Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunny PNW
    Posts
    1,116

    Backcountry ski pack

    I'm looking at the North Face Chute 35 l. Anybody has experience with it?

    I'm also looking at this ski pack. Shovel pocket, compression, A-frame carry. French text but the nice thing about it is that the shoulder straps pivot, and follow your shoulders moving w/o restraing you. According with one of my friends it's really great when skiing down. Not sure how great when the skis are A-frame on the pack, though. Very cheap too even with a high Euro. (Decathlon = French MEC or REI but for all the sports, and cheaper and built to higher standards---at least tested standards!).

    And maybe the Ortovox Top Rider protection 7.25 (has a spine protection built in) but it's on the small side (25 l).

    drC
    Last edited by Dr. Crash; 10-22-2003 at 08:57 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere
    Posts
    6,587
    if that's the one reviewed in the Powder BC issue, then pass. The ski holding system is shit-tastic...unless the pack is full, the skis flop everywhere. I watched a friend suffer through a tour with one and I didn't envy her at all.
    Putting the "core" in corporate, one turn at a time.

    Metalmücil 2010 - 2013 "Go Home" album is now a free download

    The Bonin Petrels

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    8,887
    Is this a daypack? If so 35L is a bit on the high side. I'd check out the BD Slide pack
    http://www.bdel.com/gear/backcountry/slide_pack.php
    It's similar to my BD ATtack pack, which rocks.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunny PNW
    Posts
    1,116
    Yes, day pack. They have it in 25 l and 35 l. I bought the 35 l (last day of a 15% off sale, so paid <$100 for it) but after seeing hop's comment, maybe I should just return it.

    I have a SOS Pro shovel, which has a snow blade in the handle and thus a huge handle. The handle length is 1' 11 1/4". In the 35 l it does not even fit in the probe/handle tubes on the side (inside) and I have ti put it in the middle to be able to zip the bag. In a 25 l it would have to be outside (not sure how to latch it well there) or the bag won't close.

    The slide pack looks nice (and will hold a snowboard, good to lend to a friend) and the price isn't bad. But 20 l sounds small. What is the height of the inside volume (for my handle)? And how's the shovel pocket?

    drC

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Babylon
    Posts
    13,450

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    4,336
    Wow, 35 liters is huge for a day pack unless you plan on carrying rope and touring gear around with you all the time. That's 2200 cu in. The 25l sounds a little more reasonable. My Da Kine Heli Pro Large is only 1100 cu in, and its plenty big to fit my shovel (blade and handle - Voile Extreme), probe, 100oz bladder, extra goggles, extra gloves, and snacks. Plus everybody knows the diagonal carrying system is better.
    OOOOOOOHHHH, I'm the Juggernaut, bitch!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere
    Posts
    6,587
    Well, don't do anything just because I think it sucks.
    Test that sucker out for yourself either at home or in the shop. Load it up with your normal ski kit and see how it works. I didn't like the way the straps that hold the skis went from the very back of the pack to the front of the sides (you know what I mean if you're looking at it) without any sort of anchor point in between. Because of this, your skis can shift around from the sides of the pack to the back and vice-versa unless the pack is totally stuffed and the skis are unable to make it around the corner. Even when stuffed, there is so much room to slide around that the do just that. Preferred methods of carrying that I've used are found on the Arcteryx M series, DaKine, and BCA. Equally hated systems were found on Wookey.
    Putting the "core" in corporate, one turn at a time.

    Metalmücil 2010 - 2013 "Go Home" album is now a free download

    The Bonin Petrels

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunny PNW
    Posts
    1,116
    Let's not start a religious war of diagonal versus A-frame versus vertical (rare) ski carry here. I once tried to figure out which one was the best on a forum, and I think I'll only find out trying it out for myself. Which of course has an impact on trying to buy a pack that can do both, like the Chute.

    Hop, yes I'll try it at home before returning it, of course.

    It's funny you guys think 35 l is way too big. Not because I doubt you, but because I (window) shopped at Marmot today and the guy didn't think that anything less than 40 l was good for backcountry.

    Also note that I'll have the Trekkers in my pack, and those take some room.

    So I have a few new candidates with ski carry and shovel pocket:

    - Dakine Blade , $99, 30 l. Nice feature: carries both skis and snowboards (I don't snowboard but maybe some day if my kids have me).

    - Lowe Alpine Powder Peak, $???, 40 l. $ should be similar to the one below. Nice feature: carries both skis, snowboards, and snowshoes, and has pocket for probe etc.

    - Lowe Alpine Storm Peak, $139, 40 l. Very well built. Carries only skis. Compresses well. Nice feature: removable blade pocket (for those non-ski days) that will also carry axes.

    - Lowe Alpine also has the Chute II, $???, 25 l (and a Chute I, $???, 15 l) that may be more like what BakerBoy would recommend, but Marmot didn't have one in store that I could look at.

    The Marmot guy says they got a demo of the Ortovox packs and it sucked and the demo fell apart.

    I tried the Lowe on, and they were very nice. Didn't feel big. Didn't have time to try the Dakine (in anothe shop). Both looked nice and adjustable for load bearing, contrarily to the North Face Chute 35 ($119, 35 l). I am pretty tempted by one of the Lowe but wouldn't mind being convinced that diagonal carry really is better, and that the Dakine is built as solid as the Lowe.

    Somehow, the pack that Lowe has categorized under backcountry skiing, the South Peak (30 l or 40 l) doesn't mention a shovel, but has a rope compressor. Must be the kind of backcountry skiing that tom and philingle do.

    drC

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    4,336
    Originally posted by Dr. Crash
    Let's not start a religious war of diagonal versus A-frame versus vertical (rare) ski carry here.


    Good, because we already know diagonal is the best.


    It's funny you guys think 35 l is way too big. Not because I doubt you, but because I (window) shopped at Marmot today and the guy didn't think that anything less than 40 l was good for backcountry.

    Also note that I'll have the Trekkers in my pack, and those take some room.
    There are varying "degrees" of backcountry packs, and without elaborating, the guy at Marmot probably thought you were doing some pure backcountry skiing. If you want a "touring" pack, that's different then... I wouldn't be able to tour very well with my Heli Pro, and 35l would probably be much better. Plus, if I was touring, it wouldn't really matter what kind of ski carry system I had, because I'd be skinning nearly everywhere. But for lift-accessed backcountry, like that of Baker and Alpental, there's no real need to lug around Trekkers (and skins), so a streamlined pack is the way to go.
    OOOOOOOHHHH, I'm the Juggernaut, bitch!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunny PNW
    Posts
    1,116
    So seriously, why do you think diagonal carry is better than A-frame?

    I'll agree that a smaller pack is nicer when riding in bounds. I'd like a pack that can do both lift-access bc and skinned bc, and it seems like it's easier to flatten a bigger pack than to make a small pack bigger. If you have to remove the pack from your back when getting on a lift anyways, why not?

    drC

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere
    Posts
    6,587
    I have been using the Arcteryx M30 for the past two years. It's about the perfect size; small and cinch-able enough to hold shovel, probe, water bladder, and that's it (Baker style) but big enough to hold all the shit you need for day touring in Yurp (shovel, probe, water, ropes, hardware, cheese, clothes, etc.)
    With the straps it comes with you can either A frame, diagonal, or vertically carry your skis. I took them off and replaced them with some webbing to save weight (I also took out the back panel...and will possibly get a smaller hipbelt this winter) which removed the vertical carry option, but I didn't like that way very much anyways.
    If I lived in CO or UT or somewhere with drier snow, or stopped crashing so much the pack would be nearly perfect. As it stands I'm not a great fan because the back panel absorbs moisture and collects, and holds a shitload of snow.

    If I had to choose a pack now it'd be a DaKine, Life Link, Indigo (haven't fondled but they look nice) or BCA.
    Putting the "core" in corporate, one turn at a time.

    Metalmücil 2010 - 2013 "Go Home" album is now a free download

    The Bonin Petrels

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    4,336
    Dr. C: I never take my pack off on the chair. It's streamlined enough that there is no need. Almost everybody I know does the same, unless you have a big ass pack.

    Diagonal carry system is more secure, faster to load, and gives the tails of your skis more clearance while walking up steep hills.
    OOOOOOOHHHH, I'm the Juggernaut, bitch!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    8,887
    Originally posted by Dr. Crash
    I'll agree that a smaller pack is nicer when riding in bounds. I'd like a pack that can do both lift-access bc and skinned bc, and it seems like it's easier to flatten a bigger pack than to make a small pack bigger. If you have to remove the pack from your back when getting on a lift anyways, why not?
    If the pack has a good compression system, so you can cinch stuff close in to your back, no problem. I've found I often fill a pack so with a smaller pack I take less junk. If everything ends up huddled in the bottom, so your pack resembles a Lowe Contour 50 (the worst ski pack I've ever used) the skiing performance of the pack will drop substantially.

    My ATtack pack claims to be 1800cu in (a bit generous I think). It carries, with room to spare:

    Puffy Jacket
    Shell Jacket
    2 pr Gloves
    2 Hats (Winter & Sun)

    Goggles In Case
    Glacier Glasses

    100oz Hydration Bladder
    Thermos
    Clifbars/Gu (in cool pockets built into the waistband)

    MEC snow study kit
    Binding Repair Kit

    Skins
    Probe Pole
    Shovel (in Shovel Pocket - handle in tool tube)
    Crampons(in Crampon Pocket)
    Ice Axe (in tool tube)

    If rope & gear are necessary - harness & minimal pro go inside, glacier rope strapped on top.

    For ski touring (hut/overnight) I use a BD Ice Pack 44L (it's a bit big for that - but skis quite nicely)

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunny PNW
    Posts
    1,116
    Thanks BB for the answer. Looks like they've got some pack police at Alpental / Summit that was forcing people to get their packs off most of the time

    Arc'teryx may be nice. Arc'teryx stuff usually is above what I can pay.

    drC

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •