Paradox Unaweep

There was a very thorough review of the Unaweep a while back. Dave really liked it.

If you want a somewhat lighter and smaller pack I can highly recommend the Exped Lightning. I reviewed it a while back here and would not hesitate to take it on a thru-hike. It has a very good hipbelt and the shoulder straps adjust up and down so you could get a better fit. I think it would be a solid choice given your gear weight and the fact that you'll have to carry extra water or a bear canister in places.

Thanks Luke, I was just looking at that one actually.

Could you point me in the direction of the review?

Some other suggestions of light but solid packs that are very common on the PCT and AT are the

ULA Circuit and GG Mariposa.

I think they would carry the weight well, but moreover, are easy to live out of while hiking. The huge front and side pockets swallow up a lot of stuff that you would use during the day, eliminating or minimising the need to open, repack, close your main pack.

Here is the Exped

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/exped-lightning-review-schmidt.html

Here is the link to the article on the Paradox

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/paradox-evolution-review-chenault.html#.U5aDvcHn_IU

My understanding is the Unaweep is basically an somewhat simplified version that is a bit lighter.

I have not had my hands on the Unaweep but it looks solid. My main hesitation would be that its probably bigger and heavier then you really need on the PCT. Of course use what fits.

I recently got a Unaweep. It was a bit of a pain to get dialed in with a lot of adjustments and experimentation (and I did a bit of sewing on it and a few mods immediately), but the results so far are remarkable. I have only done a few shake-down hikes with about loads ranging from 20-40 pounds, but if you can make it fit, it may be the most comfortable suspension I have ever experienced. I have 3 HMG packs, some REI Flash packs, a Kuiu Icon, and have owned a number of other models from Arcteryx, Black Diamond, Dana Design, Osprey Exos, and so forth. I am really loath to recommend anything I have not beat the crap out of for many miles, so take it all with a grain of salt, but so far the Paradox seems to hold a lot of promise. I will put the thing through its paces this summer.

For reference, I have a 21-22" torso and HATE ineffective load lifters (why I added extended frames and load lifters to 2 of my 3 HMG packs). My only gripe so far is the lack of integrated hipbelt pockets (you will not be swapping out the Unaweep's hipbelt as it is part of the suspension) and the attachment point for the load lifters is a bit dumb. That's the part I sewed to fix. But the construction, materials, and concept are innovative and well done.

Pack fit, use, expectations, and prior experience are intensely personal though, so even recommending something is a recipe for "WTF?"

Hey Phillip, curious about what you didn't like about the LL attachment points? I don't know how to sew so they would have to stay as is.

Thanks.

Eli, here are some pictures of my 3900 cubic inch Unaweep: http://bedrockandparadox.com/2014/05/05/paradox-unaweep/ That's a 26" frame pictured, and I have a 21" torso. I'm a huge fan of the Paradox suspension, for me it blows everything else I've ever tried out of the water. The strength is in both the frame, which both articulates and is incredibly rigid, and in the hipbelt, which seems particularly well liked by thinner folks with little in the way of hips or lumbar curve.

On paper a smaller, lighter pack like a Circuit or Mariposa should be better suited to your task. Since I've gotten used to the Unaweep I have a hard time not reaching for it over something like my GG Gorilla, even for loads in the high 20s which the Gorilla carries fine, as the Unaweep (for me) carries so much better (especially with anything slightly awkward like snowshoes). I should add that I got both these packs for free, and am thus not especially attached to either (aside from the fact that both work very well).

Eli I would look at the Kalais, great design, load carrying capability and 26″ long stay, with proper load lifters. Here is my initial review

"Hey Phillip, curious about what you didn't like about the LL attachment points? I don't know how to sew so they would have to stay as is."

They are attached about an inch above to top end of the frame, so it folds the material of the pack above the stays down and towards your head when tension is applied to the LLs. This is exacerbated by the stiffener rod sewn into the material between the upper ends of the frame that ends up right a skull level. I simply moved the ladder lock attachment point to the top of the tube the frame ends in. I don't know why Paradox didn't do this from the outset.

Thank you Phillip, Alex, David, Luke, and Ito!

I've looked at the Exped Lighting and the Khalis, both look like very nice packs. They are definitely something that I am considering.

Phillip and/or David, when you put the extensions on the Unaweep frame, does it pull the pack bag higher up on the frame? I hate having the bottom of the pack sag down below the belt.

WARNING:Semi-tangent incoming.

I think I tend to look for packs that have a unique feature to them. I'm never very interested in packs that are like other packs, with just a lower weight or something. The GG Blaze that I had was one of these (what seem to me to be) generic packs. It didn't fit my torso, and the belt was too small, but those could be remedied, and it is an award winning pack. But honestly I just thought it was boring! Same story with the Mariposa…lightweight, but just like other packs in terms of everything else. I know that I shouldn't judge them like this, but I'm most interested in packs that try new things in the quest for comfort.

I liked the Fusion because of the way the hipbelt sat behind the "spine", the way the compression straps pulled the edges of the pack away from your back, the dual buckle hipbelt, the colors (I know, I know). Too bad the shoulder yolk sucked for me.

The Aarn packs are another example of features unique to their packs. But they are too expensive to look that goofy!

The Arc Blast has that cool arched frame, but it looks a little fragile to me.

The Unaweep is unique in that it looks like a mix of external/internal frame. I was actually looking to try an external pack before I found it. I had no idea there were so few external packs in the market!

Sorry to go way off topic, just needed to type that out to make it clear (to myself mostly) what I'm looking for. Feels good man.

I will say that I have been talking to Kevin at Paradox (or Seek Outside, or whatever), and he has been most helpful in terms of answering (and asking) questions, and in a timely manner. Compared to SMD, which I still have not heard back from after four days… though it could be that SMD already has my money, and have yet to give my money to Paradox!

Funny. I'd honestly not noticed that, but you're right that tacking the load lifters as inch lower would make more sense. My complaint was that the LL buckles and top strap buckles clicked together all the time when I wasn't using the top strap.

BTW, the carbon stiffener crossbar is nice, but not necessary. I built a bag without one and didn't miss it at all.

The Unaweep is optimized to sit properly with the 26" frame. You can see how it sits in the photo I linked to above. This height can be further fine tuned by using either the lower or higher hipbelt attachment to the frame. There's also the bottom compression panel, which can compress the bottom quite a lot, making the load ride higher.

I think it's important for packs to tick aesthetic boxes as well as functional ones. For me the Unaweep really delivers on that count. It's very clean and very functional, nothing non-essential or intentionally stylish about it. This approach also helps keep the price down by making construction simpler.

I also recently got an unaweep with the 4800 cubic inch packbag. I'm quite tall (6'6"). I bought it as I wanted a larger pack for winter, heavy loads when I'm carrying a lot of my wife's stuff etc and I wanted something lighter than my 5 pound osprey aether I've had for years.
To answer the previous question. I got the 4 inch frame extensions so I can use it with the 28 inch frame instead of the 26 inch default. I find that with my height I like this better and the load lifters "lift" more. The top of the frame terminates about 4 inches above my shoulders when using the 28 inch frame which I like. I hate load lifters that don't really lift. There is not problem here with that. When using the 28 inch extensions the packbag terminates about 2 or 3 inches above the bottom of the frame. I agree with Philips comment about where the load lifters are sewn. That said it isn't a huge issue. To second Philip the pack is remarkable comfortable and you never have to worry if the load is too much for the pack with this design. With light loads the pack is comfortable as well due to the articulation of the frame. I personally don't find traditional lumbar pad packs where you have the stays or framesheet terminating in the lumbar region very comfortable with even midweight loads so the wrap around hipbelt is a revelation. I'm definitely going to retire the aether for this.
If you get the bigger packbag it does come standard with a side zip access to quickly get into the main compartment. You could probably have that added with the smaller 3900 cubic inch packbag. When you add the talon and maybe a little fanny pack or their front pack I really don't think the lack of a large amount of external storage is an issue like another poster said and at 3 pounds it is really that heavy?

Just as an aside, that 10 day section you're talking about is probably Kennedy Meadows to either VVR or Muir Trail Ranch. You'll be skipping by Kearsarge Pass which is one of the most spectacular of the Sierra Passes and cuts that 10 day resupply almost in half. If you're not stuck on spending a 10 day stretch (and running out of food like everyone that does it) then I really recommend going out Kearsarge and resupplying at Independence via a box. The hitch to Bishop is rough, that's what I did in my through hike in 2013.

Re: " I personally don't find traditional lumbar pad packs where you have the stays or framesheet terminating in the lumbar region very comfortable with even midweight loads so the wrap around hipbelt is a revelation."

Benjamin, et al.,
It would be great if you or others could elaborate about this. I've been making my own packs for a long time, but lately have been trying to reduce the tendency of the hipbelts to slip at the lumbar point (small of the back). The hipbelts have included the heavier Osprey moldables, because they can be purchased separately, are of good quality, and are cheap if you can find one in a bin somewhere. They are also lighter than some of the bomber belts, and who wants to carry all that weight.

I realize this is not the MYOG forum, but with the many comments on this thread about modifications and such, it seemed someone might have some helpful comments. Photos of packs on the web almost never seem to focus on the rear suspension – rather on the nice looking front and sides of the pack. But it is the design of the back and hip area that are critical.

Right now, I'm getting ready to install a lumbar pad on a pack that runs an Osprey Isoform belt through a horizontal sleeve at the lumbar point. The belt is installed with carboard keeping the Velcro on the belt from contacting the Velcro on the inside of the sleeve. Then the carboard strips are slid out, and the Velcro locks the belt into place. What's nice about the Velcro sleeve attachment, about 4.5" wide at the center of the belt, is that the belt rotates a bit with the hips moving up and down as you walk. This makes walking much more comfortable, and saves a lot of energy.

Here's a photo that may clarify the above:

There are a lot of claims about pack belts not slipping, but nothing I try in the shops performs well with 20-25 lbs. of weight, reasonably distributed. So I'm not about to shovel out for hundreds of $ just based on claims on websites. Even if the claims are true, what works great for another might not work at all for me.

So this is a real puzzle. Any helpful comments would be welcome. Thanks.

Eli,

Did you get an Unaweep? If so how does it compare to the Fusion 65?

cheers,

Curtis

To the (old) question on the hip belt:

The belt itself is pretty anodyne. Nicely padded, decent shape, nice 2x advantage pull system, but otherwise unsophisticated.

The thing that makes it work is how the pack "hangs" from the belt, specifically how far outboard the mount is. Here is a pic:

This is looking down from above. Notice how the belt is suspended above the bottom of the frame by the 1" webbing straps. The width of the anchoring on the belt puts the attachment points about where the flat part of the outside of your gluteus maximus (buttock muscles) falls (12" wide center to center on the bottom of the belt, 14" wide at the top). This is very different than a lumbar attachment point and wider than any inserted stay I have experienced. This is basically what makes the Paradox system different than most others. The strap continues on up and becomes the adjustment for the shoulder harness. The whole pack hangs down off this strap. It works pretty well so far in my experience (up to 40 pounds).

Okay, I have 3 packrafting trips under my belt with the Unaweep now (two overnighters and one 5-day trip), and feel somewhat qualified to make some observations. Total pack weights ranged from 30# (overnighters) to 40# (5-days).

First off, it is really a superb platform for hauling gear on tough trips. The suspension is really excellent. Extremely comfortable, and supports the loads that packrafting in Alaska requires. There is a significant amount of adjustability for various torso sizes by adding frame extensions and letting the packbag ride up and down on the frame. The shoulder yoke also has a wide range of adjustability in terms of raising and lowering it independent of the height of the hipbelt. All these adjustments can be a bit confusing at first and it takes a while to dial the pack in. Longer than any other I have owned, I’d venture, but the end result is lovely. For reference, I’m 5’10” and 185 pounds with a 33″ waist and a 22″ torso. I run the pack with a single frame extension (26″ frame) and have the hip belt in the raised position (the lower strap grommet) and run the shoulder yoke fairly high. The load lifter straps do a perfect job the whole pack drapes nicely across my back with no pressure points and supreme control. The fact that the pack ‘hangs’ below the hip belt means you can bend over at the waist and the pack does not restrict your ability to lean forward as the bottom of the pack can cantilever out. If you spend any time crawling through heavy brush, you will really appreciate this unique feature. The hipbelt is nothing extra special in terms of materials or shape sophistication, but is is extremely comfortable and suits the performance of the pack perfectly. This may be the first pack where I wouldn’t change a thing on the hipbelt (other than putting an ITW GT Cobra buckle on, as David C did). I did add a GG belt pocket though. I don’t have to reef the crap out of the hipbelt straps to keep the bigger loads from creeping down, and the weight transfer is really excellent. My pack with VX21 fabric and the standard Talon (the rear pocket) weighs 3.6# (1,650g) with Aquaseal seam sealing, the ITW buckle, GG hipbelt pocket, and some minor tweaks to straps and buckles.

Here are some of my mods to make it more packraft friendly:

I added a sleeve to the back of the Talon pocket for my paddle. The top of the sleeve is open and there is a 3/4″ webbing strap with 2 extra loops sewn on so that the shaft portion of the paddle is held securely.

I felt the standard position of the Talon back pocket was quite a bit too high, so I added a 1″ strap daisy chain to the “load shelf” and used a pair of releasable triglides to give me a few positions to play with for the bottom attachment point:

This way the Talon dropped about 5 inches and the tops of the paddles do not extend above the top of the pack much, which is key to negotiating low branches and busting through alders:

The lower compression strap interfered with the bottle pockets with the Talon so low, so I eliminated the lower buckle on the Talon and used that bottom strap to cinch the toll top down:

I added a small length of webbing to the middle compression strap to capture the lower strap so it would stay in place when I released the roll top:

As I mentioned elsewhere I moved the attachment point for the load lifters to a spot directly at the top of the frame so that the packbag wouldn’t get pulled into the back of my head. I personally feel Paradox should implement this simple design change immediately.

I felt the chest strap attachment buckles on the shoulder straps moved around too much (they are 1″ buckles on 3/4″ webbing for some reason) so I stitched the strap to the shoulder padding in a few places to make a daisy chain. This also allows me to attach my camera bag to the shoulder strap in a way it doesn’t creep down.

If you want an idea of the sorts of paces I have put this pack through, I will refer you to 3 short videos of the trips I have done with it. You will have to follow the links as the video players are sort of fake:

Link—> Packrafting Chiniak Bay

Link—> Goats, Boats & Bears. Oh My!

Link—> Packrafting around Shuyak Island

Wow man Philip!! Those are some amazing trips there. Beautiful nature and wildlife.
Thanks for sharing.

What size Unaweep are you using on trips 7 days or longer?

I use the 4800 for trips a week or longer and have used it on an 11 day trip and a 12 day trip both with a Bearikade Expedition and it worked great.  I have also used it for a few week long trips with a Bearikade Weekender.

Brad, thanks so much for the quick response. I’ve been torn between the 4800 and 6300. I think it has been difficult because for barely any more money and a negligible weight gain you get so much extra volume that you can use or not. It wish there was a size somewhere in between. Was it tight on the 11day or did you still have some space? I know everyone packs differently but just curious. Thanks.

One of those trips was with a packraft and it was very tight- a 6300 would have worked better.  The 12 day trip was just backpacking and I thought it was about right.

If I were buying today I would either get another 4800 or a Divide 4500 as each would work for most of my trips.  If I was doing packrafting trips over a week I might swing for the 6300 as there isn’t much of a weight penalty.

I cut the load shelf and some of the compression off mine and do not use a talon.

OK , great. That really helps. One last question. Have you been able to compare the Divide to the Unaweep 4800 in person?. The dimensions look fairly close( Section Hiker lists the total liters as 93L, Main bag= 73L plus 2 side pockets and mesh = 20L more = 93L total. Seek outside puts the Unaweep 4800 at 78L plus Talon 16L= 94L.  I realize that the Divide tapers from top to bottom and the Unaweep does not which makes me question how they can be that close. I’d prefer the larger one just in case. Appreciate it, Jerod.