Captain Beefheart wrote:

Misha wrote:Well - looks like the complaints about Cilogear customer service may be justified. They are yet to respond to my inquiry after several days. Wild Things are MUCH more on top of it.

If vendors have a tough time responding to *sales* inquiries, one can only imagine their responsiveness if you have any issues post-sales. Hmm...

Did you call or email? They always answer when I call. Emails usually take a little longer because I believe Graham responds to them every few days or so.

Email - I hate phone (does not allow me to multitask properly) plus I want a record of what they can do for me for future reference. Will give them a few more days . C'mon though... it is almost 2010. Even my 74 year old dad responds to email promptly

Check out BD Speed 40L - compresses pretty small and is very spacious - I went up Mt. Rainier in the summer with it, and it's my day to day crag pack, so takes up some considerable abuse despite some flimsy looking fabric. I have some crampon holes (nothing that some majic tape and seam sealer won't fix), but the stitching is bombroof. It is simple and lightweight - I dislike how Osprey overengineer their packs. You can pick one up on sale for around $80...

Agreed Misha. I believe their packs are worth the wait though. I think that you will be happy with the WorkSack's performance in the alpine. I can only imagine how sweet the Dyneema version is.

Not super happy with the 45L cilogear durability. Grommet is ripped out on top and wear holes in the bottom after just one summer.

I did hear back from Cilogear four days later. They do not offer Dyneema packs right now since they have issues with their fabric supplier. If they let me, I will try their WorkSack 45L alongside Wild Things Icesac and CCW Chernobyl.

BTW, has anybody ever seen an ecommerce website more poorly designed than McHale's? Gotta love them choices: http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/index.htm
Way to discourage potential customers

Misha wrote:BTW, has anybody ever seen an ecommerce website more poorly designed than McHale's? Gotta love them choices: http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/index.htm
Way to discourage potential customers

I doubt McHale's can be described as an e-commerce website, since all their packs are custom-made and they deal with each customer individually.

Here are a couple packs that people have not mentioned:

BD Shadow 55, last I saw one on craigslist going for $100. Their quantum 65L is slightly heavier but larger though. Plenty of attachment points for rope/harness/tripod/rack/helmet/iceaxes/etc.

I routinely go out for a week in the pack, and its great with a helmet on. Went through the pickets with it. Climbed Challenger/Luna/Fury and got stormed off of N. Buttress of Terror. Has a "hollow" for your noggin/helmet. Can be stripped down to ~2lbs when one takes top pocket/stays/framesheet out. At least BD is smart enough to use a tubular stay instead of all the morons who use flat aluminum bars which have to be far heavier to achieve the same stiffness/load capacity. Remember those old external tubular frame packs which carried heavy weight like a dream on a trail? True, they needed to get the frame off the shoulders, but... Anyways... Yea, its because of those aluminum tubular "stays" which are far lighter and far stiffer than an equivalent flat bar of aluminum. Good ol' mechanical engineering.

ULA p2 which is not made anymore, but get their catalyst instead.

Haven't used the REI Pinnacle but it looks good, but heavy and too small if you had to ask me to fit 45lbs of stuff in and on it. Love the hip pockets, but other than that it looks way way too small for more than a weekend. But that is also true of about every pack mentioned in previous posts as well.

The question becomes, do you want a weekend pack or a multiday pack? For a weekend pack on peaks that can be "bagged" in a day.... who cares about weight? +/- 1lb won't make any differnce. Carry less food, erm poop before leaving the parking lot?

Rant:
Why do only a couple packs have hip belt pockets??? They should ALLLLLLL have Hip pockets on the hipbelt. They are the best thing since sliced bread! Gets weight forward and lower on your body to boot which helps balance and getting the camera out/sunscreen out is quick! No more having to take pack off and unzip top pocket to get to the most needed stuff. Hat gloves 1 pocket camera sunglasses and sunscreen the other. Its perfect.

Brian

Misha wrote:I did hear back from Cilogear four days later. They do not offer Dyneema packs right now since they have issues with their fabric supplier. If they let me, I will try their WorkSack 45L alongside Wild Things Icesac and CCW Chernobyl.

BTW, has anybody ever seen an ecommerce website more poorly designed than McHale's? Gotta love them choices: http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/index.htm
Way to discourage potential customers

Wastral wrote:Why do only a couple packs have hip belt pockets???

[/quote]

Because they are the work of Satan. Satan is a hiker. One of them what wears workout gloves and fancy 'hydration systems' on day-hikes, carrying a SPOT messenger in a waterproof case while downloading Google maps on their iPhone.

If you wear the pack over a harness they get in the way of the gear on your harness, even more than hip belts normally do, which is bad enough. They get in the way of your arms/hands. They look dorky. If you need to put so much in them that it affects the balance of your load then you're carrying too much stuff. They are just one more bit of crap added to something that is not absolutely necessary. Yes, your ass does look big in them.

kheegster wrote:

Misha wrote:BTW, has anybody ever seen an ecommerce website more poorly designed than McHale's? Gotta love them choices: http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/index.htm
Way to discourage potential customers

I doubt McHale's can be described as an e-commerce website,

Yes it can. And I have several students that could build a much better one. (I don't know if their instructor could!)

gregory z65 is would be my top choice. the small size is 3lbs 9oz and is 3600 cubic inches.

if its too light it will just break and tear.

DanielSC2009 wrote:gregory z65 is would be my top choice. the small size is 3lbs 9oz and is 3600 cubic inches.

if its too light it will just break and tear.

That's too heavy. I am looking for a pack under 3lb made out of very durable fabric such as Dyneema (or part Dyneema) or Spectra. Ideally I can use a z-rest pad for a pack's frame for additional weight savings.

The question becomes, do you want a weekend pack or a multiday pack? For a weekend pack on peaks that can be "bagged" in a day.... who cares about weight? +/- 1lb won't make any differnce. Carry less food, erm poop before leaving the parking lot?

Multiday winter/summer technical climbing pack (up to 5 days with ultralight packing) that can be used as a dayclimbing pack if needed. I am in the process of figuring out how to survive for five days in winter conditions with under 40lb of "crap"

Damien Gildea wrote:

Wastral wrote:Why do only a couple packs have hip belt pockets???

Because they are the work of Satan. Satan is a hiker. One of them what wears workout gloves and fancy 'hydration systems' on day-hikes, carrying a SPOT messenger in a waterproof case while downloading Google maps on their iPhone.

If you wear the pack over a harness they get in the way of the gear on your harness, even more than hip belts normally do, which is bad enough. They get in the way of your arms/hands. They look dorky. If you need to put so much in them that it affects the balance of your load then you're carrying too much stuff. They are just one more bit of crap added to something that is not absolutely necessary. Yes, your ass does look big in them.

Classic! For a guy named Damien, you sure paint a grim picture of Satan

All packs that can actually carry 45lbs of crap have hipbelts that get in the way of harness loops/Buckle, unless it simply does not have a hip belt at all. Pockets when on said hipbelt don't get in the way as said loops hang below said hipbelt and harness.

Under 3lbs with 40lbs of crud... Try the ULA catalyst weighs in at 47oz. Not sure if you can still get a top pocket for their packs. The old P2 they made which is the exact same as the catalyst had a top pocket. ula.com

Still a few Cloud packs made by Kelty that get that light and can carry that much junk around. If you can find them. Dyneema... gotta love that fabric. Only other pack made with Dyneema that I know of are the Mchale packs mchale.com. But, oh my the $$$$, youch.

Brian

Misha wrote:

Damien Gildea wrote:

Wastral wrote:Why do only a couple packs have hip belt pockets???

Because they are the work of Satan. Satan is a hiker. One of them what wears workout gloves and fancy 'hydration systems' on day-hikes, carrying a SPOT messenger in a waterproof case while downloading Google maps on their iPhone.

If you wear the pack over a harness they get in the way of the gear on your harness, even more than hip belts normally do, which is bad enough. They get in the way of your arms/hands. They look dorky. If you need to put so much in them that it affects the balance of your load then you're carrying too much stuff. They are just one more bit of crap added to something that is not absolutely necessary. Yes, your ass does look big in them.

Classic! For a guy named Damien, you sure paint a grim picture of Satan

One of the previous posts reminded me to mention that the hip-belt is removable on the CiloGear packs. This can come in handy when your climbing. On my CCW Chernoble it is sewn on. I like each pack for what they are intended for. If I plan on scraping up a chimney or having to haul my pack up some nastiness, I would usually opt for the CCW since I don't want to subject the Cilo to that kind of abuse.

kheegster wrote:

Misha wrote:BTW, has anybody ever seen an ecommerce website more poorly designed than McHale's? Gotta love them choices: http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/index.htm
Way to discourage potential customers

I doubt McHale's can be described as an e-commerce website, since all their packs are custom-made and they deal with each customer individually.

e-commerce refers to any website oriented to sell goods - it does not have to be a big commercial operation - sorry, web geek here. I agree with Misha - the site looks very Web 1.0, but maybe it's intentional to give the business more homemade feel? Pretty much most climbing gear companies with small domestic operations have very simple web sites (CCH, Yates), which is ok with me - why waste $100Ks on stupid and pretty much useless Flash heavy web design? I pretty much hate the new Black Diamond website and don't shop at Moosejaw.com because their site is such a pain in a to navigate.