Platform size and thickness research

[Samcirrus]

Just doing some free research(all of yous opinions) about platform sizes and thickness vs weight.
Would you think that a platform that was 2" or 3" thick (not including post and tree standoff, so maybe 5" total) was worth it if it was half the weight of all current platforms?

I have a 15" by 15" that weighs under 2.5lbs but is 2" thick compared to 3/4" currently on most aluminum platforms. I'm just not sure of that thickness makes it much harder to pack or carry....
Edit, new questions:
If you could have the perfect width and depth dimensions for you,what would they be?
And are all the odd outer shapes of the various common platforms a good thing or would flat straight lines, like tree stands have be easier on the feet?
Thanks for your participation!

 

[raisins]

Just doing some free research(all of yous opinions) about platform sizes and thickness vs weight.
Would you think that a platform that was 2" or 3" thick (not including post and tree standoff, so maybe 5" total) was worth it if it was half the weight of all current platforms?

I have a 15" by 15" that weighs under 2.5lbs but is 2" thick compared to 3/4" currently on most aluminum platforms. I'm just not sure of that thickness makes it much harder to pack or carry....
Thanks for your participation!

For me, extra thickness is a very minor concern. With that 15x15 surface area and lightweight, I would gladly have a little more thickness to carry in.

I bungee my platforms to the outside of my pack, so I wouldn't even notice that it stuck out a bit more. I'd maybe just have to use more bungee cord.

 

[GeoFish]

Are you taking pre-orders, LOL.
Weight is more important to me. Don't think 1.5" thicker will make a difference to me.

 

[BTaylor]

Just doing some free research(all of yous opinions) about platform sizes and thickness vs weight.
Would you think that a platform that was 2" or 3" thick (not including post and tree standoff, so maybe 5" total) was worth it if it was half the weight of all current platforms?

I have a 15" by 15" that weighs under 2.5lbs but is 2" thick compared to 3/4" currently on most aluminum platforms. I'm just not sure of that thickness makes it much harder to pack or carry....
Thanks for your participation!

Some folks will gripe about having a goose that lays golden eggs crapping on the porch. In order of preference for me is the right width/length, then weight, then thickness. The only reason coming to mind that the additional thickness would be a reason for concern was if someone carries their platform in a bag or compartment that wouldnt handle the additional depth. Otherwise seems like a non-issue to me.

Is the vertical space of the 2"s accessible? Being able to add some insulation and wind blocking would make for much warmer feet.

 

[Horn]

I'm with @GeoFish ! Take my money Sam! Lol

But honest feedback, I don't mind thick. Hehe. I also strap to the back of my pack and I can't imagine I'd notice more thickness. In fact I've been carrying my mission and I hardly notice it compared to my x-wing.

At 15 x 15, I'm going to ask for this to be a halfway decent seat for ground level too- that's why the mission has been getting the nod lately. I imagine from prior posts that will be pretty temperature neutral, that's a bonus for feet and buttons in the same spirit as @BTaylor mentioned.

Excited to keep following along with this project!

 

[Zero One Actual]

Ahem.

 

[bigmike23]

I guess I'm more interested in weight. I'm so tired of seeing a new platform getting announced only for it to be 4 lbs. Saddle hunting means different things to different people. But for me, it means to be as lightweight and nimble as feasible. Throwing a 4 lb stand into the mix makes zero sense. When someone announces a 2.5lb and under platform, you have my attention.

 

[Icedog]

As the rest already said the way most of are carrying a platform the thickness isn't much issue.
At 2.5 lbs you have my attention sir!

 

[DroptineKrazy]

Yup! This^^^

 

[Samcirrus]

Some folks will gripe about having a goose that lays golden eggs crapping on the porch. In order of preference for me is the right width/length, then weight, then thickness. The only reason coming to mind that the additional thickness would be a reason for concern was if someone carries their platform in a bag or compartment that wouldnt handle the additional depth. Otherwise seems like a non-issue to me.

Is the vertical space of the 2"s accessible? Being able to add some insulation and wind blocking would make for much warmer feet.

Can't comment on the design features but it'll be 'insulated' of sorts hopefully and wind "proof" and sound dead.

 

[krub6b]

So I sense you like it thick.....but where does it stop....? You'll be happy to know it'll be quite stiff as well...
So as to not flex and all.....

In my experience there's a direct correlation between thickness and stiffness,
I don't see a problem with it being 5" deep when on a pack, especially at that weight and surface area

 

[boyne bowhunter]

Sounds like I'm in the minority here and I'm certainly not trying to discourage you from an alternative solution but the thickness of the platform comes into play for me. I'm not really worried about a pound here or there so for me the compactness thing is more important for me. I agree though, you should be able to get increased stiffness in a thicker platform as the thicker ribs will provide better bending resistance.

As further explanation, I carry my platform (currently an EDP) in the pouch of the turkey vest that I use for a pack. At height it can be a challenge to get in and out of the pack while wearing it if it's too thick. In fact I noticed the change in just the minor increase in thickness going to the EDP from the Predator, I just like the EDP better so it has stayed as my primary.

 

[Jammintree]

The way I have been carrying my gear volume / bulk is definitely a consideration. I use an outer pouch on my pack to carry my platform. All things are subject change though. So extra depth isn’t a deal breaker but it is a major consideration.

 

[Samcirrus]

Sounds like I'm in the minority here and I'm certainly not trying to discourage you from an alternative solution but the thickness of the platform comes into play for me. I'm not really worried about a pound here or there so for me the compactness thing is more important for me. I agree though, you should be able to get increased stiffness in a thicker platform as the thicker ribs will provide better bending resistance.

As further explanation, I carry my platform (currently an EDP) in the pouch of the turkey vest that I use for a pack. At height it can be a challenge to get in and out of the pack while wearing it if it's too thick. In fact I noticed the change in just the minor increase in thickness going to the EDP from the Predator, I just like the EDP better so it has stayed as my primary.

Just for alternative opinions, what thickness would be a "too fat to pack" for you?

 

[BTaylor]

Can't comment on the design features but it'll be 'insulated' of sorts hopefully and wind "proof" and sound dead.

I think I know what you mean there and if so the thickness will be of value.

 

[elk yinzer]

It's all give and take. I prefer compact over saving a pound or two generally speaking.

So far nothing I've tried matches my .5 or even comes particularly close. As I've professed in my love for it from the start, it just doesn't make sense to me if you use any sort of backpack arrangement, not to use your stand as a pack frame. Make you gear pull double duty where it makes overwhelming sense to.

Just not a fan of the cable-less saddle platforms. By the time they are big enough to stand on, they have to be thicc and get mighty hefty.

 

[kubes14060]

I guess I'm more interested in weight. I'm so tired of seeing a new platform getting announced only for it to be 4 lbs. Saddle hunting means different things to different people. But for me, it means to be as lightweight and nimble as feasible. Throwing a 4 lb stand into the mix makes zero sense. When someone announces a 2.5lb and under platform, you have my attention.

This is where I disagree. 1.5 pounds is nothing to me when it comes to packing things in vs comfort while up in a tree. I could lose 1.5 pounds in body weight in a week or two of eating mindfully.
But that is the beauty of saddle hunting. Everyone has their list of priorities in different orders.

 

[heretic]

Sounds to me like someone is prototyping a polymer platform

 

[Plebe]

It's all give and take. I prefer compact over saving a pound or two generally speaking.

So far nothing I've tried matches my .5 or even comes particularly close. As I've professed in my love for it from the start, it just doesn't make sense to me if you use any sort of backpack arrangement, not to use your stand as a pack frame. Make you gear pull double duty where it makes overwhelming sense to.

Just not a fan of the cable-less saddle platforms. By the time they are big enough to stand on, they have to be thicc and get mighty hefty.

15x15 is a good size.

It'll offer similar "usable" footspace to a .5. I know this because I use a .5 and an OOAL Ridge Runner XL.




With the .5 you get a little more distance from the tree and a built in knee rest and seat; but the saddle platforms are easier to work around the sides, and more compact packing overall. I can fit the RRxl inside a backpack.

I also have a Kuhnert's Ambush. It's no thicker than the .5, and nearly a couple pounds lighter I think. It flexes more and is trickier to set up consistently compared to the .5.

I like the way the .5 carries sticks, as a system.

So, pros and cons.

But 2.5 lbs is another league compared to these options. Folks have that much weight in accessories on bows, lol. 2.5lbs is light enough to change how I'd pack my gear. For reference, my old Fanatic Jacket weighs about 3.25 without the hood. I'd be comfortable hauling 2.5 on the back of a pack, when typically my platform/stand is the closest thing to my back.

Although a well made 2.5lb platform of this dimension would be great in many systems, it would be a luxurious "minimalist" setup paired with a low bulk climbing method like 2TC. Usually I have a destination in mind, so dragging a stand/XL platform in is fine. But, with reduced weight, I might be more apt to scout-and-hunt more. Current platforms of similar weight, 2-3lbs, don't offer enough real estate in certain scenarios. This dimension hits a sweet spot.

I think 15"x15" is money.

 

[Plebe]

This is where I disagree. 1.5 pounds is nothing to me when it comes to packing things in vs comfort while up in a tree. I could lose 1.5 pounds in body weight in a week or two of eating mindfully.
But that is the beauty of saddle hunting. Everyone has their list of priorities in different orders.

1.5lbs of body weight probably isn't perceived quite the same as 1.5lb of object. A small improvement in fitness would probably do more than losing a couple pounds. Weight loss and fitness often go hand-in-hand, win-win.