Pack Weight

[sreekers]

I have been into backpack hunting for the last three seasons now,and really enjoy it. Don't get me wrong, I like having the camper for some of my hunts, but my favorite hunts are the ones that involve the backcountry and several miles between me and the nearest human being.

I have come to the realization that quality matters, and weight matters. Unfortunately the big name hunting packs are HEAVY! The more space you have the more you bring along, and really a lot of it is un-necessary.

That said, I have put together a list of the "It" packs that most hunters look into. I have felt this way for a while, but just now put the information together. I think we are getting ripped off for heavier packs that truthfully don't really function much better, if at all. In fact I believe they impede our ability to move quickly and effectively.

Hunting Packs:

Eberlestock J107-4,500 Cu In- 9lb 6oz
Cabelas Extreme Outfitter-4700 Cu In-7lb 4oz
Badlands 4500-4500 Cu In- 6lb 9oz( I really question this listed weight)
Cabelas Extreme Ultralight-4000 Cu In- 5lb 8 oz
Mystery Ranch Grizzly-6000 Cu In- 8lb 15oz
Mystery Ranch Kodiak- 7000 Cu In- 9lb 3 oz
MR Nice 6500- 6500 Cu In- 8lb 8oz

Back Packing:

Cabelas Diamond Peak Shasta-6000 Cu In-6lb 3 oz($100.00)
Cabelas Diamon Peak Ridgeline-5500 Cu In-5lb 14 oz($74.99)
Outdoor Products External Frame-3750 Cu In- 5.25 lb($79.99)
North Face Creston 75-4350 Cu In- 5lb 15oz-($199.00)
Kelty Durango 5100- 5100 Cu In- 5lb 14oz-($99.88)
Gregory Baltoro 70-4638 Cu In- 5lb 14 oz-($219.99)
Osprey Aether 70- 4400 Cu In- 5lb 3 oz-($259.00)

I did not include the pricing on the hunting packs because we are all painfully familiar withtheir prices. They are a whole lotmore than what the back packing world is paying for theirs.

Now my question is this: Why is their only one back country backpack with the "hunting" label that takes carry weight into consideration?

What it sounds like to me is that hunters as a whole seem to be into buying the "cool" rather than the really functional. Think about it, the new Ox from Badlands sends the weight backwards away from your body when packin out meat. This produces a 4-5 mile trek bent over looking at the ground.

The next thing I think about is that because I do this type of hunting in the late fall,when the snow flies some extra gear is going to be very necessary. A 3lb difference in my pack while havin roughly the same amount of carry space will make a differencein what I pack up the hill. Let alone taking into consideration my calorie output.

Thoughts?

 

[belly-deep]

Sitka packs are light. I sold my Badlands 4500 this summer and bought a Sitka. Haven't had a chance to backpack though.

 

[Bambistew]

I wasted a lot of money on cheap/light packs and paid for it with pain. I'd rather trim 2 pounds off my gut than go with a pack that can't handle the weight. To save weight those packs use cheap webbing and buckles, light weight nylon which will blow out and tear with a heavy load. None of them are designed to carry heavy loads, 80+ lbs. They just aren't designed to get abused they're made for the backpack weekend crowd.

The MR packs shouldn't even be compared to the rest here.

 

[icb12]

Now my question is this: Why is their only one back country backpack with the "hunting" label that takes carry weight into consideration?


The next thing I think about is that because I do this type of hunting in the late fall,when the snow flies some extra gear is going to be very necessary. A 3lb difference in my pack while havin roughly the same amount of carry space will make a differencein what I pack up the hill. Let alone taking into consideration my calorie output.

Thoughts?

What's a 3lb difference when your whole goal is to come out hundreds of pounds heavier?

"hunting" packs are made more heavy duty. Thicker heavier materials, heavier duty buckles, etc, etc. All this adds weight. But this means you can CARRY more weight.
Sure I've got an ultralight osprey pack I use for backpacking, but it's really only good to maybe 60lbs. My MR is 3.5 pounds heavier, but I've had 150lb loads in it. 150lbs in an lightweight backpacking pack would destroy it.

I wasted a lot of money on cheap/light packs and paid for it with pain. I'd rather trim 2 pounds off my gut than go with a pack that can't handle the weight. To save weight those packs use cheap webbing and buckles, light weight nylon which will blow out and tear with a heavy load. None of them are designed to carry heavy loads, 80+ lbs. They just aren't designed to get abused they're made for the backpack weekend crowd.

The MR packs shouldn't even be compared to the rest here.

Bingo.

 

[T Bone]

ya...what bambi and icb said.

Kifaru and MR packs are worth the $.

 

[shoots-straight]

I fill up my MR 6500 with what I feel I must have and go! Never weigh the damn thing. I don't want to know what's in there. It doesn't matter anyway, cause it's what's needed.

 

[Big Fin]

I fill up my MR 6500 with what I feel I must have and go! Never weigh the damn thing. I don't want to know what's in there. It doesn't matter anyway, cause it's what's needed.

'Bout sums it up. If you need it, you need it, and it should be in your pack. Pack weight is secondary to performance.

 

[sreekers]

I don't believe you need it though. My buddy packs in every year to well above 10,000 feet and uses his Kelty. He has brought out several good deer, and truth be told it packs better than his cousin's Badland's 4500 or the Ox he bought this year. His pack weight out close to 100 lbs loaded with this years deer.

My question is how can weight not be a consideration? Because we are hunting we bring several items backpackers do not, which adds more weight to begin with.

I am pointing out that even some of the Osprey packs, which are lighter by a boatload, are more comfortable, and carry just as much weight are cheaper.

Third, if you are so tired from packing in the weight that you can't make the shot your mission has failed. It's happened.

My point is simply this, I know the companies are capable of making a lighter pack that is just as strong because I know they exist in the backpacking world.

With the right mentality you can cut 15lbs off of your pack weight(plus what comes off the gut).

So that brings me to the point where I think the Hunting industry in general believes that quality only comes in heavy products?

 

[belly-deep]

I think you're on to something. I've been trying to lighten up for a few years with the thought that I could do without a few things and hunt a little harder. I think it has worked.

As far as that old "take one pound off your body and you can carry one more on your back argument" it just doens't work out that way for a number of reasons. If you are out of shape, sure, getting fit will allow you to hunt better and carry a heavier pack. But to imply that you can just lose X amount of weight and carry X amount more on your back and have no difference is not correct.

 

[Bambistew]

I have a Kelty pack I'll sell you Sreekers, its in good shape, only used a few seasons. It even made it up to 11,800 feet a couple times.

 

[Calvin]

Sitka packs are light. I sold my Badlands 4500 this summer and bought a Sitka. Haven't had a chance to backpack though.

I've used those Sitka packs. I broke one packing out a good sized black bear hide/skull.

Now my Kifaru Longhunter gets the nod for 95% of my hunting.

 

[Big Fin]

My question is how can weight not be a consideration? Because we are hunting we bring several items backpackers do not, which adds more weight to begin with.

I am pointing out that even some of the Osprey packs, which are lighter by a boatload, are more comfortable, and carry just as much weight are cheaper.

Third, if you are so tired from packing in the weight that you can't make the shot your mission has failed. It's happened.

My point is simply this, I know the companies are capable of making a lighter pack that is just as strong because I know they exist in the backpacking world.

With the right mentality you can cut 15lbs off of your pack weight(plus what comes off the gut).

So that brings me to the point where I think the Hunting industry in general believes that quality only comes in heavy products?

I agree sreekers, just not sure the companies making hunting packs have a large enough part of their demographic that needs to lose that last few pounds of weight, compared to the cost it would take to get the weight down even further.

No doubt that some hunters do need that, and worry about. Probably not a large enough portion of the hunting market to justify the cost.

At least from my perspective, the needs of a hunting pack are different from what I think I would need from a Mountaineering pack. In a hunting pack, I am looking for something that can compress and be hunted quietly and efficiently as a day pack, yet when I shoot something, expand to carry 100 pound loads.

Maybe that is also the use of the Mountaineering packs, I am just not one of those mountaineering folks.

For me, the weight of my MR Crew Cab is not a factor, compared to the comfort and versatility it gives me. If making it 3 pounds lighter made it more expensive, or less versatile for the needs I have, my vote would be to keep the extra three pounds and go with what I have.

I see your point, just not sure the business economics of the hunting pack market make it feasible to incur the costs to do such. I don't think it is a "quality only comes in heavy products" mentality, but rather a business decision.

 

[BOHNTR]

I've back-packed for quite a few years now. I currently own a MR, Eberlestock, Gregory, and Kelty back-pack. Got rid of the Badlands and Cabelas (both were junk, IMO).........the ONLY backpack I hunt with now for long term bowhunting trips is the Kelty Tioga 5500. It's not "pretty" camouflage, but it's an extremely lightweight external pack that can carry A LOT of weight comfortably. Weight is weight.......and when you're back-packing in rugged wilderness you need to trim as much weight as possible, IMO. Some of those packs (empty) are 4 pounds heavier than the Kelty........heck, that's the weight of my tent and sleeping bag.

 

[RockyDog]

I bought the lightest mountaineering pack i could find for one main reason, fly-in hunting in alaska. When you are limited to no more than a 50 lbs pack on a 10 day trip then those extra few pounds can be important gear or food. I went with Osprey Crescent 86 and love. However i admit that while elk hunting in montana a MR pack would probably be more flexible.

 

[icb12]

This is how i see it:
Weight is only a factor going in. Hiking in sure a nice lightweight backpacking pack would be great.
Coming out, Say i've got 120# load PLUS the pack on my back. IF the packs carried that weight equally well then it doesn't matter because I couldn't tell you the difference between 123# and 128# when it's on my back.

The fact is that thos packs DON"t carry weight equally well, and 120 pounds in my 3# pack would feel like 200 and 120# in my 8# pack feels like 120.

IF (HUUGE if) all other things were equal, I would take the lighter pack everytime. But then again, IF all other things were equal I wouldn't have dropped the coin for a MR in the first place.

My 10 day SE AK elk hunt recently, my CC weighed 35# sans food. Thats with extra stuff required for SE. Extra corks, cork wrench, two raincoats, LOTs of socks, etc etc.
Add food: 10 pro pak mt house, 20 packages of instant oatmeal, 20 clif bars = 7 pounds of food. Thats 42# total weight to be ready for a solo 10 day hunt in SE.

I for one DON'T believe that Heavy = Quality. I believe in Quality period. If having higher quality stuff means packing a measly 4# extra weight, I'll put in the time and training to carry it.

 

[belly-deep]

This is how i see it:
Weight is only a factor going in.

That is only true if you kill something everytime you go out.

If you spend 10-15 days looking critters over before you drop one, you are spending a lot energy that you otherwise wouldn't need to spend.

 

[indian larry]

That is only true if you kill something everytime you go out.

If you spend 10-15 days looking critters over before you drop one, you are spending a lot energy that you otherwise wouldn't need to spend.

Im not sure how you hunt but i know that i dont carry camp around on my back for 10-15 day.

Back pack in, set up camp and it stays behind along with all my extras. An extra few pounds from a pack thats going to hold up and get me home is wroth it and not going to make that much of a difference.

 

[icb12]

That is only true if you kill something everytime you go out.

If you spend 10-15 days looking critters over before you drop one, you are spending a lot energy that you otherwise wouldn't need to spend.

It's hunting. I don't know how everyone else does it, but I go in planning to kill something. If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen and no matter what I enjoyed my time out there. Still, I like to be prepared to complete the plan should the right opportunity arise. Carrying a pack incapable of completing the plan seems like pretty crappy planning IMO.

Name of the game is "preparedness". And in my eyes that is a big part of hunting.


This whole argument is pointless.
Without a doubt if all other things were equal between two packs besides weight all of us would choose the lighter pack every single time.
BUT
All things aren't equal.

Let me put it this way: (maybe we should poll it)
Say you have two packs.

They are the same price, same color, equally tough, equally comfortable, equally versatile, same features, same fit, same weight carrying abilities, same warranty; same brand, etc.
Only one weighs 4#, and the other 8#

I'd take the 4# one. I would LOVE to have a lighter CC, but not if I have to sacrifice anything that it already does exceptionally well.



Also: Something interesting to think about. In the OP, take the lightest backpacking mentioned:
Osprey Aether: 70- 4400 Cu In- 5lb 3 oz
(0.019oz per cubic inch)
Compare it to the largestpack mentioned:
Mystery Ranch Kodiak- 7000 Cu In- 9lb 3 oz
(.021 oz per cubic inch)

That means to make an Osprey Aether of equal size it would weigh:8 lb 5 oz. Difference of less than a pound now....

Weight per Volume makes for interesting comparisons. Hunting packs are still heavier almost always.. but this comparison is apples and oranges. How could you possibly compare an Aether to a Kodiak??? Having finger banged both...theres no comparison there.

 

[sreekers]

I agree sreekers, just not sure the companies making hunting packs have a large enough part of their demographic that needs to lose that last few pounds of weight, compared to the cost it would take to get the weight down even further.

No doubt that some hunters do need that, and worry about. Probably not a large enough portion of the hunting market to justify the cost.

At least from my perspective, the needs of a hunting pack are different from what I think I would need from a Mountaineering pack. In a hunting pack, I am looking for something that can compress and be hunted quietly and efficiently as a day pack, yet when I shoot something, expand to carry 100 pound loads.

Maybe that is also the use of the Mountaineering packs, I am just not one of those mountaineering folks.

For me, the weight of my MR Crew Cab is not a factor, compared to the comfort and versatility it gives me. If making it 3 pounds lighter made it more expensive, or less versatile for the needs I have, my vote would be to keep the extra three pounds and go with what I have.

I see your point, just not sure the business economics of the hunting pack market make it feasible to incur the costs to do such. I don't think it is a "quality only comes in heavy products" mentality, but rather a business decision.

I don't want to come across as a smart mouth in saying this, but it will likely come across that way, not intended but a serious qustion.

You are saying that there is no company that would think it's a good busness decision to develop a light weight pack that is cost effective and can bear a heavy load?

If something is cheaper and of roughly the same quality it will sell more than the competition.

Seems to me that if a company would put a little effort into making a quality product that is cheaper and lighter people would buy it. If the concept behind the pack is quality light weight products I can't believe that only a few people would buy it.

The said company wouldn't just sell packs, it could sell and market whatever it wanted to as long as it met the light-weight and quality concept.

Personally I think the idea would catch on. I like not being beat up after a hunt, and the weight you pack in has a lot to do with that.

 

[Big Fin]

You are saying that there is no company that would think it's a good busness decision to develop a light weight pack that is cost effective and can bear a heavy load?

That's not a smart ass comment at all.

Here is what I am saying. If it were possible to get the same performance to weight ratio, at the same or lower cost, I think hunting pack companies would be doing that. They are always trying to improve things. Your comment seems to imply that their is no marginal cost to improve the weight to performance ratio. Maybe I have read that wrong, but I think there is a cost to improve the weight to performance ratio.

My point is that the performance to weight ratio will come at a HIGHER cost, and as such, there is probably not enough of a market in the hunting world who would pay the much higher cost, for the marginal improvement that might be realized.

Maybe I am wrong in my assumption that a better performance to weight ratio will be cost prohibitive. If it is not, I expect the hunting pack companies will quickly find that lower weight solution that keeps performance the same for the hunting application. Since they have not yet done so, I am going on the premise that it will cost more to reduce weight and keep performance the same.

Yes, the mountaineering packs have found a lower weight level, but IMHO, there is a difference in the proposed utilization and application of hunting and mountaineering packs. Both can be used for the other application, but each have different target users and as such, different design features. I think companies building each realize that the mountaineering customer has different demands and expectations from the hunting customer, and therefore, they make different packs at different weights, to serve the different user groups.