Need a new ski mountaineering Ski-Mo pack.

[Boissal]

Probably true but have a look at where the edges will contact the bag and maybe put some duct tape there =)

Personally I can't stand A frame carry, I always end up hitting my melon on the skis or hitting someone when I lean forward and ram them with the tips...

[auvgeek]

Personally I can't stand A frame carry, I always end up hitting my melon on the skis or hitting someone when I lean forward and ram them with the tips...

IME, A frame is better in high winds and on approaches with boots on skis. YMMV. Never hit my head or anyone else, though. But if the skis are too low, you can definitely bang your tails when stepping down in steep, rocky terrain.

Appreciate the responses. Sounds like I should order the 30L.

[Boissal]

IME, A frame is better in high winds and on approaches with boots on skis. YMMV. Never hit my head or anyone else, though. But if the skis are too low, you can definitely bang your tails when stepping down in steep, rocky terrain.

Appreciate the responses. Sounds like I should order the 30L.

I think I'm particularly unaware of my surroundings which explain why I always end up hitting someone or myself with the skis...
I do remember suffering on a 2 hours dirt hike while carrying skis + boots diagonally. The BCA airbags don't have an A frame option but I can definitely see a better weight distribution that way. I'll test the Salomon pack in A frame and report back.

[LawndartGustav]

IME, A frame is better in high winds and on approaches with boots on skis. YMMV. Never hit my head or anyone else, though. But if the skis are too low, you can definitely bang your tails when stepping down in steep, rocky terrain.

Appreciate the responses. Sounds like I should order the 30L.

The only things I miss is a balloon and a little sleeve for my shovel blade

[Jonathan S.]

Returned a couple weeks ago from two daytrips with my old X Alp 20 maxed out including avy rescue gear to find the new X Alp 23 awaiting me at home.
Since then our avy danger has disappeared. (Yes, I know that as an avy instructor I’m supposed to say that “Low Danger Doesn’t Mean No Danger” but out here sometimes it really does.) So I’ve still been using my old X Alp 20 and might not have a chance to use the new X Alp 23 until June in the PNW.
But here goes with an indoor review:

[...]
23L: Nice upgrades over the 20L
- Noticeable increase in volume
- Shovel handle/probe compartment is separate from main pouch, and doesn't bottom out on crampon pocket - much easier to fit probe/handle
- D ring on shoulder strap allows for more secure ski carry attachment
- Internal hanger for bladder
- Refined sternum strap system - allows for infinite adjustment and is easy to operate
- Crampon pocket is easier to open/close with one hand
- One gripe: the internal zippered pocket is sewn to the front panel, which prevents me from slipping my shovel blade behind it, and negates use of the pocket
- Ski carry is still uncomfortable (feels unbalanced, lots of force on the shoulder strap) at full stuff[...]

• Volume increase, agreed.
• Separate vertical compartment, utility thereof, agreed.
• More secure attachment point for hook of ski lasso, agreed.
• Bladder hanger definitely useful if you use a bladder, and might think of something else for it also.
• Sternum strap, hmm, seems kind of weird to me, so will have to await field use to pass judgement.
• Crampon pocket zipper does follow a path that seems like it should be easier to open/close. Curious note: my drain hole is still on the bottom of the compartment (i.e., as on the X Alp 20), not moved to the side closure flap (i.e., as shown in the pictures of the new models).
• Sewn internal pocket, yes, that does interfere with placing some shovel blades behind the pocket, although oddly enough (or perhaps not so oddly give the French connection?), both the ARVA Ultra and Plum fit perfectly (with a little more leeway for the latter, and a little more snug for the latter).
• Ski carry, I was about to ask where all of you got the idea that the ski carry is diagonal, then I noticed that is depicted in the official pictures. I’ve been using it as a vertical carry instead. I’ve attached a few random pictures below. (In one picture the skis are tilting a bit. Might be random, but might also be because that’s the only picture with skis only and not boots clipped into the bindings.) Obviously those skis are all very light, but even with 170cm Volkl VTA 88 Lite + Plum 165 + PG boots (which is sort of approaching a normal ski weight) I’ve carried it vertically for a couple hours at a time while still feeling relatively comfortable.

Also:

• Micro daisy chains on the back are a nice touch, and already have offered some additional utility for how I attach my helmet for setting up the initial approach.
• Two little bonus attachment points at the bottom corners of the pack (once of which I’ve already used to attach a small duct tape rope via a lift ticket plastic loop).

Overall, owning both of these packs seems a little strange. However, I definitely prefer the 23 for when I’m carrying avy gear and/or more general in general. Otherwise, the 20 is all I need. (Fortunately I still have my Manaslu 35 for when I need even more space so I don’t have to go totally crazy owning all three variations!)

[Lindahl]

FWIW, for small packs, I really love this one (discontinued though):
http://www.mountainhardwear.com/chut...ck-OU5127.html
http://straightchuter.com/tiny-packs

Been using it for a few years now and it's really just laid out in a very smart way with a great collection of unique features. The diagonal ski carry beats the crap out of anything else I've tried too (the attachment locations are perfect). It's a bit heavier than the skimo race packs, but the functional improvements are pretty awesome. The flap is an awesome design, as is all the ways you can use voile straps to attach gear.

[Jonathan S.]

Returned a couple weeks ago from two daytrips with my old X Alp 20 maxed out including avy rescue gear to find the new X Alp 23 awaiting me at home.
Since then our avy danger has disappeared. (Yes, I know that as an avy instructor I’m supposed to say that “Low Danger Doesn’t Mean No Danger” but out here sometimes it really does.) So I’ve still been using my old X Alp 20 and might not have a chance to use the new X Alp 23 until June in the PNW.
But here goes with an indoor review:

Finally got to use my new X Alp 23 last week on an overnight hut trip:
https://www.facebook.com/pg/NERandoR...22643711110203
... since my usual itinerary up there got reduced from three-days/two-nights to only two-days/one-night, so I was just barely able to make the X Alp 23 work (instead of my usual 35 liter Manaslu for that trip).

Overall, very happy with this pack!
Following up on my prior indoor assessment:

• The sternum strap that seemed kind of weird turned out to work perfectly in the field.
• The crampon bottom side pocket zipper that follows a path that seems like it should be easier to open/close didn't really get put the test, so still unclear how much it improves upon the X Alp 20 version.
• Micro daisy chains on the back definitely came in handy when I had to lash something to the outside with Voile straps.
• Ditto for the little bonus attachment points at the bottom corners of the pack, once of which I’ve already used to attach a small duct tape rope via a lift ticket plastic loop, and the other which came in handy for attaching a hand sanitizer bottle.
• All the other attributes worked out really well just as anticipated.

[auvgeek]

I have been liking the (old style) X Alp 30. The length is a little short for me @ 5'11" and a 22" torso length (measured according to the Alpine Threadworks style), but so far I like the pack a lot, esp. for $90 shipped. Nothing that annoys me so far. It's large enough for day trips with avy gear. The Ortovox Kodiak shovel fits if you stick the handle in the internal pocket which extends the length of the pack (i.e., past the crampon pouch at the bottom). I like the way the hip belt cinches up (by pulling in rather than out)—been a while since I used that style and I definitely prefer it. I don't love the way the sternum strap clips, and the durability of that clip seems questionable, but we'll see. I've done water carries with up to 35#, and it carried fine. Wouldn't necessarily use it to carry that kind of weight for days on end, but the suspension worked fine for a few hours. Haven't used the ski carry yet.

All in all, definitely worth $90.

[rod9301]

I'm using a McHale 37 l pack with beefy suspension, thick shoulder straps and thick belt.

It carries 40 lbs easily.

A week ago, I tried my wife's Patagonia Ascensionist 35 l pack, and I was shocked by how much my shoulders hurt, carrying just 25 lbs.

Sure, my pack weighs 3.7 lbs and hers is 2 lbs, but I would never trade.

The 40 lbs I carry is skis and Boots on the pack, plus minimal other stuff, ice axe, crampons, etc, all very light stuff. Yeah, food and 1l of water.

Today I did a 7 1/2 hour trip, with 4 hours on dirt.
I'm tired, but my shoulders and back are not hurting at all.

Ymmv

[auvgeek]

^^Yeah, a beefy pack with a good suspension system makes a lot of sense if you're carrying more than 20-25# for a full day.

If you're buying a 2# pack, you probably have reasonably light gear, so say 7.5# for skis/skins/binders, 6# for boots, 2# for ax & foot pons, 2.25# for 1L water, 1# for wind shirt & puffy (together), and 1.25 lb for food = 20# walking in, 7# while skinning, and 12# while booting. So if the walk in is reasonably short, a light pack will do just fine. 40# of gear seems heavy to me unless that includes a rack/rope. I'm sure Jonathan S.'s load is more like 5# for skis/binders and 3# for boots.

FWIW, my shoulders or back have never been sore from doing 3 hour "water carries" twice a week with 30-35# in a frameless 2# pack (Alpine Threadworks or X Alp 30).

But I definitely want a ~45L and a ~65L McHale pack for longer trips.

[rod9301]

^^Yeah, a beefy pack with a good suspension system makes a lot of sense if you're carrying more than 20-25# for a full day.

If you're buying a 2# pack, you probably have reasonably light gear, so say 7.5# for skis/skins/binders, 6# for boots, 2# for ax & foot pons, 2.25# for 1L water, 1# for wind shirt & puffy (together), and 1.25 lb for food = 20# walking in, 7# while skinning, and 12# while booting. So if the walk in is reasonably short, a light pack will do just fine. 40# of gear seems heavy to me unless that includes a rack/rope. I'm sure Jonathan S.'s load is more like 5# for skis/binders and 3# for boots.

FWIW, my shoulders or back have never been sore from doing 3 hour "water carries" twice a week with 30-35# in a frameless 2# pack (Alpine Threadworks or X Alp 30).

But I definitely want a ~45L and a ~65L McHale pack for longer trips.

Plus first aid kit, helmet, goggles, sunglasses case, tool kit, ski straps, phone, emergency locator, ski crampons, water bottle, carabiner.
Skis vwerks katana 184, g3 ion, Lange freetour 130 BD skins.

Shoes stashed when I reach snow.

[North]

The back panel zipper is somewhat difficult to close on the old XALP 30 and 20, especially in the scenario where you spin pack around to your front with hip strap still attached, which I've come to appreciate. The pack bulges a bit, but I think the waterproof zipper is the culprit. That's my only complaint, otherwise, its a great upgrade from other spring packs I've used, and a good compliment to my MR BlackJack.

[GeezerSteve]

^^Yeah, a beefy pack with a good suspension system makes a lot of sense if you're carrying more than 20-25# for a full day.

If you're buying a 2# pack, you probably have. . . .

But I definitely want a ~45L and a ~65L McHale pack for longer trips.

My lightest McHale (a Bump) weighs 2-1/2 lbs., has same SARC suspension as Rod's McHale SARC 37 aka LBP 37. My LBP 36 full Spectra weighs 2-3/4 to 3-1/2 lbs. (depending on how it's set up) and I'd much rather carry it than a 2 lb. mass produced pack by [fill in the blank]. The energy saved and fatigue avoided per custom fit and super stable load trumps the extra few ounces of superior suspension.

[sfotex]

I've been digging my Black Diamond Cirque 30 this season. Simple, light, pretty cheap, dedicated avy tools pocket.. Carries well. 2 zippered pockets.

[auvgeek]

My LBP 36 full Spectra weighs 2-3/4 to 3-1/2 lbs. (depending on how it's set up) and I'd much rather carry it than a 2 lb. mass produced pack by [fill in the blank]. The energy saved and fatigue avoided per custom fit and super stable load trumps the extra few ounces of superior suspension.

No disagreement here, but it costs almost an order of magnitude more than the $80 X Alp, esp if you're not in Seattle. I think it makes sense to spend that kind of money if you're carrying a heavy load all day or for multiple days in a row. If you're primarily carrying <10# for most of the day, I can't see how it's worth the extra money.

[GeezerSteve]

I think it makes sense to spend that kind of money if you're carrying a heavy load all day or for multiple days in a row. If you're primarily carrying <10# for most of the day, I can't see how it's worth the extra money.

How do you get your weight under 10 lbs. with skis/bindings/skins on/in your pack? This time of year through July most of our tours involve carrying skis/bindings/skins at some point, often in steep and/or tricky spots. Also, ski swing weight is a multiplier: a static weight of 18 lbs. with skis on an inferior pack (your 10 lbs. + skis/bindings/skins) can flop around like a compactly packed mass produced pack with a 40 lb. payload. Both will carry be rock solid with a McHale. (One of the first thing a new McHale owner notices is superior stability, i.e., no flopping.) Add weight of boots to the payload if you wear trail shoes or approach shoes for ingress/egress, and you're quickly up to 25+ lbs. with lots of swing weight for a day tour. (I seldom do that but most of my touring partners carry ski boots on some tours). You'll never know just how well a McHale carries until you have one custom made for you and nobody else.

Re money, in the big picture a McHale pack is a bargain compared to most gear purchases. A McHale is roughly the cost of a pair of skis or a UL tent, but last much longer. My oldest McHale is 15 y.o., has hundreds of hard days on it and carries like new. Dan repairs old packs, although that is seldom required. I cannot recall how many times I've heard a new McHale owner say "damn, I should have gotten one of these packs years ago.

[auvgeek]

All I'm saying is the X Alp 30 works fine if the majority of your day is spent skiing/skinning and that it's a nice pack for $80-something shipped. I have carried 35# in it for 3 hours, and my shoulders weren't sore.

Is a McHale pack near the top of my list of gear to purchase? Yes, yes it is.

[AKbruin]

Alpine Threadworks seems like a nice compromise between cost and custom fitting. The only problem is the lack of pack selection. I really wish they had a 55-65L pack.

McHale sounds interesting, and DIYSteve kind of has me sold. As others have mentioned though, I wish he had a better website.

[auvgeek]

Alpine Threadworks seems like a nice compromise between cost and custom fitting.

Except Neil's packs are all totally frameless. IME, they don't really carry better than a mass-produced pack if you have an average length torso, especially once the weight is over about 20#. 30-35# for a few hours is no big deal, but my shoulders are sore after an overnight with glacier gear (especially if ingress/egress is w. skis/boots on pack) in my AT Selkirk Light (with 3 compression straps for A-frame carry).

That said, he's a great guy who offers truly outstanding customer service.

[SKIP IN7RO]

If the measurements work for you, secondhand McHales are a great intro to his pack design and meticulous construction. There are a couple currently on Ebay in the 50L size range (no affiliation with sellers).

"As others have mentioned though, I wish he had a better website."

I love McHale's website. It contains a wealth of backpack wizardry.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Everytime this comes up the same people post the same things. I'll do my part.

I like a simple pack, one compartment with a lid, with a real suspension. Saving weight with lighter materials and fewer features is awesome. Saving weight by ditching stays and a real waist belt doesn't make sense to me when I'm going to be carrying skis (and maybe boots) on my back along with crampons, axe(s), and plenty of water or a way to make water. I don't need to be able to get my skis on my back in less than 10 seconds. Efficiency isn't about lighting fast transitions or the lightest possible weight, it's about using less energy.

Most of the time the lightest axe and crampons are sufficient. I have an ugly orange Petzl helmet, a skinny 30 meter rope, a harness that resembles a ribbon, skimo race bindings, minimalist shovel and probe I only bring out when the snow pack is at its most stable and predictable. Hell, I even started wearing spandex pants that were extra cheap because of the euro color scheme. All these things, at the right time, are great ways to save weight. But I'm not interested in 2 lb pack when a 3 lb pack will carry all that crap so much better.

[auvgeek]

I like a simple pack, one compartment with a lid, with a real suspension. Saving weight with lighter materials and fewer features is awesome.

What pack is that?

[GeezerSteve]

McHale sounds interesting, and DIYSteve kind of has me sold. As others have mentioned though, I wish he had a better website.

Yeah, it's a strange website. The info is there but things get confusing, somewhat because Dan likes to assign cute names to various iterations of his SARC packs. Start with the Ultra Light Pack page. I posted a McHale pack first time buyer tutorial somewhere on this site. I can do a refined tutorial, next week, after I return home after MD weekend. I'll be day touring, carrying my McHale Bump 32.

[AKbruin]

Yeah, it's a strange website. The info is there but things get confusing, somewhat because Dan likes to assign cute names to various iterations of his SARC packs. Start with the Ultra Light Pack page. I posted a McHale pack first time buyer tutorial somewhere on this site. I can do a refined tutorial, next week, after I return home after MD weekend. I'll be day touring, carrying my McHale Bump 32.

No worries. I can't afford a new pack yet anyway. There are definitely nuggets of backpack-related wisdom in the website. But it's hard for the unacquainted to, say, get a quick sense of what pack they might get and how much it might cost. I also get a little overwhelmed by the options. It's a deep-dive or nothing.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

What pack is that?

I have the old versions of 37 liter and 52 liter Osprey Variants. They happen to fit me very well, especially the 52 liter which I used to carry 65 lbs on the 17 mile approach to Katahdin a few years back, and as well as other overnights when I've skied with a lot of weight on by back. The A-frame carry of these packs is the most secure I've used, and just high enough that I avoid banging ski tails against my legs even when walking down hill.

The 37 liter version weighs a bit over 3 lbs. If I was flush with cash I'd buy a 35 liter-ish pack with similar features made with lighter materials (cuben fiber?), but I have no complaints about these packs. And Osprey has already replaced one under warranty (as they do) when my dog removed a zipper in order to get to a Cliff Bar. I have a lighter frameless pack I use for yoyo laps, but I could easily live without it.