Two trekking poles worth lining up side by side. On the data the DynaLock Ascent Carbon is the stronger all-round pick, and the question is whether the Trek-Z 2.0 still fits your budget or priorities.
| MSR DynaLock Ascent Carbon | Trekology Trek-Z 2.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| GearScore | 59✓ | 47 |
| Weight (pair) | 16.6 oz✓ | 19.1 oz |
| Packed length | 37 cm | 37 cm |
| Max length | 120 cm | 120 cm |
| Min length | 100 cm | 110 cm |
| Price | $190 | $56✓ |
| Material | Carbon | Aluminum |
| Fold style | Folding | Folding |
Highlighted cells mark the better spec: DynaLock Ascent Carbon in blue, Trek-Z 2.0 in amber. A blank spec is never counted as a win. Min length is shown for context and is not scored. GearScore is the overall rating (0 to 100); re-weight it on the full trekking-pole comparison. Prices are current MSRP.
The MSR DynaLock Ascent Carbon and Trekology Trek-Z 2.0 take different routes to the same job. The DynaLock Ascent Carbon is the stronger pick on most of the specs that matter, while the Trek-Z 2.0 makes its case on price.
The DynaLock Ascent Carbon is 2.5 oz lighter per pair. The Trek-Z 2.0 is $134 cheaper. On the default GearScore the DynaLock Ascent Carbon leads 59 to 47.
Pick the DynaLock Ascent Carbon if you care most about low weight, which makes it the better call for counting grams on long miles. Pick the Trek-Z 2.0 if price matter more to you, or you are focused on getting the most for your money.
The MSR DynaLock Ascent Carbon. It is 2.5 oz lighter per pair than the Trek-Z 2.0.
The Trekology Trek-Z 2.0. It is $134 cheaper than the DynaLock Ascent Carbon.
The MSR DynaLock Ascent Carbon, 59 to 47 on the default algorithm. You can re-weight the factors to match your trip.
The DynaLock Ascent Carbon is the stronger all-round pick here. Choose the Trek-Z 2.0 if price is your priority.