on 22 March 2013
It is a great backpack and product of Maxpedition. I have also the Pygmy Falcon II. The Pygmy has been my first backpack of Maxpedition and I use it as my EDC. It has 20 Liter capacity and sometimes it has no space for extra gear. So I was looking for a bigger backpack. The Falcon II is small and has more capacity, but it is built in depth. It seems to pull backwards, if it is full packed. The condor is built in width. It has one big main compartment and you can easily get your stuff. The zipper is a halfway zipper, so nothing can fall out. The main compartment is bigger than one or two small compartments, like the Pygmy and the Falcon. My decision to buy the Condor II was the right decision. It is comfortable and has enough space. One thing I did not know, was that the bottom of the DFC version does not have the black non-slip abrasion resistant (rubberised) bottom. The bottom has the same material as the rest and even the colour. I have called maxpedition and they told me, that the DFC version comes in two versions, with the rubberised and with the codura bottom. So if you want the backpack completely in DFC, you have to ask the seller before buying. I have the one without the rubberised bottom, so my pack is completely in DFC. Which benefit has the rubberised bottom? It is non-slip. But I like the complete DFC without a black bottom.
Regards from Germany
review for Maxpedition Condor II
pros: molle/pal web strapping to attach molle/pal attachments, compression straps, chest and waist straps, hidden hydration pack area, with ports/covering for mouth tube, excellent stitching and construction, separate front compartments.
bottom line: Yes it costs a lot, but in this case, you do get a premium, excellent rugged backpack.
The Condor II is a very expensive rucksack, and the high price had me umming ar arring for quite a while before I took the plunge. My previous rucksack was a swiss gear wenger, whilst not as expensive as the maxpedition, was still dearer than the run of the mill rucksacks. One of downsides of the wenger was, when packed with a lot,it fills out sticking outwards, so the my old backpack bulged out when packed with a lot - made me look like I was carrying the kitchen sink with me! The maxpedition doesn't suffer this unfortunate problem, the compression straps along the sides and top which means the pack remains compact even when stuffed to the seams.
With the top y compression straps though annoyingly you have to open them to open the zips to the two front outer compartments, so I only use the top compression straps when I need to. Otherwise the pack compacts down very well.
So do you really get what you pay for? Having used the rucksack now for a couple of months I am very impressed with it. While still on the expensive side, the stitching, construction, and detail just show through. If in your normal usage if you batter your rucksack and take it through rough weather, you’ll be glad if you went for the condor - sure there are quite a few cheaper brands - one I was close to buying was the slightly larger 36L Miltec Molle rucksack at a fraction of the cost of this one, but do you get the same quality? In the end I was not sure if the cheaper brands would stand up to the rigours of my daily use (abuse!), and am glad I went for the maxpedition condor.
This rucksack is in the large end of the medium sized class and packs very well. With two generous outer compartments, and a main compartments, as well as the hidden section at the back built for a 3L hyrdation pack - the rucksack comes built in with tube ports to allow a drinking tube through it, with a velcro covering for the ports when not in use. Although i hadn't initially intended to use the water compartment to part to carry water, am now impressed enough to look for a 3L camelbak antidote reservoir, which is said to fit well on this backpack.
One of the reasons I was drawn to the condor was the size - its more compact than some of its other models like the maxpedition falcon, whilst the falcon is a bit bigger and zips open flat, it would bulge out to the back, whilst this pack out to the sides - which you can batten down with the compression straps. Also of course this has lots of pal/molle webbing. With the webbing I have already attached a small molle pouch to the back and large water bottle molle pouch on the side which holds a 1.5L volvic water bottle. Of course these and other molle attachments are optional extras you purchase separately should you need them.
The back padding is soft and well ventilated and, with well padded, curved shoulder straps and chest support, this pack remains comfortable even when it’s stuffed to capacity and full of external attachments. I initially didn't think I would use the chest or waist straps, but with it being so comfortable, I do tend to use the chest straps from time to time, and the pack in general is very comfortable on the shoulders even when fully loaded.
I didn't realise the backpack comes in two versions, one with a black rubberised bottom and one with the same material all the way round the bag. I bought the rucksack direct from Amazon and it came with black rubberised bottom - you don't actually notice it unless you turn it upside down to look, but I prefer the rubberised bottom, less likely to slide around?
At the time I purchased this (Jan 2015 it was £110) , but the price seems to vary from month to month buying direct from Amazon, but for what you're getting, its a very good purchase.