Forums: Climbing Information: Gear Heads:
Cilo 40L vs 45L?
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Gear Heads

Premier Sponsor:

 


retro


Feb 1, 2009, 2:34 PM
Post #1 of 37 (1875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Cilo 40L vs 45L?
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Sorry guys...another Cilo question:

Which do you think would be better suited for 20-45 minute approaches with the occasional 1-2 hours and multi-pitch ice climbs in the White Mountains?

I did own the 40L before and loved it, but I see that the 45's are a bit lighter and can carry more. Is this too big for cragging and day trips with gear, or can the ability to cinch this thing down negate any worries of that? Anyone climb ice with this pack before? How did it handle? How about low angle ice? Did the pack interfere with the helmet when looking up the route?

Thanks again for your input folks! Wink
Grammy


k.l.k


Feb 1, 2009, 5:03 PM
Post #2 of 37 (1847 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I'm running a 45l for daytrips in the backcountry. Working great-- cinches down to nothing. My favorite pack in years, so far.

I'm 6'2," though, so check the sizing.


btreanor


Feb 1, 2009, 6:27 PM
Post #3 of 37 (1833 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 121

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

As I said in the other thread, the 40B is perfect. Usable for a day cragging or an overnight technical route. The amazing compressibility of Cilogear makes larger size packs usable for smaller tasks. That being said, I pretty much only use my 40B now; the last time it actually opted for the 60L was a 5 day backpacking trip where I was carrying the "guide's load" (extra sh|te, first aid kids, etc., etc.). For all my personal trips, half day to three day two night, it's the 40B.

The pack climbs very well, but like anything else (especially Cilogear, which is made to be customizable), you have to use it right. How you pack with determine both how well it climbs and how much head mobility you have with a helmet.

I've never used the 45L, but it seems hard to go wrong with either one.

Brian


kane_schutzman


Feb 1, 2009, 7:15 PM
Post #4 of 37 (1824 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 14, 2005
Posts: 896

Re: [btreanor] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

You can't add more space, but you can take it away.I'd go big


retro


Feb 1, 2009, 7:37 PM
Post #5 of 37 (1820 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [kane_schutzman] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks you guys. I am still curious how it climbs, though the 40 climbed like a dream. I can't imagine 5 liters will make much much of a difference in climbing performance. The 45's are a little lighter too, so that is always a bonus.

Tough call...Unsure


retro


Feb 1, 2009, 8:19 PM
Post #6 of 37 (1807 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [btreanor] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

btreanor wrote:
I've never used the 45L, but it seems hard to go wrong with either one.
Brian

I hear that! Thanks for the input Brian! Wink


justinboening


Feb 1, 2009, 8:52 PM
Post #7 of 37 (1798 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 1, 2006
Posts: 119

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Kind sir, the 40B is going to, in my opinion, be a significantly better climbing pack. Yes, it's true, the volume is not substantially different, but the 45 is taller than the 40, causing, as you previously mentioned it might, the pack to interfere on low angle terrain. In fact, I think the 45 is as tall as the 60, if you've ever seen one of those. Go for the 40. It's plenty light enough, it's plenty big enough. Enjoy.


retro


Feb 1, 2009, 9:45 PM
Post #8 of 37 (1773 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [justinboening] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

justinboening wrote:
Go for the 40. It's plenty light enough, it's plenty big enough. Enjoy.

Thanks Justin!


gunkiemike


Feb 2, 2009, 9:59 PM
Post #9 of 37 (1707 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2266

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I've never filled the 45L even when I have the fat rope and a dozen screws, First Aid kit, belay jacket, Thermos, water btl in its insulated cover. And the back panel DOES hit my (Meteor) helmet, but I hear it's not hard to cut the panel to stop this - I just haven't done it yet. I think a 40L would be big enough but you'll be happy with either. Yea, 5L isn't much diff.


retro


Feb 2, 2009, 10:05 PM
Post #10 of 37 (1701 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [gunkiemike] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

gunkiemike wrote:
I've never filled the 45L even when I have the fat rope and a dozen screws, First Aid kit, belay jacket, Thermos, water btl in its insulated cover. And the back panel DOES hit my (Meteor) helmet,

Thanks Gunkiemike! Come to think of it...I never maxed out my 40L. I am definitely leaning toward that one...should I decide to give up the Chernobyl....which I am not sure I am prepared to do!! Unsure


crackers


Feb 3, 2009, 12:48 AM
Post #11 of 37 (1673 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 20, 2005
Posts: 416

Re: 40B [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

btreanor wrote:
As I said in the other thread, the 40B is perfect. Usable for a day cragging or an overnight technical route. The amazing compressibility of Cilogear makes larger size packs usable for smaller tasks. That being said, I pretty much only use my 40B now; the last time it actually opted for the 60L was a 5 day backpacking trip where I was carrying the "guide's load" (extra sh|te, first aid kids, etc., etc.). For all my personal trips, half day to three day two night, it's the 40B.

Thanks for the kind words Brian and all the rest of you!

The 45L is the pack that's shown up in those awesome pictures in the last, oh, seven Patagonia catalogs. That said Mr Retro, you want the 40B if your torso is under 20 inches...

The new 40B and 45 are both quite a bit lighter than the old packs. They're both made here in Portland, Oregon. But the 40B does have a shorter back panel length than the 45L / 60L sized packs as Justin suggested quite correctly.

The guys in those catalogs are using the 45 in Patagonia, in the himalayas and all that jazz. They're using 30L's and 40B's at home for days or even weekends. I suspect that you'll have plenty of room in the 40B for all of your stuff.

I've gotten it down to about 150 emails to respond to from the OR shutdown, and I should be caught up by tomorrow. (I hope.)


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 2:18 AM
Post #12 of 37 (1652 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [crackers] 40B [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

crackers wrote:
btreanor wrote:
As I said in the other thread, the 40B is perfect. Usable for a day cragging or an overnight technical route. The amazing compressibility of Cilogear makes larger size packs usable for smaller tasks. That being said, I pretty much only use my 40B now; the last time it actually opted for the 60L was a 5 day backpacking trip where I was carrying the "guide's load" (extra sh|te, first aid kids, etc., etc.). For all my personal trips, half day to three day two night, it's the 40B.

Thanks for the kind words Brian and all the rest of you!

The 45L is the pack that's shown up in those awesome pictures in the last, oh, seven Patagonia catalogs. That said Mr Retro, you want the 40B if your torso is under 20 inches...

The new 40B and 45 are both quite a bit lighter than the old packs. They're both made here in Portland, Oregon. But the 40B does have a shorter back panel length than the 45L / 60L sized packs as Justin suggested quite correctly.

The guys in those catalogs are using the 45 in Patagonia, in the himalayas and all that jazz. They're using 30L's and 40B's at home for days or even weekends. I suspect that you'll have plenty of room in the 40B for all of your stuff.

I've gotten it down to about 150 emails to respond to from the OR shutdown, and I should be caught up by tomorrow. (I hope.)

I totally agree with what crackers is saying. My 45L has seen the most use on big alpine days and internationally. The pack has been through hell and back and there are only a few things wrong with it. I haven't used my 60L since I got the 45L, I've just been loaning it out to friends (including some attempted new routing in South America).

And now that I have a 30L, I barely take out the 45L for local trips. I've put over 30 days of use on a 30L pack so far this ice season and it is holding up beautifully. If you think you might want to carrying a bit more than the bare essentials, the 40B is the perfect pack in my opinion.

I'm 6'2'' and never have a problem carrying the 45L on an alpine climb as long as I take out the plastic frame sheet. I don't know why you'd be climbing with it, as the pack is so much lighter and comfortable for climbing without it.


(This post was edited by dps on Feb 3, 2009, 2:21 AM)


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 2:34 AM
Post #13 of 37 (1644 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [dps] 40B [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dps wrote:
I'm 6'2'' and never have a problem carrying the 45L on an alpine climb as long as I take out the plastic frame sheet. I don't know why you'd be climbing with it, as the pack is so much lighter and comfortable for climbing without it.

Yah....I always kept the framesheet in so stuff in the pack (Screw pouch, helmet, biners, etc...) were not jabbing me in the back, but you do save some weight with it out I suppose.


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 2:37 AM
Post #14 of 37 (1639 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [retro] 40B [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I still have the foam pad in the pack at all times.

If I am carrying a bunch of stuff into a climbing area, I will throw the framesheet in and toss the plastic framesheet before I start climbing.


shermanr6


Feb 3, 2009, 2:40 AM
Post #15 of 37 (1636 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 13, 2006
Posts: 79

Re: [btreanor] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

btreanor wrote:
As I said in the other thread, the 40B is perfect. Usable for a day cragging or an overnight technical route. The amazing compressibility of Cilogear makes larger size packs usable for smaller tasks. That being said, I pretty much only use my 40B now; the last time it actually opted for the 60L was a 5 day backpacking trip where I was carrying the "guide's load" (extra sh|te, first aid kids, etc., etc.). For all my personal trips, half day to three day two night, it's the 40B.

The pack climbs very well, but like anything else (especially Cilogear, which is made to be customizable), you have to use it right. How you pack with determine both how well it climbs and how much head mobility you have with a helmet.

I've never used the 45L, but it seems hard to go wrong with either one.

Brian

DANG! that must be a heavy load!


btreanor


Feb 3, 2009, 3:12 AM
Post #16 of 37 (1617 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 121

Re: [shermanr6] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shermanr6 wrote:
btreanor wrote:
As I said in the other thread, the 40B is perfect. Usable for a day cragging or an overnight technical route. The amazing compressibility of Cilogear makes larger size packs usable for smaller tasks. That being said, I pretty much only use my 40B now; the last time it actually opted for the 60L was a 5 day backpacking trip where I was carrying the "guide's load" (extra sh|te, first aid kids, etc., etc.). For all my personal trips, half day to three day two night, it's the 40B.

The pack climbs very well, but like anything else (especially Cilogear, which is made to be customizable), you have to use it right. How you pack with determine both how well it climbs and how much head mobility you have with a helmet.

I've never used the 45L, but it seems hard to go wrong with either one.

Brian

DANG! that must be a heavy load!

Ha! Yeah. My WFR certification expired so I put a couple of pint-sized med students under the top lid. They're pretty useful in a pinch, but damn lazy when it comes to taking their turn on the sharp end.

Brian


(This post was edited by btreanor on Feb 3, 2009, 3:15 AM)


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 2:30 PM
Post #17 of 37 (1575 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [btreanor] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

"btreanor wrote:
Ha! Yeah. My WFR certification expired so I put a couple of pint-sized med students under the top lid. They're pretty useful in a pinch, but damn lazy when it comes to taking their turn on the sharp end.

Brian

Laugh Nice!!!
I think I will stick out the remainder of the season with the CCW and when the new 40's start rolling off the line, I will consider picking up another one! I fiddled with the Chernobyl last night...shifting weight up a bit. move the sternum strap down a bit and it felt better than it has over tha past few seasons. I never really tweaked it much...just shoved the junk in, threw it on and out I went. Cilo taught me how to tweak!!! Wink


crackers


Feb 3, 2009, 4:14 PM
Post #18 of 37 (1555 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 20, 2005
Posts: 416

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

retro wrote:
"btreanor wrote:
Ha! Yeah. My WFR certification expired so I put a couple of pint-sized med students under the top lid. They're pretty useful in a pinch, but damn lazy when it comes to taking their turn on the sharp end.

Brian

Laugh Nice!!!
I think I will stick out the remainder of the season with the CCW and when the new 40's start rolling off the line, I will consider picking up another one! I fiddled with the Chernobyl last night...shifting weight up a bit. move the sternum strap down a bit and it felt better than it has over tha past few seasons. I never really tweaked it much...just shoved the junk in, threw it on and out I went. Cilo taught me how to tweak!!! Wink

Try next week for the new 40B's and 45Ls...I'm waiting for the new extension material to come in and then we'll be shipping them. Tongue

Glad you learned *something* from us Grammy!WinkSly


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 4:53 PM
Post #19 of 37 (1547 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [crackers] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

crackers wrote:
Try next week for the new 40B's and 45Ls...I'm waiting for the new extension material to come in and then we'll be shipping them. Tongue

Glad you learned *something* from us Grammy!WinkSly

Damned you Graham!!! OK...I will get one in a week or two!!!! Wink I miss my 40...litre that is!!


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 5:39 PM
Post #20 of 37 (1526 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [crackers] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hey Graham,
Any significant changes to the 40L since the V2's? I think I heard you added a beefier fabric to the powder sleeve??

Grammy


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 7:40 PM
Post #21 of 37 (1504 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I am going to hyjack my own thread here, but I have decided to go with the 40L vs the 45...I just don't need the extra room for cragging and daytrips IMHO...so the 40 it is. Now, I just have to figure out which pack best suits my needs...the 40B or 40L??? Not sure why one would choose the 40B over the original 40L as the weight difference is minimal, and you gt the benefit of the zippered access pocket on the front ot the 40L.

Any differences in carrying the 40B over the 40, etc..?


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 7:59 PM
Post #22 of 37 (1496 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I recommended the 40B for two reasons:

1) The internal compressions strap makes a BIG difference in load carrying comfort in my experience.

2) I never use the zipper pocket on my V1 40L, so why not get the weight savings?

Mainly it is reason #1, as I found my 45L with the internal compression strap carries much better (without the framesheet) than my 40L w/o the strap did.


(This post was edited by dps on Feb 3, 2009, 8:00 PM)


IsayAutumn


Feb 3, 2009, 8:08 PM
Post #23 of 37 (1488 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 8, 2008
Posts: 355

Re: [dps] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Please allow me to ask a question that will really expose my ignorance. I am looking to save some money and to therefore buy a multi-purpose pack that I can take to the rock crags to do some multi-pitch trad during the warm seasons. If possible, I would also like this bag to double as an alpine pack for 1-2 day adventures on alpine routes.

I have been looking at the Cilo 30 and 40B packs, but I'm just not sure they would measure up at the rock crags. Is there anyone out there with experience climbing moderate 5.10 trad routes with a 40L bag on their back? I am just wondering how the Cilo bags would hold up on rock, and if anyone has used them for rock and ice/alpine routes?

Also, for a crag bag, is the 40L too big? It would be nice to have a bag that can do it all, but I'm just not sure this is possible. Whoa is me!


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 8:16 PM
Post #24 of 37 (1481 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [IsayAutumn] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I've used Cilo bags for the last 3 or 4 years as my only packs.

I highly recommend them as alpine climbing backpacks and cragging bags. My 60L has been to Peru three times and my 45L has been to Alaska and Peru. I use the 45L mainly for alpine climbing now. It is a great backpack which holds just enough for long routes, but compresses nicely and weighs little.

Climbing harder rock routes with any pack sucks, so it's always nice to have a smaller pack to do that with. I have been using a 30L pack as my climbing pack for about 6 months now and really haven't run into any pitches where I felt the need to take it off. From the Diamond on Longs Peak to the Ames Ice Hose, I have climbed (and lead) with my 30L on my back.

If you aren't carrying too much, you can make the 30L work for just about everything but multiday routes. It is a simple, stripped down bag which is great for going light, but there is no way I could get climbing and bivy gear in it at the same time. If it is just bivy gear and your climbing gear is on you, then yeah, that could work out...

Are you going to be leading with the pack or will the second being carrying it?


IsayAutumn


Feb 3, 2009, 8:22 PM
Post #25 of 37 (1476 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 8, 2008
Posts: 355

Re: [dps] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks for your reply. More than likely the second would be carrying the bag. Obviously for harder rock routes, the smaller the better. But I was thinking that the compression straps in the 40B would allow it to clamp down nice and small when needed. I just haven't worn a Cilo pack in any size, so I'm a little in the dark on how well their 40L would climb. It seems to me that most 40L bags would be pretty burdensome, even when halfway full.

If I'm honest with myself, it sounds like I need to buy two bags. Possibly the 30L for cragging and one-day alpine, and maybe a 45L for peak bagging/ 1+ day climbs/hikes.


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 8:27 PM
Post #26 of 37 (729 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [IsayAutumn] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The 40L cinches down quite tight, here is a picture of my friend using one on as a second on the Petit Grepon in Colorado:


I think that the 40L would be a great pack to start with and then if you can get some more cash, eventually get a 30L. The 45L is an awesome alpine pack, but I think the 40L is a better all-around pack.


Partner hosh


Feb 3, 2009, 8:36 PM
Post #27 of 37 (720 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662

Re: [IsayAutumn] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

IsayAutumn wrote:
Please allow me to ask a question that will really expose my ignorance. I am looking to save some money and to therefore buy a multi-purpose pack that I can take to the rock crags to do some multi-pitch trad during the warm seasons. If possible, I would also like this bag to double as an alpine pack for 1-2 day adventures on alpine routes.

I have been looking at the Cilo 30 and 40B packs, but I'm just not sure they would measure up at the rock crags. Is there anyone out there with experience climbing moderate 5.10 trad routes with a 40L bag on their back? I am just wondering how the Cilo bags would hold up on rock, and if anyone has used them for rock and ice/alpine routes?

Also, for a crag bag, is the 40L too big? It would be nice to have a bag that can do it all, but I'm just not sure this is possible. Whoa is me!

30L
http://blog.cilogear.biz/?p=169
http://blog.cilogear.biz/?p=374
http://blog.cilogear.biz/?p=440
http://blog.cilogear.biz/?p=361

40L vs 40B
http://blog.cilogear.biz/?p=297

I personally REALLY like my 30L. I don't have a 40L or the 40B, but one day, maybe the 40B...?

so do you need the 30 or the 40? It depends on how much you'll need for the 1-2 day alpine trip...

hosh.


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 8:44 PM
Post #28 of 37 (713 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [hosh] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

After using the 30L pack for awhile now, I really just don't see getting bivy gear AND climbing gear in the 30L for a long approach + route. What I will do it toss my 30L in the bottom or side of my 45L/60L pack and then use it for climbing.

I'm damn impressed at anyone who can cram all that shit in a 30L pack and not have half of it strapped to the outside for a 2+ day route/approach.

I would definitely do a 2+ day alpine route with the 30L where I already had my harness on and gear on me...especially if we are trying to blast the route.

1 day alpine routes, no problem, take the 30L pack and suffer a bit.


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 10:13 PM
Post #29 of 37 (693 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [IsayAutumn] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks dps!
That was the type of specific info I was looking for. Less weight, a little less expensive and carries a bit better...sound like the one I will go for.

Isayautumn...I think the 30 would be perfect for what you are describing. I have a 20L that I use specifically for multi-pitch rock and it works great, but I can only carry my approach shoes, small guide book (if needed), bottle of water, small snacks, headlamp and that is about it...bare essentials. I wish I had gotten the 30 as it cinches down to nothing and gives you the option of carrying a wind jacket or fleece in the fall and early spring...when the bugs and tourists are not out yet!!! Wink


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 10:31 PM
Post #30 of 37 (684 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [dps] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dps wrote:
I
2) I never use the zipper pocket on my V1 40L, so why not get the weight savings?

Dumb question coming your way!
What did you do with your small stuff, like headlamps, cliff bars, compass, etc....when you used the pack sans the lid?

Grammy


dps


Feb 3, 2009, 10:32 PM
Post #31 of 37 (677 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

retro wrote:
dps wrote:
I
2) I never use the zipper pocket on my V1 40L, so why not get the weight savings?

Dumb question coming your way!
What did you do with your small stuff, like headlamps, cliff bars, compass, etc....when you used the pack sans the lid?

Grammy

The newer packs have a zip pocket on the framesheet flap (at least my 30 and 45 liter packs do), which is where I put sunglasses, tethers, gu, and map. I usually just shove the rest of the stuff in my belay jacket pocket, or in a small sil-nylon stuff sack.


retro


Feb 3, 2009, 10:47 PM
Post #32 of 37 (672 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [dps] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dps wrote:
The newer packs have a zip pocket on the framesheet flap (at least my 30 and 45 liter packs do), which is where I put sunglasses, tethers, gu, and map. I usually just shove the rest of the stuff in my belay jacket pocket, or in a small sil-nylon stuff sack.

Yep....gotcha!
SOLD!!!


dps


Feb 4, 2009, 4:34 PM
Post #33 of 37 (635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 116

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

retro wrote:
dps wrote:
The newer packs have a zip pocket on the framesheet flap (at least my 30 and 45 liter packs do), which is where I put sunglasses, tethers, gu, and map. I usually just shove the rest of the stuff in my belay jacket pocket, or in a small sil-nylon stuff sack.

Yep....gotcha!
SOLD!!!

Awesome. You won't regret it!


retro


Feb 4, 2009, 5:24 PM
Post #34 of 37 (626 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [dps] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dps wrote:
Awesome. You won't regret it!

Well, I loved the V2 40L and my 60L is my favorite pack of all time....can never go wrong with Cilo!!!

Thanks Wink


retro


Feb 5, 2009, 3:47 PM
Post #35 of 37 (596 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Damn...i wish this CCW pack was junk so I could just do away with it...but it is just so bomber!! It's like breaking up with a girlfriend...that you actually liked!!! Cool


btreanor


Feb 5, 2009, 4:10 PM
Post #36 of 37 (591 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 121

Re: [retro] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Retro,

I felt the same way. It's a point of pride with me that I use gear until it finally, irrevocably, dies. I'm good with a speedy stitcher, plastidip, etc. so this generally takes a long, long time. When I got my first Cilogear pack, my CCW Chernobyl was ailing, but not dead (lots of holes with patches, one of the shoulder straps finally giving way, etc.). I thought about just making due with the pack for another few years, but ultimately decided to treat myself to a new pack for a big trip that was coming up. CCW is so great that I also thought about upgrading to the CCW Chaos. But I ended up taking a chance with Cilogear.

I have nothing, nothing, bad to say about CCW and their packs; it's a fine company and makes a solid product. However, I don't regret for a second going with Cilogear; the 40B is without a doubt the best pack I have owned or used (and as I guide I used to demo lots of different packs) in 25+ years of climbing.

Brian


(This post was edited by btreanor on Feb 5, 2009, 4:12 PM)


retro


Feb 5, 2009, 4:35 PM
Post #37 of 37 (578 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 310

Re: [btreanor] Cilo 40L vs 45L? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I know exactly what you mean Brian. Living here in North Conway, there is a sense of pride that goes along with using the locat gear, but I do know that the 40B gives me greater carrying capacity, supporting a great company, more comfortable carrying, and a real good climbing pack. No regrets...

Here we go!


Forums : Climbing Information : Gear Heads

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook