UKC

I'm torn between these two. Can anyone offer any advice? Any particular pros/cons of either?
Thanks in advance, Chris

In reply to Sutty22:

AK is lighter and simpler, but generally very similar packs.

The Osprey has a more 'structured', comfortable feel. The straps, buckles etc also do a better job of 'staying put' on the Osprey, because it doesn't use the very thin/slick tapes of the Crux. Probably not a deal-breaker?

If you're likely to want to stuff the empty sack into another bag (eg to create one bag for the second on long routes), then the Crux may be a better bet as is more floppy/flexible.

All in my own limited experience.

Both very good packs.

Mark

In reply to Sutty22: As above, the crux straps creep when the sack is heavily loaded, quite annoying. Tough wearing sack though.

Cheers

Andy

In reply to Sutty22: I have a crux ak57, which although a completely different bag has similar construction. I think it's a great sack on the whole, but I have one major gripe with it - the extension collar is made out of ridiculously flimsy material that seems to wear through/tear through stiching in no time. This is obviously an attempt to keep weight down but at the expense of an extra few grams for a more durable fabric for the small amount of material the collar is made from, I dont see the point in such a sacrifice in basic funtionality. It seems crazy that the rest of the pack is made from totally bombproof material but is let down by such a small and easily remedied problem.