Our on-the-water fly fishing reporter Jason would like to complement the sling pack review Dino submitted with a review of his current pack.
Jason:
Since Dino just did his review of the Simms Dry Creek Z pack, I though I’d give my impressions of the very similar Patagonia Stormfront, a bag I have now owned for almost 3 years.
When I purchased the Stormfront nearly 3 years ago, I had already owned a couple of waterproof packs. Like Dino, I recognized after a few “incidents” that a normal pack was was not going to cut it for serious wading. My first two waterproof packs were both Fishpond Westwater Sling packs. These were slightly smaller, but similar in style to the Dry Creek and Stormfront. They were great bags, but I had my eye on the Patagonia since I started fly fishing. At some point, I broke the zipper on the Fishpond, and that was all the excuse I needed to upgrade. I am sure many of you can relate.
Like the Westwater and Dry Creek, the Stormfront is marketed as a “waterproof” sling fishing pack, meant to be worn across the chest from the right shoulder down to the left hip (although not reversible). All 3 packs have a large main zippered compartment with an internal zippered mesh pocket, a small zippered outer pocket, and use welded TPU (Thermoplastic Polyurethane) construction, a magic technology that means the bag has zero stitched outer seams, leaving the zippers as the only potential ingress points. To solve for this, Patagonia uses a fancy German-made TIZIP waterproof zipper, the same type used on the older generation Simms Dry Creek bags. Like the Dry Creek, only the large main compartment uses the fancy zipper, although I’ve found the outer pocket to be relatively waterproof. To be safe, I only use it to store trash like line clippings and food wrappers. As Dino mentioned, the zipper must be maintained. The Stormfront came with a small tube of TIZIP branded lube, which is just ordinary synthetic silicone grease. When I ran out of it, I started using the same Super Lube Synthetic Grease I use on my fly reels, which seems to work just fine.
Like the Dry Creek, the Stormfront is equipped with multiple lash points and D-ring, as well as two attachment points on the rear for the fly rod tube straps. The two straps that attach to these can hold a standard fly rod tube up to about 4-5 inches in diameter, but can also be used hold a landing net, a shorter two-piece whipping rod, or even a sand spike or two. The D-rings and lash points on the strap are useful for hanging a zinger, hemostats, clippers, or any other fishing-related paraphernalia you want to keep within easy reach while on the water. If you need to get something from inside the bag, you just slide it around your torso like you would for any other sling bag. This is especially handy on the water where a regular backpack can be a PITA to get stuff out of when you don’t have anything solid to put it down on.
The Dry Creek and Stormfront do have a few minor differences, spec-wise. The Stormfront does lack the fly patch, but more importantly to me, it also does not have a net holster. I usually just stuff my net between my pack and my back, which is not the most elegant of solutions, but it works, though I have to admit I do get a tinge of net holster-envy looking at that Dry Creek. The Stormfront is also a bit larger, at 20L versus 15L, but I don’t think this will be an issue for most people. My older Fishpond Westwater was even smaller, at about 13L and I never had trouble fitting several spools of leader, a spare fly line, Hydroflask, a few granola bars or spam musubis, and a couple of fly boxes in there (unlike Dino, I keep my birth control pills securely in the glovebox of my car). During the rainy months, a small packable rain jacket can also be stuffed in there, no problem.
All in all, if you’re looking for a good dry bag for whipping, fly fishing or any other activity near the water for that matter, the Stormfront will fit the bill. It’s waterproof, durable and more than large enough to store everything you would need for an entire day out on the water. On top of that, you also get Patagonia’s legendary Ironclad Guarantee, a true lifetime, no-questions-asked warranty. Will you have to pay for it? Yes. Like the Dry Creek, the Patagonia is not cheap. It retails for around $229.99 currently, although I scored mine for $219.99 back in 2017. Definitely steep, especially for a bag you may only use a few times a month. But as Dino says, “buy once, cry once.” In the modern age of disposable, planned obsolescence, there is something almost nostalgic about a product that can potentially outlive you.
I’ve had this sling for over a year and it’s holding up well. I do like those straps on the bottom as it’s good to hold an extra rod. But yeah, all of these higher end waterproof bags do cost some $$$
Great review. I’ll have to look into a waterproof bag next since my current one is only semi-waterproof. Great against splashes but doesn’t protect against full wipe-outs. Maybe not looking for something that high-end but will be considering $100-150 options possibly.
Might be hard to find a waterproof sling in that range. I think you can get the Patagonia Stormfront backpack for around $150. It’s actually larger but cheaper cause it uses a low-tech “roll-top” technology. It also isn’t a sling.
One thing i noticed in recent years is a lot of other companies came out with similar bags. Fishpond even replaced their Westwater (which I owned two of) with the newer Thunderhead, which is basically a Stormfront clone. They all seem to be priced similarly to the Stormfront, at around $220ish.
So it begs the question Jason, what do you like about the Stormfront as compared to the Fishpond bags you have?
-scott
Hmm, good question! Well, green fishpond was my first, then i got the blue because i liked the color a bit better. That saw quite a bit of action, until the zipper got stuck.. When i got the Stormfront, I did notice a slight step-up in quality, the waterproof zipper was a bit better (the Westwater did not have a TIZIP but a YKK water-resistant one), and it was a bit roomier. I think the newer Thunderhead is probably more on par with the Stormfront, and is priced accordingly. The Westwater was still a great bag for the price (i think i scored both for just over $100), too bad Fishpond decided to go up-market to compete with Patagonia.
Thanks for explaining that, and for writing the review Jason!
Yeah, it’s a tough bag. Mine has logged some serious hours on the water and it’s still hanging tough. You definitely get what you pay for.
No no no I saw you pop your birth control pills out on the flats brah. “Glove compartment” he tell…
Great review braddah! I probably would’ve bought the stormfront if I seen it first haha. I just happened to come across the Simms. I don’t think you can go wrong with either 🙂
Haha! You got me!
Yup, Simms makes top-notch stuff, I prefer their boots and waders to Patagonia.
Before choosing to spend your hard earned funds with Patagonia you should be aware of how they use their profits.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lLS0EyHMXRk here is a link to some serious biased propaganda that they have put their name on. Link is only to the trailer. Kinda of ironic how these folks on the film can talk about all these major impacts that are negatively impacting the wild fish but have no concerns about pursuing them with hook and line. If they have that much concern then leave the fish alone and avoid undo stress.
Also I find it strange how Patagonia would take such a stance on this when a large portion of their customers depend on hatchery fish to support their pursuit. Here in the PNW we would not be able to fish for salmon at all if it wasn’t for hatchery programs. The major problems with wild fish in the PNW is due to habitat loss and over harvest that has gone on for the past 150 years.
I can go on with my rant but won’t bore you with my own conflicts just wanted others to be aware of Patagonia. Since the film debuted I have decided to boycott their over priced items.
If you decide to view the film please keep an open mind and observe that its a one-sided production.
Hi Doug,
Thank you for making us aware of the Patagonia anti-salmon hatchery stance. I have heard of some of the negative environmental effects of salmon hatchery raised fish being released into the wild but I don’t have enough of an understanding of the whole issue.
I do think Patagonia makes a better effort than most outdoor product companies in providing better wages and safer working conditions for their factory workers, and Patagonia tries to recycle their materials as much as possible. They also have an iron-glad warranty as Jason mentioned which give me peace of mind knowing they will repair or replace their products if it is determined that the product failed due to poor workmanship or faulty materials.
thanks,
scott