|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 627
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 627 |
Need a smaller day pack type bag for my nice frame. Looking at these two bags. It will be used for day hunts from the truck and hauling critters back. I'm leaning more towards the new metcalf bag as it alittle bigger and still has the ability to pack meat.
Just looking for some input from guys who have used it before, thanks In advance gentlemen.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,065
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,065 |
I have no experience with either, but have been doing some reading on MR packs and some of the other premium top of the line companies, and will be interested to hear what others have to say.
Tim
"I hate rude behaviour in a man .....I won't tolerate it." Capt. Woodrow F. Call (Tommy Lee Jones) The Movie "Lonesome Dove"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,123 Likes: 4
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,123 Likes: 4 |
I never really liked my Crew Cab because it required undoing several buckles to get into any of the pockets other than the outside zippered one. I replaced it with a Longbow shortly after they came out. No experience with the Metcalf.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 392
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 392 |
If you are set on MR, then i would pick up the Metcalf hands down. Functional load lifters trump being pulled over backwards any day.
MR answered complaints about a lack of shoulder lift and heavy weight with the Metcalf bag. They also put out their load lifter extensions, but I don't have any experience with them.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 596
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 596 |
I have both bags. I can say with out hesitation get the Metcalf. It is easier to load meat due to the total height of the bag compressing the meat between the bag and the frame. The front of the crew can is much shorter and when wrapping over a load shrinks pretty fast making larger loads harder to clip/buckle in.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 782
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 782 |
I have the CC, LB and Metcalf. If I could only have one, it would be the Metcalf. That being said, on several occassions, I have hauled out entire boned out deer and day use paraphernalia with a LongBow. It was tight, but doable.
Metcalf will also get you through a week long hunt with no problem.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,191
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,191 |
If you are set on MR, then i would pick up the Metcalf hands down. Functional load lifters trump being pulled over backwards any day.
MR answered complaints about a lack of shoulder lift and heavy weight with the Metcalf bag. They also put out their load lifter extensions, but I don't have any experience with them. Was there ever any changes made on their stay extensions from the very first bags to the current ones?
I'm Irish...
Of course I know how to patch drywall
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 392
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 392 |
The stays in my bag are functional, not sure if they are different than other models.
|
|
|
|
547 members (25aught6, 10Glocks, 270wsmnutt, 160user, 257Bob, 257 roberts, 62 invisible),
2,541
guests, and
1,284
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,375
Posts18,527,446
Members74,031
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
|