Having a sort out of the many daysacks I seem to have obtained and was wondering which was better/stronger, molle pouches or permanently stitched on pouches?
Which is better, molle pouches or stitched on?
- Thread starter AndyD
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
The only thing I've noticed with the various Molle configurations i've seen and played with if we are talking about various pouches on backpacks/bergens , is it seems to allow the weight to migrate further away from the c.o.g.
Just an observation.
Just an observation.
Note, not all MOLLE is created equally. the PALS webbing (that's the technical name for the webbing strips on the pack) on some cheap packs may not be the same quality as say maxpedition packs. But good quality PALS should be strong enough for anything we are likely to put it through.
You also have arguments such as the the PALS webbing effects the waterproofness etc... But then any stitches going through the fabric will do the same, such as those for sewn on pouches...
TeeDee makes a good point about the centre of gravity. A lot of the pictures I've look at of modern "tactical" packs covered in MOLLE webbing, I can't help but think they stick out a lot at the back, which can't be comfortable.
Personally the only pockets I have on my pack are a lid pocket, and the mesh pockets on the outside. I use them for things like water bottles and my meths bottle. Oh, and the ones on the hip belt...
There is a fashion within bushcraft for forces style packs, be it the surplus LK35 packs from Sweden, or the modern Maxpedition packs. It's not for me really.
If I had a collection of packs to decide between, my first priority would be comfort, followed by weight, followed by capacity. Pockets/PALS would be near the bottom of the list of requirements.
Hope this helps.
J
You also have arguments such as the the PALS webbing effects the waterproofness etc... But then any stitches going through the fabric will do the same, such as those for sewn on pouches...
TeeDee makes a good point about the centre of gravity. A lot of the pictures I've look at of modern "tactical" packs covered in MOLLE webbing, I can't help but think they stick out a lot at the back, which can't be comfortable.
Personally the only pockets I have on my pack are a lid pocket, and the mesh pockets on the outside. I use them for things like water bottles and my meths bottle. Oh, and the ones on the hip belt...
There is a fashion within bushcraft for forces style packs, be it the surplus LK35 packs from Sweden, or the modern Maxpedition packs. It's not for me really.
If I had a collection of packs to decide between, my first priority would be comfort, followed by weight, followed by capacity. Pockets/PALS would be near the bottom of the list of requirements.
Hope this helps.
J
widu13
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Many, many people do not know how Molle should be weaved. Molle is just as secure as sewn pockets but will be heavier, although there is the bonus that the configuration can be changed to suit need. If a lightweight molle type bag of about 50 litres were to be released I'd buy it.
[video=youtube;EMuzrXU7rUY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMuzrXU7rUY[/video]
[video=youtube;EMuzrXU7rUY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMuzrXU7rUY[/video]
I have to agree quintoxicgeek, each have there place and its personal choice, it's nice to be able to add a pouch on now and again, if you need all those pouches then review what you are taking, either get a bigger bag or cut down. All those pouches on the outside its easier to snag on bushes, go for a decent bag with compression straps on the side, you can always make a big bag small but not a small bag big!
widu, there is a mole bag, Rush 72, approx 47 litres. They are out there maxpedition, condor to name a few.
widu, there is a mole bag, Rush 72, approx 47 litres. They are out there maxpedition, condor to name a few.
Last edited:
That is not a light pack. it weighs in at 2.3kg. I find it telling that noone seems to list a weight for the Maxpedition Condor II.
There are lighter weight packs out there which I am willing to bet are more comfortable to carry. Exped Lightning 60 springs to mind, as does the Montane Grand tour 55.
Of if you want something green, then there is the LK50 (just under 40L, so smaller, but you could hang a dry bag off the bottom). Or the Lk35...
Or the Berghaus Munro, 30L pack, 1kg, takes side pockets if you really want.
Notice that all of these lack PALS webbing. Webbing is heavy. The lightweight stuff that dutchware sells is 6g per foot, and that's the lightweight stuff, "bog standard" webbing is probably a bit heavier. How many feet of it do you have on the outside of your average pack? It soon adds up...
J
widu13
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Q's quite right, a lightweight bag is something like my 58L MLD Exodus at 700g INCLUDING lid, extra pouches and inflatable suspension system!
In answer to the original post, do you want to be able to remove the pouches from the bag or not?
Other than that, either/or!
Other than that, either/or!
