/ Lomo 40 litre climbing pack

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
angry pirate - on 02 Feb 2014
Back in October a thread appeared about the 40 litre drybag rucsac by Lomo
http://www.ewetsuits.com/acatalog/walkers-drybag-rucksack.html

It looked like a decent pack but now the dust has settled and folk have had chance to use it I was wondering what people think of them.
I'm especially interested in whether the back length is long enough (it looks quite short in the video) and the weight of the pack.
Cheers!
marsbar - on 03 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:

I haven't got one, but I have had the 60 l one and its great. Between me and my Dad we have a fair number of Lomo bits and pieces, they are great value and excellent customer service.

woolsack - on 03 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:

I bought one but haven't used it for any climbing related activity. Used it skiing and it felt OK and comfortable enough. I'm 5'11 and probably a regular back length
Timmd on 03 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:
I have an old 35 litre Berghaus rucksack (nearly 20 years old) which they made in the mid 90's with a similar looking back length, and I find it's a good thing in it's own way, because it stops me over packing weight-wise, or it gets too uncomfortable. So it's not best for carrying comfort, but in itself that's not a bad thing. I've started going back to it again because it stops me over carrying. The Lomo back looks more padded and comfortable looking than mine, having said that. 26 isn't a lot to risk.

(They made it along the same lines as a 'sack they made for the army, according to my dad who bought it for me when it was in a sale, so the back length is short for the waist strap to go above the army belt so the army belt can still be accessed easily. They had some fabric left over and made some extra ones to sell in outdoor shops)
Post edited at 19:29
angry pirate - on 03 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:

Cheers for all the replies. I've got a lomo holdall and I agree about the quality and as said 26 quid isn't much of a punt. I'm just wondering how good it is loaded with a rack and rope and whether it's a bit wide for climbing with.
trish1968 - on 04 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:
I have one I've used it for cycling. I found if I crossed the clips accross it reduces the width otherwise it does get in the way when looking behind you.
I was going to use it for winter climbing but changed my mind as I need to attach snow shoes as well as axes.
It is a great lightweight bag and worth the 26
I have a short back the length is ok for me but if you have a long back I can imagine loaded up it would be uncomfy.Plus the waist belt is minimal.
Post edited at 08:56
angry pirate - on 04 Feb 2014
In reply to trish1968:

Thanks for the info. I suspected it would be a bit short.
Finally bit the bullet and asked the folk at lomo. They measured the back length at 43cm for me. Shame as that's about 10cm shorter than my existing pack so no chance of it sitting on the hips.
Timmd on 05 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:

Thinking about it, the short back length could be handy for when wearing a climbing harness.
ads.ukclimbing.com
Timmd on 05 Feb 2014
In reply to angry pirate:

> Thanks for the info. I suspected it would be a bit short.

> Finally bit the bullet and asked the folk at lomo. They measured the back length at 43cm for me. Shame as that's about 10cm shorter than my existing pack so no chance of it sitting on the hips.

5 cm longer than my ancient Berghaus, think I'll get one for 26. Ta for finding out. (:-))

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