View Full Version : Gregory Acadia
Hey all!
I just got back from trying on a lot of different backpacks and think I might be in love with the Gregory Acadia. It's weighs in at over 5lbs empty, but the medium size pack fits me like a glove.
Does anyone have longterm experience with these? Any reason not to buy one?
Footslogger
02-18-2005, 16:32
Only comment would be about the empty pack weight. I carried Gregories for years and still own two (Shasta and Reality). It's hard to dispute the comfort and fit of a Gregory once you find one you like.
Not sure if they'd fit you as well but there are packs out there with the same capacity that weigh less.
'Slogger
AT 2003
well, I'm a guy who suffers muscle spasm problems in my back. I think I'm gonna take comfort over weight saving and just pack more lightly.
Wouldn't UL help with the spasms? IF you look into the Golite Race, Team, and Speed packs you may like them. They have padding in the pack pannel. The Race is what I own and is the most comfortable bag I have ever had. I have had about 5 bags. This is my first UL Pack though. Also my first rucksack. But it is so comfy.
Actually, I'm concerned that Golites don't have the same harness support that a Gregory does. I need that structure to distribute weight across my back correctly or the upper back spasms start.
Lone Wolf
02-18-2005, 17:04
Stay with the Gregory. Don't let the Goliters sway you. They're worse than Jehovah's Witnesses.
Stay with the Gregory. Don't let the Goliters sway you. They're worse than Jehovah's witnesses. lol
I like my suspension system, but it is your choice. (In my head: God will get him for not converting)muahahah
their kool-aid looks so inviting...just a sip...a little sip....
Wouldn't UL help with the spasms? IF you look into the Golite Race, Team, and Speed packs you may like them. They have padding in the pack pannel. The Race is what I own and is the most comfortable bag I have ever had. I have had about 5 bags. This is my first UL Pack though. Also my first rucksack. But it is so comfy.
I think sometimes us goliters are too quick to suggest a golite, ula, gvp, or some other ultralite pack without considering whether or not the hiker in ?? is ready to make that jump. I am am not a fanatic ultralighter but consider myself very lightweight with a 26-27 lb full pack. When I made the switch to lighter stuff, the last thing I switched was my pack. What good is an ultralight pack if your pack fully loaded is 30-35lbs? I agree that a lighter pack will most likely help with the spasms but an ultralight pack will do no good if the rest of his/her kit is not ultralight.
One of my hiking buddies used a Gregory Acadia for a long time and loved it. He in the evolutionary process is now very lightweight. I think if your in the 30-35 lb range, the Acadia is a good choice, but you can probably do better with the weight. You may want to check out the Granite Gear Ozone which will provide a very good suspension, handle 30-35 lbs, and weighs about half of what the Gregory weighs. Pack fit is a very individual thing. You should probably round up all of gear and head to your outfittters and pack a few packs with your stuff to see which ones are pleasing to your back.
TRI :sun BES
I assumed due to back spasms the hiker in ?? was going to see the lite.
Kozmic Zian
02-19-2005, 10:05
Yea.....To the Hiker in ??. Stay as light as possible. If you have back problems, it is in your best interest to do what you can before leaving to help that issue. If I were you, I'd do as some above have said, like, go to the outfitter with all your gear and try packs out. You have to learn how to hike UL. Read the WB Forums. See what other, more experienced, hikers are doing.
But, there are alot of backpacks out there that will give you good shoulder and lower back support, that weight less than 5lbs. Do your homework. Find out what works best for you. It's always the Backpackers conundrum, weight vs. comfort. Somethings will give you comfort that weigh a little more. So it's choices, my friend. But, you'll find out, on the 'Long Run', that 'light is usually right', IMHO. KZ@
Ok. Today I went to REI and tried on everything in the size pack I wanted. Once again I came around to the Gregory Acadia to meet my needs. REI wanted 199 dollars for the pack. Hudson Trail Outfitters were selling it for 139.00 simoleans. I went online and found it for 109.00 from a store in Washington state. So I bought it online. Yes, it's heavier empty than Ultra light packs but I have to think of my comfort zone and such. So, I did not drink the GoLite koolaid.
Well if it was the more comfortable for you then that is what you should get. Good luck with the pack.
Footslogger
02-19-2005, 23:26
Ok. Today I went to REI and tried on everything in the size pack I wanted. Once again I came around to the Gregory Acadia to meet my needs. REI wanted 199 dollars for the pack. Hudson Trail Outfitters were selling it for 139.00 simoleans. I went online and found it for 109.00 from a store in Washington state. So I bought it online. Yes, it's heavier empty than Ultra light packs but I have to think of my comfort zone and such. So, I did not drink the GoLite koolaid.============================
Hey Newb ...once it arrives and you have a chance to hike with it why not do a write-up here at Whiteblaze.
'Slogger
AT 2003
minnesotasmith
02-20-2005, 02:02
I've basically decided to get a Gregory Whitney ($369.00), due to the sturdiness, separate compartments, separate pouch at the bottom for sleeping bag (think WET bag atop all your other gear...), obvous comfort. Top reason, though, is the ability to temporarily go up to higher weights if needed (unlike UL gear); imagine doing the 100 Mile with an out-of-sorts knee or throbbing ankle while going UL, and thus running out of food partway... I just can't see UL on the PCT or CDT, either, unless someone had support, and maybe not even then.
Disclaimer: I am not starting an arguement. I am just stating observations.
What is funny to me is when people talk about going up in weight and how ULers can't do that with our gear. You are apparently missing the whole point of UL. We don't want to go up in weight, and thus limit our bag size and its ability to carry heavier weight comfortably. Key word being comfortably. UL packs can carry more weight if need be, but is not recommended due to comfort. But, what I am really confused about is the fact that you had the clairvoyance to realize you needed the extra food b/c you were going to get hurt.
Again I am not trying to start an arguement. I was just confused about your reasons not going UL. Personally I don't care if you go UL. It is your back, ankles. and knees. You can do what you like with them. Also, UL is not for everyone so...
minnesotasmith
02-20-2005, 04:49
I in turn don't entirely understand ULers. If your fanny-pack-sized backpack will only hold 2 days worth of food, and it's 4 days between resupply points, do you just eat only every other day? Likewise, the ability to carry enough water between sources is paramount, far more important than obeying the dictates of some near-religion that often seems to have priorities other than hiker interests in mind. Think of Flyin' Brian repeatedly not carrying enough clothing and bedding to avoid shivering in shelters at night; since he's not the moron that behavior pattern makes him look like (and presumably able to learn from bad experiences), I'd say he is operating under a flawed value system. I frankly like to sleep at night where I don't freeze (doable at any temperature for those who brought what they would need) and prefer to lay with more than just a groundcloth between me and sharp rocks or hard shelter floors; after a day's hike, I feel I deserve at least that. If it's at least a day between dependable water sources, and (like me) you drink a gallon or more of water a day while hiking during the summer, that means that you will need at such times to carry a minimum of a gallon of water (8 pounds right there).
Plus, hikers with a reasonable amount of gear (e.g., not ULers) are able to do things like hike in winter (so have about 5 more months of the year to hike in than ULers do, if they live in the North), have the supplies along to take an unplanned NERO/ZERO day by a site of natural beauty far from resupply points (instead of being forced into racing to the next resupply point to not starve -- again), are less likely to die from unexpected weather changes (BC they may actually have with them the additional clothing, food, and fuel they will need for safety), can carry some options for intellectual timepassing as needed on occasion, etc.
Now, I'll happily take the time to search around for (and pay for) equipment that is lighter, more expensive, AND (not OR) will still do the job about as well as heavier, traditional equipment versions. Too, I can't see hauling onto the Trail useless gear that adds nothing to the wilderness experience like cosmetics, jewelry, tobacco or cell phones. However, I'm not going to run around in the woods miles from civilization without enough food, water, fuel, and clothing for safety and relative comfort, or foolishly rely on an overpriced flimsy micropack that won't allow such prudence.
minnesotasmith
02-21-2005, 02:21
...my last post here (above).
Any takers?