Ultra 200X vs Ultragrid on Durston Kakwa

I think the “Ultragrid” is similar to the “Dyneema X” type grids that pack makers have been using for the last 20 years or so.  It’s a 210 denier nylon with a PU coating.  The fabric has been used by a ton of pack manufacturers including Golite, MLD, ULA and a host of others.  I’ve used quite a few packs with this fabric and it’s held up well (Currently have a custom SWD made out of 210d Dyneema X).  Abrasion resistance is pretty good, it has a reasonably soft hand, but not too soft.  Waterproofness wears out quickly and the fabric can delaminate from the PU coating which doesn’t impact the fabric  other than the waterproofness – after which there is none.

Perhaps the Ultragrid has somewhat different properties, but at  casual look it appears very similar other than it uses recycled nylon and unbranded UHMWPD rather than branded Spectra or Dyneema.

Ultra 200x is a fabric made up of UHMWPD and Polyester (I’m not sure how much of the fabric is UHMWPD) with a PET backing (like Dimension Polyant fabric – like VX21) – With 200d and what I imagine is a fairly high concentration of UHMWPD it should be even more abrasion resistant and the PET laminate should be more durable than the PU coating.

Nylon will hold and absorb some water.  UHMWPD or Polyester shouldn’t absorb any water – they may hold some water in the weave but the material itself will not absorb water.

Now, some of the experts here can probably explain all of this better than I.

Ultra X is better than Ultra but I think there have been some isolated reports of delamination with Ultra X as well. Though it is much better than Ultra. Ultra and Ultra X just has the outer layer and a mylar backing. The mylar backing thickness has been increased to 0.75 units in Ultra X from 0.5 units in Ultra due to delamination reports.

Ultragrid is not as strong as gridstop aka dyneema X is what I have heard. One can tear Ultragrid by hand apparently while it is very difficult to do that with Dyneema X or DX210 used by MLD etc in the past.

I think 5 oz DCF used by HMG is the best – but unfortunately no one uses this anymore other than HMG.

You will have to take your chances with Ultra X if you want waterproofness and want a Kakwa.

Interesting Ultra discussion here:https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/200284224/tufa-climbing-mochilla-33#ForumMessage-200304316

Good info on improvements made to Ultra X.

The XT fabric he talks about adds another layer on top of the mylar to protect the mylar layer (similar to VX in XPAC) and that may be a better option than Ultra X by itself. Though not sure how many pack makers will start using that once it is available – hope everyone moves to Ultra XT as it just seems like a better design than leaving the mylar exposed.

Searching Google – you will find one report of Ultra X delamination and many reports of Ultra delamination. That said – people have got 5000 miles on Ultra without any issues. Challenge doesn’t make Ultra any more because of the widespread delalmination issues. Ultra X is definitely better and maybe the one report was some quality issue – who knows. Nashville Cutaway explicitly states that they are not responsible for any delamination issues – not to run with their frameless packs or something like that.

That said, I do have 3 Ultra X packs knowing that I may run into delamanitation issues – praying I will not – as folks have stopped making packs using other fabrics.

I picked up a Kakwa 40 in UltraGrid earlier this year. The new version of the pack wasn’t available yet in Ultra 200x and anyway I got a killer deal on it.

I had the same questions as the OP, and since it’s still pretty new hasn’t rained yet in SoCal I can’t comment on durability or water retention.

someone at Durstan did respond to my questions about the options with this: “ for the UltraGrid, it has a softer/less crinkly feel to it, and in certain conditions the tighter weave can be an advantage for durability. Therefore, is still a very durable whilst being lightweight.”

I’ve had an HMG NorthRim and a VX pack that were hydrophobic, and I like that.  But I know I don’t often get sustained wet weather where I hike in the SW and Sierra and I’ll still have my down in a dry bag for protection. Time will tell on the durability, but I’m very happy so far.

We have an FAQ about this on our website (at the bottom of the Kakwa page). The main advantage of Ultra 200X is that is stronger/tougher but realistically UltraGrid is pretty tough too, so it can be a moot point. It is also slightly lighter and does gain less water weight because the UHWMPE and poly fibers are not water absorbent like nylon. The main advantages of the UltraGrid are the lower price and softer feel. It also has a tighter weave to give stronger seams. Seam strength was sometimes an issue on earlier packs, but we have designed around this on current packs (e.g. larger seam allowances) so that is a solved issue. Mostly I would choose Ultra 200X if you want tougher or slightly lighter, and UltraGrid if you want more affordable.

Thanks, everyone (and Dan)! I think Dan’s last sentence summarizes it well.

Here comes a purchase!

I have a 40 in 200x and a 50 in ultra grid.  I prefer the feel of the ultra grid when handling the rolltop, the water repellency of the 200x as well as the ease of single handed zipper function due to the stiffer nature of the 200x.  Both fabrics offer a fantastic value but the packs in ultra grid really standout at sub $200.  I have owned dozens of packs over 50 years of backing and you can’t go wrong with either.
Everyone’s anatomy is slightly different but based on reviews it appears these packs have fewer instances where they don’t work out.