Mountain Hardwear Alakazam 45 Review: Aluula's Arrival
The Mountain Hardwear Alakazam 45 ($575) is one of the most forward-thinking ultralight packs we’ve tested, pairing cutting-edge Aluula fabric with a framed design. The material itself is the headline: impressively light, waterproof, and remarkably tough despite its see-through construction. In our Utah-based testing, the pack delivered excellent durability and functional storage, but the suspension held it back. The awkwardly shaped frame and stiff hipbelt create a noticeable bulge at the lower back and don’t conform particularly well. As a first step into framed Aluula packs, it’s an exciting and innovative offering with clear room to grow.
Comfort
Organization
Weight
Durability
Water Resistance
Sustainability
Weight
1 lb. 14.3 oz.
Stated Load Limit
30-40 lb.
Fabric(s)
Aluula Graflyte
Adjustable Torso
No
# of Pockets
4
Access
Top
Capacities
45, 60L
Included rain cover
No
Pros
Cons
Mountain Hardwear Alakazam 45
For this season's top models, see our guide to the Best Backpacking Backpacks.
The big news with the all-new Alakazam is that it’s an Aluula pack with a frame, one of the first of its kind. In the current 2026 backpack market, the Nashville Cutway and Durston Wapta use Aluula butare frameless, while the new Aluula Gossamer Gear Mirage 40 has a frame. For quick context, a frame provides structure and support, helps transfer weight to your hips, and can increase ventilation, while adding some weight.
Unfortunately, I was not a big fan of the frame and hipbelt on the Alakazam. I’ve used the Hyperlite Mountain Gear Southwest extensively, and I enjoy its simple, framed design (removable aluminum stays provide basic structure). Yes, you have to pack carefully to make sure items sit comfortably against your back, and your back can get extra sweaty when the conditions are hot (realistically, it’s going to get sweaty anyway). But personally, I don’t necessarily feel like I need any more frame when carrying an ultralight pack.
In terms of issues, the bottom portion of the aluminum frame on the Alakazam 45, where it meets the hipblet, created a bulge that protruded into the lumbar zone of my back (I jokingly called it the organ massager). This design effectively created separation between the rest of the pack and my back, but not in a good way (not painful, but noticeable). On top of that, the hipbelt itself is quite stiff and didn’t mold to my waist very well—it was so rigid that there was quite a bit of extra space. This combination made the pack feel quite a bit less comfortable than the frameless ultralight alternatives I’ve used.
For the padding on the back panel, it's fairly light, including four rectangular-ish pads in the main part of the back, beneath some mesh. As mentioned above, the hipbelt is quite stiff, even for an ultralight pack, and the shoulder straps have very little padding. I didn’t notice discomfort there, just in the bulge in the lower back and the hipbelt.
Last but not least, it’s worth noting that Mountain Hardwear went with an aluminum V-shaped frame on the Alakazam. That’s curious given that Gossamer Gear went with a carbon fiber X frame on its all-new Mirage, and especially given the ultra-high price point (noting that the Mirage weighs less at 1 lb. 7.4 oz. for the 40-liter version). On the next version of the Alakazam, I’d love to see a slightly less intrusive frame design at the bottom, a cushier hipbelt, and a carbon frame (why go with aluminum?).
Given that this is an ultralight pack, organization on the Alakazam is minimal. The pack itself has one large opening at the top that provides access to the main compartment, which has a roll-top closure. Inside is a 3-liter water-bladder pocket/pouch. Interestingly, there is no exit port for the hose (I searched and searched and confirmed this). This likely is for waterproofing purposes, but the result is that you can’t really use that pocket for water, given the roll-top design of the pack. Instead, I was able to fit my 3-liter bladder in the very large shove-it pocket on the back. This strategy worked fine for my desert backpacking trip, but made me question why there is an interior bladder pocket in the first place.
The Mountainer Hardwear Alakazam 45 has MASSIVE side pockets—perhaps some of the biggest I’ve ever used. They swallowed my 1-liter water bottles, and you likely could fit an ultralight tent or sleeping bag in a compression sack in each. The pockets have large openings on the back panel side that can be cinched down for added tightness, so you do want to be careful with smaller items, but they certainly add significant carrying capacity to the pack. I would love to know the exact capacity of those side pockets, but it is substantial and effectively boosts that 45-liter capacity.
Last but not least, each shoulder strap has a tall mesh pocket running about two-thirds of its length (great for soft-sided water bottles and snacks), and the pack has two hipbelt pockets. I found the hipbelt pockets to be awkwardly small—I could eventually fit my iPhone 17 Pro in them, but it took quite a bit of finagling. The zipper design on those is kind of oval-shaped, which contributes to the awkwardness. If you have a smaller phone or plan to stow it somewhere else, the hip pockets would be functional and easy for snacks, Chapstick, sunscreen, and other small items. But for phones, it’s a stretch.
The 45-liter version of the Mountain Hardwear Alakazam in a size M/L comes in at 1 pound 14.3 ounces, which is impressive. Any legitimate backpacking backpack in the sub-2-pound zone is getting down there, and the Alakazam has a frame and impressive durability to boot. For context, the Hyperlite Mountain Gear Southwest, which has a similar roll-top design and is made with Dyneema Woven Composite, weighs 1 pound 13.7 ounces for the 40-liter version, so almost exactly on par with the Alakzam per liter. The Gossamer Gear Mirage 40 with Aluula and a carbon frame weighs 1 pound 7.4 ounces, or about 7 ounces less than the Mountain Hardwear pack.
All in all, the Alakazam is very competitive in terms of weight relative to the durability and feature set that it offers. Compared to Dyneema/DCF, Aluula has a two-layer design that reduces weight and the risk of delamination. The Aluula used in the Mountain Alakazam weighs just 2.3 ounces per square yard, whereas the Dyneema Woven Composite used in the Hyperlite Southwest weighs 3.9 ounces per square yard. Aluula is so thin that you can literally see through it (much more so than Dyneema), yet it retains similar strength and waterproofing characteristics. The downside is the cost, which is sky-high as demonstrated by the hefty $575 price tag on the Alakazam. If you'd like to explore this further, check out our article: Backpacking Pack Materials: A Deep Dive.
If you’ve geeked out on ultralight backpacking gear, you probably know of Dyneema/DCF, which was the OG of the ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) movement. This family of fabrics was originally designed for boat sails and boasts exceptional tear strength (pinholing in a different story, and particularly with older variants). Aluula continues the trend with a crinkly yet strong (and see-through) material that is quite impressive for its durability.
The Mountainer Hardwear Alakazam 45 is expensive, but we did our very best to test out the toughness of Aluula. I threw the pack in the back of our crowded van loaded with trekking poles and other gear, heaved it down on rocks during backpacking breaks in the canyons of Southern Utah, and really tried to pay no mind to preservation (for gear testing purposes, of course). Whereas I’ve experienced pinholing with Dyneema, we’ve had no issues yet with Aluula. It is kind of incredible that Aluula is so thin that you can read letters of packaging through it, yet it is remarkably tough. I’m sure there are circumstances where Aluula can be compromised, but we haven’t found them yet. As we continue to test the pack, we will report back here if we do.
One of the big benefits of Aluula and other UHMWPE fabrics is that they are waterproof. This means you don’t have to carry a pack cover or worry about the contents inside, although it’s often good to be safe (the pack is not seam-sealed, so not submergible). For especially wet trips, we use waterproof compression sacks for our sleeping bags and sometimes a bag liner for the inside of our pack, which doesn’t add much weight but gives us a lot of peace of mind.
On the second day of backpacking in Utah, we were rained on during the morning and on our hike out, and the contents of our pack remained totally dry. I have used a Dyneema pack in extended downpours, including a day where it literally rained the entire day, and with the same outcome there: all contents on the inside of the pack were dry.
Select icon to view details:
Longevity
Choosing durable outdoor gear and keeping it in use for longer is one of the best ways to reduce environmental impact. Our proprietary longevity rating assesses factors like overall build quality, materials, fabric denier, component durability, and real-world performance. A green check indicates that we expect the product to be long-lasting relative to its peers, a yellow check mark indicates average longevity, and a red X indicates a product that may have a limited lifespan.
PFAS-Free DWR
Durable water-repellent (DWR) finishes can contain PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances). These highly persistent “forever chemicals” are used in outdoor gear for their strong resistance to water, oil, and heat, but are linked to environmental contamination and a range of health concerns. A green check mark indicates the product uses a PFAS-free DWR, while a red X means the DWR contains PFAS.
Recycled Materials
Recycled materials are prevalent in outdoor gear, with nylon, polyester, wool, and down among the most common, but the composition varies widely. A green check mark indicates the product is made with a substantial amount of recycled materials (100% recycled or the core fabric that makes up most of the product is recycled), a yellow check means it contains a moderate to small amount of recycled materials, while a red X means there are no recycled materials in the product.
Bluesign Approved
Bluesign Technologies, based in Switzerland, operates a third-party textile management system that ensures materials are manufactured to strict environmental, chemical, and worker safety standards. A green check mark indicates a product is either a Bluesign Product (contains at least 90% Bluesign-approved fabrics and 20-30% Bluesign-approved accessories) or features a significant amount of Bluesign-approved materials. A yellow check mark means it uses some Bluesign-approved materials but less than the aforementioned category, and a red X means there are no Bluesign-approved materials in the product.
Responsible Manufacturing
This criterion evaluates a brand’s commitment to fair wages, safe working conditions, and reducing environmental impact through certifications and programs like Fair Trade Certified, Fair Wear Foundation, Worldwide Responsible Accredited Production (WRAP), and the Fair Labor Association, while also recognizing brands that manufacture primarily in the U.S. or Europe under strict labor and environmental regulations. A green check mark indicates a brand meets our responsible manufacturing criteria, while a red X means it does not.
Recycled and/or Reduced Packaging
Packaging can add significant waste to outdoor gear purchases, so many brands work to reduce its impact by using recycled materials, incorporating Forest Stewardship Council-certified paper products, and minimizing plastic and paper use. A green check mark indicates a brand uses recycled or reduced materials across all of its packaging, a yellow check indicates moderate or limited use of recycled or reduced packaging, and a red X indicates the brand does not make either of these efforts.
Repair Services
Repair services extend the lifespan of outdoor gear and reduce overall consumption, though programs vary widely. Some brands offer comprehensive repairs for a range of issues, while others provide limited or no repair support. A green check mark indicates a robust repair program, a yellow check mark indicates limited repair services, and a red X indicates the brand does not offer repair services.
Resale and/or Recycling Services
Resale and recycling programs help keep outdoor gear in circulation longer and out of landfills, ranging from trade-in resale platforms that offer store credit to take-back initiatives that recycle products at the end of their usable life. A green check mark indicates a brand offers both resale and recycling programs, a yellow check mark indicates it offers one or the two, and a red X indicates it offers neither.
Carbon Footprint Tracking
This criterion evaluates whether a brand measures, reports, and works to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions using established frameworks such as the Higg Index, Greenhouse Gas Protocol, or The Change Climate Project. A green check mark indicates a brand publicly reports greenhouse gas emissions data, sets clearly defined reduction targets, and uses established tracking frameworks such as Higg or The Change Climate Project. A yellow check mark indicates the brand tracks emissions and outlines reduction goals but provides limited data, lacks science-based verification, or does not clearly report progress. A red X indicates the brand does not appear to track greenhouse gas emissions or provides so little information that its efforts cannot be verified.
Annual Impact Report
Annual impact reports provide transparency and accountability by outlining a brand’s sustainability efforts across areas such as material sourcing, greenhouse gas emissions, waste, water use, supply chains, and packaging. A green check mark indicates a brand publishes a detailed, brand-specific impact report that closely aligns with our sustainability criteria and leaves little room for ambiguity. A yellow check indicates a brand provides some relevant sustainability reporting but lacks detail in key areas or is covered only briefly within a parent company report. A red X indicates a brand does not regularly publish an impact report.
Tester: 6’1”, 20.5” torso length
Size tested: M/L
The Mountain Hardwear Alakazam 45 comes in two sizes: S/M (torso sizes from 16 to 19 Inches) and M/L (torso sizes from 18 to 21 inches). I opted for the size M/L, and it worked well for me at 6’1” with a 20.5-inch torso. The pack has no adjustability on the back panel, but you can dial in fit via the shoulder straps.
It’s worth noting that some competing backpacking packs are offered in a wider variety of sizes or with adjustability. For example, the Gossamer Gear Mirage comes with an adjustable backpanel (16 to 20-inch torso sizes), the brand’s popular Mariposa is offered in three sizes, and Hyperlite Mountain Gear offers the Southwest in a whopping five sizes from “Extra Small (<15”) to “Tall (>21”). Most backpackers should be fine with the Alakaam and its two sizes, but people on the fringes or really looking to dial in fit may want to look elsewhere.
Gossamer Gear Mirage 40 ($450): Aluula with a Carbon Frame
If this says anything about the new Gossamer Gear Mirage 40: It’s sold out, and you can’t get your hands on one at the moment. But assuming GG underestimated the popularity of the pack and is getting to making more pronto, there is a lot to like about the Mirage. At 40 liters, it comes in at a feather-light 1 pound 3.4 ounces (wow!). Like the Alakazam, the Mirage is also made with Aluula (Graflyte V52) but boasts a carbon-fiber frame with carbon rods (the Alakazam uses aluminum, which is more durable but heavier). In terms of exterior storage, the Mirage has much smaller water bottle pockets and only comes in one size (adjustable from 16 to 20 inches). At $450 for the Mirage versus $575 for the Alakazam, it’s hard to argue against the former as the framed Aluula winner, for now.
Hyperlite Mountain Gear Southwest 40 ($395): Still Relevant
It would be unwise to think that Hyerplite Mountain Gear is simply resting on its laurels, and the venerable Southwest is still a big player in the ultralight pack space. Here, you get Dyneema Woven Composite, which was added in 2025 and boosts abrasion resistance. The Southwest features a minimalist frame and a less polarizing hipbelt than the Alakazam. Both packs weigh almost the same (the Southwest is slightly lighter at 1 lb. 13.7 oz., but also has 5 fewer liters of capacity), while the Hyperlite comes with a noticeably lower price tag at $395. In the end, we like the Alakazam, but given its ultra-high price point and comfort issues with the hipbelt, we’d lean toward the tried-and-true Southwest. For more, check out our review of the Southwest 40.
Mountain Hardwear makes a splash with this all-new Aluula pack, an even more modern and lighter material than Dyneema/DCF. The hipbelt design needs improvement to boost comfort, and we’d love to see a carbon frame instead of aluminum, but this is an exciting and innovative pack nevertheless.
Comfort
Organization
Weight
Durability
Water Resistance
Sustainability
The smallest sibling in Hyperlite’s cult-favorite backpack line, the Southwest 40 is headlined by its Dyneema fabric, which provides excellent durability and inherent waterproofing. The 40-liter version is best for short overnights and experienced minimalist packers. Drawbacks include a lack of adjustability, poor breathability, and sparse padding.
Comfort
Organization
Weight
Durability
Water Resistance
Sustainability
This ultralight pack is right up there with the category’s elite in terms of carrying capacity and organization, and it features better padding than most. The Mariposa isn’t super durable, though, and we had a sample issue with its hipbelt during our CDT thru-hike.
Comfort
Organization
Weight
Durability
Water Resistance
Sustainability
Is the Alakazam 45 for You?
The Alakazam 45 is best suited for early adopters who are excited about next-generation materials and willing to live with a few quirks to get them. If you’re drawn to the promise of Aluula—minimal weight, excellent durability, and strong water resistance—and want a pack that pushes the category forward, there’s a lot to like here. But to be clear, this is not a generalist pack, and there are clear downsides: comfort suffers, especially through the hipbelt, and you miss out on some basic features like an exit port for a hydration bladder. Finally, with its sky-high price, it’s hard to justify unless you’re specifically interested in experimenting with the latest in ultralight pack design.
hit the trail
Backpacking Gear Guides
Gear Guide
Best Backpacking Sleeping Pads of 2026
Gear Guide
Best Backpacking Tents of 2026
Gear Guide
Best Backpacking Sleeping Bags of 2026
Gear Guide
Best Trekking Poles of 2026
curated for you