Sure. Does it keep my back from getting wet? Not at all. Even if I go out and exercise completely nude my back will get wet. Solid fabric pressed against my back doesn't stop the sweat from evaporating off me. I sweat no more appreciably with a pack against my back than I do with nothing there.

I didn't sweat much or at all on WT3 carrying a Pinnacle. It had nothing to do with the pack and was all about proper layering for my exertion level in the cooler temps.

[David Ure]

There are other issues with packs that pursue back venilation: frames that jut out from the back, pushing the load outside one's center of gravity, reducing load stability and in some cases, load transfer to the hips. Gimmicky.

[Dean F.]

>> Even if I go out and exercise completely nude my back will get wet.

Yes. And it will evaporate as it should. (Unless it drips, in which case it is also wasted.) Evaporative cooling also will not happen under a layer of closed-cell foam- which is all that I've said. Most people will compensate by sweating more elsewhere on their bodies.

I maintain that a ventilated back is desirable. I don't think that saying "desirable" is much of a stretch. I didn't, after all, say "essential." I'm boggled that you can even argue that point.

>> Do I wear breathable clothing? Sure. Does it keep my back from getting wet? Not at all.

My sympathies. I, too, tend to sweat like a pig while exercising. Which then evaporates, and cools me. Which it won't do under a foam back-panel. :o)

>> There are other issues with packs that pursue back venilation:

Well, yes, it is all a trade off. A lot of desirable characteristics are mutually exclusive. For instance, classically, light weight and durability. No argument.

[CW]

It's not so much of an issue that people prefer ventilation over non-ventilation. My problem is people thinking they won't perspire under physical exertion because they have a pack with a ventilated back panel.

[Mark Verber]

It's true that no pack will prevent your back from sweating, but some packs are better at letting that moisture escape and some are packs are worse by both trapping the moisture and not wicking it away from the contact surface. The Gorilla performance in this area is down near the bottom along with every sil-nylon backed ultralight pack I have tried. Given the Gorilla's design, there is "nothing to improve" because providing better ventilation would require use of a non existent material to replace a foam pad and/or a radically different suspension system making it a completely different pack.

If I found the Exos carried weight as comfortably as the Gorilla, I would be using the Exos right now. For me, the Gorilla is a lot more comfortable, even if it soaks my back.

I haven't used the Exos extensively (just borrowed a pack for a long weekend)… but I have been using an VauDe Siena 40l pack since 2002. The Siena was one of the first packs using the aeroflex frame/mesh panel. The ventilated back really does help. It's far from perfect though… you would be surprised how much mesh (even when there isn't a pack body a couple of inches away) cuts down air movement. That's why you will see me using a courier bag rather than a backpack whenever it's practical.

–Mark

[James Lantz]

Thanks for an excellent review of the Gorilla. Just a few remarks concerning some questions & observations. I have used a small NeoAir pad in the pad sleeve partially inflated & found that it isn't as comfy as a SitLite pad. Same goes for a BA Clearview & MontBell 90 pad. These also significantly increase the "sweat factor" in warmer weather more so than the "corrugated" texture of the SitLite or foldable GG torso length pad which gives a little bit of ventilation.
I also own the Ospry Exos 34 which, to my knowledge, has not been reviewed on BPL, other than my previous brief discussion back in mid September. The 46 & 58 versions have been reviewed. The Gorilla, in my opinion, is more comfortable in cooler weather, but the Exos is "heaven in the heat" because of the ventilated back panel. The Gorilla's shoulder straps & hip belt are more comfortable than the Exos 34 & the Gorilla can carry more gear (meaning volume & not necessarily weight). My rather narrow shoulders require the use of a collared shirt with the Gorilla or the straps will irritate my neck so I agree the straps may be too wide for some users. However, I think the Exos straps are too narrow & rather poorly padded. The Gorilla is also about 7 oz lighter than the Exos.
Because of these features, I use the Gorilla in winter, spring, & fall. The Exos 34 is my summer pack. If Gossamer Gear could do a Gorilla with a ventilated back panel that would be truly "year round heaven"!! :)

[Brad Rogers]

"Yes. And it will evaporate as it should."

Not where Chris and I hike!

[James Lantz]

Yep, here in the Southeastern USA we call it "air you can wear!" ;)

[Hendrik Morkel]

"Am I the only one that sees this pack as direct competition to the ULA Ohm? What am I missing?"

+1. Though I guess it wasn't considered because you can not remove the stay.

Re: Adjustable Torso, that's just soooooo unnecessary, I am amazed that something like that gets mentioned on a BPL review. It gets used exactly once, and then that's it (Exception from the rule: you share your backpack with a lot of people, your still growing). So you got 6 ounces sitting there for something you don't need – I guess you're better of to measure your back once correctly and pick the right backpack.

Re: Gorilla, it looks like a nice pack, but for the moment I am happy with my ULA Ohm. Maybe if I can convince the girlfriend to go lightweight, I would get her the Gorilla.

[Kent C.]

>> James: "My rather narrow shoulders require the use of a collared shirt with the Gorilla or the straps will irritate my neck so I agree the straps may be too wide for some users."

possible solution (I had the same problem), here's what worked for me:

remove the orig. strap padding and replace with foam pipe insulation. Comfy over the shoulders and gets the inside edge off your neck!

Kent

PS small, 1"(as I recall) size

[Paul Lippi]

I've had my new Gorilla out for 6 hikes and am still excited with the fit. I've been carrying 9-11 kilos. I don't have an extensive frame of reference, but to my back it carries much better than my wife's frameless MLD Prophet. The extra weight-hit of the frame is worth the comfort. I only wish GG had a larger capacity version available for winter.

[Tony Burnett]

"Re: Adjustable Torso, that's just soooooo unnecessary, I am amazed that something like that gets mentioned on a BPL review. It gets used exactly once, and then that's it (Exception from the rule: you share your backpack with a lot of people, your still growing). So you got 6 ounces sitting there for something you don't need – I guess you're better of to measure your back once correctly and pick the right backpack."

Unfortunately, this is one of those (big, IMO) compromises we make when we buy off-the-rack packs (the 2nd compromise is the distance between shoulder straps). I have yet to find a one-size fits many or more commonly "2-3 sizes fits even more" pack that fits me well. More often than not, the torso length is too long. I don't want my shoulder straps to be load lifters. I want them to wrap slightly around my shoulders. The best way to get this is to not follow the manufacture's instructions and measure your torso, and look up the pack size in their chart, but to contact them and find out the exact distance between the center-line of the hip belt and the shoulder strap attachment point. If that distance is "what you like", then you can order that size pack. If it is not, you are screwed. But not so with adjustable torso length packs. Another reason for adjustable torso length packs is winter vs 3-season hiking, where your layers can affect your "effective" torso length.

Also, someone above mentioned the Ohm doesn't have compression? From the looks of it on the ULA website it certainly does. My biggest grip with the Ohm are the side pockets. They are too short. It is possible for a bottle to drop out of them when you bend over. I want my side pocket to be tall enough to cover, or nearly cover, the top of my bottles. Otherwise you risk having them fall out when you are not paying attention.

[Hendrik Morkel]

Tony, the Ohm's pockets are big. They might look small, but they're big enough to hold a 2l Platypus, energy bars, head torch, without anything falling out. I've been climbing and bushwacking with my Ohm and never had the problem of a bottle falling out. The secret is that they are tight.

Re: Adjustable Torso Length, I see your point. However, for me that is still not an option. I measured my back, three times, asked existing Ohm owners for their opinion on the forum, and got a perfectly fitting backpack as a result. As I am not wearing that many more layers during winter the Ohm will also then be the right size (I'll be wearing a merino baselayer, a smock and if its frigid a synthetic jacket on top, which will be maybe a centimeter or two thicker than what I wear in spring/ summer/ autumn). YMMV.

Re: Ohm Compression, in my opinion the best there is. Compresses the bag evenly and without letting anything move around inside.

David, I think if one measures well and shops around, one might be able to find a good fitting bag. I reckon that for some people an adjustable Torso is a blessing, for me its unnecessary weight. You always could MYOG a backpack, you know ;)

[David Ure]

"It gets used exactly once, and then that's it (Exception from the rule: you share your backpack with a lot of people, your still growing)."

Well that is true, except that an adjustable torso does allow one to get as close to a perfect fit as possible. I am a hard fit so this is paramount for me.

Re: the OHM's compression – bar none the best I have ever seen; much like the one used with Mchale Subpop packs. The OHM compresses evenly from top to bottom. I expect to see this as a running change on future iterations of Brian's packs.

[James Lantz]

Kent, thank you for the suggestion. I may also try substituting extra socks or gloves for the stock foam padding.
Paul, you might want to look at the Mariposa Plus which is similar to the Gorilla but with more volume for bulkier winter items. I've never been able to fill up the Mariposa Plus even when leaving items uncompressed

[Frank Deland]

What is the purpose of the stay. On the one hand the reviewer (Will)says.
"…tightening the hipbelt worked as expected to transfer weight to my hips."

This makes sense. This is the main purpose of a frame, but then Will says,

"The stay in the Gorilla pack simply resides in sleeves on the backpanel. It is not anchored to the hipbelt at all, so there is no structural connection to support the weight."

If the stay or frame is not connected to the belt which would then transfer the weight up off the shoulders, what is the purpose of the frame. In frameless packs doesn't the pack shape conform to the shape of one's back. Does the stay just better maintain the pack's conformity to the shape of the hiker's back?
Cinching in the belt on a frameless pack to lift weight off the shoulders, just makes a pain in the stomach area from a too tight belt, like cinching up a girth on a horse.

[Lisa Frugoli]

Tracy – I'm a woman and have been using the GG Mariposa Plus for 2 years now & absolutely love it. I don't find the shoulder straps a problem, but I do have broad shoulders. The shoulder straps come with padding that you can use or you can use extra clothing. You can also shave down the padding that comes with the shoulder straps.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Lisa

[Mark Verber]

STAYS

> what is the purpose of the frame?

One purpose of a frame is to maintain the pack torso length as weight is added. There was a discussion of this in Ryan's Quantitative Analysis of Backpack Suspension Performance. The frame in the Gorilla does this fine. From my experience the Gorilla does this fine up to 25lb. I haven't really carried more than 25lbs… typically 18-22lbs

As to transferring the weight to the hip belt… I can certainly get the weight off my shoulder and on top the hip belt so I guess it's effective. The frame + modestly tight packing hold the material taut, and the hipbelt is attached via velco the the pack fabric. I didn't have a sagging problem, and found the slightly dynamic interface better the belt and pack might have made the pack more comfortable… though it does sway more than some packs.

> Does the stay just better maintain the pack's conformity to the shape of the hiker's back?

They do this as well which I find quite helpful.

> Cinching in the belt on a frameless pack to lift weight off the shoulders, just makes a pain in the stomach

I tend to be pretty sensitive to this very issue. So far this hasn't been a problem with the Gorilla.

POCKETS AND COMPRESSION OHM

I would like to second that the compression and pockets on the ohm work very well. I tried the Ohm for a good bit of the summer. For me, it wasn't as comfortable to carry as the Gorilla has been so far. But I loved the pockets. The things I put in the pockets stay, but I could easily retrieve the items while the pack was still on. Excellent.

–mark

[Frank Deland]

Mark, Thanks for your explantion and the Link. I had to re-read the points, but I think I got it now.
"We define a pack's load carrying capacity as the weight at which the weight-bearing torso length of the pack collapses to a distance that is less than the effective user torso length, ….."

The key word, I think, is "less". I kept thinking it should be "more" instead. For me with frameless packs, the biggest drawback is when they ride too low or creep down over the butt. I had an original G4, a size large, because I bought it at a discount. My torso is a medium, so as I added weight to the pack it carried too low. I thought it was more a weight issue than a pack size or torso issue.
Now I get it. When one loads up a frameless pack the torso fit should remain constant or LESS than the "effective user torso length"., ie. the bag should not sag below.
As the weight increases, it pushes down on the belt which the stays keep in place lifting the weight off of the shoulders. I get the concept, now, I think!

Again, thanks for the link to the very detailed, informative article.

[Peter Sustr]

Just checked out the site and saw that MEDIUMS & LARGES are back in stock. $165 either size.

[Author]

Posts