Jan 22, 2011 at 5:21 pm #1268096
Caught wind of this new bear cannister at Outdoor Retailer show through the JMT Yahoo group. Looks promising.Jan 22, 2011 at 5:35 pm #1687175
As the owner of three bear canisters, let me say a thing or two.
I think that they must make the thing translucent or opaque. Otherwise, the bear will think that he has a puzzle that must be opened up.
The manufacturer conveniently ignores bear canisters by at least one manufacturer that could be competitive (Bear Boxer).
–B.G.–Jan 22, 2011 at 6:17 pm #1687191
Karl KeatingBPL Member
The accompanying video shows how the canister opens but not how it closes. From the looks of the thing, I presume you fill each half and then try to press the halves together, without having any food fall out. I don't see how you can compress your food, tilt the halves to 90 degrees, and expect to connect them–without either losing food or deliberately leaving a lot of empty space inside. The other canisters all have an opening at one end, which allows you to scrunch to your heart's content. I suspect that a 650 c.i. competitor actually will hold far more than this one, which is said to hold 700 c.i.Jan 22, 2011 at 6:47 pm #1687199
Evidently, it won't be clear. From the article, “production models will likely be a translucent color”.
There’s no doubt the bearboxer is cheaper and the bearier does not have IGBC and SIBBG certification. However, the large bare boxer is listed at 605 cu. in. and 2.8 pounds. The bearier is said to be 700 cu. in and under 2 pounds.
Of course, they only have claims at this point, but the price/weight/volume numbers are attractive.Jan 22, 2011 at 8:07 pm #1687229
drowning in spamMember
I'd remove the mesh and just use a food bag. I think it would be better if the halves could be nested because I'd want to keep both halves outside of my pack and keep the food inside my pack while hiking. I like the idea of the extender too.Jan 22, 2011 at 8:34 pm #1687234
@rp3957Locale: The Sierras
The makers of Bearier also didn't include the Bearikade in their comparisons. Unless the two halves can be nested as a previous poster stated, I see this as a major inconvenient object that you have to figure out a way to attach to the outside of your pack. The Bearikade, while much more expensive, seems to be a far superior product. Just my 2 cents worth.Jan 22, 2011 at 9:42 pm #1687244
Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks like there's a mesh "cover for the open end of each half.
I'm guessing you stuff each half, put the mesh over it to keep it from falling out, and then screw it together.
Doesn't seem that hard to me. I figure you overfill each a little, strap it in with the mesh, and force em together! ;)
If that's the way it works, it's actually pretty clever. Using a soft seal does sort of solve the problem of linearity.Jan 22, 2011 at 9:52 pm #1687247
There is a multiple use that a traditional bear canister has, and that is as a camp stool. I don't think that this egg-shaped thing would be much good there unless you try to prop it up on three rocks. Even then, I don't think that I would want to be seen sitting on it.
–B.G.–Jan 23, 2011 at 2:09 pm #1687405
The spherical or egg shape will be a problem as compared to the traditional cylinder. It will roll (away) farther. A curious bear can push it from any direction and it might not stop rolling until it is in the next county downhill.
–B.G.–Jan 23, 2011 at 4:13 pm #1687440
Hiking MaltoBPL Member
… as a very entertaining backcountry bear toy.Jan 23, 2011 at 4:17 pm #1687443
Tom KirchnerBPL Member
@ouzelLocale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
"as a very entertaining backcountry bear toy."
I guess you could smear a little peanut butter inside and use it as a decoy while you sleep with your food as a pillow. ;)Jan 23, 2011 at 4:43 pm #1687461
"There is a multiple use that a traditional bear canister has, and that is as a camp stool."
Ya, I can't imaging sitting on an egg under normal circumstances, let alone while backpacking.Jan 23, 2011 at 7:57 pm #1687571
Denis HazlewoodBPL Member
@redleaderLocale: Luxury-Light Luke on the Llano Azul
Multi-use item… May be used as a substitute for a medicine ball. Good upper body work out after a long day on the trail.Jan 23, 2011 at 8:36 pm #1687598
Franco DarioliBPL Member
Not obvious in those shots but the two ends are flat, so it does stand up by it self..
maybe not that useful as a seat depending on the size of yours.
FrancoJan 23, 2011 at 9:03 pm #1687616
Robert RicheyBPL Member
@bobrLocale: San Luis Obispo
If this passes bear tests it could be a very interesting alternative to canisters currently on the market. Its capacity to weight ratio is slightly better than the Bearikade at half the cost. The flexibility of using their expander piece ($60 extra) to increase capacity from 700 to 1000 for seems like a terrific idea if it works as advertised. Their website is http://camp4outdoors.com/Jan 23, 2011 at 10:46 pm #1687661
I'm Zac, the guy in the post (and video), and the designer of the Bearier. Just wanted to hop on this thread to help answer any questions, comments, or concerns you guys might have. As Alicia mentioned in her blog post, we're still in our development phase but hope to have units available for sale sometime in May. We'll be selling directly to customers initially while we seek out retailers to carry the Bearier 700 and GrubHub.
@bob Gross: The unit in the video is a pre-production unit. The final product will be a dark translucent red/orange, like a Nalgene. Also, I didn't mention the Bear Boxer because it's nearly identical to the Garcia. The Bear Boxer is 608 cu in and 2.8 lbs, compared to the Garcia's 615 cu in and 2.75 lbs. Also not mentioned is the Bear Keg, which is 716 cu in and 3.2 lbs.
@karl Keating: Each half of the Bearier has its own drawstring closure that ensures your food doesn't fall out. Each dome half also contains two integrated straps, allowing you to strap the individual domes to your pack in whatever configuration best suits your packing situation. If you'd like to pack the Bearier inside your pack, the flat surface of each dome can be placed flat against your back, eliminating painful rounded surfaces against your spine. All of these features exist on the GrubHub too. As far as difficulty cramming in food, it's quite easy to compress the two halves together if overloaded, as you can just push down on the top half as hard as necessary to get it closed. The two halves lock together after about two degrees of rotation, so once you get past that initial engagement it's smooth sailing.
@chris Benson: The SIBBG has been disbanded and no longer certifies canisters, and the only remaining certification organization is the IGBC. We've been in communication with the actual testers at the IGBC since we started development and have designed the Bearier specifically to pass every single aspect of their testing program. The final unit will absolutely be certified before hitting the market.
While the Bearier can be used as a chair (it's designed to handle impact forces of 3000lbs), you're right that it isn't as comfortable as a convention cylindrical canister. That said, it does have a 4" flat surface on the top and bottom. And hey, you could always carry a Crazy Creek chair with the weight you're saving. Can't win em all ;)Jan 23, 2011 at 11:20 pm #1687669
"The Bear Boxer is 608 cu in and 2.8 lbs,"
That is, unless it is the small Bear Boxer, which is only 1.6 pounds. It has less than half of the capacity, but that is still fine for a three-day trip.
Yes, let's see a Bearier that weighs 1.6 pounds and doesn't roll as easily as a cylinder.
–B.G.–Jan 23, 2011 at 11:28 pm #1687672
Tony WongBPL Member
@valsharLocale: San Francisco Bay Area
Thanks for taking the time to jump on to the BPL forums to address the concerns that have been raised and for educating us about your exciting product.
I, for one, am very interested in learning more about your product, as I am planning a 2-2.5 week Jul/Aug JMT trip this year.
I currently have the 700 CU IN Bear Vault and have been debating getting a Bearikade, but the high expense is a bit hard to justify.
The flexibility of your system is really intriguing with the GrubHub adding 300 CU IN.
Could you give us some estimate of how much weight it will add to your system?
Anyway, I have already book marked your web page and eagerly await more information and hope that you are able to make your projected roll out date, as it means that I will have an opportunity to see the final stats.
Good luck to you and glad to see someone out there finally coming up with a creative alternative to the "evil bear canisters" that we have to deal with. :)
-TonyJan 24, 2011 at 4:23 am #1687700
Looks great to me. I really like the extender option.
The biggest thing I like is a choice that is reasonably priced, and much lighter than anything else. I could honestly care less about use as a stool if it would save $120 or .75 lb over what I would otherwise have. The nifty packing system more than makes up for that. Hope you can get it passed with your current thickness for a 1.75 lb can. 2-3 ounces more than a Bare Boxer Contender for an extra 4 days worth of capacity sounds like a winner. Im sure it will become standard UL equipment if all goes well.Jan 24, 2011 at 4:35 am #1687702
drowning in spamMember
Have you come up with a way of carrying it? For long distance hikers, that bear canister is only good for one person, which means carrying both halves. Most of our packs are too small to store it inside with the rest of our gear, so it must go outside. It looks like that egg shape of this bear canister without the extender would easily slip out if only one strap was holding it down, like it would be with a pack like the ULA Catalyst and several other packs.Jan 24, 2011 at 6:20 am #1687723
@derekoakLocale: North of England
how many grub hubs would you be able to add if say you had a larger party?Jan 24, 2011 at 8:13 am #1687756
First LastBPL Member
@snusmumrikenLocale: SF Bay Area
Is multiple extenders part of the design? It would be a really great idea: For a weekend trip for four people, each person would carry either a half egg, or an extender piece. Sounds like it would average less then a pound per person.
Big kudos for innovation in bear cans – best of luck to you!Jan 24, 2011 at 9:39 am #1687800
James DeMonacoBPL Member
@jdemonacoLocale: San Francisco
I'm going to hold off on getting a bear can (have been renting the heavy ass garcia ones from the rangers every time) until this is released. 1.75lbs is much lighter than I thought it would be, and I like the idea of expandability.
Carrying two halves would be nice as well, as I often don't need that much storage, so I could split it with another hiker. Or, if I DO need the space, I could probably throw one inside my pack and one on the outside. :)
Very cool design, I look forward to seeing how this progresses. Good luck on getting it passed! I'm sure we're all rooting for you, haha.Jan 24, 2011 at 1:23 pm #1687901
I really like the light weight of this design. Have you thought about making a shallow cylindrical section that could attact to just one hemi-egg in order to make a very small, solo, short-trip option? I'm thinking a cylindrical "plate" that would hold flat objects, such as a package of tortillas and some tea bags,hot choc/oatmeal packets, maybe only about 1.5 inches deep. Then the hemi-egg could hold a few days of bulkier food and the whole canister would easily fit in almost any pack for short solo trips. The flat section would also make a nice serving tray/cutting board and would prevent rolling.
I hope you consider this option, because it would allow your product to be used as a solo canister (with my shallow plate idea), a longer-trip solo or short-trip pair canister (as originally purchased), or for larger groups (with the grubhub).Jan 24, 2011 at 2:54 pm #1687949
Tony WongBPL Member
@valsharLocale: San Francisco Bay Area
I like your idea of being able to make it smaller with the flat plate, but one negative that I could see is that the strength of this system to resist bears from breaking into it is the dome/egg shape to distribute the force of impact.
A flat plate might be the weak spot in the system to prevent a bear from shattering the flat plate portion of what you are suggesting.
Hope that I am interpreting your suggestion correctly…if not, sorry….I lack imagination to visualize. :)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.