/ Rucksacks - Main compartment zips??

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Piers Harley - on 30 Aug 2013
I hope I'm not alone in this but I fail to see the logic in these??
Don't they add weight, complexity and cost while decreasing weather resistances and durability?? Itís also interesting (well sort of) that more than a few top end manufacturers have designed them in to their packs at one time or another. I also accept that there are more than a few who havenít! Try as hard as I might I fail to see the point of them.
xplorer on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to Piers Harley:

Why don't you just get one without a zip. It's a no brainer. Because surely a zip isn't really worth moaning about.
purplemonkeyelephant - on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to Piers Harley:
> Try as hard as I might I fail to see the point of them.

So you can get something out of the bottom of your pack without feeling around blindly, without taking gloves off, without taking stuff out etc?

I use it all the time when I need to check if I packed an item and don't want to have to get it out again.

Piers Harley - on 30 Aug 2013
i know, all I was saying is that I don't understand the need for them. I've certainly not missed not having one.
top cat - on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to Piers Harley:

These zips are a solution in search of a problem.

I have one in my ski touring sack and never use it and it seems fragile. Normally I would not buy a sack with a main compartment zip but the rest of the design is so good I just had to make an exception ( Haglofs Rand 48, before they changed the design and spoilt it, but confusingly kept the same name!)
girlymonkey - on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to Piers Harley: I have one on my main hill bag, and love it. I will try to get one on the next bag I get to replace it. It's totally bomb proof (the bag is made by black diamond), doesn't affect the durability of the bag at all. It means when I want to get things that are lower in the bag, I just open the front and can see everything and grab whatever I need without emptying the entire bag to get to it. Sadly the bag is starting to fall apart so will need replaced fairly soon, but it is the rest of the bag that is showing wear, not the zip!
climber34neil - on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to top cat: last February I bought a new climbing sack after retiring my very old and traditional style marmot pack. After spending far to long looking on the Internet at all the options I was convinced it was going to be an osprey variant, then looking at them in the shops some of the buckles were broken and the closure system has also broke which put me off straight away, then moved on to a millit pack with side zips thinking that was handy then ultimately decided on a black diamond axis which only has zips and not a buckle in sight and have to say so far it has been excellent and I've not missed a clip top at all. Hooray for zips I say!!!!
marsbar - on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to Piers Harley: Mine has a zip towards the bottom, with a compartment that can be part of the main, or separate. It means I can get at heavy stuff without having to empty it all. I've had it 10+ years and its fine, if it goes it would be easy enough to put a new zip in. Its an old Karrimor.
GridNorth - on 30 Aug 2013
In reply to Piers Harley: Interesting. I have a Deuter Guide 45+ with a side access zip and a bottom compartment which I use for ice climbing. IMO the extra weight is balanced out by the convenience and comfort of the comfortable harness. Being able to get my belay jacket out easily without risking pulling other items out at the same time is very convenient.
keith sanders - on 03 Sep 2013
In reply to GridNorth: I aggree with you as I have a arcteryx with a side zip as you may well know and the lads I climb with think it so conveniant to get things from inside.
butteredfrog - on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to Piers Harley:

Deuter guide 35+, wasn't sure about the zip, but I find I use it all the time.
LastBoyScout on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to Piers Harley:

I think the zips work very well on smaller packs, such as my ancient Lowe Pax 15 and BD BBEE, but for anything decent, I'm with you on preferring the drawstring and lid design.

No point having side access when everything is inside a dry bag - unless you're using multiple dry bags.
butteredfrog - on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to LastBoyScout:

Multiple dry bags are the way forward.
MG - on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to Piers Harley: I agree. I have several old rucsacs that are entirely functional apart from the zips. As these are only on the lid pockets, it isn't a great problem but if the main compartments had zips, the rucsacs would be useless or need expensive repairs.
GrahamD - on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to Piers Harley:

In my younger backpacking days with the old Karrimor Jaguar sac, I thought it was great being able to get my sleeping bag out without having to unpack a weeks worth of grubby undies. Never been that bothered in a climbing context though.
BnB - on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to butteredfrog:
> (In reply to LastBoyScout)
>
> Multiple dry bags are the way forward.

Actually, waterproof rucksacs are the way forward, but this seems unusually challenging for the manufacturers. If they can make a waterproof hardshell, why not a rucksac?
cb294 - on 04 Sep 2013
Waterproof rucksacks do exist, not only as bike courier versions but also proper climbing packs:

http://www.ortlieb.de/_prod.php?lang=en&produkt=elevation

I would definitely buy one but my old Mammmut pack refuses to die. I have Ortlieb pannier bags from the first series they ever made, and they are still in daily use after 25 years or so. Totally indestructible,

CB
GrendeI on 04 Sep 2013
In reply to BnB: Actually some come pretty close. Exped do nice waterproof daysacks and Ortlieb come quite close with their alpine specific Elevation bag. But nothing has yet come anywhere near to the old Acrux series of packs form Arc'teryx. Sadly their newer Arrakis and to an extent Naos range of packs aren't that waterproof, nothing like the Acrux series.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.