GG Gorilla vs ULA Ohm 2.0

I own the Ohm and I've never had my hands on the gorilla. Ohm transfers weight really well to the hips. Side pockets are fan freaking tastic. Belt is great with the exception of how the straps run through the buckle. Not bad mind you but seems it could be done better. The way it molds comfortably to the hips works though so not much of a nitpick. Customer service is great. Fast responses to emails.

[A clarificatory note: the pack changes discussed below are preliminary and well pre-production. When and if they are integrated into an existing or brand new pack is not defined and should not be assumed or anticipated. Carry on.]

I've used the Gorilla a bunch, and carpet tested a few Ohms owned by other folks. Disclaimer: as an ambassador I got both my Gorillas for free.

Both packs are a very versatile size. Both have useable side pockets. The Ohms are a bit bigger and more secure. Both have back pockets made of comparable mesh, with the Gorillas maybe a bit stretchier. Neither back pocket is especially durable, and neither have compression. This works for plain backpacking but is not useable for more technical gear.

In my book the Gorilla transfers weight better. The stay is more rigid, and the de facto lumbar pad more functional. The Ohms I've seen are all the version 1, so this may no longer be the case.

The Ohm has load lifters, which I think are an unecessary complication on packs of this size.

Harness fit is probably the biggest different between the two, especially with the shoulder strap options ULA offers.

"Both packs have cord lacing "compression" which in my book is a crap design."

Interesting comment. I've found that the cord will slip through the cordlock over time. I resolve this by tying a slip knot next to the cordlock after cinching everything down.

David, what other issues do you see with this design?

I recently bought the OHM 2 and have only used it so far for a long day hike, at times on very steep terrain. Best way to put it is that I realized after a substantial time that I was hardly noticing it was there with probably an 17 lb. total load.
Workmanship is excellent. There are not a lot of frills but design is very good. I use water bottles and they are decently accessible in the side pockets.

Lacing compression won't withstand enough torque to compress awkward loads, the slack in the system tends to shift downwards, and it's not strong enough to carry larger/heavier/more awkward items. It is good for minor compression of low density loads and keeping lighter items in place, which in all fairness is what most backpackers require.

Ohms pockets are bigger and better for getting things in and out.

Ohm has load lifters, which work. I disagree with earlier comments about them. I find load lifters beneficial on every pack, regardless of weight, if the weightbelt is actually supporting it, it draws it in closer to the back. Yes, they are useless when the belt doesnt support weight and its all hanging down your back. The good thing about the ULA design is the top strap retains the plastic hoop, which the load lifters pull against. ANY design that just sews loadlifters to the bag IS useless, because without a bag being packed tightly, they are worthless. UL packs are best packed loose.

THe top closure on the GG packs is strange. Hopefully they change it. Their mode of having packs mfg in china makes it hard to change things except every few yrs.

I'm leaning towards the Ohm. Does it need the extra support of a ccf pad? I only carry my neoair xlite. A few oz for a sit pad isn't bad, but it would take much to get into the circuit weight.

Which brings up another thought. I've been doing a lot of pack research and it seems a lot of people recommend the circuit for greater capacity and comfort, at not a big weight penalty.

It all depends on what you like and how much weight you will carry.

When I hit the trail over 22-23 lbs, I take my circuit.
My Ohm is original with small belt winglets. It doesnt comfortably support more than 20-22 lbs without making the belt uncomfortably tight.

The new Ohm 2.O with the same belt as the circuit will support the same weight. Should be fine up to high 20s I would think, depending on how you pack the pack.

Packing the Ohm, or any frameless pack, takes a little consideration for how to keep it comfortable against your back. This pack, and all frameless packs, are most comfortable packed LOOSELY. The pack conforms to your back like a big firm pillow. With my original Ohm with the winglet belt, the pack actually wraps around my waist too. The tighter and harder you pack these packs, the less comfortable they will become.

You dont need any ccf in the Ohm for support. You probably will want it to cushion your back against hard objects and "seams" between objects where you will feel the "buckle" in the pack contents against your back. Without some pad there you would feel the joint between these objects. When using my Ohm I take short section of CCF folded in half and used against the backpanel for that reason. An inflatable will work fine, but I baby my xlites and dont use them for that.

The problem with using the "burrito" method with a ccf pad in frameless packs, IMO , is that it just doesnt result in a comfortable pack, it doesnt conform to your back. Not like a flat CCF against the backpanel in a loosely packed pack does.
But, a loosely packed frameless pack offers no support. And that is where the Ohms ingenious 1.5 oz hoop stay comes in and makes this pack stand out.

The circuit stripped will weigh about 10 oz more than the Ohm stripped. Its up to you if you need the capacity of it.

Dave–any chance the 2014 Gorilla will finally have properly angled shoulder straps?

In my opinion, one of the key advantages to the Ohm 2.0 is the harness design. The shoulder straps are actually attached at an angle, rather than sewn in straight across (though angled from there). Personally, I have more developed shoulders and trapezius muscles, and I can't get the GG straps to fit. I also found the ULA hipbelt much more supportive than the Gorilla, trying it out with my gear in the basement.

However, in GG's favor, they have a more robust, supportive stay. Dave is absolutely right there. The carbon fiber frame in the Ohm does transfer weight very well, but it cannot be shaped. It's on the perimeter of the pack, so the rest of the back can mold more closely, but the side panels won't be contoured along the line of your shoulders either. For some, this fits very well, for others like me (large shoulders) it meant that the pack angled back too far. Also, while it's true that ULA uses a more robust fabric in high wear places, they also use a less robust fabric than the Gorilla in others. The Ohm uses a mix of 210D nylon for high wear and 70D for the rest. The Gorilla just uses 140D nylon for the whole pack. Personally, if I had to choose between those two options, I'd prefer the 140D over the 210D/70D mix.

The Ohms stay rides outside the back so it doesnt touch you, and doesnt need to be shaped.

If packed loosely, like a frameless pack should, the pack conforms to the back comfortably, and still has working load lifters due to the hoop stay at the lifter attachment point.

I agree, it LOOKS like the Ohm is leaning slightly backwards on some folks, myself included.

Its not a "peanut shaped" pack, and the straight stay keeps the side seams straight and following the stay, even while it conforms to the back. With a small waist and larger shoulders, the stay must angle backwards.

The ohm is also made with some pretty light fabric. Really light on sides and front.
I have almost worn one small hole thru the side fabric, where something on the inside was pushing out,and the side compression cord rubbed the fabric see-thru thin.

"And that is where the Ohms ingenious 1.5 oz hoop stay comes in and makes this pack stand out."

So how does the hoop transfer load ?

There really isnt any such thing as load transfer "to the hips" on a pack with a belt.
By default on a properly sized pack, that is where all the weight should ride. It is accomplished because the belt is attached to the bag, which rides on the hips.

There is only the reverse. Load transfer to the shoulders, if the torso length between the shoulder strap attachment and waistbelt collapses under load, or the belt slides down on the hips.

I have never had a real issue with my load in an Ohm shifting to the shoulders, at least not at the wts it was designed for. Certainly no moreso than with any other lightwt pack. There is seemingly enough tension in the stay to prevent the effective torso length from shortening enough to matter under use. Especially when compared to how uncomfortably firm I had to pack a completely frameless pack to achieve the same thing with ~20 lbs.

I have an old original Ohm as well, and the limit for me is how uncomfortably tight I am willing to wear the winglet belt to support the weight. I once did 29 lbs on an 11 mile dayhike. Not comfortable, it left marks on my hips. 22 is my preferential maximum for my old ohm, and thats only for the first day. I would feel comfortable suggesting the new 2.0 with the circuit belt could go much higher.

For mine, I would say it really is a frameless pack, that the stay extends the wt I am willing to carry in it from maybe 16-17 lbs to 22 lbs. Thats all. (Ive used it without the stay to save the 1.5 oz or so, and 16-17 is my limit there ) Nope, just like using the circuit without stays, not worth it. They make a huge difference. Working load lifters for one.

When ULA used to say you would suffer by carrying 25 lbs in the original Ohm, they were right on in my opinion. Didnt stop many from claiming they carried up to 35 and were happy.

I've gotten so spoiled that any pack anywhere that weighs more than 30 pounds, regardless of frame or weight transfer or anything, is miserable to carry.

Just sayin'