Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I looking for some feedback on what to buy for large day back/light weight overnight pack. I'm looking for something than can take 1-2 days worth of climbing gear and light biy gear. Got any ideas? I've been having problems getting all my alpine gear shoved into my 1,500 cu in Osprey pack. On the flip side , my 5,000 cu in pack is too big to climb with.

 

I've never owned any of the Black Diamond packs but they seem to be popular. The Predator from BD looked like was nice but I've never seen it in person.

 

 

 

 

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

Cilogear 40L fits the bill for you, especially if you've already got a baby pack and a big-ass pack. Its size should fit your needs reasonably, especially if you pack light for bivies.

 

Searching around on this site (and rockclimbing.com) will reveal a lot of testimonial info about these packs. Graham has started out by grassroots marketing them via climbing websites, though now they're gaining more popularity. If you live in Seattle, you can check them out at Feathered Friends.

Edited by jared_j
Posted

I would second the Cilogear pack as a climbing pack. I've carried the 45L and plan to get a 60L. I wouldn't necessarily go for a Cilo if you're going to use it for skiing much. It can be made to work but isn't as good for skis/avy gear as a purpose built ski pack like the Arcteryx Khamski or BD Coverts and Anarchists.

 

Also check out the BD Jackal and Wild Things ice sack or rice sack.

Posted

if you're interested in checking out one of the Cilogear packs in PDX, you can take a look at mine (once I get it back - I just sent it off to graham for some touch-ups).

 

I'd agree that it's great for climbing - good weight, size & versatility.

I've used it a couple times so far for B/C skiing and it worked fine for the mellow tooling around that I was doing...but yeah, it's not as refined as some other packs out there that are more purpose-built for more serious B/C skiing/boarding

Posted

What I like for climbing is something that rides well on steep rock and is tube like enough to allow swinging ice tools.

Sweet:

Millet

Mammut

Deuter

North Face

Lafuma

 

 

Suck:

Dana

Mountainsmith

Gregory

BD

 

 

Posted (edited)

I'd look at something around 40 liter (24/2600 cu in) for a climbing pack as you describe it. 50 liters is around 3200cu. in. and a much bigger pack. Cilo and Arcteryx make decent smaller climbing packs.

 

Simply because of the fit and available sizing here is what I ended up with. By comparison it is a full lb. heavier than the 30l Cilo about the same weight as a 40L work sack.

 

http://www.mountaingear.com/pages/product/product.asp/item/210305/N/0/CMP/KNC-70150/cmpn/70150/afl/438

 

 

..corrected for volume typos..

Edited by Dane
Posted

Thanks for the info. I'm doing a bit of shopping right now. I haven't bought a new pack in 6+ years so it is all a bit overwhelming given the choices.

 

Thanks!

-Nate

Posted

Might wanna check your math there - 30L is around 1850 cubic inches and 40L is around 2450 cubic inches. I find that for day/in a push style trips 30-38L and for light multiday trips 35-50 or 55L is good. For reference the CCW Chernobyl is 3,000 cubic in/49L and the Wild Things Ice Sack is 3,200 cubic in/52L.

Posted

Second (or third) the Wild Things Ice Sac, its a great pack striped down for alpine climbing. Make sure to get one without tool tubes, or get it modified, as they don't accept leashless tools that well or at all.

 

I've heard a lot of grumbling about the new BD line. The Shadow is a great pack, but the predator seems to have some durability issues and also seems less like a climbing pack and more like a backpacking one.

 

I definately would not recommend the Sphynx, even though I own one. You can't overfill it because of the lid design, therefore its hard to carry a rope. I only break this pack out for day trips and even then I leave stuff behind. Go for something with a fully floating lid so you can fill it up and strap the rope on top.

Posted (edited)
Might wanna check your math there - 30L is around 1850 cubic inches and 40L is around 2450 cubic inches....

 

My bad, and you are correct. 40L is around 2450 c.i. and about all I want in a climbing pack these days. Still happy with the Khazri 35. Wild Things Ice sack is a bit bigger than I like. Cilo 40L or 45L would be fine.

 

Volume wise in the real world...means I can get 5 60m 9mm ropes in the body of a 40 liter pack. Easily enough room of most any 2 or 3 day alpine climb if you are packing light.

 

 

Edited by Dane
Posted

Anyone used the Osprey Exposure 50? I randomly saw it at the shop today and liked what I saw. It was slightly bigger (50L) than I originally wanted but I like the attachment points and the way it would hold a snowboard and crampons. Anyone used this pack? I see they make Osprey Exposure in a smaller size.

 

-Nate

Posted

My wife has the Exposure 50- in her opinion, it is fine for cragging and hauling stuff around trails, but sucks for scrambling and she would not think of climbing with it. The frame is tubular aluminum that, for her, extends behind her neck and offers nice load transfer but wacks her every time she looks up. The frame is not removable- which I find important for a climbing pack, and is simply too stiff. But what do I know- people here haul 40 pounds in frameless packs (ouch!) and likely climb just fine in loadmonsters... just make sure you have head clearance with the exposure series.

Posted

ahh good point. I hadn't tried looking up with that pack on. I have a 10 year old frameless pack from Lowe Alpine. I can't stand the thing as the climbing gears always sticks me in the pack and doesn't ride evenly.

 

-Nate

 

My wife has the Exposure 50- in her opinion, it is fine for cragging and hauling stuff around trails, but sucks for scrambling and she would not think of climbing with it. The frame is tubular aluminum that, for her, extends behind her neck and offers nice load transfer but wacks her every time she looks up. The frame is not removable- which I find important for a climbing pack, and is simply too stiff. But what do I know- people here haul 40 pounds in frameless packs (ouch!) and likely climb just fine in loadmonsters... just make sure you have head clearance with the exposure series.
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I second the recommendation for CCW Chernobyl. The price is right, they are light and bomber. Also, you can call the shop and speak with the owner (I believe his name is Randy - sorry if I got that wrong) and he can make modifications as needed. I did this a few years back and I love the pack.

 

Good luck.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...