Nov 30, 2012 at 1:46 pm #1296609
Hello. I'm new to BPL and currently consider myself a pretty average backpacker. I haven't made the move to UL yet but it's pretty fascinating reading up on the subject. Looking to purchase a new internal frame backpack that's somewhere around 65L-70L and am on the fence when it comes to the more custom made 'UL cuben fiber' packs.
This is by no means light but in terms of feature set this appeals to me:
Does anyone have experience with this:
If anyone does have the ULA pack. How is the internal frame and back padding? Doesn't seem like there is much there.
My average pack weight without water is right around 25lbs, 6ft/slim fit.
Thanks in advance,Nov 30, 2012 at 1:58 pm #1932215
Kenneth JacobsBPL Member
I might suggest looking at the Granite Gear Blaze A.C. 60. Sounds like it will fit the bill of your transition from your current base weight into a lighter one.
By all means, not a UL backpack…but capable of carrying the load you have. A lot of UL packs top out at 25-35lbs. max load. The Blaze A.C. 60 will handle 35lbs no problem. I have taken it even higher, but comfort level goes down from there.
KJNov 30, 2012 at 3:01 pm #1932230
Jason GBPL Member
@jasongLocale: iceberg lake
the catalyst is a good choice for your baseweightNov 30, 2012 at 3:24 pm #1932233
I own the ULA Circuit and could have gone with the Ohm model as well. I have used the circuit for 4-season camping depending on what loads and volumes were needed.
Like many members here, we have been able to acquire knowledge, experience and the gear to make using a frameless backpack as a standard method. If you think you will have a lot of hard, irregularly sized items that require stiff back padding, then ok.
May I link for you a video of one of my favorite outdoor celebrities? He uses a ULA Ohm, which is frameless and has a slightly smaller volume than the Circuit. I think you'll be surprised at what he can fit in and on it, and how reasonable his weight is. If you carry similar loads, you can certainly consider going smaller, and lighter than the Catalyst.
And now, a video from Shug Emery. Take it away, Ginger!
edited: trouble with our beloved site's hotlinking process. :)Nov 30, 2012 at 3:59 pm #1932237
Tom KirchnerBPL Member
@ouzelLocale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
"He uses a ULA Ohm, which is frameless and has a slightly smaller volume than the Circuit. I think you'll be surprised at what he can fit in and on it, and how reasonable his weight is"
The standard OHM is not frameless but it certainly can hold a surprising amount, up to 11 days, IME, at a weight of ~24#, with a base weight just under 11#, but not including water. I didn't watch the entire 6-7 day video, but I'll bet his weight is probably in that range, adjusted for the lower number of days. In that weight range, I would question why anybody would want to remove the OHM stay system, which weighs only 1.3 oz. It is an insignificant amount of additional weight for the increased carrying comfort. What I am suggesting is that frameless is not necessarily the best option when you have a framed pack that is already very light.
Edited: I assumed your 25# pack weight included food for a typical trip. If that was your base weight, an OHM would not be a good pack for you, as it tends to get uncomfortable above 30#, IME. At that point, the Catalyst, or an equivalent pack, would be worth considering.Nov 30, 2012 at 4:08 pm #1932238
Thanks for the quick responses. Those videos are great… ha. What a character, I'd like to just go on one hike with that dude..haha. So after watching those and seeing the pack (outside of a website pic) I think I'm pretty much sold on ULA.
The only "Hard" item I have to pack is a bear canister which is generally required in CA. It's the smaller of the canisters but still takes up so much frickin' space :-)
Yeah a Catalyst is what I'm looking at since with water my pack is around 30ish. All kinda depends on the trip as the winter trips add in a few extra items and heavier sleeping bag, etc …Nov 30, 2012 at 8:36 pm #1932306
Hi Matt. I've had the Catalyst for about a year, and in that time I've climbed Mt. baker and Mt. Shasta with it as well as summer backpacking trips in the trinity alps and a couple of snow camping adventures at Mt. Lassen. I was a bit skeptical about a 2lb 12 oz. pack after using a classic Dana Designs Terraplane for years. The Catalyst is a marvelous pack. The padding is relatively thin but dense on the frame sheet, yet only where you need it on the hip belt and shoulder straps. I carried 40 lbs on the Baker climb since I was the rope mule and it was extremely comfortable. Additionally, though light weight, it has been quite durable. It still looks brand new. It has excellent capacity as I can attest given all the additional gear warranted in mountaineering. All in all, a very light weight, comfortable, durable, and well thought out pack. My only nitpicks would be the top closure isn't always that easy to secure when you have a bulky load, but that is easily dealt with by moving stuff around a bit. Also, the framesheet doesn't feel as glued to my back as the terraplane, but it always feels comfortable and I've never had any hotspots, so it might just be my imagination. Good luck with whatever purchase you make and have fun with the process.
GregNov 30, 2012 at 10:52 pm #1932317
Todd TBPL Member
@texasbbLocale: Pacific Northwest
I've got four seasons on my Catalyst. It's a great pack. My base weight ranges from 18 to 21 lbs, and I've had it loaded up to maybe 35 total. Very sturdy, very comfortable. If this one ever wears out, I'll probably skip researching the market and just buy another one.Nov 30, 2012 at 11:07 pm #1932319
eric chanBPL Member
im going to be the oddball and mentioned what people arent saying … try on as many packs as you can and get the one that fits the best at the weight and price you want
if you order online make sure they will take it back and be prepared to lose out on shipping …
at the weights youre carrying … fit is everything
its that simple ;)Dec 1, 2012 at 1:13 am #1932332
@m-lLocale: W-Never Eat Soggy (W)affles
Ill say it, get that 25 pound baseweight down ASAP!Dec 1, 2012 at 1:41 am #1932335
Brian JohnsBPL Member
Mariposa and Gorilla have all the bells and whistles and none of the weight of mainstream packs. Zpacks arc blast does too.Dec 2, 2012 at 12:03 pm #1932589
Merritt DBPL Member
@tmdraneyLocale: No Mountains Close-by VA
Does your 25lb weight include the food you carry? If then you may be able go down to a Ula Circuit especially if your volume comes down. I had a Catalyst for a short time and it is great, but I quickly found it too large for my shrinking gear.Dec 2, 2012 at 1:44 pm #1932602
Jake DBPL Member
I'll put in my vote for Exos 58. light, great frame, mesh back area, enough pockets to organize but not too many.Dec 2, 2012 at 4:01 pm #1932620
Mary DBPL Member
@hikinggrannyLocale: Gateway to Columbia River Gorge
A couple more to look at besides the ULA packs:
The Six Moon Designs Starlite, with the "optional" (mandatory, IMHO) stays, will carry at least 35 lbs. comfortably. I have its discontinued "little brother," the Comet, and have carried up to 37 lbs. in it. My aged shoulders, back and hips were just fine, although my knees and feet were screaming! The Starlite has plenty of room for a bear canister the size of the large Bear Vault or the Bearikade Weekender, and will undoubtely hold a Bearikade Expedition.
I have not seen the Elemental Horizons Aquilo, but have heard/read a lot of good things about it. It got a "Highly Recommended" rating from BPL last year. If I have to replace my current pack (not yet!), I will look at its "little brother," the Kalais, which has also gotten great reviews.
Do remember that the three most important parts of a pack are fit, fit and fit!
Important: If you are planning to "lighten up," the pack replacement should be last or close to last. That's because lighter gear is generally more compact, so you don't need as much space. I can go out for 8-9 days with 40 L (2400 cubic inches) plus the outside mesh pockets, even with a bear canister. I've never had to use the extension collar on my pack and am seriously considering cutting part of it off. In other words, the pack that fits your gear now may be too big later. In the meantime, you could do some judicious trimming (aka butchery) on your current pack which could remove as much as a pound.Dec 2, 2012 at 5:19 pm #1932635
I absolutely love my Boreas Buttermilk 40, and they make a Buttermilk 60. Check it out at http://www.boreasgear.com.
Very clean, very durable, UNBELIEVABLY comfortable.Dec 4, 2012 at 4:07 pm #1933118
Lots to read through… what a great community. 25lbs would include my food minus water… I just know this because I finally got a scale before the last trip and had everything packed up at the time. Up to this point I really haven't tried to cut down weight and that's why I say I'm a pretty average backpacker.
Now to get on to the details and trim the weight as well as finding a better fitting pack. Currently I own an Osprey and I'll say the pocket design is just horrible. It's really difficult to use any pockets on it without sacrificing interior space and it's seemingly hard to keep the heavier items on the bottom due to the tapered design which looks all "cool" :-) So that's basically why I'm in the market for a new pack. The mesh back sure is nice though.
I'll checkout the packs mentioned and let ya know what I end up with. To be honest I have no intention of getting down to super-duper-insane light but I can definitely shore up a lot of weight in what I currently carry.
Thanks again,Dec 4, 2012 at 4:25 pm #1933123
Good point on trimming weight off my current pack.
Yeah, it might just be a toss-up in terms of modifying my current pack vs. buying a new one. Looking into.Dec 4, 2012 at 4:28 pm #1933124
John GBPL Member
@johng10Locale: Mid-Atlantic via Upstate NY
I noticed your last post said its hard to keep your heavier items near the bottom in your osprey pack due to its tapered design.
Generally, its recommended that heavier items are against your back, behind your shoulder blades. (lower shoulder blades for rugged off trail areas, upper shoulder blades for level trail areas) ie: usually sleeping bag and insulated (camp) clothes go at the bottom of the pack.Dec 4, 2012 at 4:37 pm #1933129
Yep, trying to get as much in-line with that as possible. Sleeping bag / clothes in a trashbag at the bottom and bear canister on top of the sleeping bag against the back. Due to the design this pushes hard against the outer pockets rendering them almost useless.
Also, while we're on the subject of weight. In a few threads I've heard mention of ditching a nalgene bottle (or something to the effect of…. "by now you probably know to get rid of that xxx nalgene bottle). I just gotta ask, why on earth would you do that? It's virtually an indestructible water container. Is it the form factor, weight, etc? It can be a pretty vial component and a strong one at that compared to a thin plastic gatorade bottle.Dec 4, 2012 at 8:06 pm #1933189
@sierradougLocale: Bay Area, CA, USA
A 2+ liter Platypus is much lighter than a Nalgene bottle and very tough. Every little bit of weight shed helps.
If you spend some time reading threads here on people posting their gear list and asking for recommendations for how to lighten up, you'll find plenty of ideas. Some will sound a lot crazier than ditching the Nalgene bottle!Dec 4, 2012 at 9:59 pm #1933221
@glacierramblerLocale: NW Montana
Nalgenes are useful in the winter, thus the reason I've bought a couple of them in the last month. However, for most three-season hiking, recycled plastic water bottles or the Platypus or Evernew collapsible bottles are far better for both weight and packed volume. The collapsible ones take a little getting used to, and the recycled ones take a little more care in cleaning (if that's your inclination, at least). But the weight savings over the standard Nalgene add up quickly.Dec 5, 2012 at 5:54 am #1933254
Jake DBPL Member
1L gatorade and powerade bottles still have a fairly wide mouth, pretty sturdy and are 2oz lighter than the normal 'white' nalgene i weighed. for 3g you can carry an extra cap
if you look at how much it would cost to save 4oz somewhere else in your gear you'd be shocked.. could be hundreds of dollars in a tarp or tent system.
little stuff adds up.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.