Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

Pack Recommendations

Post climbing gear-related questions, offer advice. For classifieds, please use that forum.
 

Pack Recommendations

Postby Scott Wesemann » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:10 pm

I am looking to get a new pack and wanted to get some feedback on the following packs:

Gregory- Palisade
Gregory- Baltoro
Osprey- Aether 70

Any other pack recommendations under $300.00 would also be good. I will be mostly using this for 3-7 day trips in the lower 48. I do carry climbing gear at times. These are the three that I am really looking at right now, but I would like some feedback from anyone that is really happy or disappointed with theirs. Thanks!
User Avatar
Scott Wesemann

 
Posts: 568
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:18 am
Location: American Fork, Utah, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby TheBootfitter » Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm

Though mine hasn't yet arrived, I am waiting excitedly for my new CiloGear pack. I'd encourage you to check them out at http://www.cilogear.com. There have been several posts on SP with user feedback as well. The 60L WorkSack sells for $220 and has an extension skirt that expands it to over 90L.

I don't have any experience with the other packs you mentioned, though.
User Avatar
TheBootfitter

 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN and Seattle, Washington, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Re: Pack Recommendations

Postby Greeneggs » Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:30 pm

climb14ers wrote:I am looking to get a new pack and wanted to get some feedback on the following packs:

Gregory- Palisade
Gregory- Baltoro
Osprey- Aether 70

Any other pack recommendations under $300.00 would also be good. I will be mostly using this for 3-7 day trips in the lower 48. I do carry climbing gear at times. These are the three that I am really looking at right now, but I would like some feedback from anyone that is really happy or disappointed with theirs. Thanks!

I'm selling this Arc'Teyrx Bora 80 that's in GREAT condition. It's got your name all over it!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ArcTeryx-Bora-80-Ba ... dZViewItem
User Avatar
Greeneggs

 
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby johngenx » Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:44 pm

I have the Osprey, and love it. Durable, fits me superbly, and carries WAY more than a 2.2kg pack should. I use for climbing, backpacking, whatever. Looks like new even after some serious abuse...
User Avatar
johngenx

 
Posts: 244
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:30 am
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Thanked: 5 times in 5 posts

Postby 96avs01 » Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:07 am

I have never been disappointed in the performance of any of my Gregory packs (Massif, Whitney and Reality). A little heavier, but carrying really heavy loads is never a worry with their suspension. My $0.02

edit: typo
User Avatar
96avs01

 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:31 pm
Location: Woodland, California, United States
Thanked: 42 times in 32 posts

Postby divnamite » Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:13 am

Osprey has always been amazing to me. I don't think you can go wrong with it.
User Avatar
divnamite

 
Posts: 491
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, New York, United States
Thanked: 4 times in 4 posts

Re: Pack Recommendations

Postby crackers » Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:28 pm

climb14ers wrote:I am looking to get a new pack and wanted to get some feedback on the following packs:
Gregory- Palisade
Gregory- Baltoro
Osprey- Aether 70


Ok, please remember that I make packs for a living, but here is some feedback on these packs from the perspective of somebody who's never inspected one...

*If you are a taller male, the Palisade and the Aether will probably carry better than the Baltoro. The wide butt of the Baltoro will probably carry better for women or shorter males than the other two packs, all things being equal (which of course, they're not).

*None of these packs use Cordura. They use generic material, called High Tenacity Nylon, that is more or less similar to Cordura. Personally, I still prefer Cordura because I think it's a better material.

*The Baltoro apparently uses a 630d HT nylon on the bottom of the pack. The material on the Palisade is apparently 1000d vinyl coated Nylon, and the Aether uses a 500d. The Palisade's will most probably last the longest.

*The Aether uses a 420d HT Nylon for most of the body of the pack. This is the strongest material used in the bodies of these three packs.

Good luck making your decision.
crackers

 
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:01 pm
Thanked: 2 times in 2 posts

Re: Pack Recommendations

Postby travelin_light » Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:46 pm

crackers wrote:
climb14ers wrote:I am looking to get a new pack and wanted to get some feedback on the following packs:
Gregory- Palisade
Gregory- Baltoro
Osprey- Aether 70


Ok, please remember that I make packs for a living, but here is some feedback on these packs from the perspective of somebody who's never inspected one...

*If you are a taller male, the Palisade and the Aether will probably carry better than the Baltoro. The wide butt of the Baltoro will probably carry better for women or shorter males than the other two packs, all things being equal (which of course, they're not).

*None of these packs use Cordura. They use generic material, called High Tenacity Nylon, that is more or less similar to Cordura. Personally, I still prefer Cordura because I think it's a better material.

*The Baltoro apparently uses a 630d HT nylon on the bottom of the pack. The material on the Palisade is apparently 1000d vinyl coated Nylon, and the Aether uses a 500d. The Palisade's will most probably last the longest.

*The Aether uses a 420d HT Nylon for most of the body of the pack. This is the strongest material used in the bodies of these three packs.

Good luck making your decision.


Damn, next time I'm buying a pack I'll know who to ask!
User Avatar
travelin_light

 
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:59 am
Location: Boulder, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby Scott Wesemann » Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:15 pm

Thank you for all of the information eveyone. Right now I am leaning toward the Osprey, but I need to go try one on first to make sure. I have heard nothing but great things about them.
User Avatar
Scott Wesemann

 
Posts: 568
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:18 am
Location: American Fork, Utah, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby RickF » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:27 am

Climb14ers,

I'll put in a plug for the Cilogear packs (the packs that Crackers makes for a living). I have two good freinds that have Gregory Palisades and they are very happy with their packs. I'm looking for something in the multi-day to week-long cargo capacity category thats built lighter than the Gregory packs. Although I haven't decided yet, I'm leaning toward the Osprey or the Cilogear. The Cilogears offer what I have found so far to be the most revolutionary design in the area of lightweight construction and volume versatility.

Crackers, thanks for the very knowledgable and objective information on the construction of your competitors' packs! It's very admirable for you to comment on the positive aspects of the other packs. (O.K. the doors open, tell us a little more about the Cilogear packs)

-Rick
User Avatar
RickF

 
Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 12:45 pm
Location: Temecula, California, United States
Thanked: 30 times in 25 posts

Postby crackers » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:03 pm

rixco99 wrote:Crackers, thanks for the very knowledgable and objective information on the construction of your competitors' packs! It's very admirable for you to comment on the positive aspects of the other packs. (O.K. the doors open, tell us a little more about the Cilogear packs)


Thanks rick, but the OP is looking for multiple compartments in his packs, and we don't make packs like that yet. The closest we have is the semi-mythical (that's for you UncleBob!) 75L which has a large sleeping bag compartment. However, we won't have that in stock till January, so ...
crackers

 
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:01 pm
Thanked: 2 times in 2 posts

Postby requiem » Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:05 am

i have an Aether 70. it is my first pack, and i am very pleased with it except for one thing; it's a little too large for my frame. i am a hair shy of 5'7" and exchanged the size Medium hip belt and harness for size Small, but for all my finagling it still barely fits "comfortably" when full. my main problem is in the load lifters i think, which are mounted a little too high and end up restricting my breathing when i'm really working up the hill.

other than that it's an awesome pack. i have one hiking partner who has the same pack but abuses it and in less than 1 season has broken a snap-buckle and torn the side (fixed with duct tape). but he's a special case.
User Avatar
requiem

 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Oakland, California, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby hatidua » Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:56 pm

I jumped on the "lighter is always better" bandwagon for a while and had a number of the very highly acclaimed lightweight packs that get mentioned on every forum. Then, for giggles, I used one of my outdated heavy packs on a three day trip a few weeks ago. Here is what I already knew, but relearned:

-a 6# pack that makes 35#s feel light & comfortable is better than a 3# pack that makes 25#s seem heavy. Additionally, what may fit someone else perfectly, may not fit me at all.

Find a dealer that carries all three of what you are considering, load them all with the same amount of weight, and walk around the shop for 30 minutes. I suspect that exercise will produce a clear winner. I don't have any of the three specific models on your list so I have no dog in this race.
hatidua

 
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:34 am
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Thanked: 4 times in 3 posts

Postby Brad Marshall » Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:16 pm

I have an Osprey Aether 85 and an Exposure 66. They fit me well even though I'm on the bubble between their medium and large. I bought the 85 to replace my older Dana Terraplane and find it carries heavy loads as well or better even though it's over 2 pounds lighter. I have no experience with the other packs.

crackers wrote:
rixco99 wrote:Crackers, thanks for the very knowledgable and objective information on the construction of your competitors' packs! It's very admirable for you to comment on the positive aspects of the other packs. (O.K. the doors open, tell us a little more about the Cilogear packs)


Thanks rick, but the OP is looking for multiple compartments in his packs, and we don't make packs like that yet. The closest we have is the semi-mythical (that's for you UncleBob!) 75L which has a large sleeping bag compartment. However, we won't have that in stock till January, so ...


Yes, thanks for the objective comments regarding your competitors packs. Out of curiosity are people looking for multiple compartments in their packs? I've owned a few with the sleeping bag divider and have never used it because I felt it prevented me from filling the pack efficiently.
User Avatar
Brad Marshall

 
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:54 pm
Location: Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada
Thanked: 17 times in 15 posts

Next

Return to Gear

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2006-2013 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.