| |
Main
Date: 01 Aug 2006 20:53:57
From: Craig Pennington
Subject: Backpack for running?
|
This weekend I did a run on a path I haven't been on in years, and I had
to cut it short due to a lack of water. Additionally, I would like to be
bring a change of shoes and clothes with me on a run. I am considering
getting a smallish backpack to carry extra water (I'm a gallon an hour
on a typical hot summer day) and to carry the clothes. I tried an
experiment with a small backpack I use for day hiking and it rides up
when I run. Does anyone have any recommendations for a good backpack for
running?
Cheers,
Craig
--
Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently
advanced.
|
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 21:21:38
From: Dot
Subject: Re: Backpack for running?
|
Craig Pennington wrote:
> This weekend I did a run on a path I haven't been on in years, and I had
> to cut it short due to a lack of water. Additionally, I would like to be
> bring a change of shoes and clothes with me on a run. I am considering
> getting a smallish backpack to carry extra water (I'm a gallon an hour
> on a typical hot summer day) and to carry the clothes. I tried an
> experiment with a small backpack I use for day hiking and it rides up
> when I run. Does anyone have any recommendations for a good backpack for
> running?
>
I'd look at Gregory, Nathan, UD, North Face, Camelbak, REI, and there's
some other brands. I've got 3 CB's that get used for running, 1 Gregory
that's my current fav for long runs, and a UD that hangs in garage (they
definitely didn't get it right on the original version of that model,
but has been improved, I hear). I haven't used Nathans, but there's some
new models that just came out that look intriguing, but not sure how
much they carry. A short coming of many packs for me is their "waist"
belt is fairly high, and I haven't found longer packs.
I use a Gregory Reactor or CB Cloudwalker as my kitchen-sink packs,
which means I carry fluid, food, extra gear, etc for several hours.
The adventure racing packs may work better for you than running packs,
since they're designed to hold lots of gear, yet be stable while running.
What packs work for people is as individual as shoes, since it depends
on body shape, what you need to carry, and probably somewhat on how
smoothely you run.
Dot
--
"Success is different things to different people"
-Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope
|
| | |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 21:43:40
From: Craig Pennington
Subject: Re: Backpack for running?
|
Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net > wrote:
[snip]
> ... A short coming of many packs for me is their "waist"
> belt is fairly high, and I haven't found longer packs.
I do use a small Ultimate Direction waist pack for training, which rides
comfortably. The backpack I was using was not designed for anything but
walking and puts most of the weight between my shoulder blades and
bounces like heck in a four-stride rhythm when running and the "waist"
belt ends up quickly where my HRM strap would be.
> I use a Gregory Reactor or CB Cloudwalker as my kitchen-sink packs,
> which means I carry fluid, food, extra gear, etc for several hours.
Both of these look exactly like what I want! I've avoided the CBs til
now, not wanting to deal with cleaning them, but they do make sense in
this context.
> The adventure racing packs may work better for you than running packs,
> since they're designed to hold lots of gear, yet be stable while running.
Maybe -- maybe overkill. I'll just have to try some out at REI.
> What packs work for people is as individual as shoes, since it depends
> on body shape, what you need to carry, and probably somewhat on how
> smoothely you run.
Yeah, I figured, but I wanted to hear others' experiences before hitting
the store.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Craig
--
Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently
advanced.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 22:01:07
From: Dot
Subject: Re: Backpack for running?
|
Craig Pennington wrote:
> Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote:
> [snip]
>
>
>>I use a Gregory Reactor or CB Cloudwalker as my kitchen-sink packs,
>>which means I carry fluid, food, extra gear, etc for several hours.
>
>
> Both of these look exactly like what I want! I've avoided the CBs til
> now, not wanting to deal with cleaning them, but they do make sense in
> this context.
Just a side note, and I don't have enough experience with newer stuff to
know which I prefer. But the Gregory is a very soft pack and wraps
around the body nicely. The material absorbs sweat, which of course, has
no place to go. But I don't remember my shirt getting wet like it used
to do with older cb packs. The cb's, OTOH, tend to be stiffer, and don't
seem to hug my body as well. The newer packs have channels between the
back material to allow air flow. I haven't used my new Mule enough to
know how that compares with the Reactor. The Reactor is 5 oz lighter and
seems better suited for what I'm needing right now, so it's gotten the
nod for most of my long runs this summer. Those pockets on belt are nice.
FWIW, I had gone to the last REI sale for the MULE (it's been
redesigned, and I thought the fixes would fit me better - they do) which
was on sale, but fell in love with the Reactor while I was there (plus
had seen somebody use one at winter ultra). I came home with both. (used
20% off with dividend for the Reactor) Retail therapy.
The North Face packs seemed as stiff as the cb's, but did have wider
tubing, iirc.
As far as cleaning the bladders, I usually just rinse 3 times when home
and stick one of those hanger things in to keep it spread while it dries.
>
>
>>The adventure racing packs may work better for you than running packs,
>>since they're designed to hold lots of gear, yet be stable while running.
>
>
> Maybe -- maybe overkill. I'll just have to try some out at REI.
I think the REactor may be considered a an adventure racing pack since
it has space for helmet. Sprint races may only be a few hours.
Dot
--
"Success is different things to different people"
-Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope
|
| | | | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 13:30:01
From: Craig Pennington
Subject: Re: Backpack for running?
|
Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net > wrote:
> Craig Pennington wrote:
>> Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote:
>> [snip]
[snip]
>>>I use a Gregory Reactor or CB Cloudwalker as my kitchen-sink packs,
>>>which means I carry fluid, food, extra gear, etc for several hours.
>> Both of these look exactly like what I want! I've avoided the CBs til
>> now, not wanting to deal with cleaning them, but they do make sense in
>> this context.
[snip]
> FWIW, I had gone to the last REI sale for the MULE (it's been
> redesigned, and I thought the fixes would fit me better - they do) which
> was on sale, but fell in love with the Reactor while I was there (plus
> had seen somebody use one at winter ultra). I came home with both. (used
> 20% off with dividend for the Reactor) Retail therapy.
[snip]
I ended up going with the CB Cloudwalker, catching the last day of REI's
labor day sale. It seemed to hit the sweet spot on the features/price
ratio at $47. Thanks for your input.
Cheers,
Craig
--
Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently
advanced.
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 17:01:16
From: 32 degrees
Subject: Re: Backpack for running?
|
ultimate direction has TONS of great "running" backpacks, many made for
long, backcountry type experiences/races.
google ultimate direction and you'll find it.
JK
"Craig Pennington" <cpenning@milo.org > wrote in message
news:pjr4q3-iku.ln1@nazg.milo.org...
> This weekend I did a run on a path I haven't been on in years, and I had
> to cut it short due to a lack of water. Additionally, I would like to be
> bring a change of shoes and clothes with me on a run. I am considering
> getting a smallish backpack to carry extra water (I'm a gallon an hour
> on a typical hot summer day) and to carry the clothes. I tried an
> experiment with a small backpack I use for day hiking and it rides up
> when I run. Does anyone have any recommendations for a good backpack for
> running?
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> --
> Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
> Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently
> advanced.
|
|
