Gear Review

2 5

Is it worth it?

more expensive, no ski carry, 2 pounds heavier than other packs in its category, hardly any internal organizational pockets, but when you are out on an expedition and run into others they will think you really mean business (or have a shit ton of money).

Responded on

Compare it to say--the Denali Pro, which carries 115L in the large size. Per Arc'teryx website, this in a large carries 110L max. So they're in the same class. This is $435, Denali is $499. The Osprey Aragon is also around this price.

Responded on

This pack will certainly carry skis. You can a-frame using any or all of the compression straps on either side (and the stout pockets at the bottom) or if you really want to rig diagonally, it will do so with ease. Not enough internal organizational pockets for you? Wow. That has not been an issue for me at all. Between the bottom compartment, the back pocket, the main silo, the brain (both pockets), the 'holster' pockets and the map-pocket... I have plenty of places to squirrel stuff away in there. I have never wanted more organizational stuff in this pack.
Also, I found this pack to be significantly more comfortable than the Argon85, especially carrying big loads. The Argon does have more in the way of organizational pockets and friffraff, but it's not remotely rain-proof and requires a pack cover in case of rain. I found that the not-being-waterproof part of the Argon really negated all the organizational 'advantages'. To keep my stuff dry, I ended up putting everything in silnylon dry-sacks, which provided organization and rendered those pockets and compartments into extra (unused) stuff.