need help picking my first pack

[blantonator]

I'm looking for a 40-50L lightweight pack for several day hikes. So far the Osprey Exos 46 is on the top of the list, but other packs include the REI Flash 50, Osprey Talon 44 and GoLite Jam2. I'd like to buy from REI thanks to my dividends.

How do these packs compare, any clear winners?

EXOS - http://www.rei.com/product/780219
TALON - http://www.rei.com/product/748230
FLASH - http://www.rei.com/product/778469
JAM2 - http://www.rei.com/product/781550

Thanks!

[frisbeefreek]

More info needed:

Your body-size (height, frame)
Expected weight carried
Terrain (are you hiking trails or scrambling in bush)

[blantonator]

More info needed:

Your body-size (height, frame)
Expected weight carried
Terrain (are you hiking trails or scrambling in bush)

ah sure.

I'm 5'6 130lbs, slender/athletic build, carrying around 25-35 lbs. Initially I'll be hiking sections of the AT in Virginia, and probably some out west, more specifically Utah.

[blantonator]

Also how do they Atmos - Exos - Talon compare against each other?

[bigcranky]

Also how do they Atmos - Exos - Talon compare against each other?

Atmos: make SURE the frame doesn't poke you somewhere. It hits me exactly in the middle of my shoulder blade. Not good. Otherwise a nice pack.

Talon: really a frameless pack. Good for 20 pounds only on my back, YMMV.

Exos: New, so no user reports yet. I tried it on at a store, seemed well made and carefully designed.

I personally prefer and recommend a 60 liter pack, especially for a first pack. A 50 liter pack is pretty tight unless you are very careful about your bag, shelter, and clothing.

[blantonator]

how many days is a 50L vs 60L good for?

[bigcranky]

how many days is a 50L vs 60L good for?

Depends entirely on your gear and clothing choices. It's almost always a good idea to buy your other stuff first, then buy the pack that carries it all.

Example: My daughter has a very light kit: down bag, hammock, light clothing, etc. It fills her REI Flash 45 women's pack, with barely any room for food. When she's hiking with us, it's no big deal, but she couldn't take it on a solo hike.

If you are *very* careful with the rest of your gear, and go very light -- high end down bag, tarp for shelter, alcohol stove, very little clothing, etc., -- then a 50 liter pack is good for almost any length hike. Certainly 5 or 6 days of food would fit inside. But if you want to hike in colder weather, it would be more difficult. Ditto if you want a double-wall tent, or extra clothes, etc.

My personal feeling (others will disagree) is that if you have to ask this question, then you should get the 60 liter pack. The REI Flash 65, the Atmos 65, the EXOS 58, all are good, solid, lightweight choices. Just load them up with your gear and pick the one that feels the best on your back.

[JAK]

You are a smaller person, so will need somewhat smaller volume,
but I think it is harder to get a good sized pack in the smaller sizes.

I have a Large Jam2, which works well for me at 3100ci, even in winter if the trip is short. The smallest Jam2 is considerably smaller, 2400ci maybe, not sure, so a Pinnacle might be better if you need a smaller size.

I haven't tried the other light packs. I just bought the first one I saw in a store.

I would stay above 3000ci, and stay under 2 pounds.

[Just a Hiker]

I am a huge fan of the Osprey Packs......they last forever and Osprey really stands behind their products. All the packs you mentioned are great, but the Exos is the one I would pick. They seem to fly off the shelves here in Maine at the various outdoor stoors. As far as a 50L or 60L pack.....maybe try the Aether-60. I have the Aether-60 and it has plenty of room for any length of hike...from a week to a complete thru-hike. Take care.


Just Jim

[skinewmexico]

When you say day hikes, do you mean overnights?

[blantonator]

When you say day hikes, do you mean overnights?

yes, i plan on hiking for 3-4 days (overnights) with my gf this spring. She already has gear, but I am mostly gearless.

[jrnj5k]

golite's pinacle might be more appropriate. Plus it can carry heavier loads and is very light.

[blantonator]

golite's pinacle might be more appropriate. Plus it can carry heavier loads and is very light.

looks like a good pack, but maybe too large for me, as it doesn't come in a small. I need to measure my torso.

[skinewmexico]

I'd second the Pinnacle. LIghtweight, and the 2008 models are on closeout all over. You can make it smaller, but a lot of the other choices can't be made bigger.

[Feral Bill]

Have you gone to a local outfitter and tried on some of these packs? Load them up and walk around the store for an hour or so each. I believe there is an REI nearby, buy, try, and if need be return. What counts is what fits and suits you.

[dloome]

My $0.02. Largely my own cranky opinion: :mad:

If you're looking for your "first pack" you would probably want to avoid an ultralight pack like the Jam 2. I've carried the '2' version of the Jam for about 4,000 miles now and it's a GREAT pack, but until you have some backpacking experience and know how to pack very light, and also how to actually pack/load a frame-less sack, it will very likely not be the most comfortable thing for you. It's also a tad small for fringe season or longer hikes with significant food loads.

I despise Osprey packs. I had an Atmos 50 for awhile and found it SO over-engineered that it gave me a headache. Too many pockets, belts, zippers, random webbing, AHH! :eek: Though it seems counter-intuitive, I find I'm far more organized and efficient when I DON'T have a ton of pockets and other garbage on my pack, and I think this is an important thing to learn when beginning backpacking. One one occasion or another I've carried other Osprey models (on outings like trail maintenance trips where the pack was provided for me) and had similar sentiments. When did a sack to carry your stuff in necessitate this ridiculous feat of engineering? I guess after many thousands of miles of walking with a pack, I value simplicity, spare functionality, and accomplishing more with less. These packs just seem like WAY too much to me. But hey, lotsa people love them, just my opinion there.

If I had to reccomend a pack, I'd look at the Granite Gear Vapor Trail or Nimbus Ozone (2 and 3 pounds, 3600 and 3800 cubes respectively.) Both are GREAT packs, very light, simply designed, and I've found them comfortable even beyond the manufacturers loading guide. Actual construction is excellent on every Granite Gear pack I've used or seen: No sloppy stitching, perfectly finished seams, etc. I also know Granite Gear customer service to be excellent. I've used the Vapor Trail as my Winter pack the past two years and love it. Both of these packs have extension collars that seem to swallow up anything, and I think the listed volume may be understated.

Good luck with your first pack!

[Just a Hiker]

My $0.02. Largely my own cranky opinion: :mad:

If you're looking for your "first pack" you would probably want to avoid an ultralight pack like the Jam 2. I've carried the '2' version of the Jam for about 4,000 miles now and it's a GREAT pack, but until you have some backpacking experience and know how to pack very light, and also how to actually pack/load a frame-less sack, it will very likely not be the most comfortable thing for you. It's also a tad small for fringe season or longer hikes with significant food loads.

I despise Osprey packs. I had an Atmos 50 for awhile and found it SO over-engineered that it gave me a headache. Too many pockets, belts, zippers, random webbing, AHH! :eek: Though it seems counter-intuitive, I find I'm far more organized and efficient when I DON'T have a ton of pockets and other garbage on my pack, and I think this is an important thing to learn when beginning backpacking. One one occasion or another I've carried other Osprey models (on outings like trail maintenance trips where the pack was provided for me) and had similar sentiments. When did a sack to carry your stuff in necessitate this ridiculous feat of engineering? I guess after many thousands of miles of walking with a pack, I value simplicity, spare functionality, and accomplishing more with less. These packs just seem like WAY too much to me. But hey, lotsa people love them, just my opinion there.

If I had to reccomend a pack, I'd look at the Granite Gear Vapor Trail or Nimbus Ozone (2 and 3 pounds, 3600 and 3800 cubes respectively.) Both are GREAT packs, very light, simply designed, and I've found them comfortable even beyond the manufacturers loading guide. Actual construction is excellent on every Granite Gear pack I've used or seen: No sloppy stitching, perfectly finished seams, etc. I also know Granite Gear customer service to be excellent. I've used the Vapor Trail as my Winter pack the past two years and love it. Both of these packs have extension collars that seem to swallow up anything, and I think the listed volume may be understated.

Good luck with your first pack!


I agree with your comments on the Granite Gear packs, but I have to disagree with your comments regarding Osprey Packs. I have the 2005 model of the Aether-60 and it has a top pouch and one single web pouch in the back, and I am sort of partial to having a hip belt......so, I am wondering how that is being "Over Engineered"?

[MintakaCat]

Depends entirely on your gear and clothing choices. It's almost always a good idea to buy your other stuff first, then buy the pack that carries it all.

That's what I was thinking too. And with him being new to this, I bet he'll need a pack thats a bit larger also.

[blantonator]

My $0.02. Largely my own cranky opinion: :mad:

If you're looking for your "first pack" you would probably want to avoid an ultralight pack like the Jam 2. I've carried the '2' version of the Jam for about 4,000 miles now and it's a GREAT pack, but until you have some backpacking experience and know how to pack very light, and also how to actually pack/load a frame-less sack, it will very likely not be the most comfortable thing for you. It's also a tad small for fringe season or longer hikes with significant food loads.

I despise Osprey packs. I had an Atmos 50 for awhile and found it SO over-engineered that it gave me a headache. Too many pockets, belts, zippers, random webbing, AHH! :eek: Though it seems counter-intuitive, I find I'm far more organized and efficient when I DON'T have a ton of pockets and other garbage on my pack, and I think this is an important thing to learn when beginning backpacking. One one occasion or another I've carried other Osprey models (on outings like trail maintenance trips where the pack was provided for me) and had similar sentiments. When did a sack to carry your stuff in necessitate this ridiculous feat of engineering? I guess after many thousands of miles of walking with a pack, I value simplicity, spare functionality, and accomplishing more with less. These packs just seem like WAY too much to me. But hey, lotsa people love them, just my opinion there.

If I had to reccomend a pack, I'd look at the Granite Gear Vapor Trail or Nimbus Ozone (2 and 3 pounds, 3600 and 3800 cubes respectively.) Both are GREAT packs, very light, simply designed, and I've found them comfortable even beyond the manufacturers loading guide. Actual construction is excellent on every Granite Gear pack I've used or seen: No sloppy stitching, perfectly finished seams, etc. I also know Granite Gear customer service to be excellent. I've used the Vapor Trail as my Winter pack the past two years and love it. Both of these packs have extension collars that seem to swallow up anything, and I think the listed volume may be understated.

Good luck with your first pack!

Thanks for the advice. The Vapor looks like a great pack, and at 90 bux tough to beat price wise. I'll have to check it out and see how it fits.