![]() ![]() Unfortunately, the feel good aspect of this was undermined by an excess of packaging when unboxing, which just made the experience feel not as nice. With pluses to both sides, we decided by recording which duffel we grabbed more often, and it was the Patagonia that narrowly won.Ī small extra comment here is that the Base Camp gives you a handy storage bag for it. The North Face gets some compression straps (which only sort of help) and more useful daisy chains (which help with lashing down or piggy-backing multiple bags). ![]() The Patagonia is better with organizing and general usability, giving you slightly better pocketing (there’s a split internal lid pocket and an external zip pocket) and softer materials. Versatility – The North Face 0, Patagonia 1 While the Patagonia looks more refined, these are adventure duffels, so we’re awarding this one to the Base Camp. But in the name of thoroughness, we need a winner. Ummm, who cares, right? These are workhorses, so look doesn’t matter too much. Vitals: 120L, 1.36kg, TPU laminate on 1200D Polyester ![]() Vitals: 155L, 2.2kg, TPE laminate over 840D ballistic Nylon But heck, we wanted gear haulers so we went with scale. That raised a few issues, as these duffels probably perform slightly better in medium sizes (straps are more in proportion and their lack of structure is not as noticeable). We’ve chosen the largest size in this format for both brands. With the support of Patagonia and Rushfaster, we’ve hauled two of the big names in adventure duffels into some remote spots, and found a narrow favorite. While the classic duffel was little more than a strap and a cavity, modern gear duffels have pimped things a fair way. It might be into a camp spot, up a sheer granite wall, or just in your car for a fun week away. The North Face Base Camp battles the Patagonia Black Hole ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |