I have a sabre 45 and 75. The 45 is great, even at heavy loads it sticks to my back and I do not have to lean forward to balance. But the 75 is extremely uncomfortable, the belt doesn't seem stuck to the back of the pack so the bottom of the back seems to flop down like a beer belly resulting in me leaning forwards to balance up. Any ideas what I am doing wrong, I've pulled in the straps on the shoulders and tightened up all the other straps.
Sabre 75 not comfortable - what am I doing wrong
- Thread starter wilekayote
- Start date
Well, if the 45 fits you like a glove, that does suggest that the 75 might be a little too tall for your back length. Since it doesn't have an adjustable back system but you've done everything you can by adjusting the shoulder straps, there isn't a great deal you can do.
Also if you're on the slim side, those chunky hip belts can't really get a grip, which doesn't help. & the lumber pad has nothing to rest on so slips down..
Also if you're on the slim side, those chunky hip belts can't really get a grip, which doesn't help. & the lumber pad has nothing to rest on so slips down..
It might be that the base volume of your pack isn't full enough. Ram a load of gear in there so it's well supported and try again, I had this problem with an 85 litre pack
I had the same problem with the Karrimor, I bought one brand new before a trip that seemed to fit fairly well. It is build like a tank, but fit-wise a struggle during the whole 12 day trip. Sold it and got an ex-army Saracen with an adjustable back frame. Much better.
Thanks for the replies. 5'10" 178cm 77kg medium build. Gut 93cm at its max. I had to put extra foam in the 45 belt for a better fit but the belt on the 75 is more comfortable it just does stop the droop at the back.
The belt is attached to the outer shell of the pack but that part of the outer shell is not attached to he internal board at that point. I think if it was it might solve the problem, Is this how they are all made or do I have a dodgy one?
The belt is attached to the outer shell of the pack but that part of the outer shell is not attached to he internal board at that point. I think if it was it might solve the problem, Is this how they are all made or do I have a dodgy one?
Size wise seems to be OK then, so as already suggested it might be a packing problem. Are you filling her up sufficiently ? Big packs need to be carried full in order to work at their best. If you only half load, the weight will just push the base down & the whole bag will droop, whereas fully loaded, pressure on the sides, back & front transforms the pack into a firmer unit.
This is exactly what I was trying to say in my post, but you have worded it much better than me
I never have seen a rucksack with internal frame where the belt was attached to the frame. Usually you can easily pull the frame out after opening just one strap buckle.
I don't know the Sabre 75. Theoretically it could be too large for you. You aren't the tallest, but also not really a dwarf. I think it should fit you, but I stay unsure in this case. It is possible that your carrying system is too large.
I recommend to compare the dimensions of the carrying system of Sabre 75 and 45. Are they identic or is the carrying system of the Sabre 75 significantly larger?
If yes, it's perhaps too wide for you.
If not it seems to be a packing fault.
Unfortunately @eraaij didn't yet tell us how tall he is. But he could have had the problem into the other direction. A too tall Dutch in a too small British rucksack???
Berghaus offers the larger - non adjustable - rucksacks for several back lengths, like clothing is offered in several body sizes.
One size fits all doesn't work with non adjustable rucksacks with hip belt.
If the rucksack carrying system isn't adjustable it fits correctly only people with approximately the body hight that the makers did choose for the average man.
And it is absolutely possible, that the perfectly fitting back length of the smaller packs is smaller than the perfectly fitting back length of the larger pack.
A very small person usually has problems to find a well fitting large rucksack, and a very tall person usually doesn't find so easily a well fitting small rucksack.
It's obvious, that the makers assume that a small guy can't carry a fully loaded 120 litres rucksack anyway. And they don't offer such constructions for the rare exceptions.
I mean, generally one needs to keep that in mind. But otherwise you seem to look pretty normal.
I think you should try to pack it differently.
And you should write an e- email to Karrimor SF. They seem to have an excellent client service and they also can tell you if the rucksack was constructed for your back length or not.
I don't know the Sabre 75. Theoretically it could be too large for you. You aren't the tallest, but also not really a dwarf. I think it should fit you, but I stay unsure in this case. It is possible that your carrying system is too large.
I recommend to compare the dimensions of the carrying system of Sabre 75 and 45. Are they identic or is the carrying system of the Sabre 75 significantly larger?
If yes, it's perhaps too wide for you.
If not it seems to be a packing fault.
Unfortunately @eraaij didn't yet tell us how tall he is. But he could have had the problem into the other direction. A too tall Dutch in a too small British rucksack???
Berghaus offers the larger - non adjustable - rucksacks for several back lengths, like clothing is offered in several body sizes.
One size fits all doesn't work with non adjustable rucksacks with hip belt.
If the rucksack carrying system isn't adjustable it fits correctly only people with approximately the body hight that the makers did choose for the average man.
And it is absolutely possible, that the perfectly fitting back length of the smaller packs is smaller than the perfectly fitting back length of the larger pack.
A very small person usually has problems to find a well fitting large rucksack, and a very tall person usually doesn't find so easily a well fitting small rucksack.
It's obvious, that the makers assume that a small guy can't carry a fully loaded 120 litres rucksack anyway. And they don't offer such constructions for the rare exceptions.
I mean, generally one needs to keep that in mind. But otherwise you seem to look pretty normal.
I think you should try to pack it differently.
And you should write an e- email to Karrimor SF. They seem to have an excellent client service and they also can tell you if the rucksack was constructed for your back length or not.
Have you tried contacting Karrimor Sf? I had a recent issue with a squeaky sabre 45, contacted them and had a reply from the CEO within hours, and the issue resolved within a week. Fab customer service and i'm sure they'll be able to offer help or advice.
I should have mentioned that. I am a tad over 1.80m, and yes- I think it felt as if it was on the small side when fully loaded up. Nothing bad otherwise about the pack apart from it getting a bit squeaky on the trail, as written here in the Thread. Forgot about that
Thank you!
But now I am really wondering.
178 cm body hight can't be too small if 180 cm is nearly too tall.
Of course we talk here about back length and not body height, but that doesn't look logical.
Is @Karrimor SF regularly on board here and could tell us please which is the body height the Sabre 75 is made for, if we assume a usual north European body shape?
To know the optimal body height for the Sabre 45 would also be pretty interesting by the way.
But now I am really wondering.
178 cm body hight can't be too small if 180 cm is nearly too tall.
Of course we talk here about back length and not body height, but that doesn't look logical.
Is @Karrimor SF regularly on board here and could tell us please which is the body height the Sabre 75 is made for, if we assume a usual north European body shape?
To know the optimal body height for the Sabre 45 would also be pretty interesting by the way.
Last edited:
Agreed, it's all in the relative dimensions. Bottom line in my case is that no matter what I tried, I could not get a comfortable fit, forcing my spine backwards when resting the pack on the hips and with eveything moderately/normal snug. This meant that the weight was on my shoulders more than it should be during the trip. It was simply too short for my back.
This was especially a hindrance with the heavy loads and I can get that fit right away with the Saracen. Since I don't own the Karrimor anymore it is a bit hard discussing this in detail. It would have been stellar when it had an adjustable height.
Best,
-Emile
An adjustable system also has its downsides, the weight for example, but it is often also less practical and less durable.
I like very much that Berghaus makes the large rucksacks in several sizes. But I like the System at the Savotta Jääkäri L too, because here the hip belt changes the position and not the shoulder straps.
I find that theoretically superior, although Arwy is surely able to make rucksacks that last.
I like very much that Berghaus makes the large rucksacks in several sizes. But I like the System at the Savotta Jääkäri L too, because here the hip belt changes the position and not the shoulder straps.
I find that theoretically superior, although Arwy is surely able to make rucksacks that last.
Is it the Sabre with the plastic mounting strips on the side for attaching side pockets like the zips on a Berghaus?
Last edited:
The Karrimor jaguars & condors of the 1980s/early 90s were the forerunners of today's SF sabres.
