Hi! Bill Ostrom here. You're right, the photo does not give much information. It is a full plastic frame sheet and 2 aluminum stays that is similar to the design of most internal frame backpacks on the market. It is very effective in transferring weight between the shoulders and hips. It does add weight... and a lot of comfort.

Anne and Bill Ostrom here, again. In 2018/19 Bill designed the yellow RBW barrel harness with RBW as an entry level harness to fill that gap in the market. And your harness is from that year, when our name was on the label.

Having said that, our business association ended in 2019. And we have had no input into any harness design updates since then. I.e., if our name isn't on it, we had no involvement in the design.

In 2019, we gifted the designs of the barrel accessories to RBW as a goodwill gesture (cooler, buckets, accessory pocket etc.). We wanted canoeists to have access to our designs.

We love our Ostrom packs! Had them going on 15 years, and they are still like new. Would not trade them for anything, despite the wieght.

_________________
"I've never met a river I didn't like. The challenges are what we remember, and the experiences will make great memories for when I can pick up my paddle no more". Me

So I ended up deciding to try the RBW pack as the cost and weight is just so much lower. Can give some more info on it for anyone who finds this and is interested.

The tag says "Manufactured and Assembled in Hong Kong and Canada", so make of that what you will.

I don't know how much I would trust their tag at all, as it says the bag weights 2.2lbs (on their site it says 3.75lbs), but on my scale it is 4.5 (granted, my scale is a normal scale that I stood on with and without the pack). The tag also says "1000D Cordura Nylon" with the cordura blacked out with a sharpie...

That being said, for $150 I am very impressed with the quality. The zippers are heavy duty and YKK. The grab handles are big and very squishy to grab. All the stitching looks high quality to my eyes, with lots of reinforcement where you want it. They certainly have seem to have gone with "lets pad the crap out of this" over "lets go with an ergonomic design"

Have a few trips in the next few weeks so will try to come back and update further.

An Ostrom may still be in my future!

these packs appear 99% the same.
no, they appear 100% the same if you don't look at the logo.

as for how much they, in fact, are the same,
i would be very interested in that. particularly, the stitching program, the material and number of layers. it was said above:



like this RBW one?


it was said earlier that it's a "coincidence" that RBW packs are similar to Ostrom packs.
it is no coincidence. something explains the similarity.
i am not really interested in what explains that, but i AM absolutely interested in what exactly the differences are.

for the no-frame version, RBW and Ostrom price differs by $60.
for the frame version, RBW and Ostrom price differs by $130.
they are apparently the same packs. something explains that price difference. is it the brand name?

it's not like CCS, Granite Gear, Chinook, Level Six, etc, compared to RBW. Those are totally different packs, and so the price difference is 'accounted for' by virtue of that difference.
whereas here, since the RBW and Ostrom are mirrors of each other, one is left to wonder what accounts for the price difference.

given that these packs are so identical, i think it would be quite natural (and helpful to paddlers) for either RBW or Ostrom to state what the differences are.

well, i was wrong that they are identical to the eye.
they aren't, if you look close.
and there is 1 feature which is different if looking from far (the back).
below is a pic showing differences/similarities.
ostrom is on the lower row, and rbw is not that shade of red. it is brighter as in above pic.

notes:
-although ostrom pics don't show top zipper pocket, it does have it like rbw has it.
-although rbw pics don't show back cushion, it does have wide foam behind the red fabric
(ostrom seems to add a black non-firm plushy thing against the foam back; that's the black shown).
-rbw has more grab loops around the pack, ostrom has more d-ring clip points.
-rbw seems to add more quirky features. eg, adding more material to top zipper pocket
so that it 'bunches' a bit (not flat tight), so that when stuffed, no strain on zipper/easy zip (more space).

-rbw seems to repeatedly invent/add thoughtful features to each year's model
-ostrom seems more of a 'one-finished-pack', and more comfort oriented.
and the hidden foams+visible webbing might be more premium, though pack body seems same material.
-ostrom might have more areas of the pack that are double layered. not sure.
-ostrom has modular hip belt and shoulder straps, which should add comfort for those who find standard sizing uncomfortable. it also allows to replace parts (that's the advantage for me).

all in all, ostrom seems a pack polished toward a bit more durability and a bit more comfort.
hard to say if that bit is negligible or not. really hard.
i think how and what you pack, and how you tighten straps, are the Real factors there.
(ostrom and rbw both have frame option and the proper tension-ing lines).
though ostrom frame seems to cost $70 more than rbw frame. not sure why that is.

i have seen people complain while using these ostrom packs and any pack, as long as they loaded the beast up and the port was long enough.
i know ostrom marketing says things like "portages should be comfortable!".

lol well, they ain't.
and people use duluth packs because they don't care. those who do care grab a pack with an ok frame and an ok belt. that's where comfort Really shows up. night and day. it's like the first time trying a hammock on trip after years and years of no such thing. unreal feeling.
the comfort steps in when those 2 parts do, not when tweaking those 2 parts.

The most significant difference is the Ostrom is built to be a dependable lifelong pack not compromising on quality. The Second Major difference (and honestly the most important difference) is that Ostrom packs are custom fit, to you and your unique proportions. There isn't another canoe pack out there that is designed to custom fit you, meaning the load is carried properly and comfortably. "ostrom seems to add a black non-firm plushy thing against the foam back; that's the black shown" I think what your looking at is some of the padding, and from a picture does look a bit odd. However, This unique setup allows you to set up your torso length helping with that custom fit. There is over 1 inch of foam on the back to make this as comfortable as possible.

As far as the internal frame option, Ostroms is sewn in, holding the frame in the right spot of the pack to properly carry the weight to your hips. I believe that sewing is done in Canada, and could help explain the additional cost. I personally have some questions about having the removable frame, and wonder how it might move around and not carry the load correctly.

Personally, I have used a lot of different packs. old and new. Technical and traditional. large and small. From just about every manufacturer and Nothing compares to an ostrom when it's custom fitted to you.

hi Ray thanks for your input,



yes that is important. but does RBW fall short in that regard? that's the question right?

-thread type + stitching scheme for each high-stressed area
-foam type + amount in belt and straps, and back of pack,
-webbing type + material of main body of pack, along with # layers of it

are the key things one might want to ask Ostrom and RBW, to see what accounts for the extra $80 (it's $80 extra not $60 as i previously said). and if one wants a frame,
apply same type of questions to it, to see if the extra $50 (on top of said extra $80) is worth it.



yes this is huge deal for someone looking to max out comfort.
4 shoulder strap sizes, 4 hip belt sizes, 3 torso sizes = 48 body types accommodated with an ostrom. that's pretty amazing when you think about it.

RBW accommodates 1 body type lol. what were these guys thinking? not even 2 body types accommodated out of the entire population. just 1 body? were we born on an assembly line? lol.

truth is, all these companies have been selling 1 size and on average they work. all those packs throw you a party of comfort, compared to a pack without a belt and frame --- THE canoe pack.

i suppose one gets a secondary party with ostrom
how much MORE of a party that adds to the existing party, is the big the question i think. depends on each person's body, and attitude.

myself, i care only about your first point.
if i find out the answers i will post them here. these 2 packs seem to be the top 2 canoe packs in the province, maybe the country.

Truthfully, without being able to put these 2 packs in your hand you never going to get a real feel for where the better value is. In the hiking world, there are many companies that make packs in different sizes for different body shapes so the custom fit idea does make sense. Why only one canoe pack manufacturer has started makes little sense to me.

Ostrom has a legacy in Canada of building the best packs money can buy, a pack that you will only need to buy once and you will still get to pass it off to your grandchildren. They have the knowledge of what works, and what doesn't. I have never been on a trip where an Ostrom pack failed, in any way. I can't say that for any other pack including the ones you are comparing too. I have Ostrom packs from the late 1990s that I'm the 3 or 4th owner of and they are still 100% solid. I also have the new ones, and to be honest, they are so similar to the old, that you would struggle to tell the difference.

Below are some of the tech specs you where asking for.

Built for Comfort
• The back pad has heavy padding (3/4” / 19mm cushy reticulated foam over a layer of 1/2” / 13mm dense EVA foam)

• Lumbar pad has 1" / 25mm soft ether foam over a layer of 1/2” / 13mm dense EVA foam.
• Shoulder straps are S-shaped to fit all genders better. (S, M, L, XL)
• Hip belt is comfortable for all genders. (S, M, L, XL)
• Shoulder straps and hip belt have 2 layers of foam for comfort. (1/2” / 13mm high-quality EVA dense foam & 1/2” / 13mm soft ether foam)


High-Quality Materials and Construction
• Reinforced high-stress areas are bar-tacked. (compression straps, handles)
• National Molding Duraflex buckles.
• #10YKK zippers with un-coated sliders. (better wear and tear)
• 1000 denier nylon fabric with a double layer on the bottom, front, and sides.
• Multi-Density EVA foam does not compress over time.

ya, good question re 'why only 1 canoe pack maker offers size variants'.

for the answer,
i would guess 2 things: 1, it's a canoe pack, and 2, it's a canoe pack.

where by 1 i mean: companies are guided by what it is, what it's always been
where by 2 i mean: users aren't much asking for better fits, since they're on canoe trips

backpacking, on the other hand, is about carrying a load Every minute of the trip, so it makes sense backpacks have evolved toward comfort optimisation.

you said that "i can't say that about the rbw pack" (per ostrom pack never failing). are you saying that RBW pack failed in some way? in what way did it fail?

thanks for the specs info Ray, and yes, great that the old ostrom is = to the new.
but it begs the question:
is RBW as bomber as the old ostrom = new ostrom?

ill try to get more specs and then the specs for the RBW pack, then compare them.
it all comes down to specs.
and again i am really interested in what way the RBW failed (if it did). can you elaborate?

I reached out to the source! If you need any more info I suggest reaching out to Bill.

Hello Folks. Bill Ostrom here. Ray has agreed to post this for me as I am not overly familiar with posting and my partner (brains, beauty & computer expertise) is away hiking in Spain.

I too, was surprised that RBW’s canoe packs looked so similar to my Ostrom packs!

They are made in the same factory in China. I introduced RBW to the manufacturer I had used for 3 years and continue to use.

Being made in the same factory does not mean that they are made to the same specifications.

An example of this is that World Famous hiking packs used to be manufactured in the same factory as Osprey Packs. Two different companies, designs, price points and product expectations.

There are several differences between Ostrom and RBW packs not already mentioned in these posts and a few that I will repeat.

EXAMPLES:

Ostrom packs are sewn 4 times. Our competitors packs are sewn 2-3 times.

Ostrom packs have a stitch count of 7-8 stitches per inch.

A small detail. Our zippers are #10 YKK zippers. The zipper slider is nickel plated not coated/painted. With extensive use the coating wears off sliders and the zipper teeth start to separate. Our zipper and fabric edges are bound/taped while most competitors are not.

Ostrom packs are unique with an extra layer of 400 denier pack cloth in the back panel where most reinforcement occurs. This extra reinforcement has meant no failures of shoulder straps or hip belts separating from the pack in over 35 years.

Ostrom packs have 4 sizes of shoulder straps (SS) and hip belts (HB) to fit most people. If a SS or HB is damaged, or you lose or gain weight, it is easily replaced. I do not believe that performance and comfort are enhanced by a “one size fits all” type of pack.

Ostrom frame sheets in the Wabakimi canoe pack are sewn in permanently. This provides maximum stability and load transfer. I experimented with a pocket and velcro for the frame sheet but it did not meet my expectations. There is a reason that almost every manufacturer has their frame sheets permanently sewn in!

Our Winisk and Wabakimi canoe packs are also unique in that the torso length is adjustable.

My Ostrom packs are heavier and more expensive because they are built to exacting standards and have features that are unique in the canoe pack market. This takes extra labor, webbing, fabric and buckles.
I design and have my packs manufactured using 3 main principles. FIT, FUNCTION & DURABILITY.

Ostrom packs may be a fit for you (pun intended) if you are willing to carry an extra pound or two, want to be more comfortable on portages and know that your pack will last a lifetime on the trail and portages. Please feel free to contact me directly.

Sincerely, Bill Ostrom, bill@ostrompacks.com

thanks ray and bill,

again, ray, you seemed to have implied that the rbw pack had failed in some way. did it actually fail, or did you mean that you haven't tried it, and therefore cannot say how good (or how bad) it is?

exhaustive details in this thread (though still missing RBW specs, which are coming). this thread should be helpful to those on the fence per these 2 quite similar packs, which (again) do seem to be the most thoughtfully built canoe packs in the country.

i myself own 2 ostrom packs (haven't used them yet) and 2 rbw packs, but do not have them with me, otherwise i would be dissecting the crap out of them into a 10 page closeup-picture report.

another ostrom perk:

the zipper is covered by a flap (rbw not), which protects the zipper from high-force snag, such as when ripping the pack out of the boat etc, and (more obviously) protects it from dirt and sand (tiny rocks) getting in there, jamming it up, possibly damaging it?

i would like to respond to:

the reason the frames are permanently in, is likely due to who those manufacturers are: those tall and skinny Hiking packs are literally machines evolved specifically for life on the trail. they are like tigers, so perfectly fine-tuned to their habitat and business.

so, there is no motivation to have the frame able to slide into the material, vs., have it be already slid in. that would be like having the hip belt attachable instead of being already attached. the tiger comes complete, all done up and ready for action.

the following could be true, but i would be shocked if it was:

we would lose (a relevant magnitude of) the effectiveness of the frame, had we made a strongly stitched sleeve into which the frame gets inserted, instead of strongly stitching the frame to that same place.

indeed, the velcro lid seems flimsy (not really holding the frame to place). but unless that flap gets burst open (gets found open), from the forces of the portage, the frame did not move.

that is one of the reasons i like cheap questionable gear lol. it enables you to see what the limits are. what the requirements actually are.

it's like bumping into the curb so that you know where it is

thinking on this more: if the frame is stitched to the material on BOTH sides of that frame (not clear if it is stitched on both sides), then it does seem this would add rigidity between you and load. because picture it: the load inside the pack is pressed against the backside material, so it is dragging that material left/right/up/down in small shifts as you walk (load bounces), or lean on a crooked slope, etc. so here is the thing: if the frame is independent of that dragged material, then these little shifts happen more easily (the material slides on the frame). but if the frame is NOT independent of that dragged material (if it is stitched to it), then the frame must shift too. and for the frame to shift, the material on the OTHER side (if stitched to) must shift, and for that to shift your back must shift. that's rigidity between you and load. so this could be a reason to NOT prefer a pocket for the frame, since a pocket is by definition not stitched. but i don't know how significant the shift-difference would be (bill would know). it just seems like there is so many layers (and different foams) before we even get to your back, and so the shifts still happen. i could be wrong though. it seems that it may dampen the shifts rather than stop them. which i guess is like stopping them. stops the 'suddenness' of them. sort of like a heavy canoe does not 'feel' the waves, though still does (must) respond. makes carrying smoother feeling.

Yes, I did personally see a failure on a couple of packs (a couple of seasons ago) where an RBW pack failed. Both occurrences it was the seems that let go. I have no idea what the packs are like at this time and can give no more information than that on them. They were new or close to new so misuse couldn't have really been a factor. They were not mine, nor do I own any RBW. What I can tell you is they weren't nearly as full or heavy as my ostrom ones were and they seem did in fact let go. Was it a trip-ender? no. But were the owners disappointed? Absolutely. Again, I can not comment on how it was dealt with after the trip. I have also had failures on Eureka, Hoolagain, Serratus, sealine, North49, and a few more.

I strongly suggest you reach out to Bill, and have an open-minded discussion with him about your questions. You may be surprised at his answers. Im sure he can explain to you all the reasons the frame sheet options did not meet his expectations. It's a long dark rabbit hole.

At the end of the day - I just want to go Canoeing, and my first trip was with duffle bags as a teen. just about anything is an upgrade from that.

great info. thanks for sharing. hopefully the owners sent them back and RBW improved the stitching since. one might want to ask RBW. i also have their earliest pack -- the one whose top extension matches in color the pack itself (now extensions are always black, like ostroms). no issues yet. yes i have talked to bill a couple times and those discussions are what led me to buy his packs. here today, i am more interested in having the differences in plain view and quantified, for my own knowledge, and so that the topic of this thread gets addressed, for the benefit of anyone stuck between these 2 (leading) packs. i keep the ostroms on the shelf for remote long trips (just for assurance), and take RBW and others everywhere else. i have seen nothing but positive reviews for the RBW (on Canadian Outdoor Equip. site, some Ostrom users in there even put it on level of ostrom), and there are trip-camps using these RBW packs all summer every summer, abusing them as trip camps do. wonder if they're holding up for those camps, or if they're just buying new ones each year.

anyone interested in what benefit stitching a frame has over sliding it into a stitched sleeve, should ask themselves, each other, and different manufacturers, not just ask ostrom.
ditto with trying to estimate whether the improvement therein is negligible or not.