Hyperlite Mountain Gear Porter / Expedition Pack Review

[Kattt]

To blame Hendrik for how ridiculous and rude this thread has become….seems hardly fair.
This kind of discourse is quite likely to turn people off, no matter the quality of the product; I am learning a bit of that firsthand. But hey, Hendrik is all the way in Finland….

[dan mchale]

This is about Conflict of Interest and nothing more.

1) We have reviewers that had a hand in developing the product they are reviewing and recommending.

2) We have a reviewer that chastized the entire cottage backpack industry only to say his current favorite pack stood out from all the losers, without disclosing he had a hand in developing the pack.

3) We have a reviewer that takes in gear from countless companies to review and test them and then takes his inside knowledge of this gear, some of which can be proprietary, and helps other companies develope their products with that knowledge, possibly and probably without the company or companies knowing the source of the ideas.

[Kyle Meyer]

4) We have a pack maker claiming the invention of the daisy chain and claiming intellectual ownership of the idea of a backpack without pockets.

[dan mchale]

You really don't get it. I am claiming no such thing. I don't own the daisy chain or the spacing and that is not the issue, but possibly you wrote your post while I was writing my last post. We will find that the Daisy Chain is symbolic as this advances.

number 1) through 3) are true. #4 is built on assumptions.

[Richard Scruggs]

Kat P re: "To blame Hendrik for how ridiculous and rude this thread has become….seems hardly fair."

Yep, Hendrik should only be blamed for contributing to how ridiculous and rude this thread has become . . . to be fair.

[Ron D]

It seems to me that if Dan has defensible intellectual property through a patent (and Dan has patented aspects of his packs) then that is the way to pursue any copied design issue. Otherwise this is all just internet noise. I have a McHale and love the pack and enjoyed working with Dan through the process, but arguing about daisy chains being 11 1/2 to 12 inches apart is insanity.

[dan mchale]

This is about a conflict of interest at this website not McHale Versus Hyperlite.

[Ken Thompson]

"In my opinion, BPL should edit the review, which really is the source of much bad feeling, and apologize/ explain why the attitude. All Chris or Ryan have done is deflect and dodge any comments critical of the tone and content, if they've bothered to respond at all."
+1

[dan mchale]

Years ago when Ryan sent out his first letters encouraging companies to let BPL review their gear, I was not interested.

If BPL had also said that along with reviewing the gear, they would take ideas they glean from the gear and help other companies design gear with that gleaned information, well, I certainly would have passed on that too!

[Kyle Meyer]

That's not what happened. You don't own the idea of daisy chains or simplistic pack designs. You're paranoid, delusional, and being ridiculous.

Just stop.

[dan mchale]

I would like to direct people to the posting I have copied below. Go to that date in the BPL archives.

Anybody that knows my product can easily see that is my water bottle pocket that got copied. This in itself is not a big deal but it shows the lack of originality going on here, and the willingness, cynical or otherwise, to copy others, when in fact they are in the review business? I have actually designed water pockets for other companies, and it's quite easy to avoid directly copying another companies product and even invent something new. Maybe somebody can post that photo for me.

Kyle, just stop? Maybe you should take the criticism of Jordan off your website.
http://kaiuhl.com/

…………………………………………………….

(simplespirit) – BPL Staff – MLife

Locale: WNC

Re: HMG packs on 08/20/2011 16:41:46 MDT
This is the latest version of the RJ pack with some custom pockets I made attached.

………………………………………….

[David Ure]

Klyle, Dan feels one way – you don't have to agree and I love a little bantering but this is getting a bit personal.

Understand what Dan is saying – many of his ideas are NOT on other packs and given Ryan's ownership of a Mchale pack and understanding of the offering, his involvement with a mass pack producer in making a version with the same ideas leaves questions in Dan's mind and a bad taste in his mouth. It is one thing to make your own pack with these features – sincerest form of flattery and all that – but to take those concepts and have a hand in designing a mass produced pack and then promoting it is a bit disingenous. I didn't see what Dan was saying at first but I do now.

Agree or disagree but really the name calling should stop. Its just plain mean and you seem like a nice guy so this is probably out of character.

[Franco Darioli]

Thanks David.
I would be peeved too if I were in Dan's shoes.
Franco

[Nick Gatel]

It seems to me that if a BPL staff member has an interest in a company (i.e. financial, advisory, etc.), then a product from that company should not be reviewed at all. Should BPL decide to review it product, no matter who the reviewer is (e.g. reviewer has no relationship), at a minimum the relationship should be stated at the beginning of the review. It also seems to me that if a company gives a product to BPL for review and it is not returned, then perhaps that product should not be reviewed because value has passed from the vendor to BPL.

This is how unbiased reviews should be handled, and is how Consumer Reports does it.

I have no idea if anyone at BPL has a relationship with the company in question, other than being a paying customer. But if there is one, BPL should let the membership know it.

Doesn't this make sense?

Any input from the BPL staff on the question?

[BlackHatGuy]

"It also seems to me that if a company gives a product to BPL for review and it is not returned, then perhaps that product should not be reviewed because value has passed from the vendor to BPL."

Much of the gear reviewed here has been given to the reviewer, and is so stated at the end of the review (per regulation or law, whichever). I'm okay with this, as I don't think it effects the reviews. Agree with the other parts of your post though, and said much the same thing in the cottage gear stagnation thread.

[David Thomas]

>"a company gives a product to BPL for review . . . is how Consumer Reports does it."

Er, no.

Consumer Reports accepts no free samples from everyone and pays retail (or negiogates as if an private buyer for cars) for everything they test. Things like cars are resold with full disclosure that it has been poked, prodded, crashed at 5 mph, and repaired.

Medical journals require disclosure of potential conflicts of interests (prior employment, honoriums, grants, free or subsidized samples, stock holdings, pre-pub review, etc). Consumer Reports doesn't allow any potential conflicts of interests.

At a bare minimum, relationships (past and present) and freebies should be disclosed. Better yet would be to buy retail as an apparent private buyer. If I was sending a product for review, I'd be extra careful to send a high quality example.

[Nick Gatel]

David, that what I meant. CR buys everything.

[Luke Schmidt]

My concern with buying gear would be that BPL would get cheap and limit the scope of reviews.

There are certain controversies I'm not touching at the moment but I think MOST of the time BPL reviews have been pretty unbiased. Compare what we get here to Backpacker for example.

[David Thomas]

Nick: Got it. Agreed.

The low-hanging fruit is disclosure. ("This was a sample sent to BPL for review for free." or "This was on loan from the manufacturer." or whatever.) It costs nothing, not even the cost of a pack or tent. And it avoids so many accusations of un-disclosed conflicts of interest.

Ideally, also include a short bio on each reviewer. Because if the reviewer is a gram-weenie thru-hiker every summer, that's different than a technical climber and different than a Scout leader. Just lay it out there and let the reader factor those things in.

[dan mchale]

Let's go back to 2007. Where do people think the 2 buckle hipbelt idea came from for the Arctic 1000 Pack? I don't recall anyone giving me credit for that – It was all Ryan Jordan and Brian Frankle of course;

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/ula_arctic_dry_pack.html

Here is a post showing a photo of the buckles;

kevin davidson
(kdesign)

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson

Arctic Pack photos and introducing Comandante Sub-Zero on 06/16/2007 14:29:57 MDT
As promised to Nicholas, some photos. These were of a loaded pack w/ the 50L bag, my Pad and a 2L Platypus in the back (yes, a 2L filled up to about 1.5L fits in the zippered pocket).

A Revolution in Pack Evolution—-very comfortable w/ the 25# I've loaded it with to date and shlepped on a little 5 mi. dayhike. I think that Ryan Jordan and Brian Frankle may well have knocked this one out of the park!.

Edited by kdesign on 06/16/2007 14:35:42 MDT.

[t.darrah]

I can't speak regarding daisy chain spacing but when looking at the link Dan provide, earlier today, there is no question that the attachable water bottle/side pocket shown on the HMG is copied from a McHale pack. Anyone that has owned a McHale pack (I've owned a few) would recognise the pocket design.

It is interesting that the picture of the pocket has now been deleted.

[dan mchale]

I saved a copy for the record. Photo was there a few hours ago. Thanks for the info Thom.

[Ken Thompson]

Another bad thing about the rolling review concept is that the article you read one day can change significantly by the next. All this editing shows a lack of integrity.

[Cayenne Redmonk]

Huh ? The article changed or just the forum ?

[Ken Thompson]

They have made changes to the article since it was first posted. Cheesy.

[Author]

Posts