You had a 2 ounce pack,please do tell.The Sea-to-Summit pack I used to thru-hike the Colorado Trail was nearly 11 oz lighter
You had a 2 ounce pack,please do tell.The Sea-to-Summit pack I used to thru-hike the Colorado Trail was nearly 11 oz lighter
If I die trying now I wont die wondering how life could have turned out.....
Zimmerbuilt quickstep is about the same
http://www.zimmerbuilt.com/store/p36...Step_Pack.html
I don't know how much to tell. Sea-to-Summit makes a 2.4 oz pack. They have made it for a couple of years. It a little bit small but if you are truly a UL then it works great. When I did the Colorado Trail last year, I didn't even notice I had a pack on.
http://www.seatosummit.com/product/?...o2=0&o3=377-36
Wolf
Pretty much every pack (from a cottage vendor) is a Ray Jardine or Glen Van Peski variant in some form...
X-Pac is a bit like cuben (comes from sail cloth industry too). It also comes in lots of flavors and weights. Instead of a Dyneema mosquito netting like layer (like Cuben) in the sandwich of PET layers though it has a very heavy diamond grid of dyneema laid onto a base fabric (nylon) prior to lamination. Some of it has an inner liner (scrim) but I think all the pack folks are using the X series without it. So it's like the laminated Cuben z-packs uses but a bit tougher.
It is very stiff and tough. So stuff like bike panniers, dry sacks, or waterproof duffels make a lot of sense.
Same deal for a bomber pack (bushwhacking, etc), and/or waterproof pack for something like canyoneering.
To an extent... it sews like fabric so it's a bit easier to work with in that respect, but depending on the weight you use it is very stiff and hard to roll/fold/etc.
There were folks having issues with it delaminating (like a PU coated pack would have)... not sure if that has been fixed as the fabric began being marketed more for packs than sails.
Personally; as Wolf is pointing out... at base fabric weights of 4-10oz per yard... it's heavy. Yes it's only a yard of fabric in some of the minimal designs like this- but the fabric itself is overkill for a maintained trail.
The advantage to it is that because it is so stiff it can act as a mild frame/support for a frameless pack. But to keep it competitive on weight you need to slash out all the features as these guys have done.
Nothing wrong with it- just that even something simple like the Gossamer Gear pad sleeve many like- gone. Same with other features. You've "blown your budget" weight wise on the fabric itself; so I'd say to consider that a bit harder as the fabric becomes the "features". Not so much buyer beware but buyer be aware.
Folks out west may find the fabric a big bonus; but a dyneema x fabic is more than tough enough for most folks- https://ripstopbytheroll.com/product...ema-x-gridstop
ULA uses a 210 denier Robic and Gossamer gear uses either a 100d or 70d version of the same fabric to give you an idea. Those are both considered pretty durable (ULA pretty Bomber for UL packs) so to me that's enough fabric durability IMO... the X-pac stuff typically used seems a bit much.
I originally thought this was these guys finally getting things going... they've been around a while and looks like they do finally have a pack out now too. http://www.cascadecraftworks.com/shop/highline
(I mainly saw them as a source of materials) http://www.cascadecraftworks.com/fabric/
SwoDaddy- might want to poke around on Backpacking Light to see if the delamination issues have gone away as I don't know for sure as I passed on this material in my mind and stopped watching it.
Keep in mind- there are lots of different weights and makeups as well.
I can't comment on Mystery Ranch's choice to pull it... could have simply been the same issues folks had getting Cuben/Dyneema material for a bit as consolidation of the brands took place.
Or they could have simply said we'll stick with what we know. A heavy PU coated fabric will eventually break down (decade of use?) but everyone knows how to sew it and how it behaves. I think with Xpac- the simpler the shapes the better and it would probably be hard to integrate that fabric into a more complicated pack like a mystery ranch where there are lots of reinforcements and stress points that would be impossible to match to the X grid on a small scale like a pack.
You disgust me. Great share! What were you averaging MPD, how often resupplying, averaging for daily calories, in what direction, and in what month did you CT thru? I also would very much like for you to share your kit with these factors included!!! Seriously, don't leave us hanging without these details!!!
Indeed! Share the details of your SUL minimalist CT thru-hike.
T U JB. I'm on the same page. My conclusions too.
"Pretty much every pack (from a cottage vendor) is a Ray Jardine or Glen Van Peski variant in some form..."
the frozen man found in the Alps Otzi Had a backpack like that.
Thom
You'd be astonished to hear the SUL wt Wolf probably carried on that CT hike. He's been doing it for over ? yrs and many many miles too. He's a minimalist expert.
I recalls Wolf saying his base wt is around 2-2.5 lbs in the past. He doesnt talk about his gear, but anyone thats ever tried to achieve 5 lbs has a good idea of what you can and cant bring to get that low.
I use my s2s as a travel bag, and day pack occasionally. 8-10 lbs is OK. Its light enough to bring for summit pack for most. I would do overnight with it. Someone on bpl played with one a few yrs ago adding foam back for comfort /structure and SUL loads.
Several mfgs used to offer simple silly nylon packs in ~5oz range, but there was no money to be made.
theinfamous,
I keep my pack really lightweight, breaking 10 pounds only when leaving town (5 days food). The shoulder straps are not the best. What I found that worked is if I overlaid my sleeves so I had more padding over where the pack was cutting in, it didn't even bother me. After the first day hiking out of town, my pack was light enough I didn't even notice it on my back. That is what worked for me.
Hope this helps.
Wolf
Wolf
Wow. I think some people just high jacked left52side’s thread. For those that might have forgotten he was telling everyone about the new PA’LANTE packs. I’m sure it is a nice pack and all for $210 - $250. I only point are other packs already available that are already lighter, less expensive and have been used for thru-hiking. My Colorado Thru-hike was unsupported (the same as all my hikes). Cheyou and Just Bill also pointed out several other options that are available.
UL doesn’t have to cost an arm and a leg. I haven’t used a PA’LANTE pack and cannot say either good or bad things about it. Maybe left52side might have some first-hand knowledge. Get us back on track.
Wolf
No sorry I have no knowledge of these packs,I had just been watching some John Z. videos and I knew him and Andrew Bentz were working on A new pack company.left52side might have some first-hand knowledge. Get us back on track
I agree that the price is rather steep for A pack that is to be used as A minimalist type FKTER pack.
I myself will generally use something along the lines of A gossamer gear rukus pack or similar for those type hikes.
If I die trying now I wont die wondering how life could have turned out.....
Might want to be mindful of being perceived as UL arrogant defining 'true UL' according to one's own definition than imposing that 'trueness' on others. It is perceived by some, including those who could benefit from going lighter, as another pissing contest.
These packs could be fine for some as Ulers doing their hikes under their scenarios.
I think the underneath stretchy pocket is a bit gimmicky and potentially a weak spot of the design.