[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [at-l] Kelty Gale backpack
- Subject: Re: [at-l] Kelty Gale backpack
- From: Pat Villeneuve <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 17:06:23 -0500
- Organization: Spencer Museum of Art - University of Kansas
I have the Kelty Brisbane. It's an internal that expands to 3,000ci. It
weighs around 2.5. Works great for me for ultralight hiking.
Give Me Chocolate
Phil Heffington wrote:
> I've been surfing the net for a few minutes and ran across the Kelty
> website. I scanned across their listing of backpacks in an effort to
> identify backpacks which would do the job, but be a savings in weight. I
> saw the Kelty "Gale" listed as a pack which weighs 2 lbs. 10oz. and has a
> capacity of 3500 c.i. It is listed as costing $90. Is there something
> wrong or unmentioned about this pack? It seems remarkably light for the
> capacity listed. Most of Kelty's other packs are in the 5-6 lb. range.
> Tell me what you know about this. I'm looking for a way to lighten my pack
> weight down from my Kelty Tioga, which weighs in at 5 lbs. 11oz. if the pack
> cover is included (according to my spring loaded scales).
> * From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | http://www.backcountry.net *
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | http://www.backcountry.net *