View Full Version : what would you recommend?
I am looking for a bag that has about 3300 ci (~55 Liters). I like the Skareb 55 by TNF and the Gregory Z55, but there is one problem:
neither of them have bottom access. the Z55 has front access, but what I really want is a bottom area. ~3lb is ok for the weight. What do you recommend that has about 3300 ci and has at least top and bottom access?
Most popular packs in that range don't come with a seperate bottom compartment, such as the ULA's, Z-Pack and Vapor Trail.
off the top of my head, the only pack I can think of is the Vapor Lattitude by granite gear. It's got front panel access, so the entire pack opens up from the front makin it easy to access things at the bottom, like a sleeping bag. My buddy used it on his PCT thru-hike and loved it. 2 lbs 10 oz for a medium and it has held up great after 2600 miles.
Whatever you decide to do, I feel its my moral duty to sway you from purchasing a North Face pack. Yes, they jazzed the designs and lightened up some, but it's still North Face. We couldn't give these packs away at the shop I worked at. Do you really want to thru-hike with a pack made by a company owned by Vanity Fair??:-?
warraghiyagey
11-30-2007, 21:46
I'd recommend not starting different threads about the SAME friggin topic.
take-a-knee
11-30-2007, 22:08
SKAR, please ignore the rude yankee, sometimes they just can't help themselves, it must have something to do with the weather up there.
Back to packs, I've owned exactly one that was panel opening, never again. It was harder to organize and impossible to keep anything dry. With a top loader you can use a trash compactor bag to line the pack and load you bag first, hammock or tent body, then clothing and roll the top of the plastic liner down and tuck it between your gear and the inside of the pack...you stuff stays dry. You can goose neck it and put a rubber band on it and float the pack across streams if need be.
As for sleeping bag compartments at the pack bottom, they are invariably too small, too large, and the zipper is gauranteed to snag and tear a hole in your pack liner.
warraghiyagey
11-30-2007, 22:33
Take a Knee, my bad. It's not the weather. It's not my geography. It's not missing the trail. It's just me working toward not being that way someday.
Peace
:)
take-a-knee
12-01-2007, 00:14
Take a Knee, my bad. It's not the weather. It's not my geography. It's not missing the trail. It's just me working toward not being that way someday.
Peace
:)
Not a problem Warra, I have several NY friends, that's how I know you folks so well. I'm also married to a yankee.
warraghiyagey
12-01-2007, 00:20
Not a problem Warra, I have several NY friends, that's how I know you folks so well. I'm also married to a yankee.
Ha Ha. If you were from up this way you would have known better!
:p :p
first off, you should know i hammock, im the same skar from the HF.
welll, i read somewhere that the bottom compartment is great to put your hammock, quilts, weathershields, etc. that way, it is for easy access, and seperate from the pack.
PS, im a pack cover guy, not a liner guy.
stranger
12-01-2007, 22:42
There is benefit to access on the bottom of packs. The whole access thing came from complaints in the 1980's from external frame users who were frustrated with internal packs not having a easy access to their bag.
So, in order to sell packs (which is the first goal of any pack maker, functional designs come second all too often), companies started doing it. But after many years most people have realized that alternative access other than through the top is simply unnecessary, more expensive, and potentialy problematic.
First off, it makes the pack heavier, less weather-proof and could potentially fail under stress.
Second, generally, you want lighter, bulkier things at the bottom of your pack, like your bag, extra clothing, thermarest, etc...You will not need these things during a typical day.
Third, this concept assumes that you will be taking your bag out of your pack, then putting all the stuff you don't need back into the pack, hence the need to have a compartment to just remove your bag without disturbing the rest of the stuff that you don't need...but why would you carry things that you don't need? That's silly.
So I wouldn't worry about pack "features" when choosing a pack. I would recommend that you focus on fit, suspension, volume, compression, stability, torsion flex, etc...Cause if your pack feels like crap, you won't carry it anyway.
Oh...and make sure the pack you get is what you want, and what you are happy with - I wouldn't regard my advice, through correct, as overly relevant in your quest to get a pack you love.
stranger
12-01-2007, 22:44
Sorry, two things I noticed.
Looking back, I didn't answer your question, I misread your thread. So choose to ignore everything.
And a typo - I meant there is no benefit to bottom access in my opinion.
This is why I went with an external frame pack. It is a little heavy, but atleast I can get to things without emptying the entire pack at times. Also makes it easier to balance the load. I like heavy stuff at the bottom like food, water, and clothes. Unfortunately those are the things that you need most. So in a top loader thay have to be on top or else you have to empty the entire pack for lunch. I choose to carry an extra pound for the convenience.
I am looking for a bag that has about 3300 ci (~55 Liters). I like the Skareb 55 by TNF and the Gregory Z55, but there is one problem:
neither of them have bottom access. the Z55 has front access, but what I really want is a bottom area. ~3lb is ok for the weight. What do you recommend that has about 3300 ci and has at least top and bottom access?
Take a look at osprey atmos 50.Only 3000ci but lower,back,hip,front and main top.I have one and a ula but like the 50 better for comfort.
troglobil
12-02-2007, 11:37
its a bit bigger than you want ...65 liter, but the REI ridgeline has bottom access. It is a decent pack
nitewalker
12-02-2007, 11:53
[quote=skar578;460156]I am looking for a bag that has about 3300 ci (~55 Liters).
it would be really funny to see someone sleeping in a 3300ci bag..if i were you id go with at least 10,000ci bag.....lol:D
i own an older model of this: http://www.trailspace.com/gear/gregory/reality/#description
it is comfortable at 30Lb load, durable and reliable ,top and front openings...
well as I remember correctly, the Skareb 40 fit well, and so did the Gregory z55. The z55
is
said to have front opening, but the website has an arrow pointing from the back of the pack (against your back). How do I get into the front, does the big bucket pocket open up? worst case, no bottom is fine, as long as it has a front.
I wish the gregory advent pro was a bit bigger (the '06 model) and thicker materials. all three openings, darn.
stranger, although you misread my q, the info was still good to have.