Test Reports
Test Cycopac 1 | Test Cycopac 2 | Test Cycopac 3 | Test Cycopac 4 | Test Sandals |Product test and review by Becky
Product tested: Source Vagabond Cycopac Hydration Pack
Sample description: Orange/Grey
Capacity: 70 oz.
**************************************************************
RATINGS: (from 1=poor through 10=excelent)
Category 1: Initial Impression = 8
Comments: The pack had a neat, classic appearance; but may be somewhat plain in comparison to Camelbak or Ultimate directions. I liked the “Pop” gold trim. It looked VERY well constructed with the stitching being tight and perfect. The seams were all finished. The zippers looked like they were of excellent quality. The pack looked extremely durable because of this. I liked the clear bladder, (as opposed to the somewhat opaque, textured one that Camelbak sells). I felt more confident that I could see any unwanted growth or dirt.
Category 2: Fit/Comfort = 8
Comments: The Pack fit very snug and secure. While comfortable, I was always aware that it was there because it pressed against my lower back. When using it on one hike, I had to strap a jacket that was bulky to the shock cord. Surprisingly, the pack remained balanced and I was not even aware that I had the jacket attached.
Category 3: Capacity/Volume = 9; Bladder; /5 Pack Volume
Comments: The Bladder was perfect for me from extended hikes, to short walks to car trips; the pack volume was very disappointing. The small front zippered pocket barely held my keys. Though it stated that there was back storage, I would not put any thing right next to the bladder, and even if I did there was not really any room. When going for an all day hike or fishing I found I had to carry an extra pack. Even for short walks there was not enough room for essentials.
Category 4: Drinking valve = 10
Comments: The Valve was the best I have used (Camelbak, Ultimate Directions, Platipus). Drinking was effortless and it felt like drinking out of a glass gulping the same amount of water, it did not leak.
Category 5: Features (Pockets, lash points, tube clip, fill cup etc…) = 7
Comments: The single pocket was tight with very little room for what I would consider necessary. The lash points were good, but again only enough for a very light jacket. I did force a larger one and the straps held well but I wonder how long before I would stress the stitching and stretch the cord. The tube was at an excellent angle for accessing the drinking valve; the fill cut was too small. I found that if I used a small mouth drinking bottle filling it was very easy, but if I tried to use the tap or pitcher, it was awkward to handle the pack and bladder open at the same time I usually spilled some water until the bladder was full enough to hold the two sides apart. Also I felt cleaning more difficult.
Category 6: Materials, hardware and construction = 9+
Comments: The fabric was tough and durable; as mentioned before, the stitching was tight and even; zippers perfectly sewn; seams finish – when I used the zippers I never caught them on an edge and I did not even have to be careful. I had to stretch and force the lashing cord to hold a thick jacket there was no sign of stress; the cord attaching the fill cap to the pack looked flimsy, but I yanked and pulled at it but could not get it to budge. The fabric used to insulate the bladder worked well. The water always remained cool.
Category 7: Overall performance = 8+
Comments: Except for pack volume, I felt that this product was excellent.
Question 1- Would you buy and/or recommend this product?
Yes, I would definitely buy this pack. I would recommend it because of the quality and durability and
Question 2 - How does this system compare to similar hydration packs you have used? Which do you prefer?
I would compare it to the Camelbak (early) Mule, the UD Sipstream; I think the drinking valve is superior. I prefer the UD bladder (easier to clean and fill) I liked the volume of the UD pack best. I prefer the quality and construction of the Cyco and the fit when using it for activities such as climbing, biking fishing because the pack stays in one place on your back.
Question 3 - Briefly describe how you tested this pack – Location, type and intensity of activity, weather, liquid carried, other gear carried etc…
I used the pack for walks almost every day, fishing, hiking and on extended car trips and gardening. The weather was varied from cool, ( 50 degrees) windy to 80 degrees. I used water. I carried an extra pack when fishing and day hikes to carry fishing flies, 2 way radio, phone, lunch, first-aid basics, knife, sun glasses, rain gear etc…
