[at-l] Tuckerization

[bakpakr@planetcable.net (Bob Wardecker)]

Yea I know that is a monster pack. I like it but not for my thru. I will be
getting another pack shortly Don't know which one yet I am looking at a few
different ones, An Arc'teryz, Lowe, and Dana. it will definitely be lighter
and smaller.
Bob
A.K.A. Shakeyleggs GA-ME 2001
A Bad Day On The Trail Is Still
So Much Better Than A Great Day At Work

http://users.planetcable.net/bakpakr
----- Original Message -----
From: "kahley7" <kahley7@ptd.net>
To: <bakpakr@planetcable.net>; <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [at-l] Tuckerization


> At 10:18 AM 2/2/01 -0500, Slyatpct@aol.com wrote:
> >In a message dated 2/2/2001 9:57:58 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> >bakpakr@planetcable.net writes:
> >The Frogg Togg pants also work equally as well over you legs, either
hikng or
> >in camp.
> >
> >That's 84 ounces you can easily drop and will put you under 20 pounds.
>
> And less bulk so you might be able to get by on a smaller pack.  If
> this is the one you are talking about, it's HUGE!!
>
>
http://www.gearfinder.com/datasheet.asp?PN=Alaska%2D882&FAM=Packs&P=2042,0,0
,0,1606
>
> and heavy!  No wonder your legs shake <g>.
>
> Even if you feel you need light and medium weight bottom layers, moving to
knit rather than
> fleece will reduce bulk if not weight too. I love fleece, but have made
the switch to knits for
> trail use because of the bulk issue.  You are making a lot of good choices
> and have a good low weight, so I don't understand the need for so much of
a pack?
>
> Unless you plan on packing a cat? <g>
>