Identify packs that require sleeping pads as frames

nm

Don't know what you mean by required, but a sleeping pad is not required in the Ohm, you can certainly pack it and carry it quite comfortably without one.

A pad is not required for the GoLite Jam. It's nice to have one, however.

> Don't know what you mean by required, but a sleeping pad is not required in the Ohm, you can certainly pack it and carry it quite comfortably without one.

Fair enough. "Required" means that if there is no sleeping pad used, then there is insufficient back padding to prevent feeling the contents of the pack.

For instance, it is my understanding that the Ohm has two pieces of fabric forming a sleeve for a sleeping pad. I would consider this "insufficient back padding" for my purposes.

Man you guys are fast.

Thanks for the input so far.

acronym 6/22/2010 12:06 AM

Many UL packs are that way with two pieces of fabric holding a sleeping pad externally to the pack and against the wearer's back. Some don't have that, and you simply roll the sleeping pad up cylindrically, stick it into the main pack, and then let it unroll. That forms a soft cylindrical tube/frame for all of the pack contents.

–B.G.–

"For instance, it is my understanding that the Ohm has two pieces of fabric forming a sleeve for a sleeping pad."

If so, that's new. My Ohm had two angled 'straps' at the top on the inside of the pack that could hold a pad in place at the top of the pack.

I still don't understand what you are asking.

I own the both the Pinnacle and the Jam and they both come with their own removeable CCF pad. Hence you do not really need a sleeping pad to form a frame if you do not need one.

Is this classed as "sufficient" or "insufficient" back padding? You have it listed as the latter, even though it has padding and I do not believe that a sleeping is actually "required", but it is most certainly optional.

pretty sure neither of those granite gear packs need a sleeping pad for support, however the granite gear virga, my pack of choice, IS frameless and requires a CCF pad or other source of support.

I suppose "requires" is a relative term though, I've seen people carry frameless packs without a CCF pad being used as a frame.

"I own the both the Pinnacle and the Jam and they both come with their own removeable CCF pad."

Wow, I've had my Jam for 2 years and didn't realize that the pad was removable! I've even shortened the straps and cut unneeded loops off of it. Show's how little I've been paying attention to my gear!

Don't forget the Six Moons Swift, Starlight and Traveler

I've tried both these packs on and they have a pad already.

> I own the both the Pinnacle and the Jam and they both come with their own removeable CCF pad. Hence you do not really need a sleeping pad to form a frame if you do not need one.

Fantastic. That's exactly what I was asking. Pinnacle and Jam should be listed as "option."

>My Ohm had two angled 'straps' at the top on the inside of the pack that could hold a pad in place at the top of the pack.

So the Ohm is properly labeled as "required," correct?

Thanks for pointing out the SMD packs.

Thanks to everyone so far.
acronym 6/22/2010 10:45 AM

"So the Ohm is properly labeled as "required," correct?"

No. The Ohm has a carbon hoop frame, and comes with a thin removable foam pad that fits down the back of the pack (where it would pad your back from your gear.)

ULA suggests that a sleeping pad will provide more support to transfer weight to the hip belt, but it is in no way "required." If I were carrying a very light inflatable pad — say, a Neoair — my Ohm would carry just fine with the Neoair in a stuff sack inside the main pack.

However, that's true for every pack you have listed — even the totally frameless rucks don't "require" a sleeping pad, and just inserting a sleeping pad in one of them doesn't automatically provide an internal frame.

What are you really trying to learn here?

Yup the Ohm comes with foam back pad so it's not just fabric between you and the packs contents.

Closed cell foam padding in a pack is nice because it adds a little comfort/structure and it also is great for using a camp seat if the ground is wet. It also works well under your feet at night in combination with a short sleeping pad.

Even a pack that has just fabric between you and the packs contents doesn't really require a sleeping pad frame if you do a thoughtful job of packing the pack. I've never really found this hard to do.

> What are you really trying to learn here?

My current total pack weight is about 28 lbs (very near the limits of many UL packs). Dropping my current pack and replacing it with a UL pack would bring my total pack weight down about 2 lbs.

I want to know if the packs listed would require me to change my sleeping mat in order to use them comfortably.

The OHM is a great example. I can’t find anywhere on their site that states that the OHM comes with it’s own foam pad. I can find two “indications” that the OHM will use a sleeping pad (FAQ and Video). I’m just confused, and trying to understand.

Thanks for helping me.

Thanks.
acronym 6/23/2010 9:03 AM

acronym.esq wrote : "My current total pack weight is about 28 lbs (very near the limits of many UL packs). Dropping my current pack and replacing it with a UL pack would bring my total pack weight down about 2 lbs."

I would work on the contents of the pack first, then replace the pack when you have the load light enough for a UL pack. If your load is 28 pounds, you may have some work to do before an UL pack is really workable. I guess the question is, 28 pounds with how many day's supplies?

Keep in mind that most UL folk talk in terms of base loads (sans water/food/fuel), where pack manufacturers are listing *maximum* recommended loads– the whole enchilada. A *comfortable* load is probably a good percentage under the recommended maximum.

*Generally*, if a pack design has a sleeping pad as part of the pack system, it is one of the lighter cottage industry rigs and best with lighter base loads. I don't know of any factory made packs that are deliberately designed to incorporate a sleeping pad. Some can be adapted.

If you are using an internal hydration bladder, that will add to the picture.

As others have said, you can arrange the items in your pack so that you aren't being skewered by the contents. I use a Thermarest Prolite short pad and pack it folded and placed against my back to add padding. My sleeping bag goes in the bottom, with tent parts on top (if I'm using a tent) pad against my back, clothes next, and then food and kitchen kit outboard. My kitchen kit is probably the lumpiest/hardest of the contents. Tent poles go down the side. Survival and hygiene items are in the outside pocket. I'm using a pack with compression features, so I can suck the whole works down tight and stable.

The sleeping pad-as-cylinder trick can work great– best with closed cell foam pads and simple pack designs, IMHO. I put a trash compactor bag inside the pad/cylinder and start stuffin': sleeping bag, tent parts, clothes, kitchen kit, food.

again, the list is wrong…the two granite gear packs on that list HAVE frames, the only ultralight frameless pack they make is NOT on your list (virga).

Seems like sort of a silly, subjective list anyhow, I don't really understand the purpose I guess.

"My current total pack weight is about 28 lbs (very near the limits of many UL packs). Dropping my current pack and replacing it with a UL pack would bring my total pack weight down about 2 lbs."

Is that total weight with food and water for your longest projected hike?

If so, then you're Likely to be fine with any of the framed lightweight packs like the Starlite or maybe the Ohm. I would not ever again want to carry 28 pounds in a frameless pack, with or without my sleeping pad as a 'frame."

That said, I'd want to get my base weight (everything save food water and fuel) down to 15 pounds or less before trying to save weight on the pack.

> Is that total weight with food and water for your longest projected hike?

Yes. Everything including 3L of water.

> If so, then you’re Likely to be fine with any of the framed lightweight packs like the Starlite or maybe the Ohm. I would not ever again want to carry 28 pounds in a frameless pack, with or without my sleeping pad as a ‘frame.”

Yes. That is exactly what I am getting at. I don’t want a pack that requires a sleeping mat as it’s only padding and frame support. It isn’t clear to me which ones require a pad, could use a pad (when I drop more weight), or can’t use a pad.

My question and situation is almost exactly the same as Mr. Wurster’s except I took the time to assemble a list of possible packs that could handle 25-35 lbs comfortably. Now I’m trying to clarify the short list of packs where their framing is not clear.

I really do appreciate the clarifications.

acronym 6/24/2010 1:59 AM