That's true but usually they come in size 2 or (rarely) 3. Funny, given the length of the average dutch guy... Some 10 years ago I bought a Vulcan, ignorant with regard to the size system, and it is a size 2. I'm 1.93 cm but used the Vulcan a lot without ever experiencing a problem. It's a confortable pack even if it's not my size.
PS DDokkum: like your quote, it's Sgt Gunny Highway in't it?
Well, the Vulcan that I ordered yesterday arrived this morning and I have just had chance to have a quick play around with it.
The waist belt on the Vulcan sits lower on my hips and feels great when I have just tested it with approx 25kg in the bag where as the Sabre sat higher up and felt as though it was digging into my waist.
The only complaint I have of the Vulcan is the belt fastener. On the Sabre it was a simple quick release buckle but on the Vulcan it is 2 pieces of plastic that just lock into one another.
The Vulcan also has a zipper around the bottom to access the bottom of the pack which is probably not something I will use and my only concern is just how durable that zipper is in the longrun.
I have however just found a couple of padded straps in the lid of the Vulcan and have no idea what they are for!!!
I have however just found a couple of padded straps in the lid of the Vulcan and have no idea what they are for!!!
Karl5, thanks for the info. After a little adjustment it covered my hipbone fine and felt great. Will persevere with this bloody belt fastner
Have anyone here actually done a side-by-side comparison of the two?
It sounds everyone are just promoting the thing they have themselves purchased? (as i also did).
I belive both packs are nice, based on reviews of both, and my own handleing of my sabre. But one must always remember that the best backpack is the one that fits you perfectly
One sidenote: How good does the bottom and sidepouch attachment zippers hold up on the vulcan? it seems a little odd that there are no supporting straps to make sure the zippers don't go bust under stress.