Mountain Warrior Vs. The Reckoning

[WyoRob]

It seems everyone is hyped about the Reckoning but I'm just not sold on it yet. I ordered by Kifaru frame today but held off on ordering a pack. Anyone care to explain the benefits of the Reckoning over the MW?

 

[ljalberta]

It's definitely personal preference. I've had a MW for about a year now, but see the appeal of the Reckoning. I like the larger capacity, and integrated side pockets on the Reckoning. I also like the 3 horizontal compression straps that also go across the front of the bag. I like the ability to run it without a lid and the centre zip. Some of course will like the ability to add and remove side pockets with the MW, the panel load, and large front pocket, and the fewer number of straps. The MW also has an internal water bladder pocket with ports if you're into that. The MW is a great bag, the Reckoning seems like another great bag - I don't think you can lose here. The good news is that either one you order, if you find you don't like the layout once you get it, you could return it for the other bag.

 

[dotman]

I like that with the MW you can run it so that zero straps have to be removed when day hunting to access the bag and back pocket. I went with the MW because I have found over the years is that I prefer no excess straps and the panel loader design.. Really one isn't better then the other it just depends on what you prefer.

 

[Jordan Budd]

X2 on the personal preference. I was actually going to move to the MW this year before they released the Reckoning. But the center zip works a little better than the panel loader for how I'm running it. I also like the new lid attachment system on the reckoning. I'm a big side pocket person because I'm always carrying a tripod and almost always a spotter. I used a spotting scope pocket on my AMR last year and it was ok, but pretty much had to run one strap around the middle to keep it tighter against the bag anyways, and not as much room in the pocket versus this sewn in one.

But again just personal preference. With the return policy you could try them both out and see which suites you better. For me, it's the reckoning.

 

[TacticoolMike]

Sounds like the gentlemen before me summed it up well but I'll give my little insight. I just had this brief mental battle with myself earlier today. I have the MW currently but was considering the Reckoning. I was thinking about ordering a spotting scope pocket or 2 for some overflow capacity to carry long items like tent poles, etc, to free up space in the main bag. The reckoning has them built in so that awesome. Center Zip is good too. Plus its the new kid on the block and that has it intriguing as well. Then I started thinking about how I prefer to carry some items. The Reckoning has no internal organization that I'm aware of (could totally be wrong). I like the zippered mesh pocket on the inside of the panel load door of the MW. I have my water filter kit, fire kit and FAK all stored and easily accessible there. Plus I kinda like the outer pocket for easy stowage of quick access gear, etc. So, I decided to stick with my MW. I don't think you could go wrong though either way.

 

[mmccolloch]

I used to have the AMR which has is pretty similar to the MW with the pockets on the back of the bag. The one thing I absolutely hated about the AMR and I would have the same complaint with the MW is that all of my easy access gear became pretty inaccessible when I had a bow strapped to my pack and I could no longer get to those back pockets easily. This would be pretty easily avoidable if you plan ahead and put gear in a guide lid, or something similar, but it just seemed like I would ALWAYS forget something and as soon as I got everything strapped in to leave for the day, I would have an "oh shit" moment and need to take everything out again. I now have a reckoning with a large belt pouch on either side. This completely eliminates this problem & I couldn't be happier.

 

[dotman]

I used to have the AMR which has is pretty similar to the MW with the pockets on the back of the bag. The one thing I absolutely hated about the AMR and I would have the same complaint with the MW is that all of my easy access gear became pretty inaccessible when I had a bow strapped to my pack and I could no longer get to those back pockets easily. This would be pretty easily avoidable if you plan ahead and put gear in a guide lid, or something similar, but it just seemed like I would ALWAYS forget something and as soon as I got everything strapped in to leave for the day, I would have an "oh shit" moment and need to take everything out again. I now have a reckoning with a large belt pouch on either side. This completely eliminates this problem & I couldn't be happier.

When hunting you don't strap your bow to your pack though. That will create an access issue for a center zip as well.

 

[mmccolloch]

When hunting you don't strap your bow to your pack though. That will create an access issue for a center zip as well.

Definitely agree with you. It was more on the hike in/out or when it wasn't my day to hunt. If I was going solo or always carrying my bow it would be a complete non issue. My goal with my setup in day mode is to never have to get into the main bag unless something is on the ground.

 

[mrbillbrown]

I'm an AMR user. Love the layout and when cinched down it leaves the large back pockets open for quick use items.

My fear with the Reckoning is the lack of exterior center pockets.

When I cinch my AMR down I suck up the bottom two straps (bringing the bottom of the bag up as high as possible) then cinch the 6 side straps leaving just the back pockets accessible. When the Reckoning is cinched down in a similar fashion you're left with absolutely nothing on the bag to hold day gear. Sure the center zip is outstanding but but not having any exterior pockets would drive me nuts.

Now throw in the lack of interior bladder hanging or hose port and I have a hard time choosing the Reckoning over the "perfect" AMR.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ctsmith]

I prefer the MW and run it in day mode mostly. No lid and no other pockets, the pack alone. Love the unhindered access to the built in large rear pocket where gloves, beanies, flashlight, and food are stashed. I usually have a rifle strapped to one side of the pack and large tripod strapped to the other. For that reason I do not like the center buckles of the Reckoning and prefer the independant buckles of the MW. With center buckles whatever is strapped to boths sides are released when the buckle is released. If not careful it is easy to dump the rifle while accessing the tirpod. With the MW I can remove the tripod and not have to worry about or re-adjust the rifle on the other side. Additionally, I would not run the rifle in the pocket on the side of the Reckoning, the barrel would ride too high for my taste. On the MW I strap a gun bearer on the side PALS and run the butt of the stock several inches below the belt. I run the K connectors in place of the buckles on the compression straps. The flexibility of the K Connectors secure the rifle and tripod much more snug than the rigid buckles that do no work well contorted over the rifle and tripod. Additonal compression straps can alway be added to the MW, thats the beauty of it and a couple are always stashed in the pack just in case.

One side of the belt is open and i move the gun bearer to the belt with the transition from hike to hunt mode. On the other side of the belt is a water bottle holder and a rangefinder pocket.

 

[mmccolloch]

I'm an AMR user. Love the layout and when cinched down it leaves the large back pockets open for quick use items.

My fear with the Reckoning is the lack of exterior center pockets.

When I cinch my AMR down I suck up the bottom two straps (bringing the bottom of the bag up as high as possible) then cinch the 6 side straps leaving just the back pockets accessible. When the Reckoning is cinched down in a similar fashion you're left with absolutely nothing on the bag to hold day gear. Sure the center zip is outstanding but but not having any exterior pockets would drive me nuts.

Now throw in the lack of interior bladder hanging or hose port and I have a hard time choosing the Reckoning over the "perfect" AMR.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess I forgot to mention in my post that I run a large belt pouch on each side of the Reckoning, which gives me a spot to put all of my gear for easy access.

 

[mrbillbrown]

I guess I forgot to mention in my post that I run a large belt pouch on each side of the Reckoning, which gives me a spot to put all of my gear for easy access.

The lower sides of the Reckoning must be set up differently than my AMR. When I cinch the bottom and tuck the sides of my AMR is makes the lower side areas "useless" for belt pouches. Those lower side mounting areas get tucked up for day mode. When I tried to leave lower side pouches and cinch everything up it was very ineffective and didn't work very well for me. If I've got time later today I'll try to shoot some pics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rhunter424]

The lower sides of the Reckoning must be set up differently than my AMR. When I cinch the bottom and tuck the sides of my AMR is makes the lower side areas "useless" for belt pouches. Those lower side mounting areas get tucked up for day mode. When I tried to leave lower side pouches and cinch everything up it was very ineffective and didn't work very well for me. If I've got time later today I'll try to shoot some pics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think this is what you're talking about:

The lower sides seems like an odd place for pouches if the whole bag is compressed, in my opinion.

 

[mrbillbrown]

Yes, kind of. Now cinch that thing down for day mode and those lower side pockets aren't gonna be very functional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jordan Budd]

Yes, kind of. Now cinch that thing down for day mode and those lower side pockets aren't gonna be very functional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here are a couple of pics. I cinch the bottom of the bag as well, there are a couple layers in the bag that give it a little shape, but the bottom is completely cinched. Side pals and back pals are totally good for pockets in that setup.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chasewild]

Had the same thoughts as I was contemplating upgrading my pack -- MW or Reckoning.

These things sold me on the Reckoning:

1. Three center compression straps;
2. Center zip for dumping/loading camp crap;
3. Hip belt pouches, lumbar pouches, and lid pouches create plenty of accessibility for small stuff;
4. Easy modification to carry the water bladder inside;
5. Internal organization is the only issue that doesn't have a quick fix but can be negotiated with usual stuff sacks, etc.

 

[JPD350]

I have the Reckoning and have only used it in day mode so far and I have been more than happy with it compared to my former T2 pack. I guess I am a little different than most when it comes to day mode, I tend to place most gear in the bottom of the pack and cinch up the top 2/3s of the pack, my want is that every time I plop down on the bare ground I can lean against it like a chair and glass also when against a tree it gives the perfect lower back support for a nice siesta. The top section of the reckoning really cinches down!
Here is a pic with my scope strapped in, I can also break it apart and stick it in the center zipper really quick if I don't want it exposed, so far I cinch those side pockets down as tight as they go only having a few small items that I hardly use in them.
View attachment 45545

 

[WyoRob]

I think I'll end up going with the Reckoning, as the meat shelf is a big benefit.

What's the best method for securing a rifle to the side of the pack?

 

[ljalberta]

I usually have a rifle strapped to one side of the pack and large tripod strapped to the other. For that reason I do not like the center buckles of the Reckoning and prefer the independant buckles of the MW. With center buckles whatever is strapped to boths sides are released when the buckle is released. If not careful it is easy to dump the rifle while accessing the tirpod. With the MW I can remove the tripod and not have to worry about or re-adjust the rifle on the other side. Additionally, I would not run the rifle in the pocket on the side of the Reckoning, the barrel would ride too high for my taste. On the MW I strap a gun bearer on the side PALS and run the butt of the stock several inches below the belt.

The side buckles on the the Reckoning are seperate from the center buckles. So you can access the center zip without dropping whatever you have strapped to the side of the pack completely off. The EMR II has the single wrap-around straps that your describing. It also seems to me you could run the gunbearer the same on the Reckoning as the MW.

 

[Jordan Budd]

I think I'll end up going with the Reckoning, as the meat shelf is a big benefit.

What's the best method for securing a rifle to the side of the pack?

Could attach a gun bearer to the pals on a side, the secure it with a strap. Or do the same to the back. Could also attach a pocket to the side or back, leave it unzipped and drop the butt in then run a strap over the barrel. Gun bearer will keep the butt lower than the bottom of the pack. Pocket will obviously keep it a little higher.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk