Newbie Rucksack Questions

[darrenleroy]

Hello all,

After 35 years in the urban jungle I've recently been introduced, via a wild camping trip to the New Forest with an experienced woodsman, the massive quiet joys of the great outdoors.

Since then I've taken a couple of trips to Snowdonia, one to Knoydart in Scotland and am planning a canoe trip down the Wye in the summer. I understand but a fraction of what some of the guys are posting on this site but I'm very grateful for the crumbs from the forum tables.

I want to update my kit as my rucksack is a 25 year old Karrimor Jaguar 65 litre and would like to get some input from the posters here.

I have been looking at the Karrimor SF 60-100 and the 75 as they both come highly recommended on BCUK by the forum members but I have some questions I wonder anyone could answer.

I am 5'7". I like lugging my kit on my back and feel something around the 70 litre mark rucksack would be a good compromise between volume and bulk. I certainly don't need anything bigger. I already have a little day sack for bimbling. I really only want to buy one rucksack that will hopefully last me another 25 years!

What is more comfortable to carry: the SF 60-100 or the 75? I understand the 60-100 has an external frame and the 75 has an internal. Is this correct and does anyone have knowledge of using both.

Would anyone recommend foregoing the expense of a Karrimor SF product for a standard army rucksack instead? Is there such a thing? And who exactly makes this?

Is it Web-tex or is this, like, Karrimor a deluxe version of the standard army issue sack. What about the JetFlow? And why is there such a disparity of price between the Bergens I've mentioned?

I know it's a lot of questions but I really want to make the right choice.

All the best,

Darren

[darrenleroy]

From reading around the forums I'm sensing Web-tex isn't as appreciated.

[MartinK9]

I'm old and set in my ways, I have had the same Berghaus Vulcan Bergen coming up for a quater of a century and have had no problems with it at all, it has served me well and only now is it showing signs of it's age.

I'm 5'8" and mines a size 2.

[Shewie]

I really like my Sabres and would recommend them to anyone. Some don't like all the straps but they can be shortened or removed if they're a problem, personally I don't mind them. Also there are some comments about the newer production standards but again I think they're solid enough and I've never had any problems with them.
There are some good surplus alternatives to try, the Berghaus Vulcan is probably the one to look at first. I tried a Vulcan for a while but once I tested the Sabre I switched immediately.
Lowe Alpine also make a couple but I think they're in DPM which might be an issue ?

Try before you buy though if you can, it makes so much sense with a pack.

Give the Webtex packs a wide berth ;)

What sort of kit will you be carrying ?

[fletch]

ok, i really dont know what people have against the webtext PCLE clone. Aside from it have IR reflective issues (not an issue unless your a soldier or happen to be in the business of avoiding russian soldiers equiped with night visiosn) there is not really anything wrong with them.

If your looking for a hard wearing,capacious and reliable pack then have a look at webtex (or PLCE bergen).

I've had my webtex bergen for about 4 years and it has been on 3 canoe expeditions in france (wet all the time), several canoe trips in scotland (again pretty much wet all the time from being in the bottom of a canoe). The Arctic twice on various survival courses, countless weeks in the woods in the UK, a month backpacking around india and now it is sitting beside me in Guatemala after 3 months backpacking around central america.

The *only*issue i have had is that the cotton zip tag thing (the bit of cloth tied to the zip) disappeared somewhere on the last boat/van/truck/bus ride whilst moving through guatemala. cosmetic problem only and fixed in a bout 15 seconds with 4 inches of paracord.

It's a great pack and cheap too. If money grows on tree's where you live then by all means look at the karimor range, they are very good pack indeed but for the extra cost....just get a webtext or ex army PLCE.

It's got loads of loops and a large one for tucking your axe into, plenty of clips etc for attaching other plce kit to it. It is 100 % compatible with modular PLCE options. I've just found a nice resting place for my machete which fit's snugly between the side pouch and main bag and has a webbing lock off strap there for the waist loop of my sheath to ensure it does nto fall out.

The shoulder and waste straps are massively adjustable and thoughtfully seated providing a very good yoke system for heavy weight..

not sure why everyone hates webtex so much.

[johnboy]

Hello all,

After 35 years in the urban jungle I've recently been introduced, via a wild camping trip to the New Forest with an experienced woodsman, the massive quiet joys of the great outdoors.

Since then I've taken a couple of trips to Snowdonia, one to Knoydart in Scotland and am planning a canoe trip down the Wye in the summer. I understand but a fraction of what some of the guys are posting on this site but I'm very grateful for the crumbs from the forum tables.

I want to update my kit as my rucksack is a 25 year old Karrimor Jaguar 65 litre and would like to get some input from the posters here.

I have been looking at the Karrimor SF 60-100 and the 75 as they both come highly recommended on BCUK by the forum members but I have some questions I wonder anyone could answer.

I am 5'7". I like lugging my kit on my back and feel something around the 70 litre mark rucksack would be a good compromise between volume and bulk. I certainly don't need anything bigger. I already have a little day sack for bimbling. I really only want to buy one rucksack that will hopefully last me another 25 years!

What is more comfortable to carry: the SF 60-100 or the 75? I understand the 60-100 has an external frame and the 75 has an internal. Is this correct and does anyone have knowledge of using both.

Would anyone recommend foregoing the expense of a Karrimor SF product for a standard army rucksack instead? Is there such a thing? And who exactly makes this?

Is it Web-tex or is this, like, Karrimor a deluxe version of the standard army issue sack. What about the JetFlow? And why is there such a disparity of price between the Bergens I've mentioned?

I know it's a lot of questions but I really want to make the right choice.

All the best,

Darren

Hi Darren and welcome to the forum and congratulations on getting into the outdoors..

The best rucksack / bergen for you is the one that fits you the best.

It could be a Karrimor Sabre or it could be a Berghaus Vulcan or it could be a Webtex PLCE Bergen copy or the Army issue bergen..

You need a rucksack that fits your back length correctly and shares the weight between the hip belt and the shoulder straps.. 10 minutes on google will produce a heap of information on this.

The basics are the hip belt sits slightly above your hips ( not around your stomach) and allows the transfer of the majority of the weight of the loaded Bergen to your hips and pelvis area. Having a waist belt up around your stomach is no good at all for getting the weight to load bear on your hips.

The problem with a lot of Bergens oirented for 'Military' use is they can have very short back lengths or fixed back lengths which stops them fitting optimally or they have no waistbelt at all. In the military more often than not you're wearing 'webbing' so you want the 'Bergen' to sit above all of the pouches and other kit around your waist. So a short back length is seen as a useful thing to have.

For 99.9% of outdoor use a well fitting Bergen is what you want especially if you're loading it up and carrying for a reasonable distance.

Basically you're rucksack choice will come down to a Fixed back length or Adjustable back length.

Common 'Bushcraft' Bergens ( there are others):

Fixed back length one size only offered:

Karrimor Sabre 45
Karrimor Sabre 75
Karrimor Predator Patrol 45
Karrimor Predator Tecmec 50

Fixed back length Size choices offered:

Berghaus Vulcan 4 sizes
Webtex PLCE
Issue PLCE * Short and long only


Adjustable Back Length:

Karrimor Sabre 60-100
Karrimor Sabre 80-130
Lowe Alpine Sting / Stingray
Lowe Alpine Saracen


Personally I'd look for fit and comfort of a bergen over a particular brand if you do not mind brighter colours your choice expands 10 fold. In reality trying to give specific advice on fit via a forum on fit is nigh on impossible.

I really like my Vulcan as it fits me well. Other folk will like Sabre 75's, Webtex etc..

You have to go and try a few on..

Webtex gets a bad reputation mainly because they produce copies of military kit (the Webtex PLCE 'bergen' is a copy of the army issue Bergen which is a detuned copy of a rucksack Berghaus used to make called the Crusader) that when subjected to hard military use fails very quickly. Argueably if you're not using it in that environment it may last longer. Generally with outdoor kit you pay your money you take your choice.

I personally don't have a downer on the Webtex Rucksacks but you can often get the 'real thing' for similar outlay via ebay etc..

Hope this helps...

[Kerne]

I want to update my kit as my rucksack is a 25 year old Karrimor Jaguar 65 litre and would like to get some input from the posters here.

All the best,

Darren

I have a 25 year old Karrimor Jaguar 65 and I still use it loads but especially when weight isn't an issue (I have an ultra-light Vapour Trail for lightweight stuff) It is rugged and capacious and I like the way it is split into compartments/pockets. If I am going anywhere where I don't have to carry my pack long distances on a daily basis, this is the one I choose. So, if it ain't broke...

[gordonmac]

I am 5'7". I like lugging my kit on my back and feel something around the 70 litre mark rucksack would be a good compromise between volume and bulk. I certainly don't need anything bigger. I already have a little day sack for bimbling. I really only want to buy one rucksack that will hopefully last me another 25 years!


Hi Darren,

I'm about the same height as you and recently bought a Deuter Aircontact Pro 60 + 15 (http://www.deuter.com/en/products/33827_AircontactPRO60u15_470_0 7_ENG.php). I had it out at the weekend for the first time and found it very comfortable after a tiny bit of fiddling around with the adjustable back system. The load I was carrying was around 16 kilos (35 pounds), not the heaviest load really, but was a good enough indicator of the comfort of this bag.

One of its selling points for me was the front opening (it opens from the top, too), which allows you to easily get at stuff lower down in the pack without having to burrow down from the top.

Anyway, best of luck with whatever you choose :)

[big_swede]

There is no need whatsoever for a military pack in the civilian life. If it's because it's tougher than an ordinary pack your doing something wrong. If you can't handle a such a simple item as a rucksack without breaking it you shouldn't be allowed anything near anything as dexterity challenging as a knife. Or a fire.

If you want one because you want a green one, or you wanna look like some paramilitary or if it's because RM has one, then that's okay. We all like to pretend. But you don't really need it.

What the BCUK people recommend is not the same thing as it's the best. There is a strong 'herd' mentality going on here.

If I were you I would get a crux pack in gunmetal and just concentrate on getting out there.

[johnboy]

There is no need whatsoever for a military pack in the civilian life. If it's because it's tougher than an ordinary pack your doing something wrong. If you can't handle a such a simple item as a rucksack without breaking it you shouldn't be allowed anything near anything as dexterity challenging as a knife. Or a fire.

If you want one because you want a green one, or you wanna look like some paramilitary or if it's because RM has one, then that's okay. We all like to pretend. But you don't really need it.

What the BCUK people recommend is not the same thing as it's the best. There is a strong 'herd' mentality going on here.

If I were you I would get a crux pack in gunmetal and just concentrate on getting out there.

Say what you really think BS ;)

[Shewie]

There is no need whatsoever for a military pack in the civilian life. If it's because it's tougher than an ordinary pack your doing something wrong. If you can't handle a such a simple item as a rucksack without breaking it you shouldn't be allowed anything near anything as dexterity challenging as a knife. Or a fire.

If you want one because you want a green one, or you wanna look like some paramilitary or if it's because RM has one, then that's okay. We all like to pretend. But you don't really need it.

What the BCUK people recommend is not the same thing as it's the best. There is a strong 'herd' mentality going on here.

If I were you I would get a crux pack in gunmetal and just concentrate on getting out there.


:pokenest: Brilliant response

Couldn't we say the same about every aspect of our hobby, it's all pretend none of it necessary.

Nowt wrong with playing soldiers.

[bushwacker bob]

I also use a Karrimor jaguar but its not as new as yours. Its works fine for me.
If it aint broke......

[kai055]

http://www.britishmilitarysurplus.co. uk/shopscr87.html

got mine from here a couple of years ago and use it all the time

[darrenleroy]

Thanks for the ongoing advice.

Shewie: I'll be carrying kit for bushcraft - small tent and or bivvy bag, sleep mat, sleep bag, clothes, cutting tool, mess tin etc, but I also want to do feel comfortable hiking for up to 15 miles a day. I think around 70 litres should cover this.

Fletch: Does the Web-Tex PLCE waist strap actually reach the waist? Others have said it's designed to fit around webbing so sits higher up. I really need a good waist strap to support and spread the load as I'm a weakling.

Johnboy: brilliant synopsis. Thanks.

Gordonmac and Big Swede: I guess it's easy to get sucked into the toy soldiers thing. I am attracted to the muted colours of army sacks because they tend to blend in with the surroundings, and they've been proven in the field so to speak, but I guess I shouldn't rule out any bag. Comfort is the key.

If money were no object I'd be looking at the Berghaus or Karrimor SF Bergens.
For lightness I like the sound of the Crux Pack or Deuter Air Contact Pro

I think I need to get to some shops and start trying them on...

[big_swede]

Gordonmac and Big Swede: I guess it's easy to get sucked into the toy soldiers thing. I am attracted to the muted colours of army sacks because they tend to blend in with the surroundings, and they've been proven in the field so to speak, but I guess I shouldn't rule out any bag. Comfort is the key.

If money were no object I'd be looking at the Berghaus or Karrimor SF Bergens.
For lightness I like the sound of the Crux Pack or Deuter Air Contact Pro

I think I need to get to some shops and start trying them on...

What I look for in a rucksack is mainly simplicity, multiple usage and light weight. It has taken my some 20 years of outdoors activities to reach this conclusion. I avoid all extra pockets and features, I rarely use them. Some do, mind you. For instance, making a day pack out of side pockets is something I have never ever done, or even felt the need of although I have had packs with this feature. I think sidepockets are just in the way. The same can be said of extra straps and strap points. I rarely use them. But it was just recently that I have taken this stance. If you go back thru my posts you will see that I was very fond of army frame packs. You can see the 'what to do in sweden when it's too cold to paddle' thread in out and about section to see that I still use them on occations when my other packs are too small. But I just can't justify the extra weight when it's not needed. Light is right, especially if you do this as a recreational activity. But some guys and gals still prefer the army lookalike drill, and enjoy telling other people about their struggles, in the pub. For some people the suffering is the goal, or so it seems.

Of course there are several ways we all go about outdoors activities, none is really wrong, (just stoopid.. :D). Almost all my outings are foot based, that is I carry my stuff. And since I want to enjoy the outdoors as much as possible I try to reduce the strain of walking. There is an easy way to do this, ease your burden. It took me a lot of years to understand that no carrying system in the world is worth its weight. Carrying is made easier by lighten your load, not by any carrying systems. Of course the easiest way of lighten your load is by omitting stuff you don't really need. This is very dependent on what land your planning on travelling through. I live in Sweden with a right to roam that is very liberal compared to the English, Welsh and even Scottish ones. I would never carry a entrenching tool for instance, since it's much easier to make a digging stick whenever I need one. Likewise I wouldn't carry a fire box or similar stuff, since I don't need it, I don't even use a stove most of the time, the same with tents. I don't bother. So this is not a UL gospel, it's just a philosophy of carrying less by knowing how to use your surroundings, and enjoy yourself in the mean time. On the plus side I can, if I like, travel further and faster than if I was loaded like a mule.

It's not a coincidence that most outdoors people don't use army items any more. It's a shame though that the choice of colours in the civilian outdoors business is almost always limited to very bright colours.

[big_swede]

Say what you really think BS ;)

What do you mean JB?

[fletch]

Thanks for the ongoing advice.

Fletch: Does the Web-Tex PLCE waist strap actually reach the waist? Others have said it's designed to fit around webbing so sits higher up. I really need a good waist strap to support and spread the load as I'm a weakling.



yes of course. They are correct in that it can ride high to sit above your webbing if you your a soldier. However, it has adjustable straps like any rucksack so you can lower it or raise it. When you lower it you'll find that it tends to lean back a bit, which is why it has another set of adjustable straps at the top to pull it back onto your back.

but i think any pack will do this, it's a non issue anyway.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2kk7zt.jpg

i guess you already know about the removable side pouches as well? you can remove one or both if you want a smaller pack or take them both off and join them together to make decent day sack (with a webbing yoke)

[Diamond Dave]

What I look for in a rucksack is mainly simplicity, multiple usage and light weight. It has taken my some 20 years of outdoors activities to reach this conclusion. I avoid all extra pockets and features, I rarely use them. Some do, mind you. For instance, making a day pack out of side pockets is something I have never ever done, or even felt the need of although I have had packs with this feature. I think sidepockets are just in the way. The same can be said of extra straps and strap points. I rarely use them. But it was just recently that I have taken this stance. If you go back thru my posts you will see that I was very fond of army frame packs. You can see the 'what to do in sweden when it's too cold to paddle' thread in out and about section to see that I still use them on occations when my other packs are too small. But I just can't justify the extra weight when it's not needed. Light is right, especially if you do this as a recreational activity. But some guys and gals still prefer the army lookalike drill, and enjoy telling other people about their struggles, in the pub. For some people the suffering is the goal, or so it seems.

Of course there are several ways we all go about outdoors activities, none is really wrong, (just stoopid.. :D). Almost all my outings are foot based, that is I carry my stuff. And since I want to enjoy the outdoors as much as possible I try to reduce the strain of walking. There is an easy way to do this, ease your burden. It took me a lot of years to understand that no carrying system in the world is worth its weight. Carrying is made easier by lighten your load, not by any carrying systems. Of course the easiest way of lighten your load is by omitting stuff you don't really need. This is very dependent on what land your planning on travelling through. I live in Sweden with a right to roam that is very liberal compared to the English, Welsh and even Scottish ones. I would never carry a entrenching tool for instance, since it's much easier to make a digging stick whenever I need one. Likewise I wouldn't carry a fire box or similar stuff, since I don't need it, I don't even use a stove most of the time, the same with tents. I don't bother. So this is not a UL gospel, it's just a philosophy of carrying less by knowing how to use your surroundings, and enjoy yourself in the mean time. On the plus side I can, if I like, travel further and faster than if I was loaded like a mule.

It's not a coincidence that most outdoors people don't use army items any more. It's a shame though that the choice of colours in the civilian outdoors business is almost always limited to very bright colours.

Great Post with lots of information. I go for the Karrimor Sabre and Predator because of the quality and the civilian colours are just too much.

David

[big_swede]

I have a 25 year old Karrimor Jaguar 65 and I still use it loads but especially when weight isn't an issue (I have an ultra-light Vapour Trail for lightweight stuff) It is rugged and capacious and I like the way it is split into compartments/pockets. If I am going anywhere where I don't have to carry my pack long distances on a daily basis, this is the one I choose. So, if it ain't broke...

That makes us two with a vapour trail in this thread...

[sapper1]

yes of course. They are correct in that it can ride high to sit above your webbing if you your a soldier. However, it has adjustable straps like any rucksack so you can lower it or raise it. When you lower it you'll find that it tends to lean back a bit, which is why it has another set of adjustable straps at the top to pull it back onto your back.

but i think any pack will do this, it's a non issue anyway.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2kk7zt.jpg

i guess you already know about the removable side pouches as well? you can remove one or both if you want a smaller pack or take them both off and join them together to make decent day sack (with a webbing yoke)


You are very wrong on this.The belt is a stabilising belt not a waist belt.A waist belt is designed to transfer the weight to the hips . The plce pack is designed to sit on your webbing and through this ,transfer the weight to the hips and the shoulders via the webbing yoke as well as the shoulder straps.
The stabilising belt as fitted to plce packs is not padded enough nor thick enough to transfer any weight comfortably.

[gregs656]

I guess it depends how much you want to spend as well. I have a big old beast of an issue Bergen and I have used it quite a bit, it was £15 off the site mentioned previously and it's fine. I have had it on my back for several hours with no real issues. It's massive, and you probably don't need anything quite so cavernous.

I also have a Dutch issue Low Alpine Sting I bought as surplus, it was about £50 and it's brilliant. A good amount of room, strong, adjustable, comfortable. I did consider quite a few options but none of them screamed at me as such a complete bargain as the sting - I am very happy with my choice.

[fletch]

You are very wrong on this.The belt is a stabilising belt not a waist belt.A waist belt is designed to transfer the weight to the hips . The plce pack is designed to sit on your webbing and through this ,transfer the weight to the hips and the shoulders via the webbing yoke as well as the shoulder straps.
The stabilising belt as fitted to plce packs is not padded enough nor thick enough to transfer any weight comfortably.

you are of course entitled to a different opinion than mine but there is no need to be quite so confrontational now is there?

i think that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

5 posts and i'm out of here

[big_swede]

you are of course entitled to a different opinion than mine but there is no need to be quite so confrontational now is there?

i think that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

5 posts and i'm out of here

There there, it was very confrontational, but no need to threaten with resigning yet. You most certainly have valueable experiences to contribute with.

[Barn Owl]

Darren,if I saw an old Jaguar on the bay I'd probably bid for it mate.
No,I'd def' bid for it...:D

Keep yours and try to get your hands on some of the others mentioned to try out first,you know it's the only way.;)

[TinkyPete]

All I can really add to this one is, make sure you try before you buy and if you can try to test it with a simialr weight that you will carry most decent outdoor shops will let you fill it up with kit so you can see what the size/back system is like.

Everyone of us is different on how we wear, carry and use our packs/bergens and what and how we pack them, it is very much a personal thing on what you want out of a bag.

There are loads of ways that each of us put our kit so what works for one may not work for you. All I can say is that there is a basic way to pack them though, try to get your heavy kit close to your back and as high as possible but don't forget you still want your most used kit to hand the quickest, you don't want your waterproofs to be at the bottom with no way of easy getting them when in the UK.

[Paul_B]

All I can say is Big_Swede made a very good point about people on this site and their big green sacks. Depends what you are using it for. Carrying loads of heavy gear short distances from the car, landy or van to a wood camp / moot spot then very well. If you have to carry all your gear in one bag over many miles while backpacking then I do think you have to account for why you are carrying up to 3kg in a sack when there are sacks available that work just as well in the real world weighing 1kg or even less depending on your load weight.

IMHO the big green sack does not offer any benefit in what is perceived as its biggest selling point and that is durabilty. I have used sacks and most definitely abused them for many years and have not so far damaged a sack. I have used some UL sacks weighing 600g and found them perfectly adequate for backpacking use. I scramble, climb and throw them around. I trip, stumble and fall on them. Sit on them and even been known to throw them down on the ground in a strop.

My point is the bergen type of sacks are an old technology now. They are a little bit from the time when it was thought thicker fabric, more webbing and more stitching makes it a real tough sack. There are better options out there but they might not be the big green or black SF sack/bergen. You are not a bulk, contract buying military body so why get the type of stuff they get limited with. Afterall it is not uncommon that some units allow them to buy their own, better stuff.

I personally think the newer products inspired by the USA's UL backacking community using dyneema and some amazingly tough but light fabrics is a better choice for backpacking. The Crux is known as a bombproof sack. If you rip one of them you are a cretin. That make of sack is tougher than the bergens. It is the simplicity of it that makes it particularly tough. A single compartment body of the sack made out of as few pieces of fabric as possible, with good stitching, webbing and buckles, etc. They all contribute.

Now as an outside bet try Aiguille Alpine. Based in Stavely in the Lakes they make their own sacks above their shop. They offer a degree of customisation all in their standard price. The sacks are cheaper than main stream brands for what they are and there is no fuss with them making them reasonably light. If you read through some threads on here you will find out that people tend to keep this make and use them for decades. They are known as being well made and very durable. I like the fact that I have got aa back length made to fit my back not the "standard" back size whatever that is. I think it is also another good sign that MRT members use them as do climbing guides and I believe some military units (if he's not spinning me a yarn). You just have to get over the big green sack herd mentality.

Sorry if I've been controversial with my big green sack comments but its just my honestly held opinion that those sacks are attrocious for backpacking use when compared with what is out there. There are some reaally good sacks that people are ruling out for what appears to me to just be a question of colour.

[darrenleroy]

Darren,if I saw an old Jaguar on the bay I'd probably bid for it mate.
No,I'd def' bid for it...:D

Keep yours and try to get your hands on some of the others mentioned to try out first,you know it's the only way.;)

I'm proud of my purchase, it's been with me around the world, but the zips are starting to go, the shoulder straps aren't the more comfortable S-shape, they're not that padded and the back is too short for the waist strap to sit on my waist. (I did buy it when I was a teenager!).

God, I'm loving all this information. It's what men are designed to do; talk kit.

[Paul_B]

My advice is to take your gear to shops and try to load up a few sacks with your gear (if the shops allow it) or at least items to the same sort of weight. Try sacks on for one that is comfortable.

Whatever you do choose one piece of advice I will offer is to work out the best way to pack your sack and always pack it that waay. IME if everything has its place and everything in its place it is better for an efficient camp. It also helps to ensure you don't leave anything behind too and to ensure that you have what you need gto hand when you need it. Organisation is key.

[Paul_B]

I remember people still using Karrimor gold guarantee sacks from that length of time ago. Every time a zip or stitch goes thhey send them back to Karrimor with a copy of the guraantee (on even has the original receipt from over 25 years ago). One guy keeps hoping they will write it off anf give him a voucher for a brand new one but they never do. Instead they keep repairing the zips, stitching, buckles and webbing. Then sending it back cleaned and praactically as good as new all for free! On top of that it is a 75litre adjustable back rucksack capable of carrying a heavy load comfortably all day yet only weighs about 1-1.5kg!!!!

[Shewie]

Now as an outside bet try Aiguille Alpine. Based in Stavely in the Lakes they make their own sacks above their shop. They offer a degree of customisation all in their standard price. The sacks are cheaper than main stream brands for what they are and there is no fuss with them making them reasonably light. If you read through some threads on here you will find out that people tend to keep this make and use them for decades. They are known as being well made and very durable. I like the fact that I have got aa back length made to fit my back not the "standard" back size whatever that is. I think it is also another good sign that MRT members use them as do climbing guides and I believe some military units (if he's not spinning me a yarn).



They do them in Olive too :D

[The Cumbrian]

My POD Black Ice weighs about a third as much as my Berghaus Vulcan, but has survived over fifteen years of arguably the toughest test of a pack ( apart from combat ), British winter climbing. Even that pack is not considered lightweight these days.

How many people on here have worn a good quality pack out? A friend of mine dropped his pack off the A Chir Ridge on Arran, and the only casualty was the pots of yoghurt that he was carrying.

Cheers, Michael.

[big_swede]

To be honest I don't really understand this "try it out" thing. I have never tried a modern pack that wasn't comfortable when properly adjusted.

The packs I find the most comfortable to wear have always been fixed length packs. And light ones. With a light load.

[preacherman]

To be honest I don't really understand this "try it out" thing. I have never tried a modern pack that wasn't comfortable when properly adjusted.

I dont want to argue with a "big Swede" :) but I went looking at a new pack last summer that I had only seen on line that had great reviews and did not cost the earth. I tried it out with 12 kg, the max it was designed to carry comfortably but found the external frame digging into my back a little that I knew would bother me over a distance. When I was in the shop I tried out a Crux Ak47 in Gunmetal. I loaded it up with all of the weight bags in the shop 20kg worth and tried it on. It felt really comfortable even though they are only really designed for half this weight. I justified the high price by knowing that my body would thank me in the years to come. They do come in different back lengths so its worth trying it on to get the right one.


The Ak 35 is a fixed back and will be my next purchase if I can swing it. I have never put on a pack that immediatly felt bang on. This one did.

Andrew

[big_swede]

I dont want to argue with a "big Swede" :) but I went looking at a new pack last summer that I had only seen on line that had great reviews and did not cost the earth. I tried it out with 12 kg, the max it was designed to carry comfortably but found the external frame digging into my back a little that I knew would bother me over a distance. When I was in the shop I tried out a Crux Ak47 in Gunmetal. I loaded it up with all of the weight bags in the shop 20kg worth and tried it on. It felt really comfortable even though they are only really designed for half this weight. I justified the high price by knowing that my body would thank me in the years to come. They do come in different back lengths so its worth trying it on to get the right one.


The Ak 35 is a fixed back and will be my next purchase if I can swing it. I have never put on a pack that immediatly felt bang on. This one did.

Andrew

I mean fixed back as in fixed sizes, not adjustable.

[preacherman]

I mean fixed back as in fixed sizes, not adjustable.

Sorry if I misquoted you, I presumed you meant that even though its a fixed back that it should still be adjusted correctly, shoulder straps etc, to get the best possible weight transfer for the activity, up or down hill etc.

The Crux AK 47 is a fixed back, not adjustable but in a few sizes. I have a long back and if I had bought online I would have had the wrong pack. Glad I bought it though :)

[sapper1]

you are of course entitled to a different opinion than mine but there is no need to be quite so confrontational now is there?

i think that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

5 posts and i'm out of here
I apologise if I've hurt your feelings.
I thought I was being informational rather than confrontational.

[johnboy]

.

Sorry if I've been controversial with my big green sack comments but its just my honestly held opinion that those sacks are attrocious for backpacking use when compared with what is out there. There are some reaally good sacks that people are ruling out for what appears to me to just be a question of colour.

Any rucksack regardless of: colour, provenence and construction or material will be 'attrocious' to carry reasonably loaded any real distance if:

1. It has a fixed back length that doesn't fit you correctly.
2. It has an adjustable back length that's incorrectly fitted.
3. It's frameless and badly packed.


I have a bit of experience in the outdoors and I have about 20 rucksacs of various types ( if I include the hire ones) out in the shed. I can honestly say
my Vulcan with it's cyclops 2 back system and which happens to be green I find the most comfortable. I've tried others from Aarn Designs, Macpac, Yakpacks, TNF, Karrimor etc all were ok but just not as comfy.

Ultimately folk will buy what they want and use it how they will.


On the 'bay' currently a Green Karrimor Jaguar

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rucksac-Karrimor-Jaguar-S65-KS-100e-SA-i_W0QQitemZ150432493298QQcmdZV iewItemQQptZUK_SportingGoods_B ackpacksRucksacks_Bags_EH?hash =item230679aef2

[Diamond Dave]

This has been one of the best threads on rucksacks we have had for a long time....very informative. thanks to everyone who has contributed.....

[darrenleroy]

I also use a Karrimor jaguar but its not as new as yours. Its works fine for me.
If it aint broke......


Bushwacker Bob: After all the advice I've had on this forum I've come to the conclusion that I'm worrying WAY TOO MUCH about my pack. You've kind of led me to come full circle and look at my old Karrimor Jaguar in a new light. I'm just getting into the great outdoors and I think I got a little carried away and have realised there is a lot I can do to make my old bag more comfortable. (admittedly, the Karrimor SF Sabre 75 does make me salivate when I see a picture of it all strapped and compressed into a sleek, green tube.)

I've come home tonight and decided to weigh my basic kit and sack and reload it according to advice on this site and to pay closer attention to how I adjust the straps to improve comfort. It's never going to match the latest designs for padding and fit but it will do for now.

Karrimor Jaguar 65 – 4.4lbs

Stupid Blow Up Mattress – 3.8lbs

Two Man Tent from Black's – 9.8lbs

Army issue Goretex Bivvy – 1.8lbs

Sleeping Bag – 1.8lbs

My conclusion is that while the Jaguar doesn't weigh as little as say a Crux AK57 (2.8lbs) or a Granite Gear Vapour Trail (2.3lbs) the sack isn't too heavy and it has easily enough capacity to go off into the woods or to hike a few miles.

I can lighten the load massively by dumping the blow up mattress I so rashly bought in a bid to save some money (freezing on my trip last week to Snowdonia) and getting something lightweight like the Therm-a-Rest Neo Air (just .8lbs). I should have bitten the bullet and just bought it.

The tent is also ridiculously heavy for my needs. Although I can't afford it I'd love to give the Hilleberg Akto (3.3lbs) a go one day, or just continue with sleeping in my bivvy during the warmer months.

From chucking out the big tent and blow up mattress and replacing them with the Therm-a-Rest sleep mat and the Akto tent I'd be saving myself 9.5lbs.

Ultimately, if I ever do a long hike like the Pennine Way I think I'd buy a lightweight bag like the Vapour Trail, but as I don't have loads of money and I don't want to get too caught up in all the excitement and do something I'll regret I'll do some more research and take my time before deciding if and what bag is best for me in the woods. Until then I'll re-learn to love my old Jaguar.

[Harley]

I have a bit of experience in the outdoors and I have about 20 rucksacs of various types ( if I include the hire ones) out in the shed. I can honestly say
my Vulcan with it's cyclops 2 back system and which happens to be green I find the most comfortable.

Crikey, that is a well qualified recommendation!

I think I've narrowed my choices to Sabre 75 or this one, time to try them on with a bit of weight thrown in by the sound of it.

Thanks again from me as well chaps (and chapettes, if any) goodjob

[preacherman]

Personally I have been trying to reduce pack size and weight but if you are definitely interested in a large pack then the links below should be of interest to anyone looking at military vs civillian expedition size packs.

These are from Pablo's Woodlife site. The article in the first link is really well thought out and written and the videos are self explanatory.


http://www.woodlife.co.uk/2008/11/25/carrying-stuff/

http://www.youtube.com/profile?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&user=prmaklpboo#p/u/12/mb21Cmuq9kA

http://www.youtube.com/profile?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&user=prmaklpboo#p/u/13/XquLbzFjrwM

http://www.youtube.com/profile?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&user=prmaklpboo#p/u/14/aM_IIstI9b4

Andrew

[drewdunnrespect]

now personally the standard issue bergan for me is all i need it does everything i need and more but yes you are not wrong it is heavy and for long distances i can see it being a problem

[gregs656]

I tend to agree. I would quite like to swap mine for a long back one because I have a long back, but no real complaints about it.

[Paul_B]

Got mine and took it out for a spin. A sack from Aiguille Alpine that is, I have a nice black number with an XL back. Made a good carry and all the room I need for a multi day trek in the hills. Is tough as they come. A nice clean climbing style of sack. Perfect for backpacking and only 1kg too. Its also discrete for those who like such sacks. My point is why get a big, heavy load lugger in a "army style" that is probably no more comfortable than a lighter weight and just as durable sack from a British manufacturer that will do what you need it to do but is still a lot lighter than most bergens by some way. Is it image over substance?

[johnboy]

Got mine and took it out for a spin. A sack from Aiguille Alpine that is, I have a nice black number with an XL back. Made a good carry and all the room I need for a multi day trek in the hills. Is tough as they come. A nice clean climbing style of sack. Perfect for backpacking and only 1kg too. Its also discrete for those who like such sacks. My point is why get a big, heavy load lugger in a "army style" that is probably no more comfortable than a lighter weight and just as durable sack from a British manufacturer that will do what you need it to do but is still a lot lighter than most bergens by some way. Is it image over substance?

How many Ltrs is your new Aiguille Pack?

[Paul_B]

Good question. Its supposed to be about 47 litres in the standard back length. Mine is 1" longer than the long back length or 3" longer than the standard. That probably makes it a bit more than the 47 litres. I am also not too sure that the standard sacks are that accurately measured for volume anyway. I think it is about 50-60litres. I have a 50+10litre berghaus alpine style sack that is also on the large vollume size. That one has more volume than my previous 65litre standard backpacking sack. So I really have not idea to guage it against.

All I can say is that when I first saw it I thought they had made it too long. Turns out to be ok. I can get my backpacking kit into it including way too much gear (a tent, bivvy bag and tarp plus two stoves / cooking systems, etc.). I would say that it is about 10 litres less capacity than my previous sack so that should make it 50 litres. The shape is interesting. It is kind of wider at the base and the top but tapers in a little at the middle. I suppose that is to give it plenty of freedom of arm movement for scrambling / climbing with it. I am yet to get it comfortable. The strut in the middle of the back needs re-shaping to get the sack comfortable or might end up being removed completely, I'm really not sure yet.

Whatever sack people buy I do think that for backpacking you have to play around with each new sack to get it comfortable. I am in that process now. It is a case of getting the padding to mould to you and for you to get the back support shaped right (in the case of alloy strut supports in the back). When I get it truly comfortable I reckon it will be a great sack. All sleek and black. It really does look good. A few straps that were attached too long to be any good but an easy mod to correct it.

I can heartily recommend Aiguile Alpine sacks.

[maddave]

All I can say is Big_Swede made a very good point about people on this site and their big green sacks. Depends what you are using it for. Carrying loads of heavy gear short distances from the car, landy or van to a wood camp / moot spot then very well. If you have to carry all your gear in one bag over many miles while backpacking then I do think you have to account for why you are carrying up to 3kg in a sack when there are sacks available that work just as well in the real world weighing 1kg or even less depending on your load weight.

IMHO the big green sack does not offer any benefit in what is perceived as its biggest selling point and that is durabilty. I have used sacks and most definitely abused them for many years and have not so far damaged a sack. I have used some UL sacks weighing 600g and found them perfectly adequate for backpacking use. I scramble, climb and throw them around. I trip, stumble and fall on them. Sit on them and even been known to throw them down on the ground in a strop.

My point is the bergen type of sacks are an old technology now. They are a little bit from the time when it was thought thicker fabric, more webbing and more stitching makes it a real tough sack. There are better options out there but they might not be the big green or black SF sack/bergen. You are not a bulk, contract buying military body so why get the type of stuff they get limited with. Afterall it is not uncommon that some units allow them to buy their own, better stuff.

I personally think the newer products inspired by the USA's UL backacking community using dyneema and some amazingly tough but light fabrics is a better choice for backpacking. The Crux is known as a bombproof sack. If you rip one of them you are a cretin. That make of sack is tougher than the bergens. It is the simplicity of it that makes it particularly tough. A single compartment body of the sack made out of as few pieces of fabric as possible, with good stitching, webbing and buckles, etc. They all contribute.

Now as an outside bet try Aiguille Alpine. Based in Stavely in the Lakes they make their own sacks above their shop. They offer a degree of customisation all in their standard price. The sacks are cheaper than main stream brands for what they are and there is no fuss with them making them reasonably light. If you read through some threads on here you will find out that people tend to keep this make and use them for decades. They are known as being well made and very durable. I like the fact that I have got aa back length made to fit my back not the "standard" back size whatever that is. I think it is also another good sign that MRT members use them as do climbing guides and I believe some military units (if he's not spinning me a yarn). You just have to get over the big green sack herd mentality.

Sorry if I've been controversial with my big green sack comments but its just my honestly held opinion that those sacks are attrocious for backpacking use when compared with what is out there. There are some reaally good sacks that people are ruling out for what appears to me to just be a question of colour.

I won't mention the word "Duluth" then..... I promise :D

[drewdunnrespect]

mad dave you evil man lololololol

[wentworth]

I used to use a golite pack, then started making my own ultralight frameless sacks. But for my most recent 5 day trip, covering up to 40km a day, I went back to my beautiful GREEN canvas rucksack.

Pity I don't know that real walkers use XYZ :)

[darrenleroy]

Why did you go back to your old sack?

[wentworth]

Hi Darren,
we had to lug 6L of water for a lot of the trip. 6kg of gear(including pack), 7kg of food (we were anticipating it taking 7 days) and 6kg of water.
I was glad to have the frame on my old pack for this trip, even though at 2kg it was the heaviest thing I carried. My gear may be light, but food and water are not!

If you don't have to carry more than 2L, light sacks are fine.