|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| Home | Forums | Register | Gallery | FAQ | Calendar |
| Retailers | Community | News/Info | International Retailers | IRC | Today's Posts |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
October 22nd, 2007, 17:50
|
#16 | |
|
I'm still working on building up my 64 with a new bag from CP gear, one of my co workers just got his modified, bigger bag so it holds a little more and new straps, and I must say it's cat's ass, way better than the 82 in my oppinion. But people have their likes and dislikes about either one. I'll see if I can post some pics, it's a costly upgrade but if you use it a lot it's well worth it.
__________________
Mint! Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
October 23rd, 2007, 00:23
|
#17 |
|
I bought the 64 bag/straps/yoke etc. from CP Gear. The new bag is already a good size larger than the old issued one. It's the most comfy ruck I've ever used, civvy or military. Way better than any of the trials we were given. We told this to the developers and neither they nor the upper management were interested. They just don't get the whole "if it ain't broke don't fix it" idea. There must be a market for the 64 ruck, since there's now 3 manufacturers in Canada alone making them...
__________________
"Anyone with a name like Amanishourbariki should give a few letters to the poor Ng family." - Snarfangel, Fark.com |
|
|
|
|
October 25th, 2007, 18:24
|
#18 | |
|
|
Why would they listen to the troops we're only the ones using them all the time. I just like how everything sits with the 64, your sleeping bag doesn't have the chance to loosen off on you and bang off your ass when your marching. It's all just nice and tight.
__________________
Mint! Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||
| Bookmarks |
|
|
 |
|
