Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Macpac Amp Light 45 vs Talon 44: shop impressions
Display Avatars Sort By:
Adrian B
(adrianb) - MLife

Locale: Auckland, New Zealand
Macpac Amp Light 45 vs Talon 44: shop impressions on 02/13/2007 18:28:03 MST Print View

Yesterday I tried on both the Amp Light 45 & the Talon 44, and found it pretty hard to choose between them.

When first on the Talon felt a little more comfortable & 'softer' on the back: in comparison the Amp was a bit 'harder'. When weighted down both were comfy though.

The Amp feels like it's tougher & more rugged: the pack material feels stronger and less flimsy than the Talon, the clips & straps more substantial. Probably the slightly heavier weight of the Amp contributes to the impression of toughness as well.

I prefer the more restrained styling of the Amp: the Talon looks a little cheesy, the Amp more serious.

The Talon uses stretch pockets on the side & pack, the Amp uses thick non-stretch mesh with drawcords (potentially safer? probably just comes down to preference).

The Talon has a few more hooks, straps, pockets & 'features': the Amp is a bit more minimal & less cluttered. Again, probably just personal preference.

In the end I walked out of the shop with the Amp, but when I got home I found that the sleeve for a water bladder was to short for my 3.0L camelbak bladder - inexplicably it's only about 28cm long. According to the cascade designs website, Platypus does a 1.8L model which is about the right size (the 2.0L camelbak is still too long). But since I'd only just bought the camelbak I went back and swapped for the Talon (which has a hydration sleeve which goes the full length of the pack). If I'd really preferred the Amp over the Talon I would have been happy to stick with it and find a smaller bladder. Or you could probably mess about with the stiching at the bottom of the short bladder sleeve on the Amp.

If anyone else is having trouble deciding, I suspect you wouldn't go wrong either way :)

Edited by adrianb on 02/13/2007 18:32:11 MST.

jeremy sanders
(germ007) - F
Talon 44 on 04/13/2007 15:32:56 MDT Print View

I am interested in the Talon 44. How is it so far? I am curious if I can fit a lighthouse tent, marmot atom bag, jetboil, food and cloths in the main compartment.

Rick Dreher
(halfturbo) - MLife

Locale: Northernish California
Re: Talon 44 on 04/13/2007 16:37:14 MDT Print View

Hi Jeremy,

I reviewed the Talon 44 here:

I can't respond as to whether your specific gear will fit, only that it's roomier in practise than some packs of the same capacity due to its shape and external carry features.

If a shop in your area carries them, I suggest taking your main gear there and have them fit you. I found it to be a comfortable and flexible pack.

Pieter Nienaber
(pnienaber) - F

Locale: Swanbourne, Western Australia
Talon 44 on 04/14/2007 02:14:22 MDT Print View

Hi, i have owned a Talon 44 since Christmas 2006 (yes, Osprey sent some to Paddy Pallin Australia before they were available elsewhere, apparently).

I love my Talon 44 and have taken it on a 3-day hike (60 km) loaded with 14kgs (3 liters of water and 1 litre of wine), a Bivvy, JetBoil, etc. That is probably its comfortable limit. 12kg feels a lot better.

I am very happy with the Talon. I know it is not going to last forever, but it is certainly light!!!

I used a 2 litre CamelBak in the Talon's sleeve, and yes it will also take a 3 litre CamelBak.

The Talon was significantly cheaper than the Amp 45 ($215 AUD vs $299).

I like both packs, but the price swayed me.