Kifaru vs Stone Glacier - Specifically fit and frame comparison

[snowcamoman]

Steve,
I was really anticipating your feedback on the new XCurve. I'm happy for you that it's working out with the same results I had. I can't wait to haul out sheep and camp.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Bughalli]

Great info. I was going back and forth on this as well. Tough decision. I like Kifaru's Reckoning bag. For those with the SG what pack are you going with? Do you miss the modularity and pockets? Normally I would say I prefer pockets, but after switching to a FHF bino harnes and pockets (GPS & range finder), as well as moving more towards a minimalist approach, I find I might not need as many pockets on the pack.

 

[coues32]

R Burg

I live in Payson and been running SG krux with the large Sky bag for 3 years, great set up. Shoot me a text if you are interested in checking it out.

9072zero21321

 

[sr80]

Great info. I was going back and forth on this as well. Tough decision. I like Kifaru's Reckoning bag. For those with the SG what pack are you going with? Do you miss the modularity and pockets? Normally I would say I prefer pockets, but after switching to a FHF bino harnes and pockets (GPS & range finder), as well as moving more towards a minimalist approach, I find I might not need as many pockets on the pack.

You think youll miss pockets and such, but you wont. Any of the little stuff I need to carry can go in the lid, or a swing out pocket hanging from the inside of the bag. Those swing out pockets are great, ad as many as you need, or as little as you need. Makes the pack very customizable.

 

[MT_Wyatt]

Great info. I was going back and forth on this as well. Tough decision. I like Kifaru's Reckoning bag. For those with the SG what pack are you going with? Do you miss the modularity and pockets? Normally I would say I prefer pockets, but after switching to a FHF bino harnes and pockets (GPS & range finder), as well as moving more towards a minimalist approach, I find I might not need as many pockets on the pack.

I much prefer the more streamlined pack without a bunch of stuff on it. I've ran the solo, Sky archer 6200, the access bag, avail 2200 and now the sky 5900. With swing out and camp pockets I never feel like I need more, especially with things kitted in stuff sacks. For exterior access, the lid gives me plenty. I never felt the need for exterior pockets with the solo or sky 6200 because I could just open the side zip or single exterior pocket quick enough.

That's all just my personal preference. For me, having the skinnier profile behind me fits the bill and improves my travels. I got one like how Kurt's designs are purpose built for hunting - there's nothing extra, bit what's there is incredibly useful. That isn't anything against Kifaru, because some of their bag designs go in that same direction.

 

[snowcamoman]

I also prefer to have a streamlined and narrower pack vs. a pack with pockets hanging off all over it. I've done the add a pocket and pouch setup before and it just wasn't my style. In honesty, it really didn't make me more efficient at packing my bag and the pockets seem to want to hang up or catch on brush when I was fighting the jungles.

Once you get used to packing your bag a specific way for a trip, there really isn't a need for any other extra pockets on the outside besides a lid and a hip pocket for my style of hunting (10 to 12 day trips). Every little thing I need to get to quickly fits into the hip pocket and any other items that I need once I stop are in the lid. If it's going to start raining, or if I need to access larger items, I pack my bags so that those items are easily accessible via the center zip or panel zip on the Sky 7400 and 5900. Plus, with the load shelf option, I don't have to worry about trying to re-arrange and reconfigure my packing system to deal with cramming meat into my main bag.

 

[Iltasyuko]

I was doing weight comparisons between Kifaru and SG also and did notice the SG.coming out a fair bit lighter. How is SG so much lighter than Kifaru and are there any drawbacks to this lighter weight - durability or ability to handle really heavy loads for example ?

Forgive me if this has been covered and I missed it, but the SG X-Kurve is lighter than my Kifaru EMRII by over 2lbs. That is significant weight when doing remote hunts. I own over 1/2 a dozen Kifaru packs and frames, they are all well built,, I might even dare say over built. Mil spec one might say. SG has a proven track record to be tough enough, without being over built. The new belt as mentioned locks in like no other I have tried, no slip at all. I'm 150lbs 30 inch waist, this kind of puts me between a small and medium with kifaru belts. The small does not wrap around me enough and the medium will bottom out as I drop weight on a long hunt. The comfort of the frame is awesome, but try as i might I have always got a bit of belt slip with a load. The SG belt with the side straps lock around the iliac crest and the non slip belt keeps it there. I really love the EMRII bag, but I believe I will be Okay with my Sky7400 bag too. The X-Kurve can also be adjusted for another user quick and easy, kifaru is easy too, but the advantage goes to SG.

Steve

 

[tipsntails7]

Great info. I was going back and forth on this as well. Tough decision. I like Kifaru's Reckoning bag. For those with the SG what pack are you going with? Do you miss the modularity and pockets? Normally I would say I prefer pockets, but after switching to a FHF bino harnes and pockets (GPS & range finder), as well as moving more towards a minimalist approach, I find I might not need as many pockets on the pack.

I've had the timberline, nomad, EMR2 and now a mountain warrior. For SG I have a solo and a 6200.

I don't miss the pockets or modularity at all honestly, and I really thought I would. It got to a point where I was putting stuff in pockets that honestly didn't need to be just to justify the pockets. It's just as easy for me to put a beanie and gloves in the lid of the SG then its own separate pocket on a kifaru.

I still dig kifaru and for day or camera bags their modularity is awesome. But at this point for my hunting I don't need all those pockets.

I'm lucky that the krux frame fits me very well or else I would still be using kifaru.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stid2677]

I was doing weight comparisons between Kifaru and SG also and did notice the SG.coming out a fair bit lighter. How is SG so much lighter than Kifaru and are there any drawbacks to this lighter weight - durability or ability to handle really heavy loads for example ?

Still too early for me to make a judgment based on my own use, however SG has a proven track record for durability. Kifaru's are built almost bullet proof, that kind of durability has a weight penalty, and for long range hunts and my own weight hauling ability the SG is worth the weight savings. Anytime you can shave 2lbs or so off a sheep pack weight, that is worth it. Think of it like this, a 3/4 ton truck is great when you need to haul a heavy load, but overkill as a daily driver. My days of packing extreme loads are behind me, so I don't need a pack capable of holding more than I could lift.
It appears that the SG bag material is of a lighter weight and thinner than Kifaru, I believe that is where much of savings is at and a more minimalistic approach.

 

[R_burg]

I much prefer the more streamlined pack without a bunch of stuff on it. I've ran the solo, Sky archer 6200, the access bag, avail 2200 and now the sky 5900. With swing out and camp pockets I never feel like I need more, especially with things kitted in stuff sacks. For exterior access, the lid gives me plenty. I never felt the need for exterior pockets with the solo or sky 6200 because I could just open the side zip or single exterior pocket quick enough.

That's all just my personal preference. For me, having the skinnier profile behind me fits the bill and improves my travels. I got one like how Kurt's designs are purpose built for hunting - there's nothing extra, bit what's there is incredibly useful. That isn't anything against Kifaru, because some of their bag designs go in that same direction.

Its hard to imagine myself going without *any* exterior pockets like on the sky archer. Especially in bivy mode when doing day hunts, I like to have stuff accessible on the outside.

Being that you ran the Archer and now the 5900, do you appreciate the horseshoe zip and front pocket?

 

[tipsntails7]

Still too early for me to make a judgment based on my own use, however SG has a proven track record for durability. Kifaru's are built almost bullet proof, that kind of durability has a weight penalty, and for long range hunts and my own weight hauling ability the SG is worth the weight savings. Anytime you can shave 2lbs or so off a sheep pack weight, that is worth it. Think of it like this, a 3/4 ton truck is great when you need to haul a heavy load, but overkill as a daily driver. My days of packing extreme loads are behind me, so I don't need a pack capable of holding more than I could lift.
It appears that the SG bag material is of a lighter weight and thinner than Kifaru, I believe that is where much of savings is at and a more minimalistic approach.

Stid, SG uses cordura 500, I assume it's the same as kifaru? They use xpac fabric as well. So maybe there? Not sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tipsntails7]

Its hard to imagine myself going without *any* exterior pockets like on the sky archer. Especially in bivy mode when doing day hunts, I like to have stuff accessible on the outside.

Being that you ran the Archer and now the 5900, do you appreciate the horseshoe zip and front pocket?

Make a list off all the stuff that you need, you've got 2 belt pockets and a lid.

If it doesn't go in the belt pockets your takeing your pack off regardless of what setup your running, as your not reaching any of the pockets on a Kifaru without taking the bag off either


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mtnboy]

I was doing weight comparisons between Kifaru and SG also and did notice the SG.coming out a fair bit lighter. How is SG so much lighter than Kifaru and are there any drawbacks to this lighter weight - durability or ability to handle really heavy loads for example ?

I feel I have beat the piss out of my SG for a few years now and it is no worse for the wear. Hauls heavy loads great in my opinion but I've never used a Kifaru in the field to compare.

Full rear quarter, back straps, horns and chain saw. No exact weight but I'd guess north of 100lb

4 bone in quarters, back straps, loins, head, spotting scope, tripod and all other day hunt gear. Again surely north of 100lb I'd guess.

2 front quarters from a rag horn bull.

The SG will haul as much weight as you can handle.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[MT_Wyatt]

Its hard to imagine myself going without *any* exterior pockets like on the sky archer. Especially in bivy mode when doing day hunts, I like to have stuff accessible on the outside.

Being that you ran the Archer and now the 5900, do you appreciate the horseshoe zip and front pocket?

I haven't used the 5900 enough as a daily pack to have a good perspective, meaning these are initial impressions, so take it for what it's worth - I like the horseshoe because I can use it as a side zip like I'm used to for quick access, but open it way up pack and unload. The front pocket built in is nice for organizing/ grabbing things in bivy mode. I'm not used to having one so still working through how I'll use it daily.

 

[Tex68w]

I'm not sure where exactly the weight savings are coming from but they both use 500 cordura. I can't imagine my Sky 5900 ever falling apart on me, it's a well built bag.

 

[charvey9]

I ran an SG Krux frame for two seasons, and now going on my second year with a Kifaru platform with hunting frame.

Comparing the two, I actually prefer the SG frame design with the diagonal and vertical stays creating the "X" in the frame. It really allowed you to crank down the load lifters and leverage the frame off your back for heavy loads, if that is what you like to do. Very similar to an old style packboard.

The Kifaru frame definitely gets the nod in comfort with the belt, shoulder straps, and back padding. Without the diagonal stays, the pack/load moves with you better than the SG. That isn't necessarily good or bad, just personal preference on how you like your load to feel.

Bottom line, the Kifaru is more comfortable with average to heavy loads than the SG, which is why I continue to go that direction. I would love to see a Kifaru frame option with diagonal and vertical stays. I even toyed with the idea of putting the Kifaru belt/straps on the SG frame. It would be possible, but required hacking into the SG frame and I opted to leave it alone.

I am really tempted to give the Xcurve frame a try, since it seems the redesign focused on comfort to compete with Kifaru.

 

[snowcamoman]

I beat the snot out of the 5900 in Kodiak this fall hauling several deer through some foul terrain. It performed perfectly and is no worse for wear. Like MT_Wyatt, that horseshoe zip is the ticket for easy access and loading. I have no worries about my SG failing, no matter how much weight I'm hauling.

 

[Bughalli]

For guys with both, how would you compare the load shelves? I ask because Kifaru states they have two contact points or heights. One 1/3 up from the bottom for smaller loads that would ride higher on your back and another at the bottom for a full size load shelf. I didn't see a lot of detail on SG. It appears there was only one setting for where the load shelf connects and it appeared at the bottom.

I prefer a solid shelf that is adjustable. vs 1 at the bottom and just sandwiching the hell out of it to get the meat where you want it.

 

[Yellowknife]

SG load shelf connects about 1/4 of the way up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[MT_Wyatt]

For guys with both, how would you compare the load shelves? I ask because Kifaru states they have two contact points or heights. One 1/3 up from the bottom for smaller loads that would ride higher on your back and another at the bottom for a full size load shelf. I didn't see a lot of detail on SG. It appears there was only one setting for where the load shelf connects and it appeared at the bottom.

I prefer a solid shelf that is adjustable. vs 1 at the bottom and just sandwiching the hell out of it to get the meat where you want it.

The SG attachment is on a tri slide so you can adjust its height from the bottom of the frame up to the bottom quarter. Works pretty slick, I much prefer that method than just having a piece of fabric at the bottom of the bag.