i got a camelbak clasic, which has no compartments at all. I take out the bladder and put it in mine compataible berghaus cubic 25 wenn i need storage space. And sometimes i throw that bladder in other backpacks aswell, even though they are not compataible.

Camelback is the best hydration system i tryed. Mine platypus hoser developed a crack on the hose attachment and the bitevalve isn't as comfortable to bite in. I used mine camelbak bitevalve wenn i used to use it. I also bought a source transporter, which i sold, becaus i didn't worked for me. The removable bladder isn't, so it's much harder to clean and dry, the "suck"valve is a bit annoying too....

Thank you all for all the great feedback! I think I can make a fairly good decision now, without finding out (too late) that I bought the wrong item.

I already have a closet full of "bad decisions" of various other items that I didn't research properly before buying.

Only dramas with camelbacks in a survival situation is trying to fill them without a tap nozzle to shove in the resevoir fill hole.
You know how you have to fidle to get it to fill up.
Tyring filling one from a very shallow water source, muddy hole or from a tree hollow.
You then have to use your nut to come up with a solution.
Just my thoughts to get you all thinking.

Camebak has recently made available a retro-fit kit for their HydroLink quick-connect/disconnect & shut-off valve fittings. It includes an adapter for the end of the fill tube from a water filter. To use, one unplugs the mouthpiece, makes sure the valve is open, plugs in the filter output hose, & pumps away.

Filling in less than optimum conditions (or even optimum for that matter) was one of the reasons for the introduction of the larger-opening of the Omega reservoir. Though I don't carry one (yet), it seems to me that a sponge would be quite useful in the scenario described by wazza (filling from a seep, tree hollow, etc), as would the intake hose of a filter, if carried.

Just my "tuppence", as our friends across the pond say.

David

Presumed Lost--

Yes, RAH was amazing--I won't say "prescient", because his "predictions" were the results of logical thought & extrapolation. I've read most of his works (including Tunnel in the Sky--though it was many years ago), and am continually amazed at how many things I run across that are things he described is his writings.

In one of his essays (collected in Expanded Universe), he notes that when the first guy to attempt to patent a waterbed went to the patent office, he was rejected on the grounds that the fundamental design was already in the public domain, and referred the erstwhile patentee to one of Heinlein's works wherein he described what was essentially a waterbed.

Having a new PC at home, I'm struck repeatedly by the similarity to scenes in Friday where the characters check the custom-delivered morning news & messages on the home computer.

And I just realized I'm wandering terribly off-thread... <img src="images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Sorry 'bout that.

David

>>That is in my top ten books of all time.<<

And mine, and mine. <img src="images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I don't think a short discussion of Heinlein, especially the early works, can be too far afield on a survival forum, as it was a pretty continuous theme.

The waterbed description was in "Stranger in a Strange Land". As is the case of many devotees of his earlier stuff, it's not my favorite work of his.. and it seemed uncharacteristic at the time, until he later turned out a number of similar works. Still...

"Stranger in a Strange Land" is what turned me off about Heinlein, and if what you say is true about his later works after that, I guess I didn't miss much. I think "Starman Jones" was one of his earlier works and I did enjoy that sort of story line.

I don't consider myself a prude, but when I buy a certain book with expectations based on previous excellent books by the same author, I want it to be new but in the same vein.

Bountyhunter

A lot of his earlier publications were very relevent material, but his later work would've been pure garbage if it weren't for his name on the by-line. I lost interest after reading one of his collected works that were nothing like his signature stuff.

Many of us that were impressed with his earlier works feel that way, myself included, mostly- but there were some exceptions. The one that sticks out in my mind is the "Dora's Song" part of "Time Enough for Love". The book as a whole is very much in his later style, but "Dora's Song" could almost stand on it's own as an example of the earlier style.

Unfortunately, it is my undertanding that some of the changes were due to health problems- blood supply to the brain is not a trivial thing.

While there are some of his later works I appreciate, I have to admit I'm still fondest of his "juveniles". His teenage characters are more intelligent and competent than 99 percent of the adult role models this society offers now, and they are striving to become even more competent in preparation for adulthood. If more "juvenile" writing was like this, we'd have a lot fewer problem adults now.