Camelbak vs. Platypus (Tips to Help You Choose)

0
147

If you’re a hiker or backpacker, there might be situations where it’s preferable to carry a water bladder instead of a water bottle. Two of the more popular water bladder options that we’ll be comparing today are Camelbak and Platypus.

Camelbak vs. Platypus: The Platypus hydration bladder is easier to clean, use, and is the more budget-friendly option compared to the Camelbak bladder. It also weighs less than the equivalent Camelback hydration option and is easier to pack. Camelbak gear is more expensive but it’s more durable and won’t need to be replaced as often.

Hiker drinking water on top of mountain

What is the Camelbak Bladder?

View latest price on Amazon

The Camelbak reservoir can be bought in bladders ranging from 1.5Land 3L, with insulated versions as well. The company originally only created water storage, and the bladders are designed primarily for use with Camelbak brand packs for hiking, biking, and running.

The design is fairly simple: a large bladder with a screw cap at the top and a valve to attach the hose at the bottom. The hose has a bite valve and water flow seal switch in the event you don’t want to accidentally trigger water flow via the bite valve.

What is the Platypus Bladder?

View the latest price on Amazon

Platypus bags come in 1L to 3L options and have a bit of a different design. Instead of a screw-top closure system, the Platypus has a large opening that seals like a super-charged sandwich bag made even more secure with the sliding handle that fits securely overtop.

The handle is held to the bladders by an ultra-thin, ultra-strong elasticated cable. The spout has a quick-release mechanism which the hose fits into neatly, and instead of a turn valve, you can stop the flow to the mouthpiece by simply turning the mouthpiece clockwise.

See also  What Does Bear Meat Taste Like? A Detailed Answer

Differences Between Camelbak and Platypus

Camelbak Platypus

  • Great durability and water flow
  • Heavier and more difficult to carry around
  • Easy to fill and good water flow
  • No locking mechanism on the valve

Ease of Use

Because the Camelbak is meant to fit into a custom bag, it doesn’t have a substantial handle, which means you’ll need to keep it in the pack to affix it to a tree or pole when you’re camping. The sliding handle on the Platypus makes hanging for camp-site use easier and more secure.

Unlike the Platypus, the Camelbak quick-release mechanism isn’t as easy to use. Though both bags have a quick-release mechanism, the Camelbak is widely reported as being the more difficult to use.

Design

Though both have great flow and reliable bite-flow mouthpieces, the Platypus’ mouthpiece seal valve makes it much less likely to accidentally be knocked open when shifting it around.

Speaking of shifting around, if you have a larger Camelbak and you’re not using it in the Camelbak backpack, they tend to fold in on themselves, and don’t have a great ability to maintain structure. The Platypus has a dividing wall down the center that helps it keep its shape.

Another issue with the Camelbak is that when replacing older models, they’re not likely to fit into older packs. That means that every time you upgrade your Camelbak, you’re also being forced to invest in a new backpack made especially for it. CamelBak hydration bladders can also be difficult to get completely dry when storing.

Cost

One of the reasons that I prefer Platypus is that they have cheaper options available. When testing both brands, it never felt to me like the additional cost of Camelbak was worth it.

See also  .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum vs .300 Winchester Magnum Ammo Comparison - Ballistics Info & Chart Caliber Ballistics Comparison 07 Dec, 2018 Posted By: Foundry Outdoors The following ammunition cartridge ballistics information and chart can be used to approximately compare .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum vs .300 Winchester Magnum ammo rounds. Please note, the following information reflects the estimated average ballistics for each caliber and does not pertain to a particular manufacturer, bullet weight, or jacketing type. As such, the following is for comparative information purposes only and should not be used to make precise predictions of the trajectory, performance, or true ballistics of any particular .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum or .300 Winchester Magnum rounds for hunting, target shooting, plinking, or any other usage. The decision for which round is better for a given application should be made with complete information, and this article simply serves as a comparative guide, not the final say. For more detailed ballistics information please refer to the exact round in question or contact the manufacturer for the pertinent information. True .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum and .300 Winchester Magnum ballistics information can vary widely from the displayed information, and it is important to understand that the particular characteristics of a given round can make a substantive difference in its true performance. Caliber Type Velocity (fps) Energy (ft-lb) .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum Rifle 3240 3170 .300 Winchester Magnum Rifle 3030 3520 [Click Here to Shop .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum Ammo] [Click Here to Shop .300 Winchester Magnum Ammo] VelocityAs illustrated in the chart, .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum rounds - on average - achieve a velocity of about 3240 feet per second (fps) while .300 Winchester Magnum rounds travel at a velocity of 3030 fps. To put this into perspective, a Boeing 737 commercial airliner travels at a cruising speed of 600 mph, or 880 fps. That is to say, .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum bullets travel 3.7 times the speed of a 737 airplane at cruising speed, while .300 Winchester Magnum bullets travel 3.4 times that same speed.Various calibersEnergyFurthermore, the muzzle energy of a .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum round averages out to 3170 ft-lb, while a .300 Winchester Magnum round averages out to about 3520 ft-lb. One way to think about this is as such: a foot-pound is a unit of energy equal to the amount of energy required to raise a weight of one pound a distance of one foot. So a .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum round exits the barrel with kinetic energy equal to the energy required for linear vertical displacement of 3170 pounds through a one foot distance, while a .300 Winchester Magnum round exiting the barrel has energy equal to the amount required to displace 3520 pounds over the same one foot distance. As a rule of thumb, when it comes to hunting, muzzle energy is what many hunters look at when deciding on what caliber of firearm / ammunition to select. Generally speaking, the higher the muzzle energy, the higher the stopping power. Again, the above is for comparative information purposes only, and you should consult the exact ballistics for the particular .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum or .300 Winchester Magnum cartridge you're looking at purchasing. [Buy .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum Ammo] [Buy .300 Winchester Magnum Ammo] Please click the above links to take a look at all of the .270 WSM Winchester Short Magnum and .300 Winchester Magnum ammo we have in stock and ready to ship, and let us know any parting thoughts in the comment section below.Foundry Outdoors is your trusted home for buying archery, camping, fishing, hunting, shooting sports, and outdoor gear online.We offer cheap ammo and bulk ammo deals on the most popular ammo calibers. We have a variety of deals on Rifle Ammo, Handgun Ammo, Shotgun Ammo & Rimfire Ammo, as well as ammo for target practice, plinking, hunting, or shooting competitions. Our website lists special deals on 9mm Ammo, 10mm Ammo, 45-70 Ammo, 6.5 Creedmoor ammo, 300 Blackout Ammo, 10mm Ammo, 5.56 Ammo, Underwood Ammo, Buffalo Bore Ammo and more special deals on bulk ammo.We offer a 100% Authenticity Guarantee on all products sold on our website. Please email us if you have questions about any of our product listings. Leave a commentComments have to be approved before showing up Your Name * Your Email * Your Comment * Post Comment

Spending more money on a Camelbak will mean that the gear won’t have to be replaced for a while, but they both have decent durability anyways.

Water Taste

Though both products have similar positive reviews and similar complaints in near-identical numbers in their review sections, one thing that stands out is that many people report that the Camelbak has a distinct plastic taste that doesn’t fade over time.

Is the Camelbak or Platypus the Better Option?

If you look at the facts in the case of Platypus vs Camelbak, there’s one clear winner.

If you’re a camper or hiker, Platypus is the way to go. The larger opening, ability to roll it into the size of an electric toothbrush when not in use, and the number of commercially available water filters that directly attach to the quick-release valve make this a good investment.

Though they’re not necessary, Platypus does offer a line of backpacks with integral bladder storage that’s easily usable between different Platypus bladder models.

What makes it particularly great for avid backpackers are the compatible in-line water filters. If you don’t already have one, Platypus manufactures one specifically for their bags. If you want to shop around, other manufacturers offer filters that attach straight to the pack’s spout.

Previous articleLlewellin Setter: Breed Info, Pictures, Traits, Facts & Personality
Next articleHow to Refill 1lb Propane Tanks
Ethan Smith is a seasoned marine veteran, professional blogger, witty and edgy writer, and an avid hunter. He spent a great deal of his childhood years around the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest in Arizona. Watching active hunters practise their craft initiated him into the world of hunting and rubrics of outdoor life. He also honed his writing skills by sharing his outdoor experiences with fellow schoolmates through their high school’s magazine. Further along the way, the US Marine Corps got wind of his excellent combination of skills and sought to put them into good use by employing him as a combat correspondent. He now shares his income from this prestigious job with his wife and one kid. Read more >>