Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 49 of 49
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,942
    Quote Originally Posted by kootenayskier View Post
    Seems optimistic. Id be carrying my Arcteryx Needle 65 for such a trip.
    I have used the first version of the osprey aether60 on this type of trip in the Sierra spring w/ very minimal climbing/mountaineering hardware.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    whitefish
    Posts
    1,022
    if he is carry the rope, rack, tent and stove, what are his partners carrying?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    72
    I just use an old Deuter Guide 45... heavy, but pretty versatile size-wise (can stack it up, or cinch it down reasonably small and tidy). I think best to solve for carrying bigger stuff like bag, tent/bivy, stove, fuel, etc vs. skis and helmet (those you can fit/attach one way or another). And lighter is always nice, but if a ways out there, good to have something pretty durable

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by kevino View Post
    i've had the trion 50 for like 5 years, doesn't get used regularly but have used it for hut trips, several night ski tours, ice climbing, etc. works great, no holes or failures. and they're pretty cheap all things considered and handles weight well.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason4 View Post
    I've been looking for a pack similar to what your describing. I've had a decent number of packs that are close: Cilo 45L work sack with the shovel pocket, Mammut Trion Pro 50+7 (or whatever it used to be called), a Mystery Ranch Patrol 45, a Mammut Pro 45L airbag pack and I'm probably missing something else in the list.
    Super helpful. Feels like the Trion 50+7 would have been perfect, not sure how it differes from the new regular Trion but I tried one of those and compared it with the Trion Spine by walking around with 40lbs in the pack. The spine felt much better than the regular Trion, it feels like they really cheapened out that pack with the intro of the Spine verson.

    Quote Originally Posted by bodywhomper View Post
    Yall really think the 4 days of gear listed by the op can fit in a 50l pack? Maybe if your partner(s) can carry the bulk stuff?
    Maybe this is the answer. Sorry partner, can't carry anything, my pack is too small.

    It feels like 50-55L is the sweetspot in size. We're not talking long expeditions here and I tend to have poor packing habits if the pack size constraint is eliminated entirely.

    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Has anyone tried the Evoc Patrol 40L or 55L packs? They look pretty sweet.
    Good find, also curious about other's experiences here.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    66
    I can fit that all into my 37 L Osprey Variant, which is actually much closer to a 50 L when full. It's a good pack and carries well with weight or half empty.

    I had a Mammut pack before that which was pretty good, but I think the Osprey was an upgrade. The Mutant model is a bit more minimalist and would work well, too.

    3 L of water is way too much by the way, try to keep it to 1 L and brew up or refill from a stream.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    4

    Add your own features

    Some things, like a helmet carry, are easy to add. Just buy one and clip/tie it on.
    Just about every backpack will do A frame carry, and as mentioned, diagonal carry is easy to add as well.
    So, I would focus on fit, carry systems and compromise on other desired features.

    That packing list sounds VERY heavy. Do you really need to carry 3l of water? If you are skiing, snow is frozen water...
    A packing list like that will be more like 70 liters.
    All the features and zippers you are looking for add even more weight, so now you have a heavy load inside a heavy pack! My guess would be upwards of 60lbs.
    My personal choice would be for a very stripped down pack, in order to keep the total weight manageable. After all, you have to climb and ski with it.
    Something like the Hyperlight Mountain Gear Icepack.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,315
    Get a McHale, custom built however you want, and it'll carry way better than any mass produced pack. In the long run, a McHale isn't that expensive. A typical ski mountaineer will spend more money on skis and/or other gear in a season than on a McHale pack that'll last 15-20 years.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,896
    Quote Originally Posted by GeezerSteve View Post
    Get a McHale, custom built however you want, and it'll carry way better than any mass produced pack. In the long run, a McHale isn't that expensive. A typical ski mountaineer will spend more money on skis and/or other gear in a season than on a McHale pack that'll last 15-20 years.
    I have a McHale 40 l pack where i add two side pockets.

    Can carry everything for a 7 day ski trip.

    I had it since 09, had it repaired twice, ttl cost, with repairs$850, and it's good for another few years.

    It's heavy at 3.8 lbs, but it carries so well that the extra weight doesn't matter.

    And i use it at least 50 days a year.

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,315
    Quote Originally Posted by rod9301 View Post
    It's heavy at 3.8 lbs, but it carries so well that the extra weight doesn't matter.
    Dan can make a significantly lighter pack if you want but, yeah, the superior suspension more than makes up for an extra 1 or 1-1/2 pounds. A SARC w/o bypass/bayo and Guide belt with non-exotic Spectra grid is around 3 lbs., more or less depending on girth and body size (i.e., short torso, smaller pack). Ten years ago or so, Dan built me two packs (LBP and a SARC P&G) made of lightweight full Specta fabric that is no longer available. The LBP is <2.5 lbs., the P&G < 3 lbs.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Tjaardbreeuwer View Post
    That packing list sounds VERY heavy. Do you really need to carry 3l of water? If you are skiing, snow is frozen water...
    A packing list like that will be more like 70 liters.
    My thought is that I'd rather have a single pack that's usable for every overnight trip rather than 2 separate overnight packs (one for 1-2 nights, and one for 3+) in 4-season conditions with winter/skiing being the primary use-case. I realize you could break these requirements up into three or more separate packs but I need extra gear sitting around my place like I need a hole in the head...

    Will every overnight see this thing stuffed to the gills? Nope. But the flexibility to strip/compress it down to a manageable ski/summit pack combined with the ability to expand and carry 50+ lbs is definitely necessary.

    Maybe a better question: is this philosophy stupid and is the jack-of-all trades pack too much of a compromise? It doesn’t feel like it to me but open to other’s opinions.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,896
    Quote Originally Posted by GeezerSteve View Post
    Dan can make a significantly lighter pack if you want but, yeah, the superior suspension more than makes up for an extra 1 or 1-1/2 pounds. A SARC w/o bypass/bayo and Guide belt with non-exotic Spectra grid is around 3 lbs., more or less depending on girth and body size (i.e., short torso, smaller pack). Ten years ago or so, Dan built me two packs (LBP and a SARC P&G) made of lightweight full Specta fabric that is no longer available. The LBP is <2.5 lbs., the P&G < 3 lbs.
    Yeah, but i have the bayo and a heavy duty belt. Love it

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    34
    Id add the Hyperlite line of packs to your radar as well. My main multi day pack has been the woven dyneema Porter 4400 for the last decade. Although expensive, their construction is top notch and there really isnt another material that compares to woven dyneema in terms of durability. That being said, 50+ pounds is definitely at the upper end for a comfortable carry with a three pound pack, and its definitely light on features compared to other gear schlepping packs. If you work on lightening your kit to the <40 lb mark for a weeklong trip (not hard to do these days), and learn to live with the single compartment, Ive found it to work very well for winter traverses.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    890
    Just ordered the new Trion 50 to evaluate. Will update when it arrives.

    As an aside, I'm also looking at several packs for all-year ski touring with a focus on spring missions and possible overnights. What I'm looking to do is fill a 2-pack quiver that can be used for multi-day glaciated spring mountaineering (with and without skis - think Mt. Rainier, Mt. Baker, etc etc) and mid-winter touring.

    Right now I own a Patagonia Descensionist 40L and a Patgonia Snowdrifter 30L (original generation). I don't really like either of these packs to be honest. The Descensionist 40L is nice overall, but it doesn't carry well for anything over 30lbs imo. I also don't like how small the top pocket is and the lack of dedicated upper attachment points for diagonal ski carry (or maybe I'm just stupid on this point). I like the big avy pocket which I deem essential. The Snowdrifter 30L lacks a helmet carry which is essential for a pack that small, and it can't fit my BD Evac 7 shovel which is a big negative to me. I think it is great as a sidecountry pack with a smaller shovel, but realistically I haven't done much of that.


    To be honest, I tend to like slightly bigger, heavier, and more featured packs. I like pockets because I'm kind of OCD and I tend to overpack a bit, though I'm improving on that front. In that vain, I have really liked the Gregory Targhee 45. I haven't used it in the field, but it seems to have just the right amount of pockets/features for me overall. For contrast, the Osprey Kamber 42 had wayyyy too much going on. On the Targhee 45 avy pocket is huge, and it's a big deal to be able to remove and replace everything in there when the pack is stuffed full. I didn't like that the helmet carrier was permamently attached, I'd like to be able to helmet carry at multiple points on the pack. That pocket also seemed really useful that it's stored in, but I wouldn't store snacks in it while the helmet carrier is being used. I also liked the Ortovox Peak 45, but I felt the avy pocket was too small and the side access zipper finicky (though looked cool in theory).

    The Targhee 45 seems to be in an awkward place for me. I think 35L is the minimum I'd like for mid-winter and 40L is about right for most non-technical spring mountaineering. I like 40L overall as long as it's decently compressible. I would love the Targhee 45 in a 50L configuration for more versatility for ropes, water, and gear during spring skimo outings. It seems that it would be tight for anything multi-day except for hut touring. That's a personal opinion though.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Just ordered the new Trion 50 to evaluate. Will update when it arrives.

    As an aside, I'm also looking at several packs for all-year ski touring with a focus on spring missions and possible overnights. What I'm looking to do is fill a 2-pack quiver that can be used for multi-day glaciated spring mountaineering (with and without skis - think Mt. Rainier, Mt. Baker, etc etc) and mid-winter touring.

    Right now I own a Patagonia Descensionist 40L and a Patgonia Snowdrifter 30L (original generation). I don't really like either of these packs to be honest. The Descensionist 40L is nice overall, but it doesn't carry well for anything over 30lbs imo. I also don't like how small the top pocket is and the lack of dedicated upper attachment points for diagonal ski carry (or maybe I'm just stupid on this point). I like the big avy pocket which I deem essential. The Snowdrifter 30L lacks a helmet carry which is essential for a pack that small, and it can't fit my BD Evac 7 shovel which is a big negative to me. I think it is great as a sidecountry pack with a smaller shovel, but realistically I haven't done much of that.


    To be honest, I tend to like slightly bigger, heavier, and more featured packs. I like pockets because I'm kind of OCD and I tend to overpack a bit, though I'm improving on that front. In that vain, I have really liked the Gregory Targhee 45. I haven't used it in the field, but it seems to have just the right amount of pockets/features for me overall. For contrast, the Osprey Kamber 42 had wayyyy too much going on. On the Targhee 45 avy pocket is huge, and it's a big deal to be able to remove and replace everything in there when the pack is stuffed full. I didn't like that the helmet carrier was permamently attached, I'd like to be able to helmet carry at multiple points on the pack. That pocket also seemed really useful that it's stored in, but I wouldn't store snacks in it while the helmet carrier is being used. I also liked the Ortovox Peak 45, but I felt the avy pocket was too small and the side access zipper finicky (though looked cool in theory).

    The Targhee 45 seems to be in an awkward place for me. I think 35L is the minimum I'd like for mid-winter and 40L is about right for most non-technical spring mountaineering. I like 40L overall as long as it's decently compressible. I would love the Targhee 45 in a 50L configuration for more versatility for ropes, water, and gear during spring skimo outings. It seems that it would be tight for anything multi-day except for hut touring. That's a personal opinion though.
    Thanks, sounds like we have very similar thoughts here and looking forward to an update.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    cordova,AK
    Posts
    2,822
    I bought my first new pack in a long time last year. Purpose was ski mountaineering trip in sierras. Carried most of what you are talking about. Went with osprey aether pro 70. Was happy with the pack would recomend. Carried and skied well. Synches down when not full. You are not going to find a pack that has everything you want. 50l is too small.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    890
    Quote Originally Posted by BFD View Post
    I bought my first new pack in a long time last year. Purpose was ski mountaineering trip in sierras. Carried most of what you are talking about. Went with osprey aether pro 70. Was happy with the pack would recomend. Carried and skied well. Synches down when not full. You are not going to find a pack that has everything you want. 50l is too small.
    I think a generous 50L (i.e. closer to 60L) would be fine, but I agree anything less is tight.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    454
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    I think a generous 50L (i.e. closer to 60L) would be fine, but I agree anything less is tight.
    And not have crap strapped all over the outside of your pack. So annoying!

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    7B Idaho
    Posts
    362
    The truth is the BD Mission 75 is cheap, durable, and simple. It will work fine for what you listed. You don't need most of those features, you need a sack with reasonable suspension. The Mission 75 is all 95% of us will ever need.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    890
    Quote Originally Posted by skis_the_trees View Post
    The truth is the BD Mission 75 is cheap, durable, and simple. It will work fine for what you listed. You don't need most of those features, you need a sack with reasonable suspension. The Mission 75 is all 95% of us will ever need.
    Sure but this site is never about what we *need*

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    State of Jefferson
    Posts
    397
    Check out the Millet Prolighter 60+20. Bigger technical climbing pack has ice axe attachments and rope bag. I have one of their smaller ski packs and really like it, good mix of features and a good waist band. I do think you'll end up having to compromise as most bigger packs aren't going to have a bunch of specialized compartments. Super organized efficient use of space is more necessary on a smaller svelte day pack.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    890
    Ok so the Mammut Trion 50 came in the mail and I just loaded it up with 35lbs. Overall my initial impressions are that it's pretty great.

    Its avy (or front pocket) is very well sized easily enough for my Evac 7 shovel and I can remove and replace it pretty easily with the pack fully loaded. Check one for the Trion 50.

    It's got daisy chains on the side and nice ice axe carry, as well as loops for trekking poles. Check another for the Trion 50.

    It's got great backpanel access with a water pouch sleeve and an interior mesh key pocket. Check yet another for the Trion 50.

    It's also got these really great phone / snack pockets on the backpack straps that are great. The pocket on the hip harness doesn't fit my big iPhone plus though. Probably would fit a regular iPhone.

    It's also got side pockets for waterbottles and/or pickets.

    So what's bad? Well I'm worried about a few things:

    - It's lightweight (1550g) so the materials used don't feel so burly and the padding on the pack seems questionable for long-distance with heavy loads. It's got the smallest hip belt strap I've ever seen on a pack this size.

    - The mesh panels on the side pockets worry me that they'd get super cut up by a ski or something - I'm not sure why they went mesh here? Same goes, but less so, for the phone/snack pockets.

    - The brain only has one pocket, bummer here but not the end of the world.

    What else do I wish?

    I wish it was 10L bigger and with the suspension and materials of the Mountain Hardwear Direttissma 50. Otherwise, I'm very pleasantly surprised. I feel like I'm likely to keep this pack and see how it works out for me. This is kind of what I hoped the Patagonia Descensionist would be to be honest, so I'm excited about it. I would call it a bigger more featured version of that. It seems like it could also work great for summer backpacking. I'll need to buy a helmet carrier though that will be easy.

    I have not checked how it cinches down when not full, so that's on the to-do list.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,431
    PSA: McHale is offering some new demo packs for a discounted price. http://www.mchalepacks.com/letter/index.htm

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Mostly the Elks, mostly.
    Posts
    685
    I never found this unicorn pack you want for.

    But North Face Prophet 65 has worked really well for me in this capacity. Doesn't have all the bells/whistles on OP's wish list, but in my case good enough for who it's for. Can carry +2 full camps using the outside straps.

    Light, great fit, skis well, carries weight well. Good for single night adventures and expeditions. It's been my go to forever.

    Feel free to borrow.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    464
    Mammut Trion Light 50 is a sweet pack for multiday ski touring. I believe it's discontinued, but is still available at some sites online (https://www.proskiservice.com/mammut...-backpack.html)
    Let us so live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry - Mark Twain

Posting Permissions

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