Topic
Hanchor Tuff – 25L Pack (19oz, Xpac)
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) › Hanchor Tuff – 25L Pack (19oz, Xpac)
- This topic has 11 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 1 month ago by BRYON L.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Nov 7, 2017 at 3:28 am #3500730
Just letting folks know that Hanchor has released a smaller, lighter pack for backpacking called the Tuff.
The Tuff is a 25L pack, available in VX07 (white) or VX21 (black). It weighs 19-23oz depending on whether you include the removable back pad, sternum strap and webbing hipbelt. Price is $165 USD.
Like all the Hanchor products, it should be immaculately sewn. It’s designed to be weather resistant with XPac fabrics, a roll top, and intelligently designed seams to decrease water intrusion by rolling the fabric in smart ways. Looks like a nice pack for short trips.
Nov 7, 2017 at 3:32 am #3500731Thanks Dan. Looks very professional. What’s the purpose behind the shoulder straps running down the front panel?
Ryan
Nov 7, 2017 at 3:48 am #3500735The shoulder straps running all the way down the pack started in Hanchor’s larger packs (Marl, Marble) as a way to pad the frame stays so you don’t feel them. The design is quite clever in those packs, because it successfully keeps you from feeling the frame stays, without the weight of a fully padded panel like most other packs.
As far as I can tell, the Tuff doesn’t have frame stays (which makes sense since it only has a webbing hipbelt). So I think the inclusion of the extended shoulder straps here is less essential. I think the point is to still pad the pack a little, and help with ventilation a little. The padding of these doesn’t seem that important since there is already an inner backpad (removable). Also, it might just be easier/cheaper for Hanchor to produce like this since they already make these shoulder straps for their other models. Personally, I’d be happy to have regular shoulder straps if it saved 2oz.
Nov 7, 2017 at 5:21 am #3500764Looks like a great pack. Curious about real-world experience with the side mesh pockets. Can most anyone easily access water bottles from them without taking off the pack? Angle and placement look right, but hoping someone can confirm.
Nov 7, 2017 at 5:53 am #3500765Bryon: They look virtually the same as the side pockets on my Hanchor Marl, which work well. Accessing them is reasonable. You can read more about the Marl at my review on my blog:
https://intocascadia.com/2017/05/06/review-hanchor-marl-42l-pack/Personally I prefer solid fabrics for side pockets because I don’t really need mesh here (I like it for the rear pocket) and solid fabrics are usually more durable. With some of their other packs Hanchor will do the side pockets in the same fabric as the main body for an extra $16. Not sure if this is the case here, but I’ve emailed Hanchor to ask and I’ll update this thread if I hear back.
Nov 7, 2017 at 5:09 pm #3500829Thanks, Dan, really appreciate your feedback and the review.
The VX07 v. VX21 – how much of a difference will this make? If I read your review right, for the average user/hiker, the 07 should be sufficient even with some occasional bushwacking. I realize with this size pack the weight difference is minimal. Sounds like the VX21 is more needed for rock-crawling, bouldering, etc. where you are scraping on hard surfaces.
In either case, how does the material do holding something like CF tape to cover any rips/tears/holes? Or maybe installing a small zippered pocket to the interior with CF tape?
Also, if you do the solid fabric on the side mesh pockets, does it have any elasticity at all, like the mesh? Or is it a more rigid pocket, but still able to slip a bottle or other object into it while on the move?
Thanks in advance for answering these questions. I’m still on the learning curve on this fabric, but the overall features on this pack are spot on to what I am looking for. It seems ideal for a daypack that could be stretched to an overnighter with a small kit.
Nov 7, 2017 at 7:01 pm #3500862My opinion is that VX07 is a good choice if you’re on trail 80-90% of the time and when you’re off trial you’re going easy on it (e.g. not sliding down slot canyons in Utah). I’ve done a lot of “not easy on it” off-trail with my VX07 Hanchor Marble like dragging skis through alder for hours, and it still looks surprisingly good.
The face fabric of VX07 is 70D nylon, so it’s similar in durability to what HMG uses in their packs (they use a 70D polyester I believe on the outside of their hybrid cuben).
VX21 is the stuff to have if you’re spending a lot of time crashing through brush, alder, sharp branches etc. If you’re exposing the pack to a lot of rock (e.g. sliding down sandstone, dragging it up a rock climb) then VX42 is the stuff to have.
Regarding CF Tape – The inside of the VX fabrics has a light nylon (30D I believe) to protect the waterproof layer. This ensures the waterproof layer lasts much longer than hybrid cuben, but it does make it hard to seam seal (which is why Hanchor is choosing smart seam designs rather than sealing) and there isn’t exposed plastic that you can easily glue or tape to. If you do damage a VX fabric you can either glue it with SeamGrip if it’s a small hole, or for bigger stuff either stick on Tenacious Tape (basically nylon + adhesive) or get it sewn (ideally).
With regards to attaching an internal pocket, Hanchor says the Tuff is compatable with their “Multifunctional Organizer“. I’m not sure how that attaches, but it might be a good way to go if you want an internal pocket, although it might be overkill (4oz).
Regarding the side pockets, normally the solid fabric is a bit oversized and then it has an elastic in the top hem to cinch it smaller and thus create stretch. This would be similar to how the current pockets are in the Hanchor Marble, as that pack uses 70D nylon with elastic in the top hem. Lots of companies do this (e.g. SeekOutside). If the solid fabric pocket is designed well, then it’s just as easy to use a stretchier material. But if the pocket isn’t built with enough elasticity in the top hem then it could be too tight or too loose.
Nov 7, 2017 at 8:12 pm #3500888Nice.
I’ve been debating between the HMG Daybreak and the MLD Core, but this looks to be a strong competitor, combines what I like in the other 2 into a solid package. And while it weighs more than the other 2, I think the extra ounces to gain a back panel/frame and be able to hold a little more weight overall is worth it.
It sounds like Hanchor would add a few more string loops if I asked as well. As far as an inner pocket, if they would sew one of their Mica pockets into the inner back panel, that would complete it for me.
I’ll send them an email soon with these questions.
Nov 14, 2017 at 3:34 am #3502024Just placed my order with a few modifications. Will be early December at best before it arrives, but will try to remember to put a review up here.
Feb 9, 2018 at 2:48 am #3517378When’s that review Bryon? :)
Feb 9, 2018 at 5:09 pm #3517485I’d love to see a review too, Byron! Playing around with ideas for a frameless low volume pack, and this seems to be a strong contender, albeit a bit heavier than some of the competitors.
Feb 9, 2018 at 5:20 pm #3517487I hear you guys! Just finished 2 dayhikes this week with it, so I promise a review within a week.
-
AuthorPosts
- 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!
Our Community Posts are Moderated
Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Please be mindful of our values and boundaries and review our Community Guidelines prior to posting.
Get the Newsletter
Gear Research & Discovery Tools
- Browse our curated Gear Shop
- See the latest Gear Deals and Sales
- Our Recommendations
- Search for Gear on Sale with the Gear Finder
- Used Gear Swap
- Member Gear Reviews and BPL Gear Review Articles
- Browse by Gear Type or Brand.