Discussion of New Colors, New Designs

[Astoria]

I returned those last year and I have SOSO many regrets.

[shinyacorn]

Hello, I am planning an order and was wondering if there are any plans to offer the MCB in Aubergine/Dawn? Or was it already and I missed it?

[Cristina]

Hello, I am planning an order and was wondering if there are any plans to offer the MCB in Aubergine/Dawn? Or was it already and I missed it?

Ooh what a lovely color combo!

I don't recall seeing any bags offered in Aubergine/Dawn to date. You'd have to email customer service to be sure. Emailus@tombihn.com

Aubergine/Cloud is very nice though, can't go wrong with it. And it is currently in stock!

[Bugsy]

I’m also wondering if there’s a post about whether any other changes were made to the PCSB, aside from the change to the attachment points. In particular, I’m wondering if the dimensions have changed at all. I’ve got an old one in Nordic Halcyon and I can *just* fit my 12-inch MacBook in its cache in there. It makes a great bag-within-a-larger bag so I can have a mini briefcase for around the office / at a conference. Does anyone know if there’s any reason to expect it wouldn’t fit in the new one?

Based on what I can see from the photos on the product page for the updated PCSB, am I correct in assuming it no longer has any attachment points on the sides?

I often attach my PCSB to the pocket to the back of an aircraft seat with swivel carabiners and at times also use it as a sling (by attaching an S25 hip belt), but it doesn't look like this would be possible with the new design (I was looking to get a black ballistic version instead of my current halcyon PCSB).

If this is true, maybe I should also add a request for a larger version of the Sidekick to solve my problem in the most perfect way :-).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sturbridge]

Does anyone know if there’s any reason to expect it wouldn’t fit in the new one?

Yes, it may depend on how old your PCSB is. Once upon a time there was a version that was almost a couple of inches longer than the current version. The link below mentions a length of 13.6 inches long, and the current version is 11.8 long.

https://the-gadgeteer.com/2008/02/28...nizer_pouches/

[moriond]

@sturbridge,

If the poster’s Packing Cube Shoulder Bag is Nordic Halcyon, it has the current PCSB dimensions. The longer length of the original PCSB (described in the review you linked) only applied to the very first models (in steel 200d Dyneema — now called Halcyon).

The switch to the current length improved one issue: the initial length meant that the 200d material tended to sag when placed small, heavier items that did not take up the full length of the bag, when the bag was not otherwise full or stiffened. For example, a small camera would make the PCSB sag unless the you also carried items like a sufficiently long guidebook or stuffed a jacket in to fill up the rest of the bag. The shorter current length also made it convenient to use the PCSB in a much wider range of other bags, such as the Western Flyer, Tri-Star, and Aeronaut 30, among bags specifically designed for travel, as well as a host of others (e.g. Synapse 25 front pocket or interior, etc.)

The offset attachment points for the new design in the PCSB makes it easier to carry a heavier load more stably in over-the-Shoulder strap use— something that the 210d material also encourages.

I don’t think there are size changes, but they did add more O-rings to the interior. I’ll have to wait until my order arrives before I can comment more.

HTH

moriond

[aedifica]

Yes, it may depend on how old your PCSB is. Once upon a time there was a version that was almost a couple of inches longer than the current version. The link below mentions a length of 13.6 inches long, and the current version is 11.8 long.

https://the-gadgeteer.com/2008/02/28...nizer_pouches/

Oh, interesting! Thanks for linking that, I had no idea the PCSB had ever been a different size. I was also interested to see a small change in the Aeronaut design that I hadn't been aware of before! My A45 is from sometime between mid-2011 (when Forest was introduced) and early 2013 (the last time I see the Forest/UV combination for the A45 in the Wayback Machine). Like the one in that review, mine has the snaps in place of the current internal zippers for adjusting the size of the middle section vs the end pockets; but on mine the end pocket zippers wrap around so they're on three sides of the bag like on the current Aeronauts. I noticed the Aeronaut in the review has end pockets with zippers that only open the top and one side.

The Wayback Machine confirms the larger dimensions for the PCSB from around that time: https://web.archive.org/web/20080113...ROD/ACC/TB0921 shows the "Convertible Packing Cube" (which looks just like the PCSB we know and love) as 13.5" x 8" x 3.25" / 345 x 200 x 85mm.

Edited to add: I hadn't seen @moriond's post yet when I wrote this--I wouldn't have gone looking for a confirmation of the larger size if I had seen that moriond had already confirmed it!

[pammy]

@moriond, was the Solar PCSB also in the longer length? I ask because I thought @Lani once commented that her Solar one was the larger size. But then again, maybe I'm imagining that.

[Bugsy]

Thanks for all this - super helpful! I’m going to go ahead and order a new one.

@sturbridge,

If the poster’s Packing Cube Shoulder Bag is Nordic Halcyon, it has the current PCSB dimensions. The longer length of the original PCSB (described in the review you linked) only applied to the very first models (in steel 200d Dyneema — now called Halcyon).

The switch to the current length improved one issue: the initial length meant that the 200d material tended to sag when placed small, heavier items that did not take up the full length of the bag, when the bag was not otherwise full or stiffened. For example, a small camera would make the PCSB sag unless the you also carried items like a sufficiently long guidebook or stuffed a jacket in to fill up the rest of the bag. The shorter current length also made it convenient to use the PCSB in a much wider range of other bags, such as the Western Flyer, Tri-Star, and Aeronaut 30, among bags specifically designed for travel, as well as a host of others (e.g. Synapse 25 front pocket or interior, etc.)

The offset attachment points for the new design in the PCSB makes it easier to carry a heavier load more stably in over-the-Shoulder strap use— something that the 210d material also encourages.

I don’t think there are size changes, but they did add more O-rings to the interior. I’ll have to wait until my order arrives before I can comment more.

HTH

moriond

[moriond]

@moriond, was the Solar PCSB also in the longer length? I ask because I thought @Lani once commented that her Solar one was the larger size. But then again, maybe I'm imagining that.

Hi @pammy,

Yes, I was going to write that the only two Packing Cube Shoulder Bags in the original (longer) length were 200d Steel and 200d Solar. The longer length was why I didn’t buy a PCSB in Solar, since I had one in Steel, and noticed the limitation in the design. At that time, for a very brief period, you could order packing cubes in Solar. I have one Small Packing Cube for the Tri-Star in Solar.

Also, the very earliest Aeronaut Packing Cubes (before the Packing Cube Shoulder Bag was made) were a much darker Steel, and didn’t have the cross-hatching that distinguishes 200d Halcyon/Dyneema.

As for the design changes in the Aeronaut (45) that @aedifica mentioned, the switch to having the zipper open on 3 sides of each end Pocket happened soon after the initial release. The change to zippers instead of snaps for accessing more space in the end pockets arrived with the Aeronaut 30 introduction, and percolated to the Aeronaut 45 just after that debut.

HTH

moriond

[Meglet]

I received my new Black Ballistic PCSB on Friday (yay!) and I love it! Unfortunately, what I do not love is the new placement of the shoulder strap attachments. In the original design on the ends, they supported the bag well but still hung neatly cross-body. With the new side placement, they hang cross-body a little bit better, but not so much better as to be worth the way the make the bag hang funny and the zipper opening pull when the bag is loaded with a mildly heavy load like my (largish) m4/3 camera plus lens and iPhone.

[pammy]

Hi @pammy,

Yes, I was going to write that the only two Packing Cube Shoulder Bags in the original (longer) length were 200d Steel and 200d Solar. The longer length was why I didn’t buy a PCSB in Solar, since I had one in Steel, and noticed the limitation in the design. At that time, for a very brief period, you could order packing cubes in Solar. I have one Small Packing Cube for the Tri-Star in Solar.

Also, the very earliest Aeronaut Packing Cubes (before the Packing Cube Shoulder Bag was made) were a much darker Steel, and didn’t have the cross-hatching that distinguishes 200d Halcyon/Dyneema.

As for the design changes in the Aeronaut (45) that @aedifica mentioned, the switch to having the zipper open on 3 sides of each end Pocket happened soon after the initial release. The change to zippers instead of snaps for accessing more space in the end pockets arrived with the Aeronaut 30 introduction, and percolated to the Aeronaut 45 just after that debut.

HTH

moriond

@moriond, thank you for the info. It’s so very helpful. My very first TB purchase was an olive/plum cordura Swift and it came with a yarn sack that is the darker steel without the cross-hatching. I wondered about that fabric because it looks similar yet different from the regular 200d steel dyneema. So it helps me date it to the period time of when those first Aeronaut packing cubes were being made.

In the meantime, I will continue my grail search for a Solar PCSB. Who knows, I might get lucky. For now I will content myself with PCSBs in the new ballistic colors. Very excited to have some coming my way.

[KAB]

I received my new Black Ballistic PCSB on Friday (yay!) and I love it! Unfortunately, what I do not love is the new placement of the shoulder strap attachments. In the original design on the ends, they supported the bag well but still hung neatly cross-body. With the new side placement, they hang cross-body a little bit better, but not so much better as to be worth the way the make the bag hang funny and the zipper opening pull when the bag is loaded with a mildly heavy load like my (largish) m4/3 camera plus lens and iPhone.

Oh, that's a bit of a worry about the "hang" and the "zipper opening pull"........mine due to arrive tomorrow so I will be able to experiment! Fingers crossed!

[G42]

The offset attachment points for the new design in the PCSB makes it easier to carry a heavier load more stably in over-the-Shoulder strap use— something that the 210d material also encourages.

I received my new PCSBs in ballistic. Based on your comment, I tried a large heavy book in both old & new versions and then tried with something very light... I agree, the offset attachment is more stable.

The only annoyance I found with it (learning curve) is that I would normally keep both zippers all the way forward (as I'm carrying it cross body, on my right hip)... The offset location means that the strap makes it hard to get to the zippers whilst it's hanging - I need to keep them a couple inches away from the end point in order to most quickly open the bag. I don't think this will be an issue for most things, once I make it a habit.

Oddly enough, the most startling thing to me was the new smooth 1" strap. I like the smooth material.
Between the heavier fabric and the addition of more length to accommodate winter coats though, it's noticeably bigger/bulkier/heavier to me... I'm still on the fence about this change since the old straps never bothered me.
If I were ordering these for the first time with nothing to compare to though, I probably wouldn't think twice - so I'm probably just paying too much attention to 'change'.

[Meglet]

Oh, that's a bit of a worry about the "hang" and the "zipper opening pull"........mine due to arrive tomorrow so I will be able to experiment! Fingers crossed!

I should clarify, it's not that the pull puts pressure on the zipper in a worrisome way, just that it makes the line of the zip not stay straight, so it is more difficult to zip open/closed a bit, or to get things in and out without snagging. G42 has a good explanation in the other post, too.