"I always thought it best (if I had questions about someone's pack), to buy the pack and test it for myself, but I doubt that you will ever do that with open eyes."
Aron, no offense man, but, seriously?
That's mighty noble of you, but the main point of reviews, and one of the primary purposes of this section of the forum, etc., is the dissemination of information such that you can make an educated decision before you buy.
Frankly, considering the cost of this pack, and the lofty claims, this becomes all the more relevant.
Honestly, I'd think it more likely easier to be less critical of something (especially a pricey something), that you didn't have to pay for, than the thing you did. Not hard to love something free, unless you're intent to find it's flaws.
If I paid what they're asking for this pack, I'd expect full spectra/dyneema. Which is one of the things that makes me see how it could be very important for Kifaru to differentiate themselves from the "silnylon" image.
Which btw, I didn't respond again before, but in my book, any 30D(or other denier for that matter) ripstop nylon, that's silicone coated, single, double, triple, or quadruple, no matter how tenacious or american, or what the relevant test strengths, *is* silnylon. Plain and simple, all that appears to be going on here is the manufacturer playing the semantics game. As requested, "sticking with the facts", we've been given two contradictory statements by the manufacturer. 1) This isn't silnylon. 2) "mil-spec Ultra High Tenacity American ripstop nylon" & "silicone coated on both sides"
Obviously, my definition of "silnylon" and Kifaru's definition are different, and that's the problem, it's arbitrary, there is no consensus baseline.
Anyway, this has become a soap opera of skeptics vs believers, and it's getting downright near religious, and absolutely unproductive. I know I'm playing my part, but I'm not proud of it. This is a waste of time.
edit: spelling and grammar only, I'm not going to recant.