Bought a new backpack (Mammut Creon Lt 45)

[Melensdad]

Picked up a new backpack today and am very impressed so far. Not sure if this is going on the Hadrian's Wall hike that we will be making in May or if it will stay at home. That all depends upon if Melen wants to carry her own pack. If Melen carries her own pack then we will have 3 packs on this trip and I can switch down to my smaller Lowe Alpine pack. If Melen wants use a small daypack, then I will carry this one.

First off this pack is LIGHT. Under 3#. At least 1, and more typically 2 full pounds lighter than many competitors. There is a trade-off, it has somewhat fewer features, but has what I want. It may also not has quite as durable a fabric as a heavier pack, but I don't beat up my packs.

Secondly, the pack has an air-suspension or trampoline style back system. While air-suspension/trampoline systems are not suited for heavy loads, they are the most comfortable systems I've ever found. I'm not planning on carrying epic loads, so I can live within its hauling capabilities.

Here is a short YouTube review I found that helps explain the pack: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KlSQdjXifuU

What pretty much sold me on it is that it has an effective wire support system that 1) Effectively transfers the load to the hips, and 2) the wire system articulates when you walk, making it more comfortable to wear in uneven terrain.

 

[Melensdad]

Here is a photo of the air suspension/trampoline style suspension system. These systems are employed on a lot of high quality daypacks and we have 2 that utilize this system. It prevents your back from becoming over heated, ventilates very well, so you don't have a sweat soaked back (sweating through multiple layers of cloathing) while you walk. Can't tell from the photo but you can put your entire hand in between that mesh and the actual back of the pack.

If I have any complaints its that I'd like some additonal pockets on the waist and shoulder straps. But that is pretty minor.

 

[EastTexFrank]

I love the threads on camping equipment because it reminds me how the gear has improved in the last decade or two since I seriously used it. It's just mindboggling how far it has evolved.

That pack would have been a Rolls Royce back then but at 45 litres (2700 cu. in.), it would have been a little on the small and light side for a week long trip but then, the equipment you carried back then was bulkier and heavier than the stuff you pack these days. Remind me, isn't your main luggage being transported by car from one nightly stop to the next so there's no need for you haul tons of gear with you?

I'm looking forward to the next round of purchasing, testing and reviews.

 

[jask]

Very nice pack, anyone old enough to remember external frame packs or had the pleasure of a trapper Nelson can relate! One of my biggest peaves with the transition to clean packs in the late 90s was the lack of vertical rigidity for weight distribution, and the lack of back cooling. That size is awesome- it is so easy to overload a 60L pack.

 

[Melensdad]

Very nice pack, anyone old enough to remember external frame packs or had the pleasure of a trapper Nelson can relate! One of my biggest peaves with the transition to clean packs in the late 90s was the lack of vertical rigidity for weight distribution, and the lack of back cooling. That size is awesome- it is so easy to overload a 60L pack.

Back in the early 1970's I had an external frame Kelty pack and did a portion of the Apalatian Trail in Tennessee and Kentucky. Those external frames actually work really well, but they also snag trees, branches, rock walls and everything else that you encounter along the trail. I was with two guys who had soft rucksacks and switched with one of them for the last few miles we had to walk. WOW that was miserable. That was when I learned to appreciate a good suspension system.

I have two different Lowe Alpine packs, both are smaller, both weigh more. Both have lots of little features that this doesn't have. But they have, what Lowe Alpine calls their AirZone suspension. I think they may have been pioneers in this type of suspension because 1 of those 2 packs is several years old, the other is a current model. The system works great as long as you don't overload the pack.

As for overloading packs, I am really beginning to think that most people carry way too much. In the back of my mind I'm thinking of walking the Caminio De Santiago (500 miles) from southern France across northern Spain. I think I could do it with this new pack if I don't take a tent.

Below is a video link from Mammut that explains their back system a bit better, including the wire frame system, as well as a graphic from their website about their version of the trampoline back. But mine doesn't have the "butterfly" wire shown in the video, it has a perimeter wire with a lower inverted triangle. Perphaps not quite as good as their butterfly wire, but that system is for heavier loads and this system is for moderate loads, the wire system in my pack is seen as red lines in the graphic below.

VIDEO => https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_8G1g8BpVU0

 

[Melensdad]

Been playing around with the new pack.

THE BAD: IF there is a downside to this pack it is that it is a top-loader with only a SMALL side access point to the contents. It is also just one big open compartment. They did that to save weight. It is common on ultra-light packs.

After messing with it a bit I can see that there would have been some additional value to having a LARGE side or bottom access point. Other medium/large packs I've used over the years had at least 2 compartments, each with at least 1 large access point. As this is just a large open container with the only reasonable access at the top, you have to plan your load since the only way to get to the stuff at the bottom is by emptying the entire pack. The side zipper access just seems too small to be useful. Maybe it could access a first aid kit? I'll have to really pack it a few more times to try to figure it out.

Not sure if it is a valid complaint? After all, the pack is designed to be very light and I knew it was a 1 compartment bag. Its just new to me.

THE GOOD: This bag is featherweight. I have a bag that is literally 50% smaller than this one that weighs a full pound more.

THE MEH: Or maybe the wish list? I wish it had a couple small pockets on the shoulder straps for small items like a cell phone, maybe a lighter, bandaids, etc. It does have a stretchy pocket on the hip strap, but I'd like more.

 

[rback33]

I was afraid I lost my pack after my moves, but I found it recently at my parents. This thread makes me want to load up and head to CO with my BIL for a summer trip. Maybe right after we ride a leg in the Bike Across Kansas...

 

[Melensdad]

Had a chance to test out the pack a bit. It has loops on the bottom and quick release cinch downs on top for holding trekking poles (or ice axes, etc).

I'm not thrilled with the bottom loops. They are big enough and sturdy enough (doubled up the fabric layers for the loops) but I prefer the plastic friction grommet style, on stretch cords, used by Lowe Alpine on their packs. Its not a real complaint, just a preference. Maybe because our other 2 packs are Lowe Alpine and that is what I've used?

 

[Melensdad]

OK now I have a real complaint. The side access zipper is just too small to be practical. Its maybe a bit over 6" long? Too small to actually get anything in/out. Great idea, bad execution.

It does curve down and is nicely shaped, but there is a compression strap that crosses across the zipper opening, effectively cutting it in half. WTF?

 

[Melensdad]

Complaint #2 -- This backpack does not come with an integral rain cover.

That has never been a deal breaker but it does change the weight. To my simple mind a pack weighs whatever it weighs, and since a large % of packs come with integral rain covers, the rain cover is part of the weight of the pack. So since this pack is 2 pounds, 6 ounces without a rain cover, seems to me that I have to add the weight of a rain cover.

REI sells a rain cover that should fit. Weighs 4.4 ounces. Cost $23.
Sea To Summit also makes a cover that should fit. Only 3 ounces. Cost $37. ~~which seems a bit outrageous to me~~

So to my mind the real weight of the pack is 2 pounds, 10.4 ounces. It still qualifies as an ultra-light pack given its volume. Just seems like a slightly disingenuous claim at 2#, 6oz.