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

RE: [John Muir Trail] OR 2014 reveals a titanium framed backpack (< 2 lbs) -- should be a winning JMT pack

Expand Messages
  • Joe MacLeish
    This is interesting in that the design is a 1/2 a leap forward. The materials are modern but the design does not take advantage of the new gear being used.
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 29, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      This is interesting in that the design is a 1/2  a leap forward.  The materials are modern but the design does not take advantage of the new gear being used.  The total design is for gear carried 15 years ago.  The open area at the bottom is designed to carry a rolled sleeping bag and pad.  My sleeping bag is the size of a cantaloupe (when I use a compression bag)  and my air mattress is about is 9 inches long by 3.3 inches.  Mostly I just throw the bag in the bottom of the pack and let it conform.

      I like the feel of a full frame pack and the total weight is great.  Maybe the next version will have an extended bag to hold a bear canister and the other gear internally.  Intended as an observation not a whine.

      Joe  

       

      From: johnmuirtrail@yahoogroups.com [mailto:johnmuirtrail@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roleigh Martin
      Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 12:21 PM
      To: John Muir Trail YahooGroups
      Subject: [John Muir Trail] OR 2014 reveals a titanium framed backpack (< 2 lbs) -- should be a winning JMT pack

       

       

      Take a look here (article text at link).

       

      This looks fantastic.  Wonder what the cubic inches are.  Looks like the bear canister could be fitted beneath the pack too (positioned horizontally).

       

       

      Image removed by sender. Inline image 1

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

    • Jean Dickinson
      I switched to an external frame pack this summer, a Kelty Trekker from REI for about $150. This was after buying and then returning a LuxuryLite external frame
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 30, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I switched to an external frame pack this summer, a Kelty Trekker from REI for about $150. This was after buying and then returning a LuxuryLite external frame pack because I didn't like the sway built into its design, not to mention the cost. This latest design  looks similar to the LL, although it may not allow everything attached to the frame to slide back and forth as you walk (which I couldn't get used to). Unlike the LL, this upcoming product does not have a "shelf" at the bottom against which to rest a bear canister, but I'm sure it could still be carried there and secured with velcro or regular straps. 

        My Kelty is 5 pounds, which is still heavy by UL standards but better than my old Dana Designs at 8 or 9 pounds. I've cut out the bottom of the upper compartment to create one large bag.  On my recent trip, I carried my Expedition canister inside the pack and on top of the sleeping bag and surrounded by other items. I strapped my tent outside and below the bag. This arrangement worked well and even with six days of food and water still came it at 31 pounds when I began my hike. I find the external frame much easier on my lower back and am glad I've switched. One interesting difference between the Kelty and the other two  (LL and upcoming titanium model) is that its frame is somewhat curved, as opposed to the straight lines of the other two. Maybe it's just an illusion, but I think the curves may make for a more comfortable carry. Still, I'll be curious to know more about this 2-pound model once it's on the market.

        Maybe external frame packs are making a tiny come-back. On my recent trip, I came across a hiker carrying the same Kelty Trekker as mine. We both agreed there were few of us out there but we really liked the return to what we'd used years earlier.



        To: johnmuirtrail@yahoogroups.com
        From: jmacleish@...
        Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:18:20 -0700
        Subject: RE: [John Muir Trail] OR 2014 reveals a titanium framed backpack (< 2 lbs) -- should be a winning JMT pack

         

        This is interesting in that the design is a 1/2  a leap forward.  The materials are modern but the design does not take advantage of the new gear being used.  The total design is for gear carried 15 years ago.  The open area at the bottom is designed to carry a rolled sleeping bag and pad.  My sleeping bag is the size of a cantaloupe (when I use a compression bag)  and my air mattress is about is 9 inches long by 3.3 inches.  Mostly I just throw the bag in the bottom of the pack and let it conform.

        I like the feel of a full frame pack and the total weight is great.  Maybe the next version will have an extended bag to hold a bear canister and the other gear internally.  Intended as an observation not a whine.

        Joe  

         

        From: johnmuirtrail@yahoogroups.com [mailto:johnmuirtrail@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roleigh Martin
        Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 12:21 PM
        To: John Muir Trail YahooGroups
        Subject: [John Muir Trail] OR 2014 reveals a titanium framed backpack (< 2 lbs) -- should be a winning JMT pack

         

         

        Take a look here (article text at link).

         

        This looks fantastic.  Wonder what the cubic inches are.  Looks like the bear canister could be fitted beneath the pack too (positioned horizontally).

         

         

        Image removed by sender. Inline image 1

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


      • Roleigh Martin
        If you add 900 cubic inches (14.75 cubic liters) if you strap a Bearikade Expedition to the bottom of that frame pack, it makes for a 50 liter pack, still a
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 30, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          If you add 900 cubic inches (14.75 cubic liters) if you strap a Bearikade Expedition to the bottom of that frame pack, it makes for a 50 liter pack, still a little small.  I'd have liked to have seen closer if the sum approached 58-60 liters.

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



          On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:47 PM, dave billingsley <davejbillingsley@...> wrote:
           

          Groovy! Thanks for the head's-up, R.M..Site says 35liter/36lb. capacity for $300. Cheers
           
          dave j. billingsley


          From: Roleigh Martin <roleigh@...>
          To: John Muir Trail YahooGroups <johnmuirtrail@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 12:21 PM
          Subject: [John Muir Trail] OR 2014 reveals a titanium framed backpack (< 2 lbs) -- should be a winning JMT pack

           
          Take a look here (article text at link).

          This looks fantastic.  Wonder what the cubic inches are.  Looks like the bear canister could be fitted beneath the pack too (positioned horizontally).


          Inline image 1
          -------------------------------------------------
          Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research links)
          _




        • Roleigh Martin
          They have a you tube of the pack here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgbJrWaf_po -- embedded link follows:
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 30, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            They have a you tube of the pack here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgbJrWaf_po  -- embedded link follows:

            <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/dgbJrWaf_po" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

            Corporate press release here:

            Long critical thread here -- plus pic of someone with pack on his  pack:


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



            On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Roleigh Martin <roleigh@...> wrote:
            Take a look here (article text at link).

            This looks fantastic.  Wonder what the cubic inches are.  Looks like the bear canister could be fitted beneath the pack too (positioned horizontally).


            Inline image 1
            -------------------------------------------------
            Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research links)
            _


          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.