 I bought one of these - the Wildtrek 60 - but sadly had to return it as the hip-belt wasn't quite right. It's a pity the women's version is only 55 litres  Why is the women's version 55 litres, but the bloke's 60?!! It's a minimalist bag, but very roomy and easy to pack and well worth a look at. I have got the Fastpack 40 and love it as it's incredibly comfy, especially the hip-belt with its cut out bits as Jon says. It's a great combination of lightweight but robust materials.
|
 |
 Why is the women's version 55 litres, but the bloke's 60?!! Probably because the back length is shorter,so making the pack smaller.
|
|
On one level yes, it might. But it assumes that women need to carry 5 litres less than blokes. Lightwave is by no means the only company that cuts down on litreage for their women's packs. It's very annoying because I need 60 litres, not 55!!
|
|
 Someone with a smaller back will typically be, well, smaller. and that means smaller clothing and potentially smaller sleeping bag, which takes up less space... Note that Macpas are often smaller in size W and size 2 than in size 3, for example. In other words, if you need 60 litres it may be the case that your Evil (male) Twin would wonder why he didn't get 65... Pete.
|
|
 It does make sense doesn't it. Just be glad you're not typical, Kate 
|
|
 Kate, this sack interests me. So, what exactly was thhe problem with the hip belt?
|
|
It was too large, Mal; it left a gap at the back so I couldn't transfer the weight as effectively as I should have been able to. Just a case of size - frustrating cos the back length was about right! I thought it was a terrific pack, and just wish they'd do a 60 litre in the W back length! They have them in Up & Under and will order in different back-lengths for you to try. One of the staff in there - Cath(y) is absolutely brilliant at fitting packs, so ask for her if she's working!
|
|
Just be glad you're not typical, Kate
Yep, that was one of the frustrating things. I wanted one manufacturer's hip-belt, another's shoulder harness, and a third's bag!
|
|
I note that Up and Under say it is a sub 1.4Kg pack for loads up to 15Kg.
|
|
I was after a 60 litre pack sub 2kg for loads of up to about 12kg, so I wasn't worried about the specific specifications of the Lightwave. In the end I had to compromise with a 2.3kg pack (a Deuter), but it's the most comfortable of the many I tried.
|
|
 Just for info, women's packs tend to have shorter back lengths, more narrowly spaced shoulder straps and different hip-belts. As someone says above, the shorter back length often means the women's version of a pack has a reduced capacity - Osprey is exactly the same in this respect and capacity also varies between different back lengths in the same model pack. Ultimately it's all about fit and trying stuff on. Light weight is fine, but trust me, when I was lugging a massive lightweight pack load of climbing kit, camping gear and food etc across the Andes in a lightweight, minimalist Berghaus expedition pack, I'd have happily traded an extra 1500 grammes for a more comfortable and stable carry. Unfortunately no-one appeared to make me the offer
|
|
Fantastic fitting pack for short woman, but note it does not have mesh side pockets on the pack so you can't carry water bottles if, like me, you never intend to drink from a catheter tube on your back. The mesh panels on the belt are no good for bottles as my arms are also in that place. The other Lightwave packs do have mesh for bottles on the pack, but don't fit narrow female backs.
|
|
