About | Blog | Forums | People | Free Newsletter
Trailspace is a product review site for outdoor enthusiasts. Use it to find and share great gear.

suggested pack?

8:50 p.m. on October 11, 2013 (EDT)
0 reviewer rep
86 forum posts

hey kids!

i'm rearin' to shred the long trail next summer!

i'm outta the loop these days in the pack dept.

I don't want tinfoil, nor do I want burlap.

suggested happy mediums?

simple design, bladder compatibility,  ~3000 cubes, and won' break the bank.

* in the past I've honored berghaus.

any updated models of theirs worthy of consideration?*

?

thanks!

 

 

10:11 p.m. on October 11, 2013 (EDT)
TOP 10 REVIEWER REVIEW CORPS
3,703 reviewer rep
590 forum posts

522, I don't have a recommendation for you. However, since it's so hard to search out gear recommendations, what I have done is visit retailers--I look around, see what grabs my interest, and then check TS on my 'droid to see what folks are saying about it.


Having said all that, if I were to just drop money on a pack today, it would probably be the GO LITE Jam 70. I've not used it, but I've yet to hear of someone being unsatisfied with it.

11:54 p.m. on October 11, 2013 (EDT)
72 reviewer rep
1,047 forum posts

I would have to agree with Goose and see what hits your fancy..I would reccomend looking at the Osprey Atoms 50.Its hydration compatible and a lightweight backpack..This gives you the oppertunity to keep a low pack weight..You have oppertunities to resupply every 2 to 3 days on the longtrail..

11:34 a.m. on October 12, 2013 (EDT)
21 reviewer rep
1,012 forum posts

For small unltralight loads the pack seems to matter less and less. I like the GoLight equipment but have never used one. I still favor the old Kelty externals because they are cheap, easy to fit, have great pockets and keep the back cool. They can carry as much or as little as you need and don't weigh that much.

12:28 p.m. on October 12, 2013 (EDT)
TOP 25 REVIEWER REVIEW CORPS
2,264 reviewer rep
1,252 forum posts

i would try a number of brands on and see what feels best, flavored by what is in your price range and what you like/dislike about backpacks.  comfort is my #1 criterion.

i reviewed two backpacks in the past year that fit your general profile.  they each weigh about 3 pounds, about 45-55 liters, and aren't very expensive.  

lowe alpine airzone pro 45-55:  http://www.trailspace.com/gear/lowe-alpine/airzone-pro-4555/#review27119

Boreas Lost Coast 45 (you might prefer the 60 liter one, but they are nearly identical):  http://www.trailspace.com/gear/boreas-gear/lost-coast-45/#review29357

also reviewed the REI Flash 50, but that was a while ago.  also a nice backpack, probably a little different today:  http://www.trailspace.com/gear/rei/flash-50-pack/

if i were hunting for a backpack this size completely independent of cost, it would probably be the mystery ranch big sky.  a heavyweight at 4.6 pounds, but built to last a long, long time and super-comfortable (for me, anyway).  

1:26 p.m. on October 12, 2013 (EDT)
118 reviewer rep
131 forum posts

i would try a number of brands on and see what feels best, flavored by what is in your price range and what you like/dislike about backpacks.  comfort is my #1 criterion.

i reviewed two backpacks in the past year that fit your general profile.  they each weigh about 3 pounds, about 45-55 liters, and aren't very expensive.  

lowe alpine airzone pro 45-55:  http://www.trailspace.com/gear/lowe-alpine/airzone-pro-4555/#review27119

 

I've got a Lowe Airzone Centro 35 that I use as a day pack/travel pack would agree with your review of the Airzone Pro 45-55. These are nice packs. Mine is an older model than the one you reviewed. Not the lightest, but plenty of features and I personally really like the AirZone suspension. The limit of the AirZone suspension is, as you noted, its not a great pack for hauling heavy weight ... not something I worry about with the smaller version of pack that I own.

7:02 p.m. on October 12, 2013 (EDT)
0 reviewer rep
86 forum posts

many thanks, y'all.

having retreated to berghaus,

here's the two in contention:

(it won't let me include direct links, but they were found on amazon)

* berghaus vapour 32

* berghaus vapour 15 rucksack

eeeeks--anyone know metric conversions?

sadly, I remain unclear the actual sizes of each of these.

general thoughts= greatly welcomed :)

thanks again!

522

 

 

8:31 p.m. on October 12, 2013 (EDT)
TOP 10 REVIEWER REVIEW CORPS
3,703 reviewer rep
590 forum posts

leadbelly2550 said:

also reviewed the REI Flash 50, but that was a while ago.  also a nice backpack, probably a little different today:  http://www.trailspace.com/gear/rei/flash-50-pack/

 I'm currently using the Flash 65, that I picked up off the clearance rack at St. Louis store (last one in stock). I'm not sure why they discontinued it. I pulled the internal frame out, then removed the hydration sleeve, zipper for the internal frame, the float top, and a bunch of useless straps. What started out as a 3+lb pack is now 1lb. 10oz.

Which raises the question of WHY pack manufacturers add so many unnecessary features to their packs?

11:15 p.m. on October 12, 2013 (EDT)
TOP 25 REVIEWER REVIEW CORPS
2,264 reviewer rep
1,252 forum posts

there are several conversion calculators online.  the vapor 32 is a 32 liter backpack, about 1950 cubic inches.  the vapor 15 is more like a day pack, only 915 cubic inches.

the 32 has a nylon hoop as the frame.  seems to me that so long as you don't carry too much weight, shouldn't be an issue.  if you might carry over 30 pounds, you might appreciate a more firm/stiff frame. 

April 23, 2014
Quick Reply

Please sign in to reply

 
More Topics
This forum: Older: Wool Sweaters Newer: Tree Tent
All forums: Older: Red Canyon State Park near Bryce NP Newer: Messenger Woods Nature Preserve - Homer Glen, IL