Lowe Alpine Nanon 50:60 XL - compare and contrast

[Ent]

Hi All

Well it arrived, my new pack (Lowe Alpine 50:60XL) in baby blue, so it is a boy The mother was Hiking.com.au with the price best anywhere in the world at $123.15 including postage. Does go to show that Aussie mail order houses are worth looking at. Recommended rip-off price was $319. Now it appears that Lowe Alpine has decided that unless you are Pewee Herman lighter weight packs are not for you and has dropped the XL version, hence probably the chuck out special price. So if interested in the XL fitting get in quick or seek another option. Now to the compare and contrast section

Background

I have too many packs. Glad that is out of the way Below is the list
One Planet McMillan 90 litre long
One Planet Bass 85 litres long (hybrid travel/bushwalking pack and my first One Planet pack)
One Planet Styx 75 litres long
One Planet Mungo 60 litres long (it is an older pack coming as a hand me down but I love it all the more for the little marks that it has incurred on the way to me)
One Planet Traverse 38 litres in universal harness.
Ok I am a One Planet tragic not a shareholder for the record.
Deuter Aircomfort Vario Futra 50+10 litre (holder of the longest pack name in my collection)
Mountain Design Slipstream 35 litre (air back makes it great for biking)
Vaude something hydration pack (ok it is a piece of junk and proves that Vaude Australian distributor does not care that things were even stitched on. It is my last Vaude product)
For completeness I do have two other packs that I use as day packs on overnight plus walks
Kathmandu packable pack 15 litres?
Kathmandu Dash SL 18 litres.

I brought the Deuter years ago expecting it to be my main pack but it simply was not the pack for an XXL type guy. It did a few day trips before I brought the Traverse and Slipstream and now it is the pack that I hand out to any person that I walk with that does not have a pack and the One Planets are too long in the back for them. The McMillan is my main pack until I brought the Styx. I just managed to cram enough gear for a one nighter in the Mungo and it is my scrub pack of choice. The Traverse is my main day pack and also makes a very handy pack for a new walker bit weight shy as I being the mule carry tent, cooking gear, etc, so 38 litres is room enough for personal gear.

Weight Irrelevant Social Event Optimal Weight Load (WISE OWL) walking

For me weight of a pack is not a great issue. Yes, the lighter it is the better but I value my comfort and camping out so carry a wide array of stuff that most sane people do not. This is my choice and if people think that this is stupid then that is their choice. But never been accused of not catering sufficiently for a walk. What I am looking for is the Optimum Weight Load (OWL) for me. Yes I am been selfish, it is "me" not the whole world. I will leave it to the would be world dictators to set "mandatory standards".

But that does not mean I am not curious with lighter loads for walking with people that appreciate the bush without the sound of a steam train hard on their heels. Also modern gear and careful selection can mean I get "my" (yes I know that is yet another selfish word) level of comfort with a lighter load. Gradually been accumulating lighter gear. Now I mean lighter, not UL (under long) stuff For UL convents see other posters.

Is the new 90 litre pack now 50-60 litres?

With the shrinkage in key items' weight and more importantly volume the days of the 90 litre pack might be over unless you are a family mule or just appreciate the approach of packing a pack by moving around the room and lobbing stuff into the pack in a last minute rush. I will be bold enough to say that I will always have a McMillan, even just to annoy people with stories "that is the pack that I use to carry"

I know with the Mungo I can cram gear in but while being a reasonable weight of 2.350 kilograms I thought I would go lighter. The Deuter is 2.488 kilograms. The new contender is 1.495 kilograms (not the claimed 1.390 kilograms). I am with Tony on weights. If a manufacturer claims a weight as a selling point then the product should be that weight. Very rarely have I found items to be at or below their claimed weight

Volume to weight

Now the Mungo has a harness happy with a 25 kilograms, the brilliant exact fit system in an XL fitting for me. The Deuter is rated for 15-18 from memory but it was a long time ago when I brought it. That is a fair estimate. The Nanon claims comfort zone of 10-15 kilograms. I find that my load weight to volume factor is around .25 so fifteen kilogram load capacity maximum is about where I should be. I do appreciate that Mungo can haul heavy ratios with ease so have managed 22 kilograms. Ok, I like my wine so whine about excess weigh if you do not, but it will fall on deaf ears

Nanon pack design

Ok first impressions. The thing is way too small to be useful. Hang on, let’s undo the compression straps. Um? Looks promising. Best to describe it as a mini One Planet in basic design. Even the hip belt is a mini Exact fit system. The lid configuration with pocket on top and one inside is the same, as is how is the lid is attached to the pack. The back adjustment system is similar to the Traverse. It is clear that either One Planet or Lowe stumbled across the same design criteria or there is a common ancestor. I am laying bets that there is "Java pack" somewhere back in the history of both designs.

The back pouch looks promising with expanding stretch fabric. This is a first for me so be interesting how it works for me. You can use the compression straps to lock the load in but still potential for stuff to fall out when say pack hauling. The rear zip pocket is mainly for show if the rear pouch is packed. The side “drink bottle” holders are made of the same stretch fabric and look like they will handle 1litre SIG bottles. Not so sure if I can reach them with the pack attached. I have just managed to master the One Planet ones so maybe more yoga exercises are required. The front hip pockets look useful but the side access zip to the main pack has me wondering what were they thinking. It only really acts as a source for water to get into what is otherwise a bucket. Sort of proves that good designs just get knobbled a bit by committees adding things.

All the straps are very narrow and the buckles are skeleton type. Basically, it looks like every attempt has been made create a fully fledge pack as light as possible rather than a minimalist approach to start with. Actually, given the similarity in thinking to One Planet you have all the features you need, and no overkill, side zip excluded. Given modern materials, I do not envisage a problem with this weight lightening approach used. I am so use to canvas packs that start out stiff and soften that the first up floppiness of the pack seems strange to me.

I am curious how the new wonder material Dyneema will go.

Summary

Well the pack looks good and next step is looking at the loading of it and what it takes to get stuff to fit and the compromises that involves. As my first non One Planet pack in a long time I feel little like Benedict Arnold as One Planet packs have served me very well and will continue to do so. More a case of a walk in the lighter side. Though the Shadow is not that much different in total pack weight.

Cheers

[Nuts]

For me weight of a pack is not a great issue

O c'mon

[Ent]

Hi Nuts

If it was do you think I would start the OLT at 30 kilograms for a luxury eight day three course meal trip

Cheers

[Nuts]

So you could gain the reasoning to buy a lighter pack? no pain, no gain, that sort of thing?
It's ok, mind you, I considered a Yocton for similar reasons... ie, it is very light weight

[Ent]

Brought it more out of curiosity and for a different type of walking where the target is bit to far or steep to do it in luxury style. Also the purchase of the Neo Air and WM Megalite sleeping bag means with maybe more compact camp shoes there is a chance to try the light side as volume has always been an issue more than weight with me. A case of sucking and seeing or buying and trying. Actually a plan with this thread, all going well, is to contrast the change in gear. Ie photograph the -3 One Planet Winter-lite with the Mega-lite and Exped with the Neo Air and so on. Still admit that if I was heading to Mount Field in the middle of winter I will be back to items that I trust.

As you know I am very sensitive about my back and it is not total weight but total weight and harness design that matters to me. It is well know my experience with a particular MacPac pack, which I do not plan to repeat that experience. So I am looking for a pack that does not chuck everything out for an impressive statistic. Looking for something that works for me.

I like Lowe's approach and found it very interesting to see how similar the design is to One Planet. I still think One Planet is the master of quality and look forward to see them incorporate new materials into their packs once the new material past the test of time. Trouble with a lot of leading edge stuff is new materials get pushed into use before the downside is fully understood. It is very likely that Cuban will become the next silicon nylon but still a lot more testing is needed. For me companies like Hilleberg and One Planet are bellwethers to watch as they are not prone to rush to met a cult demand. They understand that their customer have expectations outside the latest craze. This however means that they will be slower on the uptake of new materials but when they do it then they are well placed to do it well.

It is curious that after many years and modern materials the best gaiters are often regarded as the old canvas one. Does make me thing all that glitters is not gold, but I am not a too old dog to stop looking for new tricks.

Cheers

[Nuts]

Iv'e pointed out the flaws in our LA packs. No drama, just need to be worked around. I actually Would (personally) take a lighter pack for the walk you have coming up, and much less and lighter gear. If anyone Can't get by without yer extra bog roll then perhaps they shouldn't be up there? Cheese and crackers (maybe) are a noble gesture but that gesture is a poor second to a snapped ankle or just week of pain.. (which tbh I too can see it coming (based on yer usual style) but hopefully will be able to admit I am surprised )

Anyhow, yes good to see how this pack survives. Obviously not as long as a heavy canvas pack (but weight isn't the issue right lol)

[Ent]

Hi

Yes most things have flaws and the trick is to find ways around them. Did a trial pack

1 WM Mega-Lite sleeping bag 6'6" version
1 Large Neo-Air
1 Jetboil with near empty cylinder
1 MD Kaon tent (three man claimed but more two but reasonably light at 2.4 kilograms.)
1 Pair of XXXL Crocs
1 Down jacket 800 loft and thin
1 Pair of WM Flash pants. (right waist size but very short in leg length)
1 Pair of Seal skin socks
1 Pair of light inner socks
1 Set of of full thermals
1 Light weight Polar fleece Windblock top.
1 Kathmandu day pack (200 grams)
1 First aid kit
1 PLB
1 set of Event mid weight wet weather gear
1 Minimal toilet kit
1 AAA head lamp
1 gloves, beenie, and bits and pieces.

All up weight 10.9 kilograms. Still need a few items but weight does stack up as does volume. The tent is for two as planned for WFV break in run where I am the mule. Be hard to keep weight down to all up 15 kilograms with food and water but possible. As usual the Crocs are the space hogs but fit in the rear expanding pouch. Would say that the Mungo has a bit more room than its claimed 60 litres given the tight fit in the Nanon. Though there is still room for food in the Nanon so hopefully everything will fit.

Remember I am not aiming for a UL experience just a lighter weight one Tends to confirm my view that people seriously under estimate the extra percentage load required for taller walkers that carry safety gear like the PLB. Please no defensive comments that by dumping this or decreasing size is what is required. All the items I have packed I have used regularly except the PLB.

Pack harness is ok at this weight subject to the usual playing around but no where near the Mungo comfort level. Does make me wonder if the extra 700-800 gram saving is worth the compromise but time will tell as any new pack takes a while to feel right.

As for the planned trip and weights people tend to forget that size has its advantages and what kills one is merely exhausting for another The strongest asset of any bushwalker is good old fashion stubbornness and that I have in spades. Actually did not find the thirty kilogram haul up Marions and on to WFV and then returning to Kitchen Hut with day pack to met up with others to do a night walk back to WFV that horrific as a start for the complete eight day OLT experience. Yes I was very tired but injuries did not come from it. In fact I find the "horror" of heavy packs and boots rather oversold as is the benefit of light weight, at least for me. But for others a lighter load is the only sensible option as I have seen people breakdown under load. I am talking sub twenty kilogram loads so care is needed to match build and underlying medical/fitness issues. Weight to frame size is no longer trendy in this day of absolute numbers. But still I might change my mind as I did with two poles.

Cheers

[Nuts]

700g's a day for food and you might crack u15kg for a week
Those XXXXL crocs would be like carrying a couple of canoes, surely there's a better option out there.
Ditch the plb to save weight??? ha ha, who here would suggest that? Be stomped by morals rhinos

[Ent]

700g's a day for food and you might crack u15kg for a week
Those XXXXL crocs would be like carrying a couple of canoes, surely there's a better option out there.
Ditch the plb to save weight??? ha ha, who here would suggest that? Be stomped by morals rhinos

Have not really looked at the food question. Short of dehydrating own food what I have seen in the shops reminds me of the Dundee's comments re food. As for quantity, my personal target is 1 kilogram a day as remember I am not the average build. Water is an issue in summer. Barn bluff was a challenge on 600MLs on a warm day and no other water to be had. Four times I have been running on empty and that is not a nice way top be. Generally start out with two 600 ml bottles so 1.2KG gone.

Crocs replacement is a challenge hence looking at the Five Fingers but the Aussie rip of price makes that a poor choice plus no guarantee that the 47 (maximum) size will fit. With the Crocs no so much problem on the weight by volume is massive. They fully occupy the pouch so say 10 litres gone. Tried beach shoes but they make a poor choice for creek crossings due to thin soles.

On the last point, remember that it is my preference what gets carried to suit my style. The PLB is clocking up the kilometres and never been used. But it provides a life saving tool if needed. Who knows, maybe it might call a helicopter to a recover a smoker suffering from chest pains. Know any of them

As said this is a learning exercise to see what works and does not work

[Nuts]

On the last point, remember that it is my preference what gets carried to suit my style.

thanks...of course %$&@ no, I hadn't forgotten. maybe others had? there doesnt appear to be anyone suggesting otherwise?

Just commenting that's one big load of Crocs was all

I don't know what you mean with plb. It suits many peoples 'style'?? ...i have one (but think I prefer the spot system) carry a sat phone as well if that helps? good luck!

[photohiker]

Solve the crocs problem by clipping them loose on the back. I've been trying, but haven't managed to tear one off yet.

The object of minimum food rations is to replace energy consumption and maintain weight. If you're looking to reduce bodyweight I guess you could take less. What's the energy density of the 1kg proposed?

Water - pack a 2L platy or camelback etc pouch in addition to your normal bottles. Fill as and when required, you only need to carry the extra weight when you actually need it.

[Nuts]

(Iv'e been using a couple of 1.8L zip top bladders. One has a mouth valve and the other has a tap. The two hoses can be joined to make one longer one, just as a hose or maybe with a filter attached if needed. The tapped one works well around camps. They don't weigh much or take up room. I do find I carry more water than before).

[Ent]

Hi

No it is not a set-up, but a taken from the weekend walk to the Walls, a wild croc

News break, Croc in the wilds of the Walls area

This one had a story and a happy one. A few Queen Scouts in training set-off and it got lost but was united with its owner a few days later. They caught up with us with the owner clutching it in her hand. In Tassie a lot of stuff gets lost and clutters up the tracks. My pet hat being the dreaded trail of blue mat. I much prefer to have gear in the pack if possible as Tassie bush is rather destructive to stuff stuck outside a pack. Personal preference I know but sound practice for Tassie tracks.

Food, is it fuel or a pleasure? At the end of the day some people live on ham steaks and baked beans but not me. For me food is more than fuel, and I strive to make it interesting on a walk. Remember, I am not looking at a UL experience merely lighter weight options. I personally do not give a hoot that a tarp or bivi bag is smaller and lighter as they are a form of torture designed by the puritan police to me I chuckle when someone smaller than me claims plenty of room in shelter (A), sleeping bag (Z) when someone has seen me try to fit into that shelter or sleeping bag. I get the overwhelming urge to swap their footwear with two sizes smaller and send them on a forced march

As for what to carry, or not, that is a walkers personal preference and given the prejudiced views of some regarding PLBs I refer them to the Alaska study where they were found to be a good thing before been made available for general release. In fact such a good thing that the study period was curtailed. If others chose to walk with other communication devices or non at all then that is their call, not mine. Never been a life aim to be world dictator.

The aim is to see if a 50-60 litre pack in a modern materials and careful weight saving design can suit a more traditional approach to walking. Heck, 15 kilograms by UL standards nowadays is huge load so not even in the race if UL was my aim. But at 15 kilograms it is a significant weight saving over 21 kilograms. I am curious on the trade-offs involved.

Here are a few items that have been swapped over.
1. Neo-air 2.5 R rating versus plus 5 for the Exped down mat. Unless sleeping on snow no compromise in comfort.
2. WM Mega-lite verses OP Winterlite. Ok the WM is -1 and the OP -3 so some compromise in warmth. The OP is a broad fit and nice and roomy while the Mega-lite tighter fit but longer in the 6'6" sizing I have. I have got use to the more cramped confines but some people can not adapt.
3. Jetboil verses ETA (about Trangia size). One is solo while the other is for company.

I can live with the above trade-off, will maybe the Jetboil could be a bridge to far but I will give it my best shot.

Camp footwear is my main target at the moment as is the perfect solo tent. The Nallo is a great tent but still could do to be longer, for me

Cheers

[Nuts]

Ha ha well... in other words youv'e finally started the journey to U/L nirvana (by any other name), it's ok, you can just say in this copmpany

Who are the 'puritan police' ??

Something can surely be done to get a few more inches in your nallo??

[Ent]

Hi

The puritan police are the people that believe bushwalking should be hard and basic with comforts frowned upon.

OWL is more a personal thing to balance walking comfort with camping comfort. Personally I think that Neo-Air and WM plus OP with the light weight sleeping bags have given very little trade-off between comfort to the older style and unless you are camping on snow the is little reason to buy differently. But even then Neo-air are coming out with an improved model to remove that caveat. But I do accept that a flat Neo-air might not be a thing of joy so for some a foam mat is the most reliable mat.

Honestly, I think that the trade off in pack harness comfort might kill the enthusiasm to find weight saving in the pack. I was amazed at how little difference in weight between the Mungo and the Nanon. The Mungo kills the Nanon for harness comfort and rugged feel. I am looking forward to testing that theory out.

Cheers

[Ent]

Hi

Well I have packed for an overnight trip. Managed with some effort to get within the upper comfort load limit of 15 kilograms for the pack. Doing a similar route to three weeks ago so I should be bounding along given that was done with 22 kilograms. Must get a pack scales as bathroom scales just not ideal for such fine measurements.

The pack can be maxed out in weight before volume so 50:60 volume works, just. External stretchy drink bottle holders mean that they still work even if the pack is crammed full. Do like the hip belt pockets. They nicely hold the Canon S90 and/or Panasonic FT3. Gives good ready access to the camera

It will be interesting to me to experience a lighter load as I am normally low twenties in total weight. I work on the principal to carry the same load and just vary the luxury level so get use to one weight. Has meant no unexpected surprises on longer walks.

Cheers

[Ent]

Hi

Well back from the fourth weekend in a row wandering the wilderness, well maybe not so much wilderness nowadays. Took the pack into Waterfall Valley. Load was fifteen or around kilograms. Findings. Well there was no scrub so more a carry test. The waist belt is brilliant on me. No complaints. But the shoulder straps are a killer. Now this could be due to them being rather close together, so on my broad back they dig into the shoulder muscles near the neck, or rather hard, as I am spoiled with One Planets Exact fit system used on my other packs. Tried losing the thorax strap on the way out, and this improved the situation a bit.

Now I am rather deep chested so found most straps on maximum adjustment. It might be that the pack is better suited to a narrower build, especially in the chest area. Honestly, the weight saved was not worth the pain and suffering that my shoulders endured, so I wondering if lighter weight packs are a modern take on the "Emperor's new clothes" fable. Time will tell.

Tempted to photograph people and their packs up past Marions and make a book titled "Packs of the Overland Track". An amazing collection come along from cases with straps, to packs with everything hanging off them, to neatly sized packs for the individuals carrying them. Saw an "A King" pack brought in 1999 that was out on yet another OLT wander with Dad being the mule. The proud owner was thinking of getting "No Aching shoulders" embroided under the name "A King" as he was very happy with it. Saw my first Aarn on the OLT. Did see an Aarn on the previous Walls Trip along with another "A King" pack (still owned by the person that brought it). Even though the Aarn on the overland land looked rather sad in its adjustment the young owner was happy, as was her mate hauling a neatly fitted One Planet McMillan. The joys of youth.

But to its credit nothing broke on the Nanon. Many on this forum would not expect a pack to break but saw one poor young blighter carrying his pack as the harness had failed. Makes me wonder if some manufacturers really do listen or test their products. Witness a similar mishap with a fellow walkers pack last year and myself was subjected to pack failure, so listening appears to be a lost art with some gear marketers. The Lowe Alpine stood up nicely to its first test but more work is needed by me on getting the adjustment of the harness right, assuming it can be made comfortable. Anyway, here are a few pictures.

Cheers

[Ent]

Hi

On a wander up Qaumby Bluff decided to use the Nanon as a day pack so rather lightly loadsed Also played a bit with the setup and got a chance to check out the pack's way of handling walking poles. It is a reasonable system but not perfect as the poles dislodged from the top holding point twice. In both cases low scrub snagged them. Below is a picture of the poles attached.

Poles attached.

Next picture concentrates on the hip belt. As you can see it uses a similar system that One Planet uses on their Exact fit system. I find it works very well and the hip belt is very comfortable. Also the zip pocket is way cool Makes me wonder why that feature has not made it on to more packs.

Hip belt and pocket.

The next picture show the back length adjustment buckle system. Again a very neat design with easy access and simple adjustment. Quite like the way the panel is held and comes out.

Panel to back length adjustment buckle.

As mentioned before the shoulder straps are rather uncomfortable on me. Part of the reason is that they are close together so the inside edge bites into the neck muscles. Now I am rather broad across the shoulders but the pack is also an XL fitting. Me thinks that the "L" is more long than large Ok, by losing the thorax strap to is maximum and postioning the shoulder straps wide the problem is reduced but still the straps even with a day pack load are not the most comfortable of things

But then I now come to "what were they thinking". Have a look at the below picture and you will see that the all the back length adjustment does is shorten (sorry make more average) the strap length but does not actually reduce the back length The pack does not have a variable back length. This means for the best fit you must fit the pack rather than the other way around. Honestly, Lowe culd achieve much the same effect they have by having a fixed "back" and by just pulling down and shortening the chest straps at the front. Here the design has broken down to a complex approach that does not solve the problem of matching the pack's back length to yours

No back length adjustment just shorter chest straps!

I am wondering is the harness systems on lighter weight packs is rather like the fable of "the emperor's new clothes". Honestly, weight and/or money would be saved by doing away with the system Lowe Alpine use. An effective system is the one used on the One Planet Shadow to name a pack that I am familiar with. While I do not have a Shadow the same system is used on my OP Traverse day pack. It works extremely well.

While for me the back length is reasonable (probably could do to be a fraction shorter) the ability to adjust the back length to suit people is a farce. Rather disappointed given the excellent hip belt and generally well considered trade-offs in saving weight shown elsewhere in the pack.

Cheers

[Nuts]

Hi ent, i dont understand the back length comment. Whether attached to a strap or a alum bar, both systems arrive at the same outcome, raising or lowering the shoulder straps ??
There will be an optimal position for the load lifters, as is the case with the OP packs. There will also be a lower limit set by the pack back panel length (looks big to start with in this pack (do they come in sizes?? you do seem to prefer wearing it 'short'..) and a longer limit set by the strap length )

[Ent]

Hi ent, i dont understand the back length comment. Whether attached to a strap or a alum bar, both systems arrive at the same outcome, raising or lowering the shoulder straps ??
There will be an optimal position for the load lifters, as is the case with the OP packs. There will also be a lower limit set by the pack length (looks big to start with in this pack (do they come in sizes?? you do seem to prefer wearing it 'short'..) and a longer limit set by the strap length )

Hi Nuts

First and totally unrelated comment. Do not ever believe that Dodo is a internet service provider, they are hopeless having over sold their 3G service. Snail pace most of the time assuming that it actually works! Can not rely on it at all

Ok back to the pack. Lets look at the One Planet system. The first photograph is at full length the next is shorter (sorry more average length). You might be able to see that the actual back length has reduced.

Maximum back length.

Back length shorter.

As the photographs show the length between the hip belt and shorter straps has reduced. This means that a shorter back can have strap smoothly flowing over the shoulder rather in starting high and coming down which means lot of weight on the front of the shoulders.

Now look at the Alpine Nanon system. Here all the adjustment does is shorten the straps. The back length remains the same. You can shorten the straps by adjusting the bottom buckle so why merely retract the more padded section of the strap rather than just shorten length by shortening the bottom straps?

Straps at full length.

"Back" length shorten. Note, the back length is the same.

So what happens with the Lowe system is the straps stay at the same height. If you look at the photograph in an earlier post with the pack on you will see that the chest straps hit harder on the front of the shoulders rather than curving around and spreading the load. If you assume that the staps started even higher such as the top "adjusters" even less of the shoulder would be supporting the straps.

Basically Lowe used a very complicated system that does not achieve any shorting of the back length of the pack.

Yes the pack model did come in two sizes. Standard length and extra long. This is the extra long version. In fact, that is the reason that I decided to give it a shot. A lot of lighter gear tends to come in only one back length while the more traditional packs have up to four back lengths. I personally can not understand why Lower did what they did. It makes limited sense and suggests a brain snap by the designers. As said the hip belt is a great design and fits better than the straight single belt design. When tall you do battle to get most stuff the right size and even in the One Planet range the adjustment is simple as with most cars, everything at the maximum adjustment.

Cheers

[Nuts]

Do you mean the shoulder straps (chest straps)?

I can only repeat the earlier comments. The section of shoulder strap under the length of the load lifters is straight so its not changing any angles as it is drawn under the back panel. The minimum length is determined by the back panel length so it cant be shortened as far as the OP but they both effectively work the same way from there up Both raise the shoulder height The LA sternum strap looks to have enough adjustment on that slider to cope The shoulder strap doesnt start to change angle until below the adjustment range.

I too have packs (OP & LA) with both these systems. You may be wearing the hip belt too high (personal choice) ????

Narrow in the neck though isn't it..

[Ent]

Hi Nuts

Honestly I can not understand what you are getting at. The fixed point on the body is the hip belt. It sits on the hips, or should else the load is being carried by the shoulders. If it is was higher then it would sit up on the stomach and slid down to the hip unless the load is being carried by the shoulders:? The measurement of back length is from the hip to the shoulders. This varies between people and many packs adjust that distance. The Lowe Alpine system does not All it does is shorten the chest straps. Exactly the same effect can be had by shortening the bottom strap that the padded strap attaches to. All Lowe does is retract the padded section. If you took it to extremes and lengthen the bottom strap all the padded section would be retracted and chest straps the same length The distance between where the strap comes out and the hip belt does not change. Where with the One Planet System (and many other systems) the actual back length changes. If this is not apparent to you then there is not more I can write

For me, packs migrate down to the natural point where the hip belt finally sits on the hip. Sure I can hike the pack up by after time is drops down its natural point where it can not slide down anymore. Packs with a too short back length means weight sits on my shoulders and become uncomfortable. I noticed on on walk you tend to have a either a very loose hip belt or not even done up at times. This means that the pack weight sits on the shoulders. If you are happy with that then fine but for me it places too much load on my shoulders and the back. A good pack design and adjustment means that the load is transferred to the hips with the shoulder straps mainly acting as stabilizers.

Sorry Nuts but what you write does not make sense to me and no collection of typical icons shrugged shoulders will change this. Simple test, retract padded section of chest strap and lengthen the bottom section by the same amount the pack location will not change. If it does not in your book then you have changed the laws of physics.

Cheers

[Nuts]

Chest straps= shoulder straps right?

Hi Nuts The distance between where the strap comes out and the hip belt does not change.

Exactly, it is the minimum length, determined by the manufacturer, reflected in their sizing. The distance does however increase as the straps are lengthened from there. However you look at it (shoulders higher, pack lower) the effective back length (assuming the minimum length is not too long already) increases to suit.

All Lowe does is retract the padded section.

Yes, and this straight padded section is longer for just this purpose, the front straps together with the back panel adjustment lengthen together.

This thing: is a concession to the fact that I (along with the LA design team) have missed something but I doubt it. The rest can be understood by re-reading what has already been said, no big deal...I prefer other systems and overall don't think Lowe Alpine are anything special for other reasons.

Meh, maybe someone else can summarise what we are both getting at better?

Drop by and i'll show you a LA pack (same system) without sizing (full range of adjustment) perhaps you will get a better understanding of how this system is meant to work, perhaps not..

Wheres the tartan hat?

[Ent]

Hi Nuts

Chest straps does equal shoulder straps. I assume that thorax strap is accepted as the strap that goes horizontally across the chest, hopefully without strangling you.

Yes best to see the packs in the flesh to better understand what we are not understanding. Personally I much prefer the One Planet system used on the Shadow. Even on the OP Traverse the system is much more comfortable than Lowe which has proven to be a pain in the neck. Still will play with it some more to see if I can improve the situation. Though as mention the hip belt is very comfortable.

The Hat. Now there is a classic design. Thirty years old and made in the land of the Long White Cloud. Manages to keep the sun off, does not blow off in strong winds and when worn under a hood the brim comes down and acts as ear warmers. The best judges of super cars, ten years, old reckon it is cool. Sadly this features are not recognised by most adults It does show that the old timers new a lot more about getting something to work than often given credit for.

Cheers

[north-north-west]

Crocs replacement is a challenge ... With the Crocs no so much problem on the weight by volume is massive. They fully occupy the pouch so say 10 litres gone.

I don't understand this. You shove things into the shoes and thus minimise the space they take up. Surely that's a no-brainer.

[Nuts]

I sometimes just take a couple of scented kitchen bags (and extra socks) When I was carrying the crocs a compression strap kept them squashed together.

[sthughes]

Lol yeah I see what you are saying Ent, silly system that I imagine at full extension would cause extra horizontal load (ie pulling backwards) on your shoulders.

[Nuts]

Herm well... I meant to comment again on this. I missed that the load lifters are at full extension (ie the pack is actually too short). If the back panel (the pack) was another 30-40mm longer they would be doing their job no?...

ent, i rarely walk with the waist belt undone. I do it now and then, sometimes popping a shoulder strap off or the other and often not bothering with the sternum strap with light weights. I guess i'm lucky to be average size, not overly fussy, whatever..

Why not get one of the US companies to make a pack (MLD?) if your looking for a lighter alternative?

[willem]

The Waist belt to the top of the load lifters is actually the back length, and this can not be changed. adjusting the straps up or down, or making them longer or shorter as in the LA actually changes nothing in relation to the back length. I think most packs are to short as the load lifters should be above the shoulder, other wise they actually do not works as they are supposed to.
By the way I also have packs from both companies.

cheers