Download route sheets, admin forms, event documents here

Any queries? Email the coordinators  Sue, Ali & Mick at tgochallenge@gmail.com 

The TGO Challenge Message Board
Start a New Topic 
View Entire Thread
Re: Rucksack - light but supportive? - in defence of Golite

Having tried a Gust in the early 2000's i moved on to a ULA P-2 and when that eventually wore out after plenty of use, I replaced it with a ULA Catalyst. Excellent carry, no faffing when packing, loads of room but easy to synch in for smaller loads. Superb side, front and hip pockets (biggest I've seen!). Proper back system, proper straps and now available to buy in the UK (used to have to get them from USA).

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive? - in defence of Golite

Oh dear, I am getting worried. My old Karrimore weighs in at 1.5kg. Will I be able to walk all the way across Scotland carrying something so heavy or will I now have to go out and spend £175 on a new sack? Or should I diet and loose a bit off my Christmas spare tyre? Decisions, decisions!

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?


My Challenge pack-weight is usually between 12 and 14kg at various stages on the crossing. .

I own a few osprey :

stratos 32 ( old model )
atmos 50 (old model )
exos 58 ( new model )

while i prefer the weight being closer to my my back on the exos, and i find the exos being a nice pack around 10kg, the few times i loaded it to about 14-15kg ( with 10-12 days of food ) i found the belt to be inadequate and the straps not really comfortables.

but as usual with packs its a very personal thing.

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

Goodness, look what happens when I go out to work for the day (yes, I know that it's Sunday). Al's post seems a long time in the past now but I think that I need to defend myself.

Just a few extra points then:-
1) I'm using the old style Gust and Jam, which haven't suffered from the redesign of the Pinnacle and new Jam. The Gust weighs in at 570g, the Jam at 550g. I think you'd have to agree that that's a significant difference from 1100-1200g.
2) F*rting about, what f*rting about? Prior to owning these sacks, when I had a Jaguar, I had a system for packing the thing. I've never been in the habit of just ramming things in any old how. So all I've had to do is change the system and it quickly became automatic. Slowman, I challenge you to a rucksack packing race and I'd bet that I'd be no slower than you! On the rare occasions when there's been a sense of urgency, I may have been less scrupulous than usual and had to rearrange things later - but the same applied when I carried heavier packs; plus ca change.
3) It royally p*sses me off that Golite have changed their approach and gone down the safe road of additional extras and more "robustness". They were onto something when they adopted the Ray Jardine philosophy and I looked forward to even lighter and comfortable sacks appearing in the future. I'd guess that there will be other (exclusively US) companies which will produce the type of sacks which I want and I'll have to do my research when my pair of Golites eventually disintegrate.
4) I'll concede that these packs aren't built for very heavy loads. At much over 16kg, they do become uncomfortable and the hipbelts fail to work, but do many of us on the Challenge still tote such punishing loads?
5) A personal choice? Yes, of course and many will continue to favour a more rigid structure. Yet these packs work for me and I was keen to redress the bias which appeared to be developing against simple sacks. No doubt the debate will continue!

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

Mr Crawford, Sir (Esteemed Vetter, genuflect, genuflect, I am not worthy etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.)

So it's rucksacks at dawn, eh? I'll have to be careful who I nominate as my second. It can't be Mad'n'Bad Andy as he's never ready at dawn.

Lord Elpus is also a bit on the tardy side of punctuality as well... but his rucksack is always perfectly packed; There's no silly dangly bits hanging all over the shop like on Andy's pack. Very dapper, is Lord Elpus.

I suppose I would have to choose Roger Boston, as he packs the same pack as me. And he has those bionic knees which makes packing in a confined tent so much easier. He just flicks a switch and the powerful hydraulics launch him effortlessly to standing straight and tall while I'm still rolling around onto my belly before slowly getting to my knees and eventually an erect position.

I am sorry that you are royally p*ssed off with Messrs Golite. They should be ashamed of themselves. Going about p*ssing off TGO Vetters really isn't British!

Oh. Hang on.

Looking forward to sharing a few drams at Montrose, Colin. I think the last time we did that was with Waldo in the tin roofed back room at Culra in 1997.

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?


Forget the faux grovelling which I'm absorbing with the necessary cartload of salt. I will be more than happy though to accept a large Lagavulin in the Park.

Gracious, that overnight at Culra takes me back - 1997, I think it was, both of us young(ish) and callow at the time. Seems a long time ago now.

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

You chaps are really spoiled when it comes to choice of a lightweight pack. If you are a chapess, well - you are not well catered for. Having the correct back length and also women specific shoulder straps are two aspects I've found crucial. The original W Jam was brilliant and available in various back lengths. Unfortunately shorter backs mean fewer litres so I never could quite squash enough in for the challenge though it has done me proud on shorter trips. I now use a Lightwave W Wildtrek which fits well. I would have preferred the lighter Fastpack but the available back lengths are not short enough. Well, that's my two penn'orth anyway.

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

Aaaah, the Karrimor Jaguar 65 (or even better the earlier Jaguar E65 if you are old enough to remember it) is/was the pack of choice for the true hill connoisseur. Alas many are sadly over the hill, mine replaced by a Golite Terrano 70 but not a patch on the comfort and functionality of the old Jaguar and already showing signs of wear after only two years. Karrimors "new " Jaguar weighs a ton. My average Challenge pack departure weight =18 kgs.


Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

I still have a Jaguar 65, perhaps the best rucksack I've ever had. It's light enough, packs and carries very well - trouble is, after 20 years, it's now completely worn out.

I'd pay a lot of money for a new one. New stuff just isn't up to the mark.


Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

John J
I still have a Jaguar 65, perhaps the best rucksack I've ever had. It's light enough, packs and carries very well - trouble is, after 20 years, it's now completely worn out.

It goes with your knees though John.

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

Aye, they're completely knackered too!


Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

JJ. The old Jaguar 65 often appears on eBay - and they seem to sell quite well. In fact I sold Miss W's last year for £50.

Obviously still a popular choice for the discerning backpacker.

Re: Rucksack - light but supportive?

Judith, I haven't yet read through all the other responses, but I use a Golite Quest which is a fine sac for up to about 14kg, but I insert a stiffened Karrimor backpad which is easily shaped for your own lordosis, or to create an airgap of sorts, depending on your individual needs. Just an idea!