Wed 05 Dec, 2012 2:30 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 3:18 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 3:41 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 3:53 pm
Gusto wrote:
I also would have thought that Cactus Gear would have something that fits your requests. http://www.cactusequipment.co.nz/online-shop/packs--bags/78
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 5:43 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 5:46 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 5:53 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 6:57 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 7:22 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 7:29 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 7:41 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 7:45 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 7:50 pm
Robert H wrote:Yeah you have set quite a hard set of requirements for yourself. There is going to have to be a compromise somewhere!
I think by far the closest thing would be a HMG Porter pack. It is ~72L, has a simple harness, made from hybrid cuben fiber which is both waterproof and extremely strong and great for scrub (not so great for abrasion). They are also top loading, single compartmental and have daisy chains to boot. Oh yeah and it is ~900g.
I have the Porter which is basically the same pack but in a smaller capacity and I am very happy with it.
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 8:03 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 8:12 pm
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 8:36 pm
jmac wrote:R
nq111, I agree about the look of the harness on the BD Mission, which is why I was hoping for user testimony. Nice looking sac though. I
Wed 05 Dec, 2012 11:37 pm
quicky wrote:I know you may be thinking that it is too small in volume, however, remember, that there is no standardised method for measuring pack volume.
Thu 06 Dec, 2012 4:29 am
blacksheep wrote:Of course there is, but no standardised accountability for truthfulness in quoted volume.It is an absolute, and absolutes are very measurable. Some just don't. I can send a pic of how this is done if you'd like..
Thu 06 Dec, 2012 10:26 am
Thu 06 Dec, 2012 11:26 am
jmac wrote: Quicky when I was guiding a lot, Osprey was the brand my clients had the most trouble with. Poor construction quality, designed half a world away by people who didn't cater to my needs, it seemed to me. I can't see it happening unless a lot has changed. Sorry.
Thu 06 Dec, 2012 11:31 am
Thu 06 Dec, 2012 11:40 am
blacksheep wrote:If by difficult conditions you mean remote , life and death sort of thing, then consider the macpac ascent. No moving bits, been used everywhere...we never see these back in our customer service centre.
Thu 06 Dec, 2012 10:48 pm
Fri 07 Dec, 2012 7:45 am
Fri 07 Dec, 2012 8:01 am
Fri 07 Dec, 2012 7:15 pm
Fri 07 Dec, 2012 7:22 pm
Gusto wrote:It would seem the this thread is now leaning towards Cottage manufactuers. In which case it's worth mentioning http://www.zimmerbuilt.com/ . You'd need to contact them and send them the criteria that you're interested in.
Sat 08 Dec, 2012 7:51 am
Mon 10 Dec, 2012 3:09 pm
jmac wrote:...I was quite excited by the McHale website. Their philosophy for harnesses and materials looks great, but the actual sacs look like they don't understand scrub. Pockets and tizzy bits hanging off. And extra zip compartments at the bottom. My current big pack is a custom job, so I'm not ruling out a custom job though!
...
Mon 07 Jan, 2013 3:13 pm
Tony wrote:blacksheep wrote:Of course there is, but no standardised accountability for truthfulness in quoted volume.It is an absolute, and absolutes are very measurable. Some just don't. I can send a pic of how this is done if you'd like..
Hi Cam,
That would be great if you would post a pic of how MacPac measure pack volume.
Tony
© Bushwalk Australia and contributors 2007-2013.