|
erin__b
Mar 7, 2010, 10:56 AM
Post #1 of 15
(14067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2009
Posts: 4
|
I want to get a new backpack for alpine cragging/ via ferrata/ days at the crag. So, my requirements: comfortable to wear when climbing (good clearance when looking backward when wearing a helmet, non-restrictive over shoulders etc), reasonably light, large enough to carry gear+ clothing/water, and comfortable back/shoulder straps so that I can trek up the mountain with while carrying gear!.
Thus, does anyone have experience with variant and mutant packs? My impression is that the mutant is lighter and more stripped down than the variant ie no crampon storage on the front and no ski straps. Correct impression? Any other important differences? Any experience in using these packs-positive or negative?
Other packs I should be considering?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
northfacejmb
Mar 7, 2010, 4:13 PM
Post #2 of 15
(14045 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2006
Posts: 234
|
I'm very interested to see what people come up with.
My friend just bought a BD Quantum and so far it seems like a really good pack.
I don't know for sure, but unlike the Quantum and Mutant packs I don't think that the Variant has a bivy pad..
|
|
|
|
|
Samiam277
Mar 7, 2010, 5:10 PM
Post #3 of 15
(14035 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2007
Posts: 51
|
You are right in that the Mutant is more or less a stripped down version of the Variant. They use the same suspension setup, so I assume they carry similarly. That said, I have an Osprey Exposure 36, which is essentially the older version of the Variant line. I have seen the Variant in shops; they are more or less the same pack, just a few features that are different. I love my Exposure. It's a perfect size for cragging, and there aren't too many straps and buckles hanging off of it. Very simple, yet carries everything well. Osprey quality is top notch. I also have a Aether 70 for backpacking, which I also love.
|
|
|
|
|
Samiam277
Mar 7, 2010, 5:15 PM
Post #4 of 15
(14033 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2007
Posts: 51
|
Oh I forgot to add that my only beef with a 36 liter pack is that when I do backcountry multi-pitch routes, I have to throw the rope under the lid. It won't fit inside (which I prefer on long approaches with a lot of scrambling) with a full rack/water/helmet/shoes/jacket/etc, though if you and your partner split up the rope and rack you should be fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Durin
Mar 9, 2010, 12:32 AM
Post #5 of 15
(13966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2007
Posts: 113
|
You might want to consider packs made by CCW(cold cold world) and Cilogear. Both companies' main goal is to make alpine packs.
CCW is probably a little tougher and a little heavier, Cilogear is lighter and maybe not as durable.
I've got a Cilogear 45L and love it.
http://www.coldcoldworldpacks.com/intro.htm
http://cilogear.com/
Osprey and BD are way bigger companies and probably have better distribution in Europe though. If I did have to pick between the two, I'd go for BD over Osprey. They carry weight better for climbing but aren't as comfortable over long distances, and have less useless features.
|
|
|
|
|
Climbhigh1123
Mar 9, 2010, 4:21 AM
Post #6 of 15
(13945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2008
Posts: 37
|
I own a Mutant 38. I've had it for about 2 months. I really like the pack a lot. It carries very comfortably. I'm going to be using it as a cragging pack mostly. I can fit a 60m rope, a dozen quickdraws, shoes, a rain shell, chalk bag and chalk pot, small first aid kit, and lunch for myself. I can also carry a change of clothes if I need to, which is nice. The lid design with the strap for the rope is a really nice addition, which is great if you go a little overboard with gear. The way the pack fits for me is excellent. I'm 6'6 and very thin, (180 lbs) and I take a size medium. I can definitely fit more stuff in the pack though, which is a welcome addition. You are right about the mutant being a stripped down Variant. I also like the fact you can take the waist strap and flip it around and clip it in like this little spot to hold them out of your way when you have a harness on.
Hope this helps!
|
|
|
|
|
erin__b
Mar 9, 2010, 12:48 PM
Post #7 of 15
(13922 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2009
Posts: 4
|
Thanks for the useful comments.
The other packs: The BD Quantum looks like a good pack for climbing, but I somewhat skeptical of its carrying comfort. And it is too expensive for me (it costs 200 euros in Germany!)(Why is everything so much more expensive here!?)
CCW and Cilogear- both look like great gear makers. But as you said, getting it shipped to Germany would be cost prohibitive...
So to return to the Mutant vs. Variant.
Both have the same suspension system and both carry well.
The Variant has a crampon sleeve and more attachment points(ski holder); but it weighs 1.5kg and has no bivy pad.
The Mutant has no crampon pocket, but weighs 1.3kg (strips to 950) and has a bivy pad. As my primary pack usage will be rock climbing, I think the fewer buckles (that could get stuck when sliding against rock), the better. The variant ski slings are not important for me as I don't do ski mountaineering. And the Mutant is 35 euros cheaper :).
So! I just ordered the Mutant. Excited! Will report back after the summer for a review :).
|
|
|
|
|
william.alan.swanson
Mar 9, 2010, 1:47 PM
Post #8 of 15
(13911 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2009
Posts: 34
|
I realize the OP already made his choice, but in the interest of helping the curious I thought I'd post a review of the Mutant 38 from Splitter Choss: http://www.splitterchoss.com/...tant-38-pack-review/
I haven't used either, but for what it's worth I own two other Osprey Packs (Aether 60 & Stratos 24) and have been very happy with the company.
|
|
|
|
|
wallwombat
Mar 9, 2010, 2:42 PM
Post #9 of 15
(13896 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 727
|
Samiam277 wrote: Oh I forgot to add that my only beef with a 36 liter pack is that when I do backcountry multi-pitch routes, I have to throw the rope under the lid. It won't fit inside (which I prefer on long approaches with a lot of scrambling) with a full rack/water/helmet/shoes/jacket/etc, though if you and your partner split up the rope and rack you should be fine.
I have an Exposure 36 too and my only complaint is that it's a bit small. I'll be looking at a 45/50 liter pack next time.
|
|
|
|
|
Samiam277
Mar 9, 2010, 3:38 PM
Post #10 of 15
(13880 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2007
Posts: 51
|
wallwombat wrote: Samiam277 wrote: Oh I forgot to add that my only beef with a 36 liter pack is that when I do backcountry multi-pitch routes, I have to throw the rope under the lid. It won't fit inside (which I prefer on long approaches with a lot of scrambling) with a full rack/water/helmet/shoes/jacket/etc, though if you and your partner split up the rope and rack you should be fine. I have an Exposure 36 too and my only complaint is that it's a bit small. I'll be looking at a 45/50 liter pack next time.
Yeah this winter I picked up an Arc'teryx Khamski (older version of the Khamsin) which is a 50 liter. It fits everything perfectly, though I still love my Exposure 36 for lighter days, or if I'm going to be climbing with a pack on
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Mar 9, 2010, 4:08 PM
Post #11 of 15
(13869 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
I'm in the market for these guys as well. I'm finally replacing my Stratos 24, which is looking like it's on its last legs after a few years of abuse. You could fit a medium sized trad rack, 2 pairs of shoes, draws, misc anchor gear, harness, hydration bladder, lunch, and a layer or two inside the pack if you were creative, plus easily strap a rope and a helmet outside. All this in an awesomely easy to use clamshell design. Unfortunately, Osprey decided to "update" this line of packs this year, and pretty much ruined everything that was good about them.
I'm looking hard at the Variant 37 and 52 (the crampon pockets and tool attachments are lightyears better than what I was doing with my old pack. However, I can't really decide what size I want.
Anyone have a Variant 37? How tight a fit is it with a typical trad crag pack worth of gear (rack, draws, harness, shoes, rope, etc)? The 52 seems quite a bit bigger than the 37, possibly too big. Plus there are more seams and panels to possibly fail on me.
|
|
|
|
|
wallwombat
Mar 9, 2010, 9:26 PM
Post #12 of 15
(13845 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 727
|
shoo wrote: The 52 seems quite a bit bigger than the 37...
I think you're on to something there.
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Mar 9, 2010, 9:27 PM
Post #13 of 15
(13842 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
wallwombat wrote: shoo wrote: The 52 seems quite a bit bigger than the 37... I think you're on to something there.
Damn you. Damn you hard.
Edit: it's not a personal attack if I give him 5 stars, right? Please don't banz me!
(This post was edited by shoo on Mar 9, 2010, 9:28 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
wallwombat
Mar 9, 2010, 9:33 PM
Post #14 of 15
(13835 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 727
|
On a more serious note, I think there is more chance of seams splitting and panels blowing out if you always stuffing everything in.
I find my 36 liter Osprey a bit small. Another 10 liters and it would be perfect.
I have looked at the Variant 50 and it looks like a nice pack.
I like Osprey packs but next time I buy a climbing pack, I'm going to buy a Cilogear 45.
Sorry about the other post. I couldn't help myself.
|
|
|
|
|
zeth01
Mar 9, 2010, 10:03 PM
Post #15 of 15
(13821 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2006
Posts: 214
|
fuck it get a cilo gear
|
|
|
|
|
|
