Page 3 of 3
Re: losing weight
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:13 pm
by sparky
A frameless pack does next to nothing for leverage produced by your heavy dense items in your load. A suspension system does.
Re: losing weight
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 3:32 pm
by JWreno
The ULA Catalyst is my bear can pack, the ULA Circuit my NO bear can pack. What do you think is the next step up on padding/comfort load carrying capability with similar volume to the Catalyst? I am 5 foot 11 inches with a long torso and shorter 30 inch inseam legs. My wife's smaller pack actually weighs more than my larger Catalyst that that is what she needs to avoid bruised hips.
Re: losing weight
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:10 pm
by The Other Tom
Check out the GoLite Jam 70. I've used one for the past couple of years with good success.
Re: losing weight
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:04 pm
by TahoeJeff
The Other Tom wrote:Check out the GoLite Jam 70. I've used one for the past couple of years with good success.
Me too!
It is an excellent pack, but try not to drag the bottom over rough granite, or you will get small holes.
Re: losing weight
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 1:36 pm
by JWreno
Actually I was thinking a slightly heavier pack with more weight carrying comfort so I could account for my Canon 6D, 17-40 and 24-105mm lenses 3-5 extra batteries, and maybe my Surui tripod and head. Could be about 7 pounds of camera gear. Might talk my son into carrying the 2 pound tripod and head.
My empty ULA Catalyst feels challenged comfort wise when getting closer to 40 pounds vs. under 30.
I was thinking about a pack that was well padded in the 4-5 pound range empty that held about the same volume as the Catalyst which weighs closer to 3 pounds.
I kind off thinking DSLR with backpack is less in line with the topic of losing weight.