mr_macgee

Actually the Cierzo 35 is a nice classic design, it's just like the my Karrimor "Ice" bag that I had in the eighties and it had the same rip stop material. Though the Kerrimor had way better construction. I would have to agree, I would not recommend the cierzo just yet. Just look at the detail photo's on there website, you can see the seam stitching.

That doesn't sound reassuring. The Scrambler ULT does not seam more durable than the Cierzo when holding both of them next to each other. The shop had both of them and I picked up the Scrambler because it was 50% off and they were going fast but the last thing I want is a bag exploding on me because I wanted to save a couple of ounces. The Cierzo does not look like typical Arc'teryx quality, it wasn't just the material (not bad but old tech) but the stitching or should I say lack of that bummed me out. I just may have to make my own using parts/straps from bags I don't use anymore or get one custom made.

My favorite bag for carrying a minimal amount of gear was my trusted Mountainsmith Boogeyman (16L ++) but it's old and dying but it lasted forever and beat the hell out of it. I'm looking for a replacement that to my surprise has been very hard to find, a top loading (non-zipper) rucksack with compression straps and a removal lumbar pad. [img:center]http://ak.buy.com/PI/0/300/200299162.jpg[/img] Has anybody used the Mountain Hardwear Scrambler ULT 30? [img:center]http://www.outdoorplay.com/Mountain-Hardwear-Scrambler-UTL-30-Backpack-st.jpg[/img] The Scrambler is a lot bigger, more than I really need for what I do but compresses down well and 2oz lighter but not sure about durability. The Arc'teryx Cierzo 25 is also another one but again it's big. Can anyone recommend a small bag just like the Boogeyman? Don't mention Cilo Can't say enough about switching to a smaller bag under 20L, it's been very liberating even when carrying rain shells, an axe and crampons. I've got ton of other larger bags.