Mar 23, 2013 at 10:54 pm #1300805
I'm usually good at understanding these things but that one is kinda messed.
it was taken from the Vaude site which is originally in german and maybe that's the reason.
so here is the copy paste:
Main fabric: 100% Polyamide; : 100% Polyamide; : 100% Polyurethane; 210 D Cordura® Polyurethane coated; Contrast fabric: 100% Polyamide; 400 D Plain Polyurethane coated; Lining: 100% Polyamide; 200 D Acrylic coated
I can understand the "Polyamide" thing. it's the way the material built but what exactly is it? i mean if it's Cordura just say it right?
anyway next question
is the above specs. backpack would be stronger than this one:
upper fabric 100D Nylon Double Ripstop
base fabric 840D Nylon BallisticMar 24, 2013 at 12:03 am #1968959
Is there a link? Because I can't make sense of that, but I do speak German.Mar 24, 2013 at 3:20 am #1968969
@rcaffinLocale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Snicker. Yeah, translations.
Main fabric: 210 denier Cordura nylon with PU coating.
'Contrast' fabric: 400 denier plain PU-coated nylon (trim?)
Lining: 200 denier acrylic-coated nylon.
Comment: I am not impressed by the use of an acrylic-coated fabric. Cheap and nasty stuff. It's meant to a lining, but the acrylic coating will fail quickly.
CheersMar 24, 2013 at 4:21 am #1968973
1. lining means the inside material of the bag or the bottom of the pack? because if its the inside of the bag that means they dont detail the base fabric of the bag which is not cool.
2.what do you mean when you say it will fail?
3.usually the websites do not detail the gabric of the lining and only the upper and the base fabrics.
4. The specs state that the upper fabric is cordura and the rest is plain nylon, i presume that is much worse than ripstop nylon?
5. Would you choose a nylon ripstop fabric backpack over a cordura one? specs: upper fabric 100D Nylon Double Ripstop
base fabric 840D Nylon BallisticMar 24, 2013 at 10:21 am #1969032
Roger, do dyslexics routinely confuse your name for "George"?
As for Arthur's post… 840D ballistic Nylon will be much stronger (both tear and abrasion) than any of the cordura fabric in the original specs. But the 100D Double Ripstop will be weaker than the rest of the fabrics. So if you're replacing a current bag see how your usage wears it out. Did you make holes in the bottom of the bag or rather in the main pack material? Based on your wear patterns one may be better than the other.Mar 24, 2013 at 3:17 pm #1969116
@rcaffinLocale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
1) Dunno. I would need to see the pics of the pack. It may be that the 400 D fabric is the base reinforcing. Dunno.
2) Acrylic coating will break up and the fabric will leak like a sieve. Acrylic coating is used to stabilise the weave; it is not meant to be a waterproof layer. (Even if some people use it for that.)
4) The preference for 'ripstop' is marketing-driven: it sounds 'cool'. It has little value in reality. It won't stop abrasion wear, and it won't stop a barbed wire rip.
5) Cordura is much stronger than plain nylon (even ripstop), but it is usually much heavier. It is very good for reinforcing the bottom of a pack. Nylon Ballistic is similar to Cordura but avoids paying royalties for the name.
I can't comment on a pack without seeing it. Sorry.
CheersMar 24, 2013 at 3:31 pm #1969120
This is about the only one they make that uses the stated fabrics: http://www.vaude.com/de-DE/Produkte/Ausruestung/Rucksaecke/Challenger-45-10-oxid.html
The heavy fabric is used for the crampon bag and ice tool attachment points and side where the skis are supposed to be attached. Bottom and side of top lid, back panel and I would guess the front under the crampon cover is made of the thinner fabric. At least that is what the photo looks like. The photos of the not red packs are much clearer btw.
They do not claim that the pack is waterproof, in fact they don't even mention anything about that anywhere. So I suppose the acrylic coating is used purely as stabiliser.Mar 24, 2013 at 3:54 pm #1969127
You got it right, i was interested in the Vaude Challanger 45+10.
cant make up my mind between it and Mammut Trion Light.
i think the Mammut with 1000grams and built in waterproof drysack looks more appealing.
it looks a bit burlier too. mmm and i guess i kinda trust Mammut too
the thing is i cant say that 28liters will be enough on my mountain endevours.Mar 24, 2013 at 4:02 pm #1969131
Mammut makes the Trion light with 28 litres and 40 litres. The 40 litres one weighs 1.290 grams. http://www.mammut.ch/de/productDetail/251002210_v_4171_40/Trion-Light.html?cid=5089051
No crampon pouch and no gear slings on the hip belt though – if you need something like that.Mar 25, 2013 at 5:00 am #1969291
There are curently 2 Trion light models
Сheck it out: http://www.mammut.ch/en/productOverview/products_backpacks_alpinruckscke_international/Alpine-backpacks.html
the one with the built in drysack +seamsealing and the one without . the waterproof model weighs 1100grams even when it's 28litres (acording to the website and my weight at the store)
and it has gear slins on the hipbelt… i thinkMar 25, 2013 at 6:34 am #1969308
Actually I just wanted to let you know that there is a larger version of the waterproof Trion because you said the small one might be to small. The weight was for the larger one.
The weight you stated is correct for the small version.
No idea about the gear slings to be honest, I just went with the photo.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.