UKC

Hi guys,

I currently have a osprey mutant that I used for a couple of weeks in the alps over the summer, and climbing crags in the UK etc. the bag is fine and does the job....but I don't like it.... there is too much going on, loads of straps/gadgets that could be simplified and made better! I brought the pack after reading some reviews and watching a couple of youtube videos, all seemed good, but now in my minute experience i've realised i need to simplify it.

So i've been browsing the web, and so far what i like the look of are Berghaus Capacitor 35, after reading the north ridge post, the north ridge ballistic 35 looks good, and originally had my eye on quechua bioassay 35 (now sold out and replaced with a simond), does anyone have either or, are they as simple as the look but still do the job, also robust etc. any recommendations?

planning a weekend walking in scotland in jan, more sport/trad climbing between, then a month or so in the alps in the summer, so bag need to serve the purpose for these needs, but mostly alps.

thanks for any help, and merry christmas!

How's about this....New to the market...Simple design..No frills ....Just functional.Sounds like it's what you're looking for...

http://www.blueice.com/products/en/26-warthog-38l.html

and hear's a review :

http://coldthistle.blogspot.ie/2011/07/blue-ice-new-warthog-alpine-pack.htm...

Happy christmas

In reply to the ant hill mob: I have a Ballistic, which I nearly didn't buy as it wasn't a 'trusted brand'. Have been very happy with it, simple, effective and cheap. Used it for rock climbing and ice climbing with no problems. Only issue is keeping my overpacking tendency in check, as 35l is not hugh, which isn't rucksacks fault.

£35 for the Ballistic is very good value for money.

In reply to Andy Syme: Another vote for Ballistic 35, or 45 if you are worried it won't be big enough. Tough and you won't mind trashing it up, i'd have bought two at the time if i had known it'd be as good.

In reply to the ant hill mob:

Have to agree. 45l fits the whole world in or if not full adjust the side compression straps to suit!
I remember when I went to GO and saw them. Very impressed and for some reason the 35 was more expensive than the 45!! Maybe because people deem 45 too big for climbing/walking??! I'm almost sure I paid 18quid for mine with one of their regular discounts, a genuine bargain and like said above, it you trash it, you don't mind as much!!
Matt

In reply to Flat4matt: So looks like the ballistic is a good bit of kit for a really cheap price, its £30 now (still cheap), but only available at york, have sent a friend a message to see if he can grab one for me...but will see what happens? not such a bargain if i travel up from southampton! If not though, anymore info on the other models or recommendations?

In reply to the ant hill mob: For simplistic clarity in a pack, have a look at the Crux Ak37.

In reply to the ant hill mob: Have a look at the Pod Alpine 40 http://www.podsacs.com/packs_alpine40.html and reviewed here http://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/review.php?id=2843. Simple enough design. Floating lid gives extra capacity if needed or can be removed to save weight, as can the hip belt. Roll top design keeps out the elements, especially with the lid removed (I find it less faff than drawcords and snow valances). Comes in two back sizes.

If the 40's too big then there's a 30 litre model as well, but that's only available in one back size.

In reply to the ant hill mob:

I know what you mean about the Ospreys; they're all straps and flaps, floppy and soggy.

I found the Macpac Kakapo to be the perfect remedy. I think it will outlive me.

In reply to the ant hill mob:

Yup, you've given the exact reason I didn't go for an Osprey; comfy, but straps and faffage all over the place. I can heartily recommend the Deuter Guide 35+. Some people claim it's heavy, but I find when it's on it's very comfortable and doesn't feel weighty. It can be stripped down if you want to, and the plus side of the slightly higher weight is the durability; I've had mine for two years now, use it pretty regularly and it hardly has a mark on it.

In reply to the ant hill mob: In the rucsac market there are essentially two distinct segments:
- Manufacturers selling rucsacs with a fairly basic construction suitable for moderate use and moderate loads.
- Manufacturers selling rucsacs with an enhanced construction suitable for heavy use and/or extreme loads.

Berghaus, North Ridge and Quechua fall into the former. POD, Macpac and Blue Ice fall firmly into the later with Crux and Osprey also tending in that direction. As an example, I completely destroyed a Berghaus Alpine Extreme within 2-3 years but I after ten years of equally hard use a POD Black Ice was still going strong.

If you are only every going to carry 'sensible' loads of no more than 10-12kg, then you shouldn't have any issues with something like the Ballistic, but regularly load it with 25kg, haul it up routes, climb granite chimneys with it etc. and it just won't last compared to something like the Blue Ice pack.

It is worth being aware of this. However, if you are spending £30 on a rucsac, rather than £100, having to replace it a lot sooner may not be something you will overly worry about.

In reply to The Ex-Engineer:

That is a slightly simplistic view of things. I presume you meant there are companies who make good bag and there are companies that make mediocre/bad bags. My Aiguille Alpine bags use very simple designs, are very hard wearing and carry heavy loads well.


Have you used or even seen a Blue Ice bag in the flesh? They're well made out of top end materials, but the Warthog 26 is only a good bag for some 5'8'' or less as the back is too short. Even for someone who actually fits it, it is still going to be a poor choice for carry heavy loads, due to the inadequate Hip Belt.

Also I understand that the newer POD bags, like the Alpine 50 aren't anywhere near as durable as say a Black Ice.
To the OP:

I can strongly recommend these too bags as excellent rucksacks. The Cirrus is slightly smaller than the Mutant 38, whilst the Stratos is slightly bigger.

http://www.aiguillealpine.co.uk/cgi-bin/trolleyed_public.cgi?action=showpro...

http://www.aiguillealpine.co.uk/cgi-bin/trolleyed_public.cgi?action=showpro...


HTH

In reply to The Ex-Engineer: I've been using my Ballistic on Gabbro for the past 4 months and pretty much everything in between with racks and ropes in it, seems to be doing just fine ?

I don't know if i'd want to be carrying 25kg of gear anywhere to be honest.

In reply to the ant hill mob:

Put 25kg in most outdoor packs and it would soon come apart regardless of cost. That's what bergens were designed for!!!!

In reply to Captain Gear: Thanks again to everyone for the post, for financial reasons (student) I will be looking at the ballistic, although I have to admit I have had a look at all that were posted but I think the Aiguille stratos looks pretty tough, on the write ups it says a bag for life, would this be a true enough statement??

Weird question for the stratos specific, does it have a small pocket or something similar for keys etc?

Only a minor thing, but definatley looks like the bag i'm after, if its a bag that will stand the test of time then i'm sure my student loan will take a small hit in january!

In reply to Captain Gear: I was trying to highlight the underlying differences in construction between a £30 rucsac and a £100 one.

You can get simple rucsacs and highly-featured rucsacs in both price ranges. You can also get well-designed or inappropriate rucsacs whether they are cheap or expensive.

However, the one thing that the 'top end' mountaineering rucsacs have in common is that they are vastly OVER-engineered when it comes to the basic stitching and construction. That is not to say the are indestructible, just that more time and effort is expended to ensure it is not the stitching that fails first. [The POD Alpine sacs are a good example. The stitching is bombproof so it is the robustness (or lack of) of the lightweight fabrics that determine their overall durability.]

It does seems from some replies that other people don't perhaps abuse their rucsacs as much I do.

As such, there may be little for them to gain from spending more on a similar rucsac that has additional stitching and bar-tacking that they probably won't need anyway.

In reply to the ant hill mob:

My favourite ever rucksack is Lowe Alpine's Crag Attack, now updated to be even better and somehow less than I paid five years ago!

http://www.cotswoldoutdoor.com/index.cfm/product/crag-attack-42-rucksack/fu...

Awesome for everything and have found Lowe's after-sales service to be extremely good in the past..!

Are Montane's bags the right fit for you? The 32l and forthcoming 40l bags look quite nice, if you happen to be the right size and shape.

Incidentally, if a bag has too many bells and whistles, you can always take a sharp blade to it...

In reply to the ant hill mob:

I think the Aiguille stratos looks pretty tough, on the write ups it says a bag for life, would this be a true enough statement??

Maybe not a bag for life, but a big for a good ten to fifteen years of hard use.

The Stratos doesn't have an under lid pocked. It has a pretty large top pocket with a clip with car keys in it.

That's a good decision. I'd recommend you ring Aiguille and order it over the phone rather than buying it online. Aiguille make all their stuff to order and you bag will arrive much quicker if you actually speak to them.

HTH

In reply to the ant hill mob:

cilo 35 worksack if you can afford it.

In reply to ice.solo:

I stopped using my Osprey for much the same reasons as the OP. I now have an OMM Jirishanca (35l). Much less faffage and you can remove most bits if you don't want/like them. Not cheap though.