Stone Glacier Sky packs 2014

[ohhiitznik]

Kurt those packs look awesome. I'd love to give one of those a try on a trip to compare it to my Bikini Kifaru

 

[ChadH]

I'm curious how the angle of the load lifters compares to the LL's on a Mystery Ranch Metcalf. It's hard to tell from the video, since the frame is all black. I find the Metcalf "functional", but maybe not "optimal". Anyone with any first hand? Also, the size listed is 5100ci, does that include the lid (500ci) or is it before the lid? I assume it includes it...

 

[PJG]

I'm curious how the angle of the load lifters compares to the LL's on a Mystery Ranch Metcalf. It's hard to tell from the video, since the frame is all black. I find the Metcalf "functional", but maybe not "optimal". Anyone with any first hand? Also, the size listed is 5100ci, does that include the lid (500ci) or is it before the lid? I assume it includes it...

Chad, I currently have a Stone Glacier 5100, and also used a Mystery Ranch Metcalf the first year that they came out. However, I sold my Mystery Ranch Metcalf bag as quick as I got it. But, from what I can remember I really did not care for the load lifters on the Metcalf bag, I found then to be just about worthless, maybe I was messing something up on my end. As far as the load lifters go on the Stone Glacier, I do get some lift from them, but Kurt does not recommend to crank down on them. I currently walk for three to four days a week for an hour to two with anywhere from 60 to 90 pounds of sand bags in the Stone Glacier pack. The majority of the weight is defiantly on my hips, but I also do notice some on my shoulders. I snug the load lifters just enough to keep the pack tight to my back, but do not crank down on them to the point where I feel the weight shift to the front of my shoulders. I personally don't mind carrying some weight on my shoulders, if I want to I can always loosen the shoulder straps to the point where all of the weight is on my hips, but I personally do not like this feel. I am sure you will get varying opinions on this, but at least for me the load lifters on the Stone Glacier are more noticeable than I remember the ones on the Mystery Ranch Metcalf, I hope this helps.

I can not comment on the size if it includes the lid or not.

 

[ChadH]

Chad, I currently have a Stone Glacier 5100, and also used a Mystery Ranch Metcalf the first year that they came out. However, I sold my Mystery Ranch Metcalf bag as quick as I got it. But, from what I can remember I really did not care for the load lifters on the Metcalf bag, I found then to be just about worthless, maybe I was messing something up on my end. As far as the load lifters go on the Stone Glacier, I do get some lift from them, but Kurt does not recommend to crank down on them. I currently walk for three to four days a week for an hour to two with anywhere from 60 to 90 pounds of sand bags in the Stone Glacier pack. The majority of the weight is defiantly on my hips, but I also do notice some on my shoulders. I snug the load lifters just enough to keep the pack tight to my back, but do not crank down on them to the point where I feel the weight shift to the front of my shoulders. I personally don't mind carrying some weight on my shoulders, if I want to I can always loosen the shoulder straps to the point where all of the weight is on my hips, but I personally do not like this feel. I am sure you will get varying opinions on this, but at least for me the load lifters on the Stone Glacier are more noticeable than I remember the ones on the Mystery Ranch Metcalf, I hope this helps.

I can not comment on the size if it includes the lid or not.

Thanks PJG. I appreciate the response. I've done well with the Metcalf, but find it a touch small. It works great for "Day Hunt" duties, but I'm with you on the load lifters for extended wear. The best thing about it, honestly, is that the NICE frame is built like a tank and you pretty much can load it up, throw it around, do what ever you want, and it is fine.

Have you had a chance to use your Sky 5100 to pack out yet? How does it carry with, say, a whole boned out deer? I'm also wondering if there is a difference in carry when the main bag is full and if you just use the pack as a freighter. Any experience?

 

[PJG]

Chad, no experience yet packing out any meat. I do really like the load shelf on the Stone Glacier, Kurt really has a good design on the load shelf in my opinion. I haven't had the bag loaded up and the meat shelf at the same time.

I agree that the Nice frames are built like a tank. I ran a Nice frame for years. So far the Stone Glacier is more comfortable for me anyway, but I have only had it a few weeks. Time will only tell, but I'm happy so far.

 

[Hawkeye]

The brown truck just dropped mine off today and have had it loaded with some weight and humped the stairs a few times. I loaded it up with 50 lbs of Traeger pellets and it felt really good. I felt no weight in the shoulders and the adjustment in the shoulder straps has allowed this pack to truley fit my body frame in about 1 minute of adjustment.

I will say there are straps everywhere on this thing. I hope I get it put back together the right way.

 

[Tanner]

I expect my waist to be 31" after a summer of training, will the SG 3pc belt still cinch down tight on me?

Thanks,

Tanner

 

[GibsonKuenzi]

Tanner,

I have a sky 7400 with the 3 piece belt and power pulls. I'm a 31inch waist and it cinchs down tight with some room to spare. A guy might be able to go 30" on it but not much smaller. I could get a picture of mine if that would help. I also have the power pulls so that makes a difference.

On a general note, I've been using this pack for a couple weeks now hiking around with sand at 70lbs. After getting it setup I love the way it carries weight.

A couple Things I love about the pack so far-
1) the way to carry loads: I love how fast it is to strap a sandbag in it
2) the adjustability: I am 6' and 160lbs and was able to set it up perfect for my body. I have a normal curved back and it fits great
3) the compressibility: it's very easy to compress this pack from 0ci to 7400. Love that part of it.
4) I could go on, I'll do a write up later on it when I have more miles under the belt.

Things to note
1) It will need a rain cover for pnw rain, but that's no surprise
2) I bought the 7400 because it's a minimal weight gain for 2000 ci over the 5100. But there is a lot of strap length when I have it compressed down. I'm gonna try and get some of the mystery ranch Velcro deals.

-Gibson

 

[Tanner]

Gibson,

Thanks for the information, that's exactly what I needed to know. If you've got a picture handy I'd love to see what kind of room you have left in the belt after cinching it down tight. I imagine with pants/jacket on it'd only help the scenario, too.

Sounds like the 7400 will be a better option for me than a Barney's Pinnacle.

Tanner

 

[charvey9]

Finally got out this past weekend to check some trail cameras and hike around with the pack. I had it loaded up with about 40lbs, and very impressed with how it carries up and down the slopes. It really cinches down well, and minimal barreling for its size while descending steep clearcuts and log chutes.

The minimalist approach is a big change, going from my previous Eberlestock and Tezing packs that had more pockets. I really love the back duffel style access to the whole pack with the full length zipper. It really reduces on the digging down to find items. However, it can be a bit like rummaging around your junk drawer at home unless you get some additional bags/pull-outs to organize your stuff. The pockets in the pack are a nice idea, but everything I put in them fell out during my hike and migrated toward the bottom of the bag. This probably will not be an issue when the pack is full, but when mostly empty there is nothing to hold the pockets closed. Although they would add some weight, zippers or elastic bands on to hold the top closed might be a good compromise. I really got acustomed to my individual pockets for everything on the Tenzing and am just going to need to learn how to pack differently with additional pull-outs, but I think the tradeoff is well worth it.

 

[123 4/8 P&Y]

Pics pics pics...

 

[charvey9]

Pics pics pics...

This is the best I have. It was raining, so was also my first opportunity to test out the new KUIU rain gear. I was in a bit of a hurry to get down to the bottom and back up before dark, so forgot to correctly cinch down all the compression straps before descending but this is the 7400 in bivy mode with no lid.

 

[Pete from SCHNEE'S]

Anyone in or around Bozeman, come stope by Schnee's downtown to try on the entire Stone Glacier line and talk backpack hunting with us! Look forward to seeing you.

-Pete

 

[Yellowknife]

My Sky 7400 got dropped off last night. A few initial impressions:

1. This thing is big! Still not as big as my Barneys, but getting into that league. For 90% of my uses for the pack, I could have gotten away with the smaller size, but there are few things more aggravating that trying to stuff a big load through a small hole, so I elected to go with the larger bag opening of the 7400. I've got a few hunts coming up that might result is some big furry hides needing packed out.

Sky 7400 vs Barneys Pinnacle



For comparison, this is my old Terminus vs Barneys.



2. One thing that I was pleased to see is that the FULL capacity of the bag is usable. Many traditional style packs (including the Terminus) include the snow collar extension in the volume calculation. Sure it can be used, but they will typically "muffin top" in an aggravating way when you overload them, and you have to try and compress and control the load with the little lid perched way up on top. Since the Sky packs utilize a cordura main bag bag extension and a big lid to keep things under control, the snow collar is minimal and not designed to create additional space.



3. When used for more normal trips and loads, you can compress the top down to what SG calls "bivy mode", but still use the lid for the additional organization and space. This will likely be the way I will use it 90% of the time.



Total wt was 3 oz more than the Terminus.

Yk

 

[muleman]

Thanks YK. I have been having the 7400 vs 5100 debate with myself. My gut feel is to pay the unbearable couple ounce penalty and get the 7400 for when you need it.

 

[mtnclimber]

Thanks for taking the time to post pics YK. That sky looks quite a bit bigger than the terminus! look forward to hearing what you have to say about it as it was in my budget until a Leica rangefinder made its way in! Ill be sticking with a barneys bag and more time in the cub this year.

 

[O'Grady]

Has anyone packed out bone in moose quarters with a SG pack? Im from the yukon and trying to find a pack that will do it all. Ive narrowed it down to a Sky 7400 or a barneys. Any suggestions?

 

[SJ-AK]

Has anyone packed out bone in moose quarters with a SG pack? Im from the yukon and trying to find a pack that will do it all. Ive narrowed it down to a Sky 7400 or a barneys. Any suggestions?

I have packed bone in moose quarters with my SG (on the load shelf). However it was only a spike moose so not the best test. It easily handled the weight of the spike quarters and a decent amount of gear in pack itself. I seem to recall enough excess strap to think that a full big bull quarter would fit, but I can't be sure.

If all you are doing is moose hunting I would go with a Barneys. If you are mountain hunting and occasionally moose hunting I would go with a SG. Just my opinion.

 

[Matt W.]

...If all you are doing is moose hunting I would go with a Barneys. If you are mountain hunting and occasionally moose hunting I would go with a SG. Just my opinion.

This....

 

[Yellowknife]

Has anyone packed out bone in moose quarters with a SG pack? Im from the yukon and trying to find a pack that will do it all. Ive narrowed it down to a Sky 7400 or a barneys. Any suggestions?

Although the Sky has a decently large top opening, the Barneys is designed big enough to swallow a medium size battleship and will be easier to wrestle bone-in moose quarters into. The standard Barneys also comes with a bunch of exterior pockets, which let you stash your stuff while the bag is full of moose quarter. For straight moose packing, you can also pull the bag off and pack with just the frame.



The only drawback to the Barneys for moose is that it's not really a good day hunt pack.

I'm sure the Sky would also work for moose if needed, and I'd probably use the load sling if I ever have to pack out a bone-in moose with mine. Much prefer mechanized moose packing though, so it may be a while before I find out.

I don't think you are going to go wrong with either choice. I've used my Barneys in the mountains quite a bit now, and really like it. I also really like the SG's weight and ability to shrink down. It's also the far better choice for off-season recreational use (i.e. backpacking). I think the advice re: making the decision based on your typical usage given above is spot on.

Yk