Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: arcteryx bora backpacks

  1. #1

    Default arcteryx bora backpacks

    i am looking at getting an arcteryx bora series backpack. my question is whether to get the bora 80 or bora 95L? does anyone have one? have they used it on a backpack hunt, sheep? what feedback do you have? how did it handle a loaded pack with a sheep? i think the bora 80L should be big enough to handle a 7-10 day sheep hunt but am not sure and don't know where to go to look at one locally. any input would be greatly appreciate.

    thanks

  2. #2
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,416

    Default

    Check to see what the manufacturer rates them at weight wise. For modern day backpacking "heavy" is usually 50-60 MAYBE 75 lbs. You need a pack that will easily handle 125. As far as cubes.... the bigger the better I think. 7000 ci is good.

  3. #3
    Member akhunter3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    824

    Default

    Go with the 95L. I've used the 80 and while nice and large, probably not as big as you would want if your bringing out camp and a sheep. Great packs though!




    Jon
    Nurse by night, Alaska adventurer by day!

  4. #4

    Default

    thanks for your input. i have a barneys and a mystery ranch nice 6500. looking for something a little lighter that will do the trick.

    akhunter, did you pack a sheep in yours with gear? how did it do.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sdrhunter View Post
    thanks for your input. i have a barneys and a mystery ranch nice 6500. looking for something a little lighter that will do the trick.

    akhunter, did you pack a sheep in yours with gear? how did it do.
    I have owned an Arcteryx Bora 95, and still own a Barney's and a NICE 6500. All are great well made packs. The pic of me in my avatar I am sporting the Bora 95 in fact on a sheep hunt. Member Bighorse uses the Bora 95 quite a bit as well. While I never hauled sheep off the mountain I have hauled 3 caribou off of mountains with a Bora 95 and for me they don't carry the weight as well as either my NICE 6500 or the Barney's. Thus I no long own the Bora, but they are great packs. Hunting packs have a lot more to do with the load out if sucessful than shaving 2 pounds on the load in. If the frame tweaks or buckles when 10+ miles out under over 100 pounds then you will be kicking yourself all the way out not sucking it up and taking a pack that is able to better handle the weight.

    That is my experience with the Bora 95. While it will iikely get it done with camp and a an animal to pack out, but in my opinion it sucks less (100+ pound loads are never easy) with a pack designed to haul the weight.

    But if looking to save some weights and looking at mainstream mountaineering packs, Arcteryx Bora 95, Osprey Arogon 110, and Gregory Whitney will all get them done, but IMO what you are saving in a couple pounds over your NICE 6500 or Barney's on the way in you will regret on the way out if successful.

    Good luck and I hope you find a pack that works for ya.

    Oh yeah and extra cubic inches are ALWAYS your friend. If you are disciplined enough to not use the extra space to take more than you need you will always be glad you have the space on the return when hauling out your animal.

  6. #6

    Default

    thanks for input lanche. i am more concerned about weight trimming while hunting (the several days i am looking for my ram) then what happens after he's down. once the ram is down a shuttle can be made to and from airstrip regardless of distance, IMO. i have to take it easy on my back as i had sx. on it and can lo longer handle the super heavy loads. it is better for me to be as light as possible, even if it means two trips once ram is down. i plan my hunts accordingly. if i can hunt (hike the hills searching for a ram) out of an trimmed down light weight pack, and then have a pack that can handle 60-70lbs for a packout i am better off. i figure i spend most my time hunting and only a day-two packing.

    in your opinion can the bora handle 60-70lbs and still keep it's comfort, realative to the barneys or nice 6500? thanks for your input.

  7. #7
    Member akhunter3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    824

    Default

    Lanche definitely has more experience with his Bora, as I've never hauled an animal out with one. That being said, I did a couple different packing trips with ~55-60 lbs in my Bora 80, and it was plenty comfortable. I would imagine the 95 would be just fine at 60-70 lbs. However, I don't think you'll be able to put any amount of weight in it and compare it to the Barney's or NICE with it coming out on top, it's just not designed to carry weigh the way those packs are.


    Jon
    Nurse by night, Alaska adventurer by day!

  8. #8

    Default

    thanks jon and others. appreciate your input.

  9. #9

    Default

    SDR,

    If you are looking at not going over say 75 pounds like you stated and looking to save a little weight I have been impressed with my Osprey Aether 85. LOTS of room and I used it to pack between 50-65 pounds on a 100+ mile backpacking trip last summer and was very impressed with how ti handled the weight. But at less than 5 lbs for the pack weight it will certainly handle the weight you listed.

    http://www.e-omc.com/catalog/product...-Backpack.html

  10. #10

    Default

    thanks for the input lanche. if money weren't a consideration, would you go for the arcteryx or the osprey? thanks.

  11. #11

    Default

    Get a Kelty Cloud 6500. NW Dyneema. It would last you longer than anyother internal except a mcHale.

    Sincerely,
    Thomas

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sdrhunter View Post
    thanks for the input lanche. if money weren't a consideration, would you go for the arcteryx or the osprey? thanks.
    Depends. I was under the impression you didn't want a hunting pack in order to save weight. The Bora 95 is 7.5 pounds in a size medium. The Aether is more than 30% lighter which is what I thought you were after being as you were wanting to save weight. Personally if money was no object and trying to save weight you could get a Kifaru Longhunter that is 7200 cu in that is 7.5 pounds as well for less than $600 and will carry as much weight as you can in case you need it but also work well with for the 60-70 pounds you would be carrying while two tripping it. They can be had for $600 vs. the $435 for the Bora. IMO the Kifaru is twice the pack than the Bora plus it gives you the option to use it has a straight frame pack for awkward meat hauls out on the first trip and then come pack for your gear in your pack on the second trip to save more weight on the first trip as well.

    https://kifaru.net/longhunter.html

    Also if really trying to save weight the Kifaru UL packs are worth a look as well, though they are brand new and not much user reviews to hear from them yet, time will tell on these, but for a 5200 cu in pack that is less than 3 lbs they may but just what you are looking for.

    https://kifaru.net/KU5200.html

    Obviously if just trying to save weight and really only plan on 60-70 pound loads with the occasionally short 100 lb haul the Osprey Aether is certainly a viable option as well. Really depends on what you want out of your pack, but if it was me I'd go for the Kifaru Longhunter with the 8500 cu in bag, as I have never complained that my pack was too big when hauling an animal out on my back.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •