Guide’s Gear Award No. 1: Gossamer Gear Mariposa Backpack

The Mariposa is one nice pack. I have used many different packs from Gossamer Gear. This one has evolved steadily over the past 10 years or so to become one of the best high volume packs out there. While GG makes several packs (the UL Murmur at about 10oz is my choice for low volume trips up to two weeks) the Mariposa remains a cornerstone of their line.

With the newer cuben fibers replacing the older spinnaker cloth, durability with their shelters is becoming a non-issue. They increased the weight of the Mariposa to increase the overall durability by at least twice over the years, the Mariposa rests at the apex of this trend. Not bad in a 30oz pack (for a size medium.)

Does the hipbelt really just slide in and is not held by velcro? The video suggests as much.

It's sweet that GG keeps some blue as a nod to Glen.

Yes, there is velcro. This accounts for the low load carrying of 35pounds. Additional weight (the pack can certainly handle more) along with the constant movement of each stride often causes the belts to start creeping on the velcro. 30lb is the recommended weight. Solidly mounting the hip-belt will up the loading considerably, but you loose the flexibility of the modular units.

How does the load transfer to the hip belt compare, structurally and functionally, to the pack I just ordered, the SMD Fusion 50?

Well I cannot say, never used the SMD.

In theory, there is likely not a lot of difference. But, I will try to underline some of the things that jump out at me.

1) Size. The Mariposa is a LOT larger:
*By the numbers: Mariposa is 57L (~3487ci) Fusion 50 is 50L (3050ci)
*Practcal size: The external pad keeper on the Mariposa keeps the pad from inside the pack adding about 2x10x20 (400ci) to the internal volume.

2) Weight. I would guess the more rigid framework on the SMD allows more weight to be carried (~40lbs.)

3) Pack weight. The Mariposa is about 6oz lighter (more if you count removing the sit pad.)

4) If stripped, the Mariposa is suitable as a UL pack, with loads less than 20 pounds. The hip belt, sit pad & stay can be removed saving about 8.4oz on total weight. The compression system allows it to be pulled down to ~2000ci.

If stripped, the Fusion 50 lets you drop the hip belt, saving around 10oz. I believe it has a better compression system, also. I would guess at ~1500ci.

Both have load lifters to keep things snug, regardless of the load.

5) Both have decent suspensions. I have loaded up my smaller Gorilla pack to 40+ pounds and taken training hikes with it. The Mariposa has the same suspension.

I think the overall usability of the Mariposa would be greater since the volume would come in handy for winter trips, giving you greater usage. By the same token, I don't think I would use it in summer because of the volume. I use a Murmur for trips up to 2 weeks. Or, an older MiniPosa for up to three weeks (it's lighter than the Gorilla.)

On the new Mariposa I don't see any side compression straps or cords at all unless they are inside the pockets?

The Gorilla has great looking compression straps.

No straps, just grosgrain loops for cord.

I never found the velcro hipbelt attachment to be a limiting factor, and never had it slip or come undone, even at loads close to 50 pounds.

I see the loops now on closeup, so no real good compression then.

The loops allow for good compression if you use a non-stretch cord. Something light (polypropylene cord) and thick (e.g., 3mm) is effective for this purpose. Thinner cords used for compression, especially abrasive ones like spectra/dyneema can cause unnecessary wear on the fabric. If you use elastic cord don't expect to have very effective compression / stabilization of pack volume.

I guess what I really meant was no regular, easy to use, does not interfere with the side pockets, standard sewn in, not retrofitted compression.

Generally, with larger packs and light loads, say for an overnight or two, I just use a liner around my Sleeping Bag. This pretty much allows it to expand fairly well, filling any excess volume. Compression is not something I am much concerned about, rarely even threading the cord supplied by GG. (Actually have a couple hanks around here, I keep forgetting to put them back in the box when these are returned.)

For most people, the Mariposa is the single pack that will allow you to do the most at the least amount of weight. It represents a really good compromise between pack weight, carry capacity, volume, and flexibility. If this is the only pack you have, you can do a lot. It is not a 10oz Murmur HL. Nor is it a 7oz G5 SUL. Nor is it a 5#4oz Gregory "super pack." It is a UL pack.

The ancient formula for the "Big Three": two pounds for the pack, two pounds for the tent, two pounds for the sleeping bag lets you hit the so called 10 pound weight limit for UL backpacking. It doesn't cheat and call 35oz the same as two pounds. For it's purpose, it works really well for short trips/long weekends, to, two+ week long trips (with careful packing,) and, for thru hiking. It works fairly well for winter. That is a lot of territory to cover for a UL pack. The Mariposa does it well. And has been doing it for a long time. Kudos to BPL for choosing it!

But, I'm biased; I am an unpaid GG Ambassador. I would not choose this pack for myself. To me, anything over one pound for a pack is a waste of weight. (Besides, my poor old body couldn't handle any more, I think.) But, that's me…

So I've gone through about 8 packs in the last 4 years… (mainly buying through BPL used gear forum!) trying to figure out what I really wanted and needed in a pack. I eventually got a really good idea of what I wanted, but found that it didn't really exist.

Then GG released these updated Mariposa's and it was perfect, literally exactly what I wanted…on paper.

I got mine a few months ago. Pretty sure I'm going to buy another one in case I lose/wear out this one. I'm done pack shopping, my road ended with this pack.

I don't have specifics as for any one thing that sold me…it's just what I wanted in one package, size/weight, features/fit and build. Being someone who hikes predominantly in the Sierra, a bear can is with me at all times so I don't get to play in the 'super ultralight' no suspension world. This pack has proven to be the ultimate in compromise between weight/features and comfort for what I wanted. And has delivered on the expectations.

Very glad to see that others agree.

As a long term Mariposa user, I believe this Mariposa pack can no longer be considered "light weight". But I guess you can strip it down and opt for no hip belt. This Mariposa is aimed at a different market than those old 16oz blue ones from 2003. How could it have evolved to be a two pound pack?
Aussie Dave
Canberra Australia

Hi,
I've got a 2011 Mariposa Plus, and although I have a lighter CF pack now, I occasionally take this guy out and,like with my older dogs,I pause and reflect on the places we've been and the times we'll have together in the great beyond(weeping please!!)
My first UL pack and I had no complaints. I tried a friends newer Mariposa a few years ago and was jealous. These are fantastic packs and I think my search for a lighter pack may have obscured the fact that at my age (63) comfort counts a lot. I had to replace the shoulder pads but no biggy, They could be replaced.
Pretty keen,
TomL

Bear canister compatibility?

Edit: Sorry I missed that part in Mike's post.

Ken,
I used a Bearikade Expedition in my pack Vertically and stuffed bag, clothes, whatever around it and although i hated the 2 lbs. ,it carried well through the sierras where I was supposed to use it. Got checked once.
TomL

Strange I find myself so far from BPL on something. This pack goes against many of the design principles I get from the lightweight approach. And the frame is not one of them.

Lightweight is about simplicity. Simple means light and robust: less things to add up in weight, less things to break. In a pack, I take simplicity as a seamless, high volume bag with a cord lock top and extension sleeve for the odd, long section overload. Carefully chosen extras, which are always a compromise.

Multiple pockets: IMO pockets mean a couple of things, number one thing the main bag is too small, number two the user is considered inherently disorganized and pockets come to the rescue. Pockets add fabric and seams and they're a poor way of adding capacity to a pack. Do that on the main bag and let the user organize internally, if needed. Plus a pack with protruding balloons all over the place is just not stylish.

The one reason I would find pockets useful is easy access on the go, for which hipbelt pockets and low, side pockets I can take.

A lid is another accessory I don't get. A rolltop is functionally equivalent, it is simpler and lets you expand pack's capacity if needed, as it is sometimes the case at the beginning of long sections. A lid is limiting, complex and the worst place ever for a pocket. The pocketed lid is so stack in mainstream pack design that I take it as the paradigm of what I don't want in a pack.

I don't care much about compression systems as the gear inside can do that itself but if there is one I like it's the side straps. They're effective, integrate well and they're the place I like to attach anything externally, if needed.

^ yep

BPL should update this page

Guide Choices

What happened in the last 15 months?

To me this new version seems like the natural evolution of a product. It started as a niche product with a small market, and they iterated over the years to arrive at something that appeals to more people.

I bought a Mariposa Plus in 2010 which is around the time they first offered the aluminum stay. I think the listed weight at the time was probably 23-24 ounces, but with hip belt pockets mine weighs 25.2oz. So in the end this new version is only a few ounces heavier than what GG has been selling for the last 5 years, and it looks to be more durable. My pack is now beginning to show it's age with minor damage and repairs, and this new Mariposa is what will eventually replace it.

I think we all should keep in mind that there are quite varying ideas of 'lightweight' and 'ultralight' etc. Just in this thread alone this pack is compared to the 'ultra light' ideal as well as the 'light weight' ideal. Which is it?

Obviously this pack, and GG, are not trying to appeal to the 'ultra light' crowd with this pack…so why are you measuring it against that? Just because it used to be on the fringe, and used to be exactly what you may have wanted it or expected it to be…it's no longer than, and shouldn't be expected to compare against what it is not.

It's not a seamless cinch top no-frill ultra light pack.

It has more features than seemingly some people want…but Gossamer Gear seems to know a little something about their market and customer base.

I replaced an MLD Exodus with this pack, quite a bit 'heavier' and yet…more comfortable with the same load, in my opinion.

Everyone's uses and needs vary, I don't understand why people come into these threads to dump on gear when they don't agree with it's build principles.

> Obviously this pack, and GG, are not trying to appeal to the 'ultra light' crowd with this pack

Obviously, and I'm fine with that. What I find odd is that it gets a BPL award. It surely meets the criteria but I'd expect an award to mean something else

Considering the volume isn't this a UL pack for longer trips?

Isn't UL definition base weight? So you could still be under 12lbs or whatever the magic number is with this pack. And carry a weeks worth of food.

It's not solely about weight. This isn't BPSUL, it's BPL. Not everyone is willing to make the trade offs required to reach a 5 pound base weight. For those of us that want a fully featured, high volume pack that still weighs under 2 pounds, this is a great option.