Which pack for Denali?

Jonathan S wrote:

I have the Xenith 88 that I plan to use on Denali. It's a capable pack and carries fine. I used it on a 3-day winter trip last year. I was curious about the Gregory Denali, but I couldn't find it in any store near me to test, while the Xenith 88 was at REI. I also figure that 88 L is enough volume for me; if I can't fit my stuff in it (plus sled), I am probably over-packing.

Any clue on the difference between the Osprey Xenith 88 and the Aether AG 85? Looks like they’ll both carry 40-70lbs. IsoForm5 v. BioForm 4, whatever that means. $380 v. $330.

Daniel Lewis wrote:

Any clue on the difference between the Osprey Xenith 88 and the Aether AG 85? Looks like they’ll both carry 40-70lbs. IsoForm5 v. BioForm 4, whatever that means. $380 v. $330.

I don't know. They do look a lot alike. Try them both on? Some minor design differences. The Xenith has an external water bladder pouch, which I think is a good idea, although not so relevant for cold conditions where freezing is a concern.

Jonathan S wrote:

I don't know. They do look a lot alike. Try them both on? Some minor design differences. The Xenith has an external water bladder pouch, which I think is a good idea, although not so relevant for cold conditions where freezing is a concern.

I’d love to try them on, but I’m in Nashville. Not really a market for massive packs here. I’d legit have to order both and then send one back.

Daniel Lewis wrote:

 I’d legit have to order both and then send one back.

Welcome to fight club :-)

Daniel Lewis wrote:

Any clue on the difference between the Osprey Xenith 88 and the Aether AG 85? Looks like they’ll both carry 40-70lbs. IsoForm5 v. BioForm 4, whatever that means. $380 v. $330.

Googled it for you
https://expertworldtravel.com/osprey-xenith-vs-aether/
https://outdoorcrunch.com/osprey-xenith-vs-aether/
https://mountainsforeverybody.com/osprey-xenith-vs-osprey-aether-backpacks
https://www.reddit.com/r/CampingandHiking/comments/37wugh/osprey_aether_vs_osprey_xenith/

I don't see a lot of discussion on Gregory Denali 100. Is it too big/heavy? I wish to have backpack 85-90 L but not Osprey, I like Gregory fit more than Osprey. Denali seems perfect backpack, more climber like backpack not backpacker like Osprey,  bit on heavy side though..
I got one last year in Medium size, now I feel it's too large for me ( I am 5.7) ordered another one in small size, if small will fit better ready to sell medium for cheap. 

Georgy Gobozov wrote:

I don't see a lot of discussion on Gregory Denali 100. Is it too big/heavy? I wish to have backpack 85-90 L but not Osprey, I like Gregory fit more than Osprey. Denali seems perfect backpack, more climber like backpack not backpacker like Osprey,  bit on heavy side though..
I got one last year in Medium size, now I feel it's too large for me ( I am 5.7) ordered another one in small size, if small will fit better ready to sell medium for cheap. 

Got Denali 100 in small size, feels really small, especially if you wear some layers not just t-shirt. Staying with medium. Pic for size comparison.

So this is only my personal opinion: A backpack bigger then 65 L is additional weight and non practical for any trip. In 65 L backpack you will pack 50 pounds of personal stuff, you carry 50 pounds over glaciers and climbing altitude you are not going to make it.

Let’s simplify on Denali what exactly yo carry..? In back pack ..? Your tent, sleeping bag, your personal belongings (socks pants etc.) medical kit, cooking stuff and all of that is not enough to fill 65L . Most of the climb you going to wear personal gear, boots, pants, harness, parka, carabiners, ice axe . The food which is the heaviest is carrying on sled all the way to camp 3 14.300 feet. So....
People are buying to much backpack and over pack with unnecessary stuff.
Just my personal experience over 30 of mountaineering and 250 mountains climb in my life time.
Best Regards 

And Brands ...every person is different from choosing color to how the chest belt fits. Brand is personal choice for me Ospreys I don’t even like them. 

I agree Guided companies are having specific guidelines if you go with them follow their requirements however we are not going guided we are in our own. Appreciate your input.

Mitch Murariu wrote:

Just my personal experience over 30 of mountaineering and 250 mountains climb in my life time.

Any experience on any mountain in the Alaska range, Wrangells or St. Elias ranges?

Never done Alaska range My experience is on European Alps, Colorado Rocky,s, PNW, Siera Nevada mountains but I’m training who has done Alaska range, South America Aconcagua, Chile, European Alps and she has summit Ama Dablam and Lothse the 4th highest mountain in the world next to Everest. So she has observed over the years and what she is teaching that 75% of climbers in any expedition are over packing unnecessary gear and personal stuff. In Denali  for 3 weeks you are going to where the same clothes with the exception of underwear, so people pack 3 times more on personal belongings and even on food. Every climbers should have a 105L Duffel bag on a sled which is approximately 60 pounds of food and supplies and your 65L backpack with personal belongings approx 50 pounds. If You carry more than 50 pounds you are over packing.

Mitch Murariu wrote:

...your 65L backpack with personal belongings approx 50 pounds. If You carry more than 50 pounds you are over packing.

Maybe the difference between your 65L and my 75L  is the 10L of toilet paper I bring.   I don’t skimp in that dept 

@Mitch Murariu: You are right.  Everyone else with direct experience is wrong.  /thread

Ok let’s resolve this debate. Write down all your items that you will personally carry on Denali write it down.

I’m my school of mountaineering I was always teach to be minimalist I know climbers who cut the tooth brush in half for weight.

The idea is to climb light is possible so you don’t burn priceless energy and to have recovery time much shorter.

So if you make comments be on facts.

Respectfully 

Sorry, I’ve done some climbing in South America, Himalaya,  Continental US, and in Alaska. To say the demands and approaches of each of those is equivalent for most people is just ridiculous. Denali is not Huscaran, which in turn is not Ama Dablam. Here’s a tip, if you haven’t climbed in the area in question when someone posts a question about that area, maybe think about not answering that question.

SinRopa wrote:

..the bigger pack is for more space, not more weight.

Case closed right here.  

Comparing lists is meaningless.  This has been winnowed down and fine tuned that there is very little to minor variation in the gear being taken  

The issue is when, where, how you are hauling/shuttling/wearing/cacheing all that stuff.  
for the minimal pack weight delta between a 65 and 75, you are buying logistical versatility, which on Denali is a good buy   

Mitch Murariu wrote:

Never done Alaska range... Every climbers should have a 105L Duffel bag on a sled which is approximately 60 pounds of food and supplies and your 65L backpack with personal belongings approx 50 pounds.

Mitch: What you're missing is that sections of the W Buttress route are too steep for sleds once you get above 11k. However, you still need to get your food and supplies up to 14k or 17k, and you may have some unused supplies that you have to get down again. With a 65L backpack you'd be forced to do double carries, whereas you can do single carries with a larger backpack.

Your strategy would be fine on a route like the King Trench on Mt Logan, where it's feasible to take a sled all the way to high camp.

Yes 

My plan is to set camp at 14,300 camp 3 and rest, acclimate to the altitude, take a trip to 17.000 with light supplies and leave them at camp 4 , 17.000 then return back to 14.300 camp 3. And this is the reason: In between camp 3 and 4 is the most difficult climb about 3.000 feet Imagine carry 60 pounds of gear to cam 4 at 17.000 ...? By the time you there your recovery will be so difficult because of high altitude, in actuality you may not recover at all. Is where 50% of climbers are felling. Going for the summit will be light backpack, rested and Acclimated ready to climb the 6.000 feet to the Denali 20.300 .

But for that you have to be in excellent shape, the advantage is that you have now provisions at cam 4 in case of weather conditions change up on return or if you are supper exhausted. This is only a personal opinion based on books, climbers and other discussions with professional climbers who summit Denali.

There is two things to overcome on Denali is weather and altitude and yes if we get cut in Avalanche..that’s bad day. 

Mitch Murariu wrote:

My plan is to set camp at 14,300 camp 3 and rest, acclimate to the altitude, take a trip to 17.000 with light supplies and leave them at camp 4 , 17.000 then return back to 14.300 camp 3. And this is the reason: In between camp 3 and 4 is the most difficult climb about 3.000 feet Imagine carry 60 pounds of gear to cam 4 at 17.000 ...? By the time you there your recovery will be so difficult because of high altitude, in actuality you may not recover at all. Is where 50% of climbers are felling. Going for the summit will be light backpack, rested and Acclimated ready to climb the 6.000 feet to the Denali 20.300 .

But for that you have to be in excellent shape, the advantage is that you have now provisions at cam 4 in case of weather conditions change up on return or if you are supper exhausted. This is only a personal opinion based on books, climbers and other discussions with professional climbers who summit Denali.

There is two things to overcome on Denali is weather and altitude and yes if we get cut in Avalanche..that’s bad day. 

Ok.  You cache some stuff at 17k.  Weather and maybe your health takes a turn for the worse.  And now...maybe someone has to bring down your stuff because you're out of time or out of juice.

I think if you're approaching Denali as an alpine climb...fine.  But, folks "expedition style" the West Buttress because they can, and, it gives a party much higher chances for success.

Having "provisions" at 17k camp is way different than having an established camp.  If you're going to go to 17 and cache...why not cache at 16 and pick it up on your full move to the 17k camp?  Then, you're money for summit day...and you have a couple days of margin for weather or acclimating.

Anyhow...you do you for sure.  But, other comments are right...the size of the pack is for that bulky gear, not more weight.  Full parka, overboots, mittens, poo can...those alone will max out any 50L pack with no room leftover for food/fuel, tent, sleeping bag.  And, a bigger pack's weight is more than offset by how well it will carry with any load, as well as the options it provides for moving all of your stuff in one go.

I'm not a pro climber.  But, never been guided and have summited Denali and Logan (East Ridge to true summit).  Etc.

All sounds good on paper and from the comfort of a warm room in front of a computer...ha ha.

Good luck and be safe.  Tell us how it went!

I doubt that people fail the climb due to the say 3# difference in pack weight between 65/75L and  90/100L.  Maybe by putting extra stuff in it but not just the pack itself.  The difference in "bulk" between a size Medium and say an XL Parka and Sleeping bag alone may necessitate a bigger pack.  Buy everything you plan on carrying in the pack - then try loading it - if it fits you're olden - if not you need a bigger pack.