Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Luxurylite stack pack

Expand Messages
  • Jean Dickinson
    I had never heard about the LL stack pack until Rand s recent post. For years, I used an external frame pack for my JMT trips and then switched to a Dana
    Message 1 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I had never heard about the LL stack pack until Rand's recent post. For years, I used an external frame pack for my JMT trips and then switched to a Dana internal frame 14 years ago that weighs about seven pounds. I'm looking to lighten my pack and have been researching various alternatives, such as the Catalyst, Osprey Atmos 65 and Mariposa. I love the idea of carrying my Expedition bear canister outside of the pack bag, as would be the case with the LL stack pack, and am impressed that the frame and three cylinders would be about 3 pounds. It seems ideal, although very expensive (about $440 + shipping, if I'm doing the calculations right).

      But are there downsides to this pack and/or to external frame packs in general? One of my big concerns about backpacking at age 70 is balance when it comes to crossing streams on logs (which I never liked in my 30s) and precipitous heights. Would I be more at risk with an external frame pack, because it might sway more in such situations? And is there a disadvantage to having all the gear in three cylinders? 

      Thanks  in advance for any comments.

      Jean
    • Roleigh Martin
      This pack is not to everyone s liking. I tried one out and found out I m in the 10% who try it and don t like it. I did not like the way the belt worked with
      Message 2 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        This pack is not to everyone's liking.  I tried one out and found out I'm in the 10% who try it and don't like it.  I did not like the way the belt worked with me.

        Zpacks has an external frame pack that is lighter.

        Another option (more expensive but under 3 lbs) is the Kifaru Ultralight packs -- they're rated for up to 150 pounds hauling weight, so their weight distribution with the belt is super good and the pack comes with either 22", 24" or 26" long stays.  I did the JMT in 2012 with the 26" stay and one thing nice was not an ounce of weight ever touched my shoulders.  It was all distributed via the belt and the chest sternum (about 2% of the weight there).  I had a good 1 " of clearance of air above my shoulders before one saw/noticed the shoulder strap.  I like that freedom of shoulder movement.

        What I don't like is they do not make a pack in between the 3700 and 5200 size.  If it was a true 3700 size as measured by BPL's measurement standards, I could get by with 3700 but its not large enough for me, but the 5200 was too large, so I had a tailor adjust the 5200 size to make it smaller and just right for me.

        http://www.kifaru.net/KU3700.html

        They make packs for hunters and the military.  I wish they made a ultralight pack like their new 4800 highcamp pack (which weighs about 19 oz more than the 3700 ultralight).
        -------------------------------------------------
        Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research links)
        _



        On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Jean Dickinson <jeandickinson@...> wrote:
         

        I had never heard about the LL stack pack until Rand's recent post. For years, I used an external frame pack for my JMT trips and then switched to a Dana internal frame 14 years ago that weighs about seven pounds. I'm looking to lighten my pack and have been researching various alternatives, such as the Catalyst, Osprey Atmos 65 and Mariposa. I love the idea of carrying my Expedition bear canister outside of the pack bag, as would be the case with the LL stack pack, and am impressed that the frame and three cylinders would be about 3 pounds. It seems ideal, although very expensive (about $440 + shipping, if I'm doing the calculations right).

        But are there downsides to this pack and/or to external frame packs in general? One of my big concerns about backpacking at age 70 is balance when it comes to crossing streams on logs (which I never liked in my 30s) and precipitous heights. Would I be more at risk with an external frame pack, because it might sway more in such situations? And is there a disadvantage to having all the gear in three cylinders? 

        Thanks  in advance for any comments.

        Jean


      • John Ladd
        On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Jean Dickinson ... Here s my take on the in general part of the question. The classic problem with early (1970 s era)
        Message 3 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Jean Dickinson <jeandickinson@...> wrote:
          ... are there downsides to this pack and/or to external frame packs in general?

          Here's my take on the "in general" part of the question.  The classic problem with early (1970's era) external frame packs was that they tended to wiggle around, as opposed to being firmly affixed to your torso. The old Kelty Tioga packs, in my experience, tended to aggravate any weight shift. If you a mis-step caused you to lurch 2 inches to the left, the frame moved 4 inches to the left and it took work to bring it back. Or it tended to turn a stumble into a fall.

          Internal frames became popular, in part, because they solved that problem, by making the pack move conform more solidly with the torso.

          A good modern external frame pack solves the 1970's problem with a pretty solid attachment of the packframe to the torso with pretty stiff strapping in the shoulder harness and in the hipbelt.  My concern with lighter weight external frames would be that they could be more like the old Keltys (which were very lightweight) than the newer, more solid external frame packs that are pretty firmly attached to the torso.  Unfortunately, that's hard to judge on something you order online.

          I don't mean this as a criticism of any particular lightweight external frame pack. just raising a concern.
        • Ned Tibbits
          If anyone is interested in who is behind the Kifaru name, maybe the brand, Mountainsmith comes to mind. The founder of Mountainsmith, Patrick Smith, has long
          Message 4 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            If anyone is interested in who is behind the Kifaru name, maybe the brand, Mountainsmith comes to mind. The founder of Mountainsmith, Patrick Smith, has long been a sponsor of Mountain Education and we have enjoyed their fine products since the early ‘80s (sleds, packs, etc.)
             
             
            Ned Tibbits, Director
            Mountain Education
            www.mountaineducation.org
             
            Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 7:18 PM
            Subject: Re: [John Muir Trail] Luxurylite stack pack
             
             

            This pack is not to everyone's liking.  I tried one out and found out I'm in the 10% who try it and don't like it.  I did not like the way the belt worked with me.

            Zpacks has an external frame pack that is lighter.

            Another option (more expensive but under 3 lbs) is the Kifaru Ultralight packs -- they're rated for up to 150 pounds hauling weight, so their weight distribution with the belt is super good and the pack comes with either 22", 24" or 26" long stays.  I did the JMT in 2012 with the 26" stay and one thing nice was not an ounce of weight ever touched my shoulders.  It was all distributed via the belt and the chest sternum (about 2% of the weight there).  I had a good 1 " of clearance of air above my shoulders before one saw/noticed the shoulder strap.  I like that freedom of shoulder movement.

            What I don't like is they do not make a pack in between the 3700 and 5200 size.  If it was a true 3700 size as measured by BPL's measurement standards, I could get by with 3700 but its not large enough for me, but the 5200 was too large, so I had a tailor adjust the 5200 size to make it smaller and just right for me.

            http://www.kifaru.net/KU3700.html

            They make packs for hunters and the military.  I wish they made a ultralight pack like their new 4800 highcamp pack (which weighs about 19 oz more than the 3700 ultralight).

            -------------------------------------------------
            Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research links)
            _



            On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Jean Dickinson <jeandickinson@...> wrote:
             
            I had never heard about the LL stack pack until Rand's recent post. For years, I used an external frame pack for my JMT trips and then switched to a Dana internal frame 14 years ago that weighs about seven pounds. I'm looking to lighten my pack and have been researching various alternatives, such as the Catalyst, Osprey Atmos 65 and Mariposa. I love the idea of carrying my Expedition bear canister outside of the pack bag, as would be the case with the LL stack pack, and am impressed that the frame and three cylinders would be about 3 pounds. It seems ideal, although very expensive (about $440 + shipping, if I'm doing the calculations right).
             
            But are there downsides to this pack and/or to external frame packs in general? One of my big concerns about backpacking at age 70 is balance when it comes to crossing streams on logs (which I never liked in my 30s) and precipitous heights. Would I be more at risk with an external frame pack, because it might sway more in such situations? And is there a disadvantage to having all the gear in three cylinders?
             
            Thanks  in advance for any comments.
             
            Jean

          • rand
            Can t speak to the balance concerns......all I can say is that it has never been a problem for me. As to the other external frame packs mentioned here,
            Message 5 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Can't speak to the "balance" concerns......all I can say is that it has never been a problem for me.   As to the other "external" frame packs mentioned here, they don't have the ability to carry the bear cannister external to the pack.   Here's a picture of me near Hetch Hetchy with the pack......also.....the cylinders are actually a HUGE benefit.....by putting different cylinders on you can resize your pack for the trip you are taking.   Tent/ground cover/stakes in one.....sleeping bag/clothes in another....other gear in the third.   Makes organization and pack size much better.

            • rand
              ... I had him make me a fixed belt that is much more sturdy in my opinion than his hook belt. ... Not external frame Rand
              Message 6 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Roleigh Martin <roleigh@...> wrote:
                >
                > I did not like the way the belt worked with me.

                I had him make me a fixed belt that is much more sturdy in my opinion than his "hook" belt.

                >
                > Zpacks has an external frame pack that is lighter.

                .....that "frame" would not be nearly long enough to get the pack off my 6'6" shoulders.....plus no good way to carry the bear cannister.


                > Another option (more expensive but under 3 lbs)
                > is the Kifaru Ultralight packs --

                Not external frame

                Rand
              • Roleigh Martin
                Your photo came across as a hexadecimal dump. Care to upload it to the photos directory and the group and give us a link? ... Visit my Google Profile (lots of
                Message 7 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Your photo came across as a hexadecimal dump.  Care to upload it to the photos directory and the group and give us a link?
                  -------------------------------------------------
                  Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research links)
                  _



                  On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:58 PM, rand <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                   

                  Can't speak to the "balance" concerns......all I can say is that it has never been a problem for me.   As to the other "external" frame packs mentioned here, they don't have the ability to carry the bear cannister external to the pack.   Here's a picture of me near Hetch Hetchy with the pack......also.....the cylinders are actually a HUGE benefit.....by putting different cylinders on you can resize your pack for the trip you are taking. 


                • Roleigh Martin
                  Rand, I saw a version of Zpack s external frame pack on the JMT last year but the camera that took the shot got lost before getting home (or stolen). It had
                  Message 8 of 9 , Dec 29, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Rand,

                    I saw a version of Zpack's external frame pack on the JMT last year but the camera that took the shot got lost before getting home (or stolen).  It had the Bearikade at the bottom of the external frame on the outside of the pack.  It was really cool, it's not shown here:

                    http://www.zpacks.com/backpacks/arc_blast.shtml

                    But Joe can make the pack again I'm sure.  I'm blind copying him and asking him to send me details and a photo of such.  I'll update the group with details afterwards.

                    Roleigh
                    -------------------------------------------------
                    Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research links)
                    _

                  • rand
                    Roleigh: Chatted with some other folks who were able to see it...nevertheless I uploaded that one and a couple more Luxury Lite pics from the JMT to the
                    Message 9 of 9 , Dec 30, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.