Recommendations on a good ~4,000ci pack?

[Brad_CA]

Hey all, hope I'm in the right forum, sorry if I'm not.

 

Alright, so I'm looking for an approx 4,000ci pack to do my climbing in. Just got started in the climbing part of winter sports and want to get something that will allow me to go light into the Sierra during the spring & winter for no more than 4 days at a time. Ideally would like to take snowshoes, crampons, alpine ice axe & potentially a couple technical climbing axes by next winter in lieu of the alpine axe. Of course all the "normal" stuff applies too; tent, bag, jackets, misc clothes, food etc...though a lightweight bivy may be swapped for the tent depending.

 

Also, if anyone has an specific recommendations for height that would be appreciated too. I'm 6'6", stay around 210lbs(maybe down to 200lbs if I dont eat as much as I want) and am pretty slender. I know this height thing can affect an otherwise good pack, so I wanted to make note of it.

 

Mucho gracias amigos! You guys have a kick ass site here with plenty of action and I spend more and more time here....to my employers delight!

 

Thanks a bunch!

brad

[Stephen_Ramsey]

One possibility would be the BD Ice Pack, 50L.

 

It's a bit smaller than what you are describing, but it has an extendable collar so you can cram 4 days worth of gear into it.

Edited April 19, 2004 by Stephen_Ramsey

[ivan]

cold cold world chernobyl ice pack rox

 

if it don't fit inside, you dont' need it

[fenderfour]

I'm really happy with my modified GoLite Gust, but the mods were pretty extensive and included a framesheet and a new belt. You may not want to screw with it. The size is right, 3800-5000 (with collar extended).

 

BTW - I have heard that the Wild Things Andinista rides on your back like a turgid sausage, but it seems like it might fit the bill.

[Bug]

Check out Kelty's super-light packs. I've had one for a couple years now and really love it. They are reasonably priced too.

[tomtom]

Arc'teryx Khamsin 62. On sale, even.

[stinkyclimber]

Check out my Nozone for sale at Yard Sale thread.

 

I am about 6'2", and I was a little short for it, so it might fit you nice. Note that it ain't a good ski pack, but awesome for alpine climbing.

 

Edit: oops, I see you are in CA. Too far for shipping.

 

I have the Khamsin 62 and I like it - althought I would say it would be too small for 4 days in the winter probably.

Edited April 19, 2004 by stinkyclimber

[Brad_CA]

No suspension on the Ice Pack though, right? That could be a problem I would think, especially on those trips where I actually want to do a full 4 days. Otherwise, yes it is exactly the kind of thing I'm looking at.

[Brad_CA]

How about the Aether 60? Any opinions on this pack? Also, any more opinions on the BD ice pack would be great too.

[cj001f]

No suspension on the Ice Pack though, right? That could be a problem I would think, especially on those trips where I actually want to do a full 4 days. Otherwise, yes it is exactly the kind of thing I'm looking at.

The Ice Pack has a frame sheet. I've used it a half dozen plus times for trips of that lenght and never had a problem The Shadow Pack (Ice Pack replacement) has a more developed suspension.

[DPS]

The BD Ice Pack carries well with 40+ lbs of gear. I have it and like it very much.

 

I am sure you are much smarter than me and can figure out how to properly pack an Andinista so it won't carry like a turgid sausage.

[JoshK]

The Khamsin 62 is a great pack. I have come to settle on the lightweight, no frills packs with suspensions as the way to go. I went through a frameless phase but decided that the extra lb or lb and a half is worth it for the superior carry and easy of packing.

 

I had the Khamsin 52 and I could fit in 4 winter days easily. I'd say if you can't fit in the 62 then you are bringing too much!

[Stephen_Ramsey]

Correct, the Ice Pack is a frame sheet design. It does not have a conventional internal frame. No doubt about it, the Ice Pack will not be as comfortable hauling 40+ lbs as, say, a Dana Designs Pack. But the Ice Pack makes up for it by being lightweight, and good for sleeping on. By carrying the Ice Pack, I only need to carry a half-length Z-rest pad (even in winter). I sleep on the pack, the rope, and on the half-pad. It is light enough that it can be used on a (moderately) technical carry-over, but can still haul 40+ loads on the trail. You can also remove the frame sheet when you need it to function as a super-lightweight summit assault pack. It has gear loops on the waist strap, which is hugely useful to me. I guess it is not as light as the Andinista, but also not quite as expensive. At the end of the day, some packs are good for hauling loads, some packs are good for technical climbing, and some packs try to be a compromise in between. I think the Ice Pack fits into the "compromise" category.

 

My favorite feature of the Ice Pack: You can retrieve an ice tool one-handed, without having to take off the pack, by reaching around behind the pack and unbuckling the strap. This is really really useful when things get steep, and you need to get your ice tool.

Edited April 19, 2004 by Stephen_Ramsey

[olyclimber]

The current Climbing magazine has a comparison of alpine packs, though they might be smaller than what you're looking for (3000>4000ci). The Wild Things Icesac or the Cold Cold World Chernobyl get my vote.

 

Alpine pack comparison

[ivan]

No suspension on the Ice Pack though, right? That could be a problem I would think, especially on those trips where I actually want to do a full 4 days. Otherwise, yes it is exactly the kind of thing I'm looking at.

who the hell needs suspension? just do more pullups, eh?

[bobinc]

I didn't have the turgid sausage problem on a 4 day trip to the Winds last summer, but I didn't use the pack as much more than a hauling device (that is, not technical use where I desperately needed a 2nd tool, etc.). I think it's nominally bigger than 4k cubes when fully extended but this may not matter much. The stripped-down design I find quite refreshing and it's collapsibility is also a big plus.

[plexus]

My recommendation would to go to a gear shop and get a good fit. Find something that fits you comfortably, or as close as is possible. For a day pack this isn't really that big of a deal. But I got my REI Aconcagua fitted and set to my body and I absolutely love. I can carry everything in it, it compartmentalizes great, and I've taken it on a couple of climbs this winter/spring, carrying shovel, snowshoes, crampons, pickets, alpine rope, rock gear, etc. And I still have beaucoup room. True it is a "backpacking pack" But the thing's been a dream for me for big gear days as well as an overnighter with gear.

[Rodchester]

Take a good look at the Lowe Alpine Alpine Attack 65. It is brand new but is based on last years model Attack 50. Basically it is a larger verion. It sounds like it is what you are looking ofr.

 

I have the Alpine Attack 50 and like it, but with winter gear it would be small. It is also priced right. It has a crampon pouch which rocks and gear loops.

 

Check it out.

[JoshK]

That's a nice looking pack. Downside is it's pretty heavy.

[iain]

I have an alpine attack 50 and it is a great pack. the reason I use my andinista is because the lowe alpine ski straps ARE TOO NARROW FOR MY SKIS. WTF. I have some wide skis but they are not THAT wide. What a huge oversight. on their part. Otherwise, a very comfortable pack, but it has a number of weight-costing gimmicks. I agree about the turgid sausage comments on the andinista. That thing is not comfortable. Also, if you pack it full enough to make it stable in the uncompressed mode, the pack weight is too much for the unpadded shoulder straps.

[daler]

I just got a BD shadow 55L. Love it. So far it has to be one of the best alpine packs I have ever seen. Check it out and you wont' be disappointed!!!

 

later

[Brad_CA]

Very cool, thanks everyone for the reply's, I have some climbing to do so will let you know what I get and how it works.

Brad

[mattp]

A couple random thoughts:

 

Most packs have side-straps that are too short. In my opinion, there is no reason not to have them long enough that they can carry a sleeping pad if you are overloading your pack as happens sometimes even with a 4,000 ci pack. Oh well, you'll have to use a bit of parachute cord.

 

For a medium large pack like that, I wouldn't much worry about the empty weight. People carry on about how such and such a pack is too heavy because it weighs three pounds more than their super cool pack, but if the three pounds consists of features that you want in a pack, such as durable fabric, a suspension system that can cary 50 pounds comfortably, or a bivouac sleeve extension, go for it.

 

Don't worry about gimmicks such as a waterbottle holster, crampon patch, or zippered compartments for your sunglasses. Bartacked strips up the back are a plus for overloading your pack or attaching things like skis, crampons, shovel, sleeping pad, lawn chairs ...

 

Don't think the molded foam that looks space-aged and aerodynamic makes a pack any more comfortable than regular fabric. It really doesn't.

[Rodchester]

That's a nice looking pack. Downside is it's pretty heavy.

 

Joshk: at 5.5lbs its not the lightest, but I wouldn't call it heavy either, especially for a full featured pack with a frame in its size/capacity.

 

I also heard that the new model has addressed some issues such as the ski slots (but I don't know for sure).

 

Mattp: I agre with you on the side straps. This is way too common and is my main complaint with the Alpine Attack 50.

[cracked]

To be able to lash a foam pad using compression straps requires REALLY LONG straps. Long enough that they get in the way when you don't have a pad in there. I originally made mine long, but they got in the way, so I cut them down. Just have an 'extender' loop, like you say, of parachute cord.