Granite Gear Blaze A.C. 60 Review

This topic is empty.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)

Author

Posts
May 8, 2012 at 11:14 am #1289667

Stephanie Jordan
Spectator

@maia
Locale: Rocky Mountains

Companion forum thread to:

Granite Gear Blaze A.C. 60 Review

May 8, 2012 at 12:16 pm #1875565

Mary D
BPL Member

@hikinggranny
Locale: Gateway to Columbia River Gorge

I hope Addie is OK or at least on vacation!

Last week we heard from the Big Boss, and this week BPL evidently has the lovely Maia running the office! Great to hear from both of you!

May 8, 2012 at 1:43 pm #1875596

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

Nice pack except for the torso sizing. Each adjustment is about 2" from reality. I am a 19.5" torso but had to use 22" (the last hole) to get sufficient comfort.

May 8, 2012 at 2:31 pm #1875606

Alina G
BPL Member

@alina
Locale: Toronto, Ontario

Any chance of similar review of Granite Gear Crown pack? Maybe even comparison of the two?
Thank you.

May 8, 2012 at 4:19 pm #1875652

Luke Schmidt
BPL Member

@cameron
Locale: Alaska

I like the review but what happened to Addie? Maia seems capable enough but I hope Addie stays around:)

May 8, 2012 at 4:23 pm #1875653

Robert H
Member

@roberth

It looks a bit Frankenstein! But hey, when did that stop any of us. Thanks for the review.

May 9, 2012 at 9:57 am #1875843

Sam Haraldson
BPL Member

@sharalds
Locale: Gallatin Range

Have been hoping to see an objective review of the 60. This has seemed to me like a great player as an option for a thru-hiker with only a handful of others. The addition of the vertical rear mesh pocket is a superb answer to something that has been missing from GG's packs for about a decade.

ps – Hi, Maia.

May 9, 2012 at 5:05 pm #1875992

Roleigh Martin
BPL Member

@marti124
Locale: Founder & Lead Moderator, https://www.facebook.com/groups/SierraNorthPCThikers

Brad,

Nice review. Could you comment on how much BPL-method measured cubic inches there is in the main compartment of the pack? If you recall the massive review of packs done in the last 18 months, I think it was by Roger Caffin, they used packing peanuts and stuffed the pack full of such, then poured the peanuts in a cubic box that had lines drawn at each cubic foot full of space, thereby being able to tell how much cubic space there was. In that review, the GG Nimbus Ozone came out far short of its advertised cubic inches of volume. I'd like to know if Granite Gear has gone to a more accurate stated capacity.

Thanks.
Roleigh

May 10, 2012 at 7:06 am #1876188

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

I re-read this review and wonder why the pack wasn't weighed by BPL?

On a related note, if one requires more suspension (and a better one) they could buy a Nimbus Meridian and take off the top pocket which would get them to the same weight as the Blaze but without the front pocket.

Also, watch those linelocs carefully. The plastic ends pull off easily.

May 10, 2012 at 7:11 am #1876190

Roleigh Martin
BPL Member

@marti124
Locale: Founder & Lead Moderator, https://www.facebook.com/groups/SierraNorthPCThikers

David, I thought of that too. I miss the old Nimbus Ozone pack, the best pack GG ever made. It has a very long extension collar. Removing the lid from the Nimbus Meridian leaves you with a pack slightly heavier (a couple of ounces) than the Ozone but with hardly any extension collar, and there is nothing to protect the top of the pack from drizzle. It isn't anything as nice as the Nimbus Ozone.

My only complaint about the Ozone is that it truly is not a 62 liter pack as measured by BPL's methodology. It is about that of an Osprey Atmos 55 L pack. I took the amount of peanuts in the pack and they fit into the Atmos.

When one does a John Muir Trail hike and has to take the large Bearikade Expedition Canister pack size counts even though my base gear weight is 12.5 pounds (minus the bear canister).

May 10, 2012 at 4:13 pm #1876399

Brad Groves
BPL Member

@4quietwoods
Locale: Michigan

Hi, all-

First, BPL weight of the AC60 came in at 2 pounds 14.4 ounces. Sorry we didn't get the confirmed weight in there!

In my experience fitting GG packs I've found that the majority of people fit their "proper" frame size, or sometimes down an inch. Like anything, though, fit is dependent upon the individual.

I did not independently verify the volume of the pack. Frankly, that's a whole mess that even the industry cannot seem to agree on. "Standards" are not… and while I could use the method referenced above, its most significant relativity would be to other packs measured in precisely the same way. (Even with the foam peanut method, for example… do you just pour the peanuts in? Or do you "tamp" them in a little bit? How much? Do you measure the pressure of tamping for consistency? If you just pour them in, how do you ensure that all corners of the pack are equally filled? If you add any amount of pressure on the peanuts, how much do they deform? Do you add the same amount when they're then measured in the box? Loads (wait for it…) more questions like this.) One other oddity I've found in pack volume measurement is that some manufacturers include certain pocketry, while others don't. I hope we can get some more consistency in the industry.

Performance and comfort of the Blaze have been excellent, and the capacity for loads of widely varying size has been no less impressive.

At the moment I can't recall if the following point made it into the article: I couldn't find much to cut off the pack. Actually, I decided to just leave it stock. I'm not going to rip the frame out of a framed pack, or take out the foam pad from the back, or dump the hipbelt… those modifications just don't make sense to me on a pack like this. But I have no problem trimming excess strap, removing things like ice axe loops or hydration pockets and so on… and there wasn't really any of that to remove. Kudos to GG for that! At the same time, I wouldn't plan on stripping the factory weight of this pack much lower than it is.

May 12, 2012 at 12:10 am #1876884

David Lang
Member

@idahobackpacker
Locale: Northwest U.S.

Both my fiance and I have this pack. We both just loved the design and fit of this pack. The padding is thick and comfortable, adjusting the suspension for torso length is easy, and you can comfortably carry this pack all day long.

The only thing that I have thought about doing to mine was trimming the excess length from the straps, as several of them are quite long. But I decided against it for now because I don't find it bothersome yet, and the weight savings would be minimal.

As stated in the review, this pack is well made, and IMO, a well thought out design. The lack of zippers is great. Nothing to get snagged up. The roll top design keeps gear securely in place, and the stretch pockets are a feature that I appreciate.

One last thing to note- the hydration pocket on this pack is useless because it is such a tight fit. I didn't really care, because I don't carry a bladder on the trail, but I thought I would mention it so that people considering this pack would be aware of that. I could barely fit my hand halfway down the sleeve.

May 12, 2012 at 7:24 am #1876926

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

"Nothing to get snagged up."

I would disagree with this because of the side and front pockets. They are not very snag proof.

One comment about the front pocket. Once your main bag is full, the available volume of the front pocket is reduced considerably. I wish more pack makers would create front pockets that are separated from the main bag such that they are actually a pocket and not a strip of spandex. That way you could use the volume of the pocket to its fullest.

May 12, 2012 at 8:49 am #1876946

Ken Thompson
BPL Member

@here
Locale: Right there

Wow, that is not an attractive pack. Looks like leftovers sewn together. What's with the straps over the pockets?

May 12, 2012 at 9:03 am #1876951

MFR
Spectator

@bigriverangler
Locale: West

David's right about the pockets snagging. I tore a small hole in the side pocket of my Crown, which uses the same mesh for its pockets as the Blaze. I will say that the stretch mesh is pretty tough (for mesh). I was in some pretty nasty bush whacking, and I felt the snag and could have prevented it. But it is a weak point over fabric pockets.

May 12, 2012 at 9:37 am #1876963

Shane S.
BPL Member

@grinder
Locale: P.N.W

I have carried a Blaze since it's first introduction. I dig the suspension and the colors and think it is good pack, not as comfy as the nimbus ozone but close. I have experianced some abrasion wear to the mesh due to my tent poles.

The down side was the hydro pocket (the pocket is so tight, no way to get a platy in it)and the paracord plastic things at the end of the cord. So, I ordered from quest outfitters some plastic cord end caps which are MUCH better in function and appearance. The next thing I did was ordering some mesh similar to what is on the packs stretch pockests from Quest and then took the pack to a local seamstress and had her cut and sew the matertial into the hydration pocket so now my platy will just slide right in. Works fantastic with no weight penelty. Now the pack is just about steller!

May 12, 2012 at 9:51 am #1876968

MFR
Spectator

@bigriverangler
Locale: West

That's a pretty cool mod. I forgot that the Blaze has the zipper in the hydration pocket too. Pretty unnecessary in my book.

May 15, 2012 at 11:03 am #1877937

Brad Groves
BPL Member

@4quietwoods
Locale: Michigan

I do carry a bladder on the trail, but can't remember the last time I used a hydration pocket. They're a pain to access and use! I've found it much, much easier to just strap my bladder under the lid or top straps. So on the Blaze, for example, I just lay the bladder cross-wise on top of the pack, then cinch the straps over it. When I'm carrying less water, super easy to stop at a stream or whatever, yank off the bladder, and fill up. Also no futzing with routing of hose.

Even with a full pack I could still shove a sil tarp and rain gear in the back pocket…

One thing I would consider removing, come to think of it, is the silly little velcro "organizer" things on the end of some straps. The idea is to take your excess strap, neatly roll it up, and secure it. They're unnecessary and a bit clutzy.

May 15, 2012 at 11:12 am #1877943

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

"Even with a full pack I could still shove a sil tarp and rain gear in the back pocket…"

I will post a review at some point of the modular front pocket I have been testing for HMG (on my Porter). It is not affected at all by how you stuff the main bag.

May 16, 2012 at 2:19 am #1878133

David Lang
Member

@idahobackpacker
Locale: Northwest U.S.

"I would disagree with this because of the side and front pockets. They are not very snag proof."

I was just stating that there were no zippers that would get snagged. The mesh pockets, as with any mesh material, can snag up pretty easily.
Author

Posts