I bought a ULA CDT when it was time to replace my previous frameless pack two years ago or so.
I have been using a ULA Catalyst for quite some time and figured the ULA’s lightest offering would fit my needs for certain purposes.
Mainly? Solo, three-season+ use for non-technical pursuits but where I would be exploring off-trail.
Shortly after I bought the ULA CDT, I began a brief relationship with another lightweight gear manufacturer. The packs I tested (same model made in different years) were lighter than the ULA CDT but smaller. Reasonably durable but more complicated than the ULA CDT with the straps and “doo-dads” vs. the ULA CDT I had bought not long before. The total space was small on both packs from the other gear company. The smaller packs made them more useful as defined route packs with 3-4 days of food optimally. And if I went to shoulder season? Not so much a pack for me. They were/are good packs, but perhaps for a different use than what I needed. As an aside, the latest iteration of the pack now weighs 19 oz…or the same weight as a stripped-down ULA CDT.
The relationship ended with no acrimony. And I still use some of the company’s gear. But the three-season backpacks were not among the gear I decided to use going further as they did not quite fit my needs.
I grabbed my ULA CDT again over the shoulder season last year. And found it made a very good day-use ski tour pack, too.
Lots of volume, simple, quick to take things in and out of, and durable.
A design that is older by cottage gear standards.
But an older design that works.
But what are the specs? I’m not much of a specific gear person. I actually talk best about overall impressions.
You can read the specs on the ULA CDT page.
The main points for me are that the pack is roughly 3000 CI/50L and perhaps a bit more, counting all the outside pockets. Stripped down, weighs 19 oz. (And, I if were more ambitious, as light as 14 oz!) And is really good for a base pack weights of 10 lbs or less.
The fabric is made of durable and proven Robic fabric.
I have placed ~6 days of food in the pack somehow in the past. Five is perhaps better.
As mentioned, it is versatile. The profile is such that it works well for off-trail jaunts.
The outside pocket does not work well for bushwhacking. For mainly on-trail use, the mesh pocket is probably just fine, however.
The simple drawstring closure means I am not futzing with straps to get out my gear.
If I had to do it again, I’d contact ULA and have them put on a custom Robic fabric pocket first. I like the outside pocket for rain gear, hauling water for dry camping, and other uses. In the winter, my skins, wax kit, and cable bindings find a place in that pocket quite nicely. (UPDATE: ULA has since replaced my mesh pocket with Robic. The cost was $25. )
The water bottle pockets are amply sized and easy to adjust. I find the extra room helps store things such as hiking poles when I don’t need them during off-trail scrambles. The compression straps on the side of the pack work well and are ideally placed for this type of storage, too.
The pack resembles the original and classic Golite Jam a fair amount. Another versatile, durable, and light pack for what it did.
Unlike the Jam, the ULA CDT can be easily customized. I don’t use a water bladder, so I took out the bladder pocket (for example).
ULA is willing to do custom work, too.
The ULA CDT is not sexy, cutting edge, or the lightest pack out there.
What the ULA CDT ends up being is a well designed and proven lighter weight workhorse pack for those who want to keep it light, get off-trail (if not bushwhacking with the standard mesh pocket), and wants to do more than prime three-season backpacking.
And at $145, it is an excellent bargain.
I suspect, much like my ULA Catalyst, it is a pack I will use for years to come.
UPDATE 2020: I’ve used this pack many places well over the years. During my Utah walk, I somehow managed to schlep 6+ days of food, water, and a poor man’s packraft with it! The CDT makes a proven warhorse.
I also did a video overlook for the curious –