Topic

That “Hydration Revolution” from Sawyer


Forum Posting

A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!

Home Forums Gear Forums Gear (General) That “Hydration Revolution” from Sawyer

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 7 posts - 26 through 32 (of 32 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1966022
    EndoftheTrail
    BPL Member

    @ben2world-2

    @terran:

    FP's smaller intake nipple – I insert Platy tube over the nipple.
    FP's fatter output nipple – I insert Platy tube into the nipple. Fits well enough although not super tight.

    #1966039
    Michael Ray
    BPL Member

    @topshot

    Locale: Midwest

    It was me, not Colin, that had responded. I also use just plain household bleach and carry a Frontier Pro, but have never actually used it. The likelihood of cysts is quite small in reality and I try to pick wise sources. If it is suspect (valley where beavers live, nearby cattle) then I could also use the filter. Lucky so far I guess.

    ClO2 is ready in 30 min for most mountain sources. I have started carrying some tablets as backup (or for poor sources).

    #1966065
    scree ride
    Member

    @scree

    Ben, I guess the difference would be that the Geiger hydration system is under pressure. The lines have to be quite positively connected with barbed or quick connectors.

    #1966613
    Jeff McWilliams
    BPL Member

    @jjmcwill

    Locale: Midwest

    These both interest me, so I thought I'd outline the differences

    Frontier Pro
    Weight: 2oz
    Capacity 50gal
    Filter size: 3 microns
    Requires secondary treatment for Bacteria and Viruses
    Works inline
    Works as gravity filter

    Sawyer Squeeze
    Weight: 3oz
    Capacity: 1 million gallons
    Filter size: .1 micron
    No secondary treatment required for Bacteria
    Works inline
    Works as gravity filter

    I'd personally pick the Sawyer over the Frontier Pro. Capacity of only 50 gallons is a limiting factor. I can share the Sawyer Squeeze among 2 or 3 friends. 3 of us shared one in the Adirondacks. If using the Frontier Pro, the need to also carry secondary treatment, the 30 minute treatment time requirement, and the limited filter life would be significant downsides.

    I can see the attraction of the Frontier Pro for solo hikes, where that extra ounce or two really counts.

    #1966634
    Jerry Adams
    BPL Member

    @retiredjerry

    Locale: Oregon and Washington

    For Sawyer, you also have to take backwash syringe that weighs 1.2 oz if you're going to treat many gallons, depending on water quality.

    #1966635
    Jake D
    BPL Member

    @jakedatc

    Locale: Bristol,RI

    Did 18 day Long Trail thru hike treating water out of tiny trickles in a very dry season last year and back flushed once and really didn't notice a difference (ie probaby didn't need it). So unless you are doing one of the long thru hikes or expect really silty water i doubt most need to carry the syringe.

    #1966643
    John S.
    BPL Member

    @jshann

    The Sawyer does not filter virus particles, so you would pre or post treat for those.

Viewing 7 posts - 26 through 32 (of 32 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Forum Posting

A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!

Get the Newsletter

Get our free Handbook and Receive our weekly newsletter to see what's new at Backpacking Light!

Gear Research & Discovery Tools


Loading...