Lightweight Internal Frame Packs: a State of the Market Report - Part 1A: Testing Overview and List of Packs Tested

This topic is empty.

Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 87 total)

← 1 2 3 4 →

Author

Posts
Sep 1, 2010 at 5:57 pm #1642374

Wesley Witt
Spectator

@weswitt
Locale: Northwest

I vote for McHale. His packs are the best for sure.

Sep 1, 2010 at 6:25 pm #1642383

Franco Darioli
Spectator

@franco
Locale: Gauche, CU.

Kind of disappointing that some are …disappointed that the review ONLY has 26 packs considering that it is limited to a fairly narrow criteria.

One point I did not see considered is that with both the ping pong ball and Roger's version ( I came up independently with that 'solution" also)of the volume test, I am sure that you could add a few liters of water in between the balls , therefore taking it much closer to the claimed capacity.
Maybe a thin bladder (like a dry sack) filled with water could give a better measurement.
But of course even if the numbers are not correct the review does offer a comparison between the models tested.

As for the roll-top standard, I used that 3x bit also to measure the difference between the old and the new Circuit, however often I only fold my Aarn twice and that is enough to keep it dry. (the Aarns have a dry sack built in)

Franco

Sep 1, 2010 at 7:20 pm #1642398

Eric Blumensaadt
BPL Member

@danepacker
Locale: Mojave Desert

A good review of volume. Now on to more subjective topics like adjustability, hip belt comfort, shoulder strap comfort, lift straps (yes/no), side pocket attatchment provisions (yes/no) etc.

And thanks for introducing the self-descriptive terms "harness face" and "back face". I like them and hope the industry will adopt them as well. Perhaps if we all began using those terms in out posts industry WILL catch on.

Sep 1, 2010 at 7:37 pm #1642402

Anonymous
Inactive

"Maybe a thin bladder (like a dry sack) filled with water could give a better measurement."

+1

Or maybe a trash compactor bag used to line the pack before filling with water.

Sep 1, 2010 at 7:47 pm #1642408

Mary D
BPL Member

@hikinggranny
Locale: Gateway to Columbia River Gorge

While I found the the pack selection rather disappointing, I was definitely interested in the volume measurements. Roger's findings confirmed something I always suspected!

Despite some disappointments, I'm looking forward to the future articles!

Sep 1, 2010 at 7:49 pm #1642409

Ike Mouser
Member

@isaac-mouser

cilo gear packs are $750+? Wow, bet they wont sell very many, thats insane.

Sep 1, 2010 at 7:53 pm #1642414

Tom Clark
BPL Member

@tomclark
Locale: East Coast

"We discussed these, and Will decided they should fall into a difference category – sort of 'frameless with just a little stay'. So they WILL appear, but in a different review."

It would be nice to get some comment(s) in that next review to help link the two categories since I might not separate packs into the same categories as Roger did.

Tom

Sep 1, 2010 at 8:31 pm #1642431

Ike Mouser
Member

@isaac-mouser

holy crapola, they have a 1200+ backpack. Will suck when that thing rips falling down a hill. ouch, but i guess if you can afford that you can afford a few of them.

Sep 1, 2010 at 8:49 pm #1642433

James holden
BPL Member

@bearbreeder-2

while i appreciate all the hardwork put in … IMO reviewing packs is like reviewing shoes … you cannot quantify the most important thing … the fit of the pack … what works for one may not work for another

youre left with stuff you can get by looking at the manuf websites … like weight, volume, features, materials …

the only way to figure out what pack works for you IMO is to try it on

everyone likes different features and different fits … all the discussion about missing packs just shows it

Sep 2, 2010 at 1:04 am #1642459

Andrew Dolman
Spectator

@andydolman

"One point I did not see considered is that with both the ping pong ball and Roger's version … of the volume test, I am sure that you could add a few liters of water in between the balls, therefore taking it much closer to the claimed capacity."

The ping pong balls/poly peanuts have the same air gaps between them when they are in the in the box as they do in the packs – so this is not an issue with the method. ie. you measure the volume of balls+air in the box – not just the volume of the balls.

Sep 2, 2010 at 1:26 am #1642462

Andrew Dolman
Spectator

@andydolman

"If all of the packs mentioned are available in your parts, but only 1/2 are available in the US, where the majority of membership resides, then I would opine that this is not a particularly robust sample."

I wish all the packs were available in the UK. Elemental Horizons, JanSport, Montbell, One Planet, REI, and ULA are all very hard to come by here. We can of course import them sight-unseen – as can you with the Crux and Lightwave packs.

"To comment that "a fairly sizeable portion" and then immediately ask what that percentage would be suggests that you should first ask the question""

I suppose you have a point, but I know that there is a portion of the readership who are not North America based, what portion I don't know so I asked. 7 non NA readers have commented in this thread – so it's not tiny.

", get the answer, and then provide an irrelevant comment."

Have a nice day!

Sep 2, 2010 at 2:36 am #1642464

Martin RJ Carpenter
Member

@martincarpenter

Suspect outside pockets not so much a UK/Europe vs USA thing as climbing vs mountain marathon etc.

Climbers (Crux very much and Lightwave by inheritance) don't use them of course. Mountain marathon sacs the other source of lightweight things, and they seem very keen on all kinds of external storage. Like OMM(UK) for instance.

Sep 2, 2010 at 3:45 am #1642469

carlos fernandez rivas
BPL Member

@pitagorin
Locale: Galicia -Spain

Mostly european manufactures has a strong tradition making "mountaineering packs"
when they manufacture "light packs" sometimes they use "alpine designs" (no pockets)

Anyway in european users use to "keep all the stuff in" and use to drink during stops or use hydration bags as roger explain

About Cilogear packs My pack (dyneema 60 2010) weights more than 2kg total weight … much more over the criteria…

Sep 2, 2010 at 7:12 am #1642499

Clayton Black
BPL Member

@jivaro

Good stuff. Great point and review about the inconsistencies of pack volumes. Something to be aware of even if your favorite pack/brand isn't in the article.

Looking forward to the next part of the review.

Sep 2, 2010 at 7:49 am #1642507

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

"We can of course import them sight-unseen – as can you with the Crux and Lightwave packs."

No. We can't.

Sep 2, 2010 at 7:56 am #1642511

Andrew Dolman
Spectator

@andydolman

Er, why not? Try this store here.

http://www.ultralightoutdoorgear.co.uk/lightwave_ultrahike_60.html

They will ship to the USA for about £20.

Sep 2, 2010 at 9:08 am #1642531

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

I'm in Canada.

Sep 2, 2010 at 9:10 am #1642532

Andrew Dolman
Spectator

@andydolman

They ship to Canada too. Are you doing this just to annoy me?

Sep 2, 2010 at 9:20 am #1642534

David Ure
Member

@familyguy

Whether you are annoyed is irrelevant to me.

Sep 2, 2010 at 12:31 pm #1642577

Franco Darioli
Spectator

@franco
Locale: Gauche, CU.

Andrew
Re Ping Pong balls…
You are indeed correct. I am posting this at 5:30 am cause at about 4 am I woke up thinking about that..
I run a test (in my head…) using a bucket of a known size only to realise that as you state the air gap remains more or less the same regardless of the shape of the container..
Franco

Sep 2, 2010 at 10:02 pm #1642717

Roger Caffin
BPL Member

@rcaffin
Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe

I do have a Deuter ACT Lite 40+10 pack, but it turned up just a little late in the day … Apparently that was the largest they could send at the time. It will be reviewed along the same lines as soon as.

I haven't checked recently, but I suspect the ACT 60+10 might be over the weight limit?

Cheers

Sep 2, 2010 at 10:15 pm #1642719

Roger Caffin
BPL Member

@rcaffin
Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe

which is why I haven't kept up with all the questions. There may even be a few typos in the articles, but NOT in the metric measurements as far as I know (because I took those measurements myself, rather than relying on the vendor).

Yes, I am sure we could have tested even more packs. But do please note the word 'tested'. BPL does NOT do desk reviews like some mags: all gear gets taken out into the field and USED. The amount of work involved has been huge; the volume of packs lying around the house has been equally large. Sue (my wife) has been very tolerant, and even cooperative.

Anyhow folks: there are another FIVE instalments to come! Another two on 'theory', and then three with mini-reviews of EVERY pack tested.

Policy statement: you can expect more in-depth surveys of this nature in the future – with lots of real measurements. Feedback is always appreciated.

Cheers

Sep 3, 2010 at 8:23 am #1642783

Addie Bedford
BPL Member

@addiebedford
Locale: Montana

First of all: PLAY NICE. I will put the smackdown on you guys if need be. Mostly by harassing you via email.

That counts as smackdown, right? Right?!

Second, apologies for the conversion errors. Roger included some conversions for our American readers, I came up with some of the others, and it's just a messy task, especially considering how big this article is. The errors that were pointed out have been fixed. Please feel free to PM me if you notice typos or errors – they drive me nuts, and I appreciate the help!

Third, we're trying something new with this SOTM. The big SOTM itself will be published in three sections (first one here) in successive weeks (almost all at once, but with one-week breathers between each). We'll skip a week, and the last piece of the SOTM will have individual mini-reviews published all at once. Rather than draw things out like we did with the down jacket SOTM, I will be loading ALL of the reviews and making them accessible from one page. I'm exhausted just thinking about it, but it will hopefully be a great tool for readers.
Thanks!
Addie

Sep 3, 2010 at 9:12 am #1642795

Rakesh Malik
Member

@tamerlin
Locale: Cascadia

" the volume of packs lying around the house has been equally large"

… a new meaning for the phrase, "Pack rat" …

Anyway, I have to admit that the plethora packs cluttering up your house would be entertaining to see. Now I'm imagining a similar profusion of tents…

Sep 3, 2010 at 3:40 pm #1642876

Roger Caffin
BPL Member

@rcaffin
Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe

> a new meaning for the phrase, "Pack rat"
Please: the technically and politically correct term is 'gear freak' :-)
(Pack rats collect ANYthing; gear freaks collect interesting gear.)

> Now I'm imagining a similar profusion of tents…
I have no more than 7 tents …. (I think)

But there are a few sleeping bags and quilts here and there, and a growing pile of other gear items waiting to be tested. Yeah, my wife does make the occasional comment.

Cheers
Author

Posts