Best backpack for overnight Cascade highpoints

I'm looking to be more efficient with my mountaineering pack and upgrade from my 65l Gregory pack.

I was looking at something like the Osprey Mutant 52 or the Black Diamond Speed 50.

Any other suggestions for a good Rainier/Baker/Shuksan overnight kind of bag. I prefer one with easy ice tool attachments.

Pack advice online is all but useless. Packs are like shoes, some brands/models fit some individuals great, and others not not at all. You know how folks tend to have either a 5.10 foot or a Sportiva foot? The same goes for packs.

I fit Gregory packs great, and Osprey packs not at all. Go to a big store like REI that has a large selection. Get measured for the correct frame size. Then put weight in the packs (a good store will have sand bags) and backpack around the store. See what works.

For an overnight trip, a 40l pack will work. For up to 3-4 days with climbing gear, 55l should be fine. Look at the weight of the packs. The Gregory Baltoro packs are great but they weigh more than can be rationalized. 

Any of those popular packs will be fine if they fit you well. Did you already look ​here?​​​

If you want an excellent pack made in the USA: Cold Cold World, Alpine Luddites, Cilo Gear. The latter is local to you.

I need a 50L for overnights in cold weather personally. To each their own. Also every manufacturer seems to measure differently which can be frustrating. 

I did the north ridge of Mt Baker with a bivy with this pack.
I did a 4 (or 5...?) night trip on baker with AAI with this pack
I did a 6 day trip to the pickets to climb East Ridge of Inspiration Peak and the West Ridge of West McMullin with this pack for the hike and the first one inside for a summit pack.

Just get you a ultralight 30
a slim and good for climbing 45
and a heavy load hualing 65+
and you can do anything in washington.

Cold Cold World Chernobyl is what you want for all of those objectives. If you want something a little smaller, the CCW Valdez is the ticket. I have both and use the valdez more in the summer and the chernobyl more in the winter. If deciding between the two, get the chernobyl and compress it when you need to. They both climb technical routes very very well.

If you go with CCW, call them to place your order. Give them you're back measurement and you'll get a bag sized to you. They'll do some light custom work too, either for free or a very small fee depending on what you want. For example I didn't want a ski carry or daisy chains on my valdez. No probs.  

Best value in packs that fit out there imo.

Arcteryx Alpha FL45 is great.  I also like the Patagonia Ascentionist 40.  The Patagonia pack seems like the most cost-effective alpine climbing pack to me.

Mutant 52, you can always strip it down should you need to save a little weight; you can't add capacity.  I guess it all depends on how much gear you'll be humping around - sleeping bag, belay jacket, food, stove, tent, etc.  Be honest with yourself.  "Fast & Light" isn't for everyone in every scenario, but being conscious about what you pack & how much it weighs will get you pretty far.  ClimbingOn nailed it - Packs are like boots, everyone likes a pack for different reasons & not all are made the same.

I've had the Patagonia Ascentionist 40 for a little over a year now.  It did not hold up for me.  The ice tool attachment points both broke along with the main closing strap.  I wasn't crazy rough on the pack either.   I got it fixed but now the ice tools fall out when there's lots of shaking.  Go for a Cilogear or something along those lines.  The Patagucci 40 is light but will absolutely not hold up.

Check out the Mountain Equipment Tupilak packs. I just got a Tupilak 37 and really like it. The 45 might be what you’re looking for. Comparable to the FL45 (but more accurately 45L). I like the tool attachments, the simple pocket accessible from inside or outside the pack and the roll top + top flap. Materials and construction are solid. 

Are you talking about Liberty Ridge, Baker's North Ridge, North Face of Shuksan (e.g. carry-overs with some technical 2-tool climbing)?   If so, then yeah a purpose-built alpine pack makes sense.  

 If you're talking about the Emmons Route on Rainier, Coleman-Easton on Baker, or Sulphide / Fisher Chimneys on Shuksan, then any old backpacking pack is fine.

My "old man yells at cloud" thing on all of this is that many people buy these kinds of packs and accept the tradeoffs even though they don't need the "on-route" performance characteristics. .   You're not doing a bunch of "swinging tools over your head on summit day" type stuff on the second set of routes I listed.   If you want to cut weight that's fine, but just recognize that you're giving up comfort on the approach.  Is that the right tradeoff for you?  Only you can answer.   The answer depends on your athleticism, your willingness / ability to carry more of the load on the approach on your shoulders rather than your hips, etc.  

You need to be rolling modern on the rest of your kit for this size pack to be workable.  30 degree lightweight down bag, light puffy, canister stove, single-wall mountaineering tent, etc if you want to fit everything.   The other old man wisdom of "take all your shit to REI and see if you can actually stuff it into a smaller pack" sounds lame in the modern era of internet shopping but there's wisdom to it as well.

I've had A LOT of packs over the past few years.  A couple years ago it became a small obsession to me...haha

My top 1-3 day cascade pack is the Arc'teryx FL45.  It is extremely light and the 45L goes a much longer way than you'd think.  It is really light on features, but I think it is worth the weight savings.  Say, compared to the HMG Ice Pack 3400, I believe the FL45 is a much more effective use of weight and overall much easier to use. I put a lot of milage on the Mammut Trion Pro 50 as well, but I think it is just too heavy.  You can stretch all of these packs to make them work for longer climbs as well, but they get less practical.

When going to the longer more expeditionary style climbs, my favorite pack has been the Mountain Hardwear South Col 70L.  It is very feature rich, waterproof, has plenty of space for blue bags- all for a reasonably light package.  I've had the HMG Ice Pack 4400, which is about 1lb lighter, but really sacrifices on features that I miss on these longer style climbs. (Notably, I need a place to keep my blue backs outside of the main compartment of my pack.)  The Gregory Denali 75 has been a favorite to many (which I also have) but is just way too heavy.

I've also made a handful of smaller packs work, for example the FL30 and the Mammut Trion Light 38 for overnight climbs.  However, the weight savings is too insignificant to justify.

MN B wrote: I'm looking to be more efficient with my mountaineering pack and upgrade from my 65l Gregory pack.

I was looking at something like the Osprey Mutant 52 or the Black Diamond Speed 50.

Any other suggestions for a good Rainier/Baker/Shuksan overnight kind of bag. I prefer one with easy ice tool attachments.

Seems like a downgrade in packs, or at least a down-sizing.

I personally disliked the BD Speed 50.  Suspension was poor, it was uncomfortable to wear, and for as bulky as it was it packed poorly and had very few features.  My experience with Osprey is that they make comfortable packs, but can go overkill on the features and are tough to pack/strip down.  I haven't tried the Mutant specifically.  

CiloGear 30:30 has been my go to since August 2017.  I've used it for everything, including 8 day backpacking trips, multi-day ski tours, overnight Sierra climbs, and in-a-day trail runs/peak bagging.  Light weight and versatile, but requires more attention when packing to get it comfortable and filled out.  FWIW, easy tool attachments.  

Highly recommend.  

I really dig my Mutant 38 so far. I plan to pull the trigger on the Mutant 52 soon (maybe even today).

Being an Arc'teryx fan boy (I've got Alpha FL/SV jackets, theta SV/beta SL  pants, Alpha FL gloves, down mitts, etc) I want to try the Alpha FL 45. But until I find the right deal on it, I'm content to wait.

Picking this old thread back up - on routes such as north ridge baker, Fisher on Shuksan and forbidden west ridge....are most departing summit from base camp , therefore a bigger pack is ok and use a smaller summit pack on the harder lines to reach objective?  I have different options, was just interested on how most of you approach this.  Thanks!

I’ll revise my opinion from 2.5 years ago with some updates-

I now much prefer the HMG Ice Pack 4400 to anything of that size. They made some minor revisions over the past few years to make it more user friendly. It carries weight really really well, and can be rolled up nice and tight when you climb above your camp.

I now prefer the HMG Prism to the the Arcteryx FL 45. The Prism is super light, carries better the the Arcteryx, and has more features but can still be stripped down. 

Both those bags totally negate the notion of a separate summit pack altogether in my book. 

Matthew Wilson wrote:

Picking this old thread back up - on routes such as north ridge baker, Fisher on Shuksan and forbidden west ridge....are most departing summit from base camp , therefore a bigger pack is ok and use a smaller summit pack on the harder lines to reach objective?  I have different options, was just interested on how most of you approach this.  Thanks!

I'd use a ~30-40L for a single day push so I can fit my climbing gear inside on the approach. 

Overnight/from a base camp I'd opt for a big comfy pack to carry in and something like a Tufa Mochilla on summit day. I'd just put my harness on, rack up, crampons etc.. from the start so I don't need as big of a pack (as the 30L). 

One could opt to stuff/strap the overnight gear to a midsized pack and then climb with it too, as a single pack solution. 

Wouldn't agonize over it. Basically depends on your personal gear list and preferences. Maybe you're Clydesdale sized and your layers and sleep system take more room. Maybe you're more conservative in terms of what you're not willing to leave behind. No right answer. 

Matthew Wilson wrote:

Picking this old thread back up - on routes such as north ridge baker, Fisher on Shuksan and forbidden west ridge....are most departing summit from base camp , therefore a bigger pack is ok and use a smaller summit pack on the harder lines to reach objective?  I have different options, was just interested on how most of you approach this.  Thanks!

I find that a stripped down 30-40L pack works totally fine for summit day, since none of those routes have the type of sustained steep technical climbing that makes a bigger back frustrating.  And, given that most of those routes are usually climbed in summer in a good weather window and don't require massive racks, a 30-40L pack should be plenty big enough for everything to get you to base camp.

I used a BD Speed 30 on Baker's N. Ridge and the N. Ridge of Stuart, and recently used a BD Speed 40 for a trip into the Pickets to climb Inspiration (2 nights, double rack, 2 half ropes, tent, etc.).  It's extremely rare that I need more than 40L in the Cascades, I reserve my huge packs for long gear intensive trips like a weeklong trip in the Bugaboos or the Cordillera, or backpacking trips where I bring a bunch of beer.

Matthew Wilson wrote:

Picking this old thread back up - on routes such as north ridge baker, Fisher on Shuksan and forbidden west ridge....are most departing summit from base camp , therefore a bigger pack is ok and use a smaller summit pack on the harder lines to reach objective?  I have different options, was just interested on how most of you approach this.  Thanks!

I think 35-45 L is just right for three-season, overnight objectives in the NW, and I think a summit pack is unnecessary in this case. The exact size will depend on your body size and how compressible your insulation is, and also if you're doing these trips in a day or as an overnighter. A lot of people in the MP forums are pretty "dialed" and spare no expense in getting 800+ FP down [everything], but if you have synthetic it will take up much more room. Baker NR and Fisher Chimneys are doable in < 24 hours with decent fitness and good conditions, and omitting the overnight gear will free up a ton of space. I did them with 22-25 L packs, but that wouldn't work for an overnight trip. If I wanted to take in the sights on Shuksan and spend a night by Lake Ann (spectacular), I'd bring my 38 L. If it was a guided group and I only had bulky gear (full rock harness instead of a webbing glacier harness, bunch of extra clothes that guiding services require, 4-season sleep system if I could not afford an additional summer setup), I might go for 60 L. If the 60 L couldn't be stripped down, I might bring a summit pack if my fitness was in question.

Thank you guys for fast response, awesome to know there are helpful souls such as yourself on MP !

I actually have a Cilogear30L which I can't imagine adding my overnight items into - use all the time for day climbs, especially in Alps and ice climbing. I do have larger "hiking" backpacks in the 50-70 range but not technical.  Sounds like I need to look for a bomber 40L-45L pack.  I'd be going with private guide , fast moving (hopefully), likely just 1 overnight on most of the objectives, but since we are going to do a bunch we are not going to try and do them all in 24 hours or less.