View Full Version : Ursack Minor vs Ratsack
lazy river road
01-12-2010, 14:39
Ok So im trying to decide between these two bags for food storage too use this summer on my E2E of the LT. Im not so concerned about bears as I am rodents, racoons and other criters who may get their way into my food. I see advantages and disadvantages of both. Ursack minor is lighter while ratsack seems more durable. I want to be able to tie it around a tree trunk and not have to worry about getting it over a limb and booping my self on the head with a biner. Any one use either of these before, suggestions, is it a gymic, should I just go with a regular stuff sack. :-?
Two Speed
01-12-2010, 14:47
Can't comment on ursack vs. ratsack, but have recently invested in an ursack. Got tired of rodents getting into my food bag.
lazy river road
01-12-2010, 14:55
its never even happned to me and I got hungry just thinking about rodents eating through my food so figured id be pro-active about it. Two-Speeds, did you get the ursack or the ursack minor. The website says that the ursack is made for bears while the minor is made special for rodents.
Two Speed
01-12-2010, 15:13
Not sure if there was a rat bag when I bought mine.
The weight difference is enough that I just bought an Ursack Minor for my trip. As they say on the Ursack website, folks that buy now are essentially beta testers, but I'm encouraged that they included racoons in the list of things it's supposed to be proof against.
Given the weight, at worst I can still hang it like a regular food bag, and of course I'll do that anytime bears are much of a concern anyway.
Off the mark, but if you can avoid camping where other humans make a habit of camping or congregating you can avoid much of the rat/mouse/small rodent/bear problems! Start doing it and you'll notice the difference!
Couple smarter campsite choices with some smarter cooking, campsite hygiene/management, food storage(possibly an odor proof Alosack plastic bag), and/or possibly different food choices and the problem mostly goes away. If you practice these measures you will also stop adding to the problem yourself for future hikers. Sometimes, avoiding problems on the trail means not necessarily having to try to change the behavior of the wildlife that lives there, but the human animals that visits there!
Pickleodeon
01-12-2010, 20:53
I had an Ursack (not the minor version) for my thruhike and loved it. No problems with critters at all. The only downside was the rain got in, but that'll happen with most stuff sacks and my food was all ziplocked. I just had a lot of wet ziplocks.
"The only downside was the rain got in, but that'll happen with most stuff sacks and my food was all ziplocked. I just had a lot of wet ziplocks."
I like to keep mine in some sort of outer bag; an indoor-type trash bag liner of appropriate size with drawstring closure is good. If even you use an O.P. sack or don't mind the inside stuff getting a bit wet, I don't like putting a wet Ursack inside my pack.
My Ursack Minor came in the mail today. My immediate impression was "wow, this is light" and of course the related "so can it really keep critters out?"
I don't know, of course, about the latter as I'm not going to subject it to any high abusive tests. But the 2.7 oz listed weight is accurate; on my scale it comes out at 76 grams, or indeed 2.7 oz.
Even though it's rated at the same volume capacity as the bear-proof Ursack's, it seems larger --- same height, but laying both bags flat, the Ursack Minor spreads out wider. So I don't have any capacity concerns.
The fabric is, as you would expect, more flexible, doesn't have the stiffness of a regular Ursack.
A regular Ursack has cord coming out of two grommets at two different points along the bag rim; there are no grommets on the Ursack Minor and the cord comes out at just one point. The stiched-to-the-inside-top instruction tag describes a different knot to tie too.
Overall seems quite nice; the proof, of course, will be when some of us have various critters try to get inside --- and the associated stories of how they either succeed or fail.
Even though it's rated at the same volume capacity as the bear-proof Ursack's, it seems larger --- same height, but laying both bags flat, the Ursack Minor spreads out wider. So I don't have any capacity concerns.
How many days worth of food do you think you could put in the Ursack?
"How many days worth of food do you think you could put in the Ursack?"
Again, it's listed at 650 c.i., 8" dia by 13" long --- compare that to whatever food container you already use.
I think it's almost pointless to talk about "number of days" of food carried by any food container, whether bag, mesh sack, plastic cannister, or whatever. Your metabolism alone can vary this greatly: as a thru-hiker in 2008 I was eating on the order of double the calories I'd require in more normal times. The types of foods you bring and how you pack them can also make a big difference. Here's one site that gives some ideas about packing a bear can efficiently (http://www.sierrawildbear.gov/foodstorage/packingabearcanister.htm). If you look around you can likely find more.
Factor in also that you can carry the first 2 - 3 meals outside of this as you'll eat that the first day.
I guess a rough guess would be at least 4 - 5 days with somewhat efficient packing and high metabolism, I'm pretty confident I could get 8 days at a more normal metabolic rate. But these are rough approximations.
I think it's almost pointless to talk about "number of days" of food carried by any food container, whether bag, mesh sack, plastic cannister, or whatever.
Yeah of course, I know that. I was just looking for a ballpark figure.
lazy river road
01-15-2010, 15:13
All interesting and great information...I think im gonna place my order for my ursack minor once I get paid. The Ratsack just does not seem worth it for the weight. Now do the smell proff bags they seel really work or will I get the same results out of a heavy duty ziplock freezer bag. I plan on takeing mostly freezer dried/instant hot water foods.
The Opsak (http://www.loksak.com/products/opsak) is best for odor.
In comparison, the other "plastic" bags only have a superficial resemblance to the Opsak. Our odor-sense is nothing like that animals can detect.
"Now do the smell proff bags they seel really work or will I get the same results out of a heavy duty ziplock freezer bag."
I'm inclined to agree that the OPsak is better than a ziplock. Ursack.com sells OPsak's, which suggests that they think they're the right thing to use.
The issue I have is that a 12" x 20" OPsak gets to be a PITA to completely reseal at least once a day inside of an 8" dia x 13" tall Ursack (or Ursack minor). After the first week or two on the trail I find myself not bothering to try to reseal but just fold it over.
lazy river road
01-15-2010, 23:27
hhuumm...good info thanks a lot...I just found my next new toy to buy..