Soapbox

Sometimes wonder if there is any requirement for meshing on these back systems at all, they compact clothing layers and are another layer of fabric trapping heat & generating sweat, surely designers could simply use a simple crossing of cord and elimate the need for mesh?

I bought a Freeflow Lite back in May. Unfortunately, it was broken by August (one of the poles forming the curvature folded and another pushed it's way through the fabric that was meant to retain it) and so only used one briefly.

I found that it does a lot to resolve the sweaty back issue. I suppose your point is the reason they have added another cut-out to the mesh.

The mesh forms part of the structure of the pack (in fact, on the lite, you can release the mesh and the back then goes entirely flat) and I think that if you say had a simple X shape formed of string then it would be a less stable shape as well as potentially leaving interesting marks on you at the end of a long day.

Having briefly experienced it, I don't believe that Freeflow itself gives enough benefit to justify the reduced sack stability by moving the kit further from the wearer's center of gravity.

Alex,
I've had a 25L freeflow II for 3 or 4 years now, and I've found the mesh very hand for resting the head against when taking a break or at the end of the day while waiting for transport.

I now own four sacks ,of which the 25l freeflow is by far the most comfortable.
Yes it sometimes interferes with coming down a scramble but that apart I would rather wear it than any other(so far).
Have a pining for osprey but have not tried one yet.

I just bought a Berghaus Freeflow on Friday, and tried an Osprey at the same time. I've become a big fan of these type of packs after toting a Vango Air Canyon around for the past couple of years. I'm not at all keen on a hot and sweaty back! In fact, although I'm very keen on lightweight gear, and I've looked long and hard at GoLite and Gossamer packs, I just can't bear the thought of a pack that sits against my back any more, no matter how light and comfortable they may be in every other respect. I know it costs me extra weight, but that's the price I'm willing to pay for the extra comfort. I'll just have to keep shaving the weight off in other places! Centre of gravity doesn't really concern me, since I don't lug a lot of weight around, but obviously, it would be an issue if a big pack was made this way. As for the mesh, I don't think you can really get rid of it and still have a tensioning system that would be as stable.

Not doubting the effectiveness of the current curved freeflow systems (I'm the proud owner of an Osprey Atmos).

I just wonder if designers have considered removing meshing altogether, but retain two lines of material to maintain the curvature. This would reduce surface area contact between the back and the pack.

What type of material is used for the new freeflow mesh?

Alex - I'm the sort of person who has no hesitation about 'improving' my gear with razor-sharp knives, hacksaws, drills, etc. However, something tells me to leave the 'freeflow' mesh well alone!

On the surface, the mesh looks like it is just made of plastic, but it has very little capacity to stretch, so my guess is that the plastic covers some kind of strong thread... definitely not a metal mesh... but something I'm unlikely to detect without cutting into it.

I also doubt that existing packs would remain stable if the mesh was removing, but don't you find yourself looking at these packs with the increasing removal of meshing wondering when they will just get rid of it completely? (or perhaps its just me...)

Maybe if they could get rid of it, they would. Let's face it, backpacks only need to be in contact with the body at both shoulders and on the hips. They've come a long way over the years and are a sight more comfortable than they used to be. (I suffered a broken steel pack-frame digging into my back when I started this game!) I think you're right, and the next step will be to get rid of the mesh altogether, but hopefully that won't mean additional weight to maintain the curve and stability.

Amen Paddy, the Atmos meshing doesn't take the stain of maintaining the curvature, I'm pretty sure it could be removed (but at £90 I don't fancy experimenting...).

Gave mine away, too unstable.

I've noticed that the Lowe Alpine "Pure Air" back system does eliminate the mesh entirely. It just has foam contact point at the hip and shoulders from what I remember.

You must have money to burn Bat Girl... but what do you mean by unstable? Were you hauling bricks or just your footwear collection? ;-)

The "pure air" system still appears to have fair significant contact areas of padding, but seems to be the way back systems are moving.

I have a 'fully waterproof' military rucsac (Central/Eastern European I think) that uses a curved back system. The upright and transverse curves are set by pre-curved sprung bar of some sort. There is no mesh involved. The pack sits away from the back a little and vents very well. Apart from the astronomical weight (caused by the use of fully chromed leather, steel and the thickest rubber canvas known to man) it is a fantastic bit of kit.

No, I had used it for a few years but I found it great till I went scrambling and as I got a much better more stable climbing sac ( womens specific fit) and the berghause sac was sitting unused I gave it to some one woul would use it for nice little days walks for which it is fine.

I gotcha Jules, thought you were referring to giving away a £90 Atmos sack!

Scrambling and climbing packs have different requirements to hill walking pack - it helps to have a concentrated centre of gravity.

Osprey publicity did picture some chap happily abseiling with an Atmos, helpfully you can also utilise the back space to carry a water bladder which helps combat weight imbalance (just don't go using it on an edge to prevent rope damage...)