This was here a few weeks ago for $79.99... Eeeerrgh.

But seems like a really nice backpack. I haven't even used it yet.
xD

Wish I'd waited.

great review on the revival 50 (s/m)

http://www.altrec.com/sierra-designs/revival-50-backpack

rgriffin09 wrote:This was here a few weeks ago for $79.99... Eeeerrgh.

But seems like a really nice backpack. I haven't even used it yet.
xD

Wish I'd waited.

Don't feel bad, it's still huge savings compared to what it is listed as for retail. Here it is on Amazon (Listed by Sierra) for a lot more.

Those looking for a hydration pack should stay away from the CamelBak Antidote 100, it doesn't fit well. Although I'm not too fond of the design, the Platypus Big Zip SL 3 Litre is a perfect fit.

Wow! Sierra Designs is the real deal. They don't put out junk. These backpacks are not "book bags." These backpacks are for backpackers.

I got this the last time it was offered and there were a few comments about the waist belt not being all that comfortable. I think this pack is the most comfortable pack I've ever worn. The belt fits where it should and the air channel that keeps most of the pack off your back is total genius. It's important to get the right size, don't base it on how tall you are. You need to actually measure your torso.

Sierra Designs makes quality packs, but take note, these do not have waterproof zippers. Also take note, you may be a guy who likes to wear red or light blue (I'm often in red in the mountains), but women's hip belts on a quality pack are cut differently- so buy the gender appropriate pack for you.

are these too large to be used as a 2nd carry-on on aeroplanes? I usually have a rolling luggage as the primary carry-on, and have a backpack that I could also load as much as possible as the 2nd piece.

Also, it seem to be made of 150 denier, which seem to be on par with umbrella fabric. Is that strong enough for anything?

Wish Woot! would put a 75 or 80 pack up. 50 is just too small for extended backpacking.

lwang wrote:are these too large to be used as a 2nd carry-on on aeroplanes? I usually have a rolling luggage as the primary carry-on, and have a backpack that I could also load as much as possible as the 2nd piece.

Also, it seem to be made of 150 denier, which seem to be on par with umbrella fabric. Is that strong enough for anything?

I don't know about the carry-on aspect since I haven't flown for a couple years but I can address the thickness. The fabric is much thicker and stronger than umbrella fabric. It's plenty strong while still being relatively light. I wouldn't worry about the shell unless you put an open knife, saw, or hatchet inside the pack.

rgriffin09 wrote:This was here a few weeks ago for $79.99... Eeeerrgh.

But seems like a really nice backpack. I haven't even used it yet.
xD

Wish I'd waited.

Same here. This is the fourth time or so that I've been burned on a big ticket item because I didn't just wait for it to pop back up a month later. The Kelty air-mattress from the other day is another example. All in all its $40+ that could have gone to buying more crap.

lwang wrote:are these too large to be used as a 2nd carry-on on aeroplanes? I usually have a rolling luggage as the primary carry-on, and have a backpack that I could also load as much as possible as the 2nd piece.

Also, it seem to be made of 150 denier, which seem to be on par with umbrella fabric. Is that strong enough for anything?

Several reviews for this pack do mention abrasion tears, specifically along the waistbelt, so that is something to keep an eye out for, but in general the reviews of this pack are very good along with the larger 65L versions. See the comments from the previous sales of this pack for some good info.

lwang wrote:are these too large to be used as a 2nd carry-on on aeroplanes? I usually have a rolling luggage as the primary carry-on, and have a backpack that I could also load as much as possible as the 2nd piece.

Also, it seem to be made of 150 denier, which seem to be on par with umbrella fabric. Is that strong enough for anything?

This backpack is pretty long, and will probably not fully fit underneath an airline seat without the guy sitting in front of you stepping on it. It will fit inside the overhead bin of a 737.

The green part of the backpack does feel a bit like umbrella fabric. It's thin, but it makes the backpack exceptionally light, even with the aluminum support and the cushy padding. I've mostly used it as luggage, rather than doing any serious hiking with it, but it is quite comfortable.

My main complaint, besides buying this bag for more than this current price, stems from the top of the backpack. The top of the main compartment closes with a drawstring, and it's capped by a top piece which is attached via 4 straps, two of them with buckles for easier access to the main compartment. If I removed a sweater from the bag, I'd have to readjust all 4 straps to lower the height of the backpack, or else the top piece would start flopping around. As this is my first non-school backpack, I'm not sure if this is a common design of top loading backpacks, but it's something that is a bit of a hassle if you plan on removing stuff from the main compartment often. At least they were thoughtful enough to put a zipper behind the front pocket for easier access to stuff in the bottom of the main compartment

mm20 wrote:Sierra Designs makes quality packs, but take note, these do not have waterproof zippers. Also take note, you may be a guy who likes to wear red or light blue (I'm often in red in the mountains), but women's hip belts on a quality pack are cut differently- so buy the gender appropriate pack for you.

I bought the gender specific packs for myself and my wife. Just to clarify, the red woman's pack in person is much closer to a plum color, if that helps.

How do these bags capare quality wise to the KELTY bags, which seem to be a constant item on WOOT?
I am looking for something to use for overnight camping.

Thanks.

lwang wrote:are these too large to be used as a 2nd carry-on on aeroplanes? I usually have a rolling luggage as the primary carry-on, and have a backpack that I could also load as much as possible as the 2nd piece.

Also, it seem to be made of 150 denier, which seem to be on par with umbrella fabric. Is that strong enough for anything?

This is my main concern as well. I am looking for a backpack that holds lots of stuff but works as a carry-on. Thanks for asking this.

Anyone have any idea whether or not the men's s/m would be too big for a 12 year old boy? I realize I would need to measure torso length but wondering about ballpark guesstimates.

rgriffin09 wrote:This was here a few weeks ago for $79.99... Eeeerrgh.

But seems like a really nice backpack. I haven't even used it yet.
xD

Wish I'd waited.

I am in the same boat.

Can any female owners of this product give sizing information? My wife could really use this but I'm wary of buying a backpack without her trying it on. I tried looking up some videos of people wearing it but they only use super petite models for that.

Josepdin wrote:Wish Woot! would put a 75 or 80 pack up. 50 is just too small for extended backpacking.

No, not necessarily. I hiked the AT with a 52 L pack and most other hikers I met had 40-70L packs (and there were some ultralighters with daypacks). Ultimately it comes down to how much weight you're comfortable carrying, which relates to how often you resupply and the gear you bring (and lightweight quality gear is increasingly available/affordable).

I am not directing this comment to Josepdin specifically (by all means, go with the size pack you prefer), more so to others who may want to get into long distance backpacking and assume they need the biggest pack possible. Generally, the lighter your pack, the happier you'll be

I don't have any experience with Sierra Designs packs but the brand is generally cheaper than the high-end suppliers and decently regarded. As with any online buying, of course, the only problem is you can't try it on before you buy it. Unless you're an experienced backpacker already, you really want to make sure your first pack fits properly, and preferably have someone show you the proper way to wear it.

NaCl wrote:Can any female owners of this product give sizing information? My wife could really use this but I'm wary of buying a backpack without her trying it on. I tried looking up some videos of people wearing it but they only use super petite models for that.

Here's Sierra Design's website for the larger (and maybe newer?) version of this pack: http://www.sierradesigns.com/p-345-jubilee-65-womens.aspx. Couple reviews there too.
Sizing instructions: http://www.sierradesigns.com/images/SD-Packs_Instructions_Revival_1of2.pdf
If her torso is more than 17" or less than 14.5", don't get it. Obviously the closer she is to the middle of that range, the more likely it is to fit. Pack fit is mostly based on torso length but hip size can also be a factor--for example, I am 5'8 so I got a M pack rather than a S (from a different pack manufacturer that offers 2 sizes for women), but I am quite skinny and the waist belt (with pockets on it like this woot) is a little too big. A few manufacturers can provide different sized belts if need be.

General recommendation (or maybe it's obvious?) for trying on packs--load them up with weight (preferably the gear you'll be using!) first to get the most realistic fit.

wsp1811 wrote:How do these bags capare quality wise to the KELTY bags, which seem to be a constant item on WOOT?
I am looking for something to use for overnight camping.

Thanks.

Sierra Designs and Kelty are both owned by AmericanRec. Generally Sierra Designs products are better than Kelty products. (Like Lincoln vs. Ford.)

Apparently OOS on women's and men's M/L....dang.

xibbumbero wrote:Apparently OOS on women's and men's M/L....dang.

Women's have come back up, hoping men's M/L will come back too.

lwang wrote:are these too large to be used as a 2nd carry-on on aeroplanes? I usually have a rolling luggage as the primary carry-on, and have a backpack that I could also load as much as possible as the 2nd piece.

Also, it seem to be made of 150 denier, which seem to be on par with umbrella fabric. Is that strong enough for anything?

I just bought a new backpack to travel with. Our local outdoor place told me 44L is generally the top carry-on size. I think it depends on how you get the capacity, but it's a good rule. I went with a Eureka Wolf Jaw 40L and couldn't be happier. Plenty of space, and panel loading so taking out the laptop at security is easier.

Missed out on a large because I waited til I got home. Shucks!

Dang it! I just had a friend measure me, and now the Men's M/L size backpacks are all gone. Darn darn darn!

LumpyOne wrote:Dang it! I just had a friend measure me, and now the Men's M/L size backpacks are all gone. Darn darn darn!

How tall are you I am trying to decide sizes. I'm just under 6ft, about 160lbs.

runer113 wrote:How tall are you I am trying to decide sizes. I'm just under 6ft, about 160lbs.

runer: you need to appropriately measure your torso for the right fit. Height and weight mean little when it comes to trekking backpacks. REI has a good guide:

http://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/backpacks-torso-hip-size.html