Arcteryx Alpha FL 40 vs Blue Ice Warthog 40
|
I’m looking to pick up an ultralight 40ish liter alpine pack, and I think I’ve narrowed it down to two options: Arcteryx Alpha FL 40: 715g, $290 and seems to be very popular as an ultralight alpine pack. Blue Ice Warthog 40: 700g, $200. Cheaper and lighter than the Arcteryx, and it comes with side compression straps and removable padding on the waist belt. Seems like it could be better than the Arcteryx, except I can’t find a single review of it anywhere online. (Note that I’m looking at the new, purple warthog pack, and not the old blue version) Would love to hear about people’s experiences with either of these lacks, but especially the new blue ice pack, since I can’t find any reviews of it online. Or if there are other packs in this weight class, I’d be curious to hear about those too. Thanks! |
|
I have the previous verison of Arcteryx Alpha FL 40 that I got at a bargain. It climbs very well for its size and can carry way more than 40l. It is slightly awkward to pack do to the internal drybag, but I like it a lot. I had the Patagonia Ascensionist 35 before that also packs way more than 35 l. I like the Arcteryx slightly better and would say that they carry about similar volume over overpacked. I would guess at least 50 l. |
|
John L wrote: I've had the Blue Ice pack since February of 2022. I like it ok. It carries well for it's minimalist hip belt and suspension. It climbs well. It's been durable and I've been abusive to it. The features are minimal but executed well. I have a few dislikes... The buckles clog with snow during transitions where the pack has to be set down. The G hooks for the straps are a little small but also seem to come undone on their own too easily. There's no extension collar. There's no brain/option for a brain (which I didn't think I would care about but have missed at times since there's no extension collar). The volume is optimistic at 40L compared to some other competitors. I've never used the Arcteryx pack to give a direct comparison. I'm in my mind I'm comparing it against Mountain Hardwear Alpine Light 35 which I like better and feel has the same volume. I'm also comparing it against BD packs, and predecessor BI Warthog 45. |
|
I have the newer remodeled Arcteryx Alpha 40L pack. I find it okay. Not the miracle bag I had been led to believe by the overwhelming positive reviews. It is made of a pretty darn durable material compared to most other bags. This makes it heavier but its minimalist design still makes it a very light choice. I will second that the pockets the Arcteryx does have are kinda weird and shouldn’t be filled too bulky. Many folks might prefer a lid/brain or other organization style of some kind. It’s definitely “huge” for 40L and can carry more than that easily. I agree 55+ liters is possible. It’s climbs decent but unfortunately I find that is is uncomfortable when I pack it heavy/full. Overall I think it’s just too big for the intended use. I’m capable of bringing everything I need for a 5+ day trip in a smaller bag. I would consider the smaller Arcteryx 30L may be a better option, but I haven’t had a chance to try it. Assuming this pack feels like a 40+ liter bag it seems perfect to me. The other bag I’ve heard the best reviews of is the Hyperlight Mountain Gear Prism 40L. Lots of $$$ but very light and “durable.” They other option is the Mutant 38 from Osprey. Lifetime warranty. |
|
If you go the Arc'teryx way, I'd get the Alpha 30 FL. It extends to about 37 liters with the collar. I have the first gen alpha fl 45 and the 2nd gen 30. They are similar in size. The new 40 must be a huge monster and a whole different kind of bag than the streamlined, waterproof and ultra simple climbing pack that the 30 is. Pretty much what Alex says above. |