The Kifaru Tahr

[rhunter424]

I didn't realize how tall the bag was haha. From the spec's it's almost a foot higher than the stays.

 

[Aron Snyder]

The photos do make it look tall, but we did add a little so the collar would work (when the pack is at 3,400) for a lid.

I didn't realize how tall the bag was haha. From the spec's it's almost a foot higher than the stays.

 

[Tuscor]

So with the collar it is substantially bigger then? Any indication of the volume with collar included? Just an estimate even?

 

[Aron Snyder]

It's closer to 3,700 ish fully expanded

So with the collar it is substantially bigger then? Any indication of the volume with collar included? Just an estimate even?

 

[russ_outdoors]

I was really hoping the Tahr would come in a lot lighter. I mean the Camp Bag comes in at 0.8 lbs and 4800 ci with a zipper and roll top. The Tahr is 1.75 lbs and only 3400 ci. Nearly an extra pound and less volume...

 

[COlineman78]

I was really hoping the Tahr would come in a lot lighter. I mean the Camp Bag comes in at 0.8 lbs and 4800 ci with a zipper and roll top. The Tahr is 1.75 lbs and only 3400 ci. Nearly an extra pound and less volume...

But the camp bag doesn't hold itself to the frame. The material that makes up the volume is not the heavy part; it's all of the webbing, straps and buckles that add up. The Cargo Panel weighs 1oz less than the Tahr, which would be required to carry your camp bag, so total weight (2lb 8oz) would be more than the Tahr. Or at the very least a Grab-it with a couple compression straps (~7oz) would make it 1lb 4 oz so only 0.5lbs lighter for something not quite as functional. Can't compare apples to oranges. By this comparison My EMR2 sucks because a contractor trash bag is so much lighter and has more volume.

 

[dotman]

But the camp bag doesn't hold itself to the frame. The material that makes up the volume is not the heavy part; it's all of the webbing, straps and buckles that add up. The Cargo Panel weighs 1oz less than the Tahr, which would be required to carry your camp bag, so total weight (2lb 3oz) would be more than the Tahr. Can't compare apples to oranges. By this comparison My EMR2 sucks because a contractor trash bag is so much lighter and has more volume.

Actually a camp bag can easily be mounted to a frame without using anything but a few extra compression straps, it does attach to the top loops on the frame.

 

[COlineman78]

Actually a camp bag can easily be mounted to a frame without using anything but a few extra compression straps, it does attach to the top loops on the frame.

Looked at the pics after posting and it looks like they're using a Grab-it with a couple compression straps, but still giving up a lot of functionality. Grab-it is 5oz and I am assuming each compression strap is 1-2 oz, so total would be in the 1.25lb range with the camp bag.

 

[russ_outdoors]

Actually a camp bag can easily be mounted to a frame without using anything but a few extra compression straps, it does attach to the top loops on the frame. The extra straps can't weigh too much.

^^^ This... A couple of vertical daisy chains up the back and and a handful of loops here and there and the weight would be closer to a pound. Heck, even drop a little material by reducing the volume a bit. I was just hoping Kifaru would produce a bag to compete with the lighter weight versions on the market like the Stone Glacier Solo.

 

[russ_outdoors]

Looked at the pics after posting and it looks like they're using a Grab-it with a couple compression straps, but still giving up a lot of functionality. Grab-it is 5oz and I am assuming each compression strap is 1-2 oz, so total would be in the 1.25lb range with the camp bag.

Not sure what functionality is lost... the front zipper on the Camp Bag actually adds some IMHO. Sew in some straps and anchorage points on the bottom and you could eliminate the Grab-It and still be able to place things between the frame and the bag.

 

[dotman]

Looked at the pics after posting and it looks like they're using a Grab-it with a couple compression straps, but still giving up a lot of functionality. Grab-it is 5oz and I am assuming each compression strap is 1-2 oz, so total would be in the 1.25lb range with the camp bag.

Grab it is not needed to secure the camp bag. But most would use it anyway no matter the setup but not needed if you want to just run a camp bag. Also if you want an even smaller capacity the hanging meat bag is pretty much a smaller camp bag without zipper.

The diff on this is I have a camp bag and have secured it to my frame with little effort, not just looking at pics . Back to the new bag.

 

[rhunter424]

Regarding the tahr's weight-

Aron can confirm, but given Kifaru's past spec's with weights on the product page I'm guessing that the posted final weight of 1lb 12 oz includes the set of 3rd compression straps, the meat shelf and a basic lid.

Assuming that, you could probably remove 8 oz by cutting out the meat shelf, using only 2 compression straps and no lid.

• Standard lid = 3.5 oz
• Meat shelf = 3 oz
• Set of compression straps w/ buckles = 4 oz?

 

[Aron Snyder]

^^^ This... A couple of vertical daisy chains up the back and and a handful of loops here and there and the weight would be closer to a pound. Heck, even drop a little material by reducing the volume a bit. I was just hoping Kifaru would produce a bag to compete with the lighter weight versions on the market like the Stone Glacier Solo.

I normally don't like to do this on a forum, but here's a few things I think you're not figuring in to your #'s.

The Stone Glacier Solo that I have weighs in at 3 lbs 10 oz's (frame and bag)

When comparing apples to apples (24" Ultralight Hunting Frame) and Tahr, you're looking at 4 lb 8 oz's.

Now if you figure the Tahr has a "over the top strap" and it can be taken off, you can deduct 1.75 oz

The compression straps on the Tahr are 8 inches longer (all 11 of them) and the Tahr also has two vertical compression straps for the lid. We did that because when loading up moose antlers and bear hides we the extra length was handy. Those of you who are UL guys could cut those down if you wanted and save an additional 2 oz's.

As far as size goes, the Tahr is a conservative 3,400 CI, but it's actually closer to 3,700-3,800 when fully expanded. The Solo is 2,700 and doesn't have the same option.

The Tahr was also weighed with a standard lid, but when comparing the Tahr to the Solo it would need to be weighed without the lid, as the Solo doesn't use one.....so that's another 3.5 ounce deduction.

We do come in a bit heavier (apples to apples) than the Solo, but it's actually like 2.5-3 ounces difference and not 16 oz.

I will add that we are definitely not trying to get into the "who can be the lightest" race, but I did want to throw out those things so people had more realistic numbers to compare.

Stone Glacier does make a great pack and I am in no way taking anything away from the Solo. The Tahr was built to function like the Solo (and others as well), but offer a little more versatility (longer compression straps and lid/pocket options), but still give the same type of offering.

Hope that made some since......it's early and I haven't finished my coffee yet

 

[MT_Wyatt]

I normally don't like to do this on a forum, but here's a few things I think you're not figuring in to your #'s.

The Stone Glacier Solo that I have weighs in at 3 lbs 10 oz's (frame and bag)

When comparing apples to apples (24" Ultralight Hunting Frame) and Tahr, you're looking at 4 lb 8 oz's.

Now if you figure the Tahr has a "over the top strap" and it can be taken off, you can deduct 1.75 oz

The compression straps on the Tahr are 8 inches longer (all 11 of them) and the Tahr also has two vertical compression straps for the lid. We did that because when loading up moose antlers and bear hides we the extra length was handy. Those of you who are UL guys could cut those down if you wanted and save an additional 2 oz's.

As far as size goes, the Tahr is a conservative 3,400 CI, but it's actually closer to 3,700-3,800 when fully expanded. The Solo is 2,700 and doesn't have the same option.

The Tahr was also weighed with a standard lid, but when comparing the Tahr to the Solo it would need to be weighed without the lid, as the Solo doesn't use one.....so that's another 3.5 ounce deduction.

We do come in a bit heavier (apples to apples) than the Solo, but it's actually like 2.5-3 ounces difference and not 16 oz.

I will add that we are definitely not trying to get into the "who can be the lightest" race, but I did want to throw out those things so people had more realistic numbers to compare.

Stone Glacier does make a great pack and I am in no way taking anything away from the Solo. The Tahr was built to function like the Solo (and others as well), but offer a little more versatility (longer compression straps and lid/pocket options), but still give the same type of offering.

Hope that made some since......it's early and I haven't finished my coffee yet

Aron - thanks for clarifying the bag differences, I appreciate reading why you guys design things the way you do.

Since you are comparing to a backpack you have in hand, I'm curious if you can comment on how the setup rides on your back with the ultralight duplex frame - I'm running a Krux frame right now, and I'd describe it as feeling super "flat" and torsionally rigid. The solo bag doesn't really add or subtract from that at all. How would this Tahr setup compare? I haven't used a duplex or Kifaru bag to date. If you don't want to get into it I understand, not looking for you to knock the product, I'd just like to hear how/what I could expect to be different.

The SG solo is 3400 cu in for those comparing these two, I used it with a lid for a 5 day trip and needed every inch last month.

-James

 

[PJG]

The biggest differences for me between the two for me was that the weight of the pack was carried on my shoulders when using the Stone Glacier, whereas the weight was carried on my hips using the Kifaru. My shoulders do not last long carrying the majority of the load. Once I got over 40 pounds the Stone Glacier was pretty uncomfortable.

Also, even though the new Ultralight Kifaru frame runs vertical stays the frame itself does not feel flat. The padding material that they are using really molds to the curvature of the back, to the point that it feels like you are running curved stays in it.

 

[ChrisS]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I love reading about process of designing these things and what goes into it.

 

[Aron Snyder]

haha, we must have been typing at the same time.

What you types is pretty much exact and yes, it was weighed with all you listed above.

Regarding the tahr's weight-

Aron can confirm, but given Kifaru's past spec's with weights on the product page I'm guessing that the posted final weight of 1lb 12 oz includes the set of 3rd compression straps, the meat shelf and a basic lid.

Assuming that, you could probably remove 8 oz by cutting out the meat shelf, using only 2 compression straps and no lid.

• Standard lid = 3.5 oz
• Meat shelf = 3 oz
• Set of compression straps w/ buckles = 4 oz?

 

[Aron Snyder]

If you like hearing about it, I'll go into things into a little more depth with the Tahr as well as the Argali and Markhor.

When the Tahr was originally designed, it was very naked and weighed 1lb. A few of us tested it for a couple weeks and decided that it was lacking in to many areas.

1) If you killed something the compression straps were to short for a large load
2) Not having any real pockets or way to attach pockets sucked (for us anyway)
3) Only having two compression straps was fine for backpacking, but the option of a 3rd was worth the weight penalty
4) Using a UL type material for the load shelf was great in theory, but tree stands, shed antlers and things like that rubbed holes in it quickly and it only saved a fraction of an ounce in weight.

There were several other things that came into play with the Tahr to get the final product, but those stick out in my mind the most.

Kifaru as well as myself are not locking to get into the UL war and the Argali and Tahr are as light as we feel we could go before sacrificing durability, functionality and possible options. When we tested lighter fabric, webbing and buckles we quickly found out that the small weight savings was not worth the long term outcome.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I love reading about process of designing these things and what goes into it.

 

[russ_outdoors]

I normally don't like to do this on a forum, but here's a few things I think you're not figuring in to your #'s.

The Stone Glacier Solo that I have weighs in at 3 lbs 10 oz's (frame and bag)

When comparing apples to apples (24" Ultralight Hunting Frame) and Tahr, you're looking at 4 lb 8 oz's.

Now if you figure the Tahr has a "over the top strap" and it can be taken off, you can deduct 1.75 oz

The compression straps on the Tahr are 8 inches longer (all 11 of them) and the Tahr also has two vertical compression straps for the lid. We did that because when loading up moose antlers and bear hides we the extra length was handy. Those of you who are UL guys could cut those down if you wanted and save an additional 2 oz's.

As far as size goes, the Tahr is a conservative 3,400 CI, but it's actually closer to 3,700-3,800 when fully expanded. The Solo is 2,700 and doesn't have the same option.

The Tahr was also weighed with a standard lid, but when comparing the Tahr to the Solo it would need to be weighed without the lid, as the Solo doesn't use one.....so that's another 3.5 ounce deduction.

We do come in a bit heavier (apples to apples) than the Solo, but it's actually like 2.5-3 ounces difference and not 16 oz.

I will add that we are definitely not trying to get into the "who can be the lightest" race, but I did want to throw out those things so people had more realistic numbers to compare.

Stone Glacier does make a great pack and I am in no way taking anything away from the Solo. The Tahr was built to function like the Solo (and others as well), but offer a little more versatility (longer compression straps and lid/pocket options), but still give the same type of offering.

Hope that made some since......it's early and I haven't finished my coffee yet

Very helpful information Aron. I might suggest you add a full weight breakdown on the Kifaru website. My impression was that the 1 lb 12 oz was for the main bag only. A "minimum weight" spec would be helpful for anal retentive weight freak guys like me. I don't cut the handle off my tooth brush... I leave it home...

 

[Aron Snyder]

Very helpful information Aron. I might suggest you add a full weight breakdown on the Kifaru website. My impression was that the 1 lb 12 oz was for the main bag only. A "minimum weight" spec would be helpful for anal retentive weight freak guys like me. I don't cut the handle off my tooth brush... I leave it home...[/QUOTE

That's is supposed to be up now, but the IT guy has sick kids It will be up as soon as he gets back to the office.