pack size

[rtavious]

So far ive seen Kelty, Osprey, and Gregory Pack. Any other good brands or ones to avoid?

 

[Nodust]

I use ULA and Gossamer Gear. A little more minimalist than the others you listed. I love mine but never used any other pack. So I can't really compare.

 

[Nick]

I used Lowe Alpine packs for the first few years I was backpacking. I think I still have at least 4 or 5 of them. Easy to pick them up at a huge discount on Sierra Trading Post. Most of them were a little heavy compared to modern packs, but I still liked most. They had ample padding and a comfy fit. My favorite was the Lowe Alpine Ion (or something like that). It had a roll top closure like a dry bag. If you want to try a few things, using the extra 35% coupons on STP is a good way to do it. You can get like 4 bags for the price of one.

 

[Vegan.Hiker]

Just a few notes...

- The days where down is automatically lighter, warmer, and more compressible than synthetic are over (fortunately for me, since I can't use down). Today, synthetics can be lighter, more compressible, and unlike down, retain their warmth properties when wet. My synthetic sleeping bag (Mountain Hardware Ultralamina 32) weighs 1 lbs 11 oz and compresses to 6"x10". It's smaller and lighter than my fleece liner when compressed.

- Since your buying a bunch of gear at once, if your looking to save a little money on the pack, the Jansport Katahdin line of packs are very light, durable, and inexpensive. They come in 40, 50, 60, and 70 liter capacities I believe. My 50L is a Katahdin and weighs 2lb 1oz, and costs about $75. If you don't mind spending more though, I personally like my Osprey and Deuter packs the best.

- I agree with Nick, Lowe Alpine packs are luxuriously comfortable. My multi-day is a Lowe Alpine TFX Khumbo and while it weighs about 6 lbs, it's by far the most comfortable pack I've ever had.

- While I still think 38~40L would be the ideal size for overnight and weekend trips, a 50L as others are suggesting here, would still be suitable (especially is you have some larger gear heavier gear at the moment). But I would warn you that anything larger is going to encourage you to take more than you need. Smaller packs force you to prioritize and only take what's necessary.

 

[rtavious]

Just a few notes...

- The days where down is automatically lighter, warmer, and more compressible than synthetic are over (fortunately for me, since I can't use down). Today, synthetics can be lighter, more compressible, and unlike down, retain their warmth properties when wet. My synthetic sleeping bag (Mountain Hardware Ultralamina 32) weighs 1 lbs 11 oz and compresses to 6"x10". It's smaller and lighter than my fleece liner when compressed.

- Since your buying a bunch of gear at once, if your looking to save a little money on the pack, the Jansport Katahdin line of packs are very light, durable, and inexpensive. They come in 40, 50, 60, and 70 liter capacities I believe. My 50L is a Katahdin and weighs 2lb 1oz, and costs about $75. If you don't mind spending more though, I personally like my Osprey and Deuter packs the best.

- I agree with Nick, Lowe Alpine packs are luxuriously comfortable. My multi-day is a Lowe Alpine TFX Khumbo and while it weighs about 6 lbs, it's by far the most comfortable pack I've ever had.

- While I still think 38~40L would be the ideal size for overnight and weekend trips, a 50L as others are suggesting here, would still be suitable (especially is you have some larger gear heavier gear at the moment). But I would warn you that anything larger is going to encourage you to take more than you need. Smaller packs force you to prioritize and only take what's necessary.

i dont mind spending more say 200 max.. yeah i worry about over packing too lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Forum Fiend v1.3.1.

 

[Vegan.Hiker]

i dont mind spending more say 200 max.. yeah i worry about over packing too lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Forum Fiend v1.3.1.

Then ignore the Jansport recommendation. It's also worth considering that the Osprey's have the trekking pole Stowe and Go system which is awesome. Not only for stowing them when not in use, but also for using the front loop just to hold the handles for a few seconds to free your hands for taking a picture.

 

[gnwatts]

Just a few notes...
- The days where down is automatically lighter, warmer, and more compressible than synthetic are over (fortunately for me, since I can't use down). Today, synthetics can be lighter, more compressible, and unlike down, retain their warmth properties when wet.

Don't mean to hijack here, but could you forward your sources on this? I would like to use a synthetic bag, but my experience is that down is superior in every way, weight, warmth, compressible size, as long as it is dry. Again, I would love to find an alternate to down that is as efficient.

 

[Nick]

- While I still think 38~40L would be the ideal size for overnight and weekend trips, a 50L as others are suggesting here, would still be suitable (especially is you have some larger gear heavier gear at the moment). But I would warn you that anything larger is going to encourage you to take more than you need. Smaller packs force you to prioritize and only take what's necessary.

I think you're spot on here, but I do think that the 38-40L range is probably a better goal for someone who has a bit more experience and has whittled down their load a little better. It could be pretty tough starting out like that. A lot of noobs might even have a hard time fitting into a 50, but I'd still say never go above that. Hell, when I was using my 36/38L packs, even super experienced folks who pack lighter than me were pretty surprised that it would all fit in that tiny thing. And even though I prefer the 50 now, I do totally agree that your stuff should fit in a 36-40L pack for that kind of trip, I just prefer how the 50L carries it nowadays.

- The days where down is automatically lighter, warmer, and more compressible than synthetic are over (fortunately for me, since I can't use down). Today, synthetics can be lighter, more compressible, and unlike down, retain their warmth properties when wet. My synthetic sleeping bag (Mountain Hardware Ultralamina 32) weighs 1 lbs 11 oz and compresses to 6"x10". It's smaller and lighter than my fleece liner when compressed.

Interesting. I haven't really looked into any of that in the last couple of years. Maybe it's time to start paying more attention.

 

[Opi]

Let's see I need 1 pack for....
8 to 10 day wilderness excursion
5 day trip pack
2-3 day trip pack
overnighter pack
day pack
I need more packs

 

[Nick]

8 to 10 day wilderness excursion
5 day trip pack
2-3 day trip pack
overnight pack

These are all the same pack!

 

[Nodust]

Let's see I need 1 pack for....
8 to 10 day wilderness excursion
5 day trip pack
2-3 day trip pack
overnighter pack
day pack
I need more packs

I can fit all but the 8-10 day in one pack. My normal backpack is lighter and more comfortable than the camel bak daypack I bought.

 

[Nodust]

Just a few notes...

- The days where down is automatically lighter, warmer, and more compressible than synthetic are over (fortunately for me, since I can't use down). Today, synthetics can be lighter, more compressible, and unlike down, retain their warmth properties when wet. My synthetic sleeping bag (Mountain Hardware Ultralamina 32) weighs 1 lbs 11 oz and compresses to 6"x10". It's smaller and lighter than my fleece liner .

You must have some brand new stuff.

The synthetic I've seen was at best almost as light for the warmth. Not close in compress ability, and yes much better when wet.

Better when wet is all synthetic has. But that is a big one. Everyone has to decide what's important.

 

[Parma]

I know North Face now uses a water resistant down in their sleeping bags.

 

[Parma]

Here's water resistant down explained
http://www.backcountry.com/explore/what-exactly-is-water-resistant-down-insulation

 

[Nodust]

Down is always better, until it's not.

 

[Vegan.Hiker]

Oh boy, didn't mean to start a controversy here. Allow me to remove foot from mouth as I backtrack a bit. I apologize for not being more measured with my words, but what I wrote was not what I was really trying to say. I was not trying to say synthetic is "better" than down (although re-reading my post, it certainly sounded like it), because as we all know, each has it's pros and cons. What I should have said is that there are some synthetics now with warmth to weight ratios and compressibility, that are on par with down and that coupled with the hydrophobic advantages of synthetics, synthetics can be a better option overall. Particularly if you combine top of the line synthetics (primaloft gold) with advanced design on things like baffles and zipper draft tubes (like how Mountain Hardware laminates their synthetic insulation directly to the inside of the shell). As an example of how synthetics can often be the better overall option, notice that in OutdoorGearLab's testing results for the Best Insulated Jacket, all are synthetic http://www.outdoorgearlab.com/Insulated-Jacket-Reviews

So I want to apologize to @gnwatts and @Nick as I feel I misled you to believe I knew about some brand new technological breakthrough. But here's a link to some information about Primaloft Gold (used to be called Primaloft One) which is the best synthetic currently on the market. http://www.patagonia.com/us/patagonia.go?assetid=63310

Also @gnwatts, if you are trying to get away from down for ethical reasons (as was my impression), but love down and how it performs, you can buy down products made by Western Mountaineering. Whereas most companies "live pluck" which is painful and cruel, Western Mountaineering only uses down that is naturally shed from geese during the molting process, therefore causing them no harm. I'm not here to convert anyone (I promise) and certainly not here to judge anyone, but if you or anyone is interested, I'd be happy to share the research I've done over the years regarding cruelty-free hiking (shoe glues, non-leather boots, wool sock alternatives, etc.) You can always shoot me a private message.

 

[steve]

Don't forget granite gear, they make some fantastic packs. @Tess has the crown 60, and it's a great pack. The frame sheet isn't stiff enough for my liking, so when I use it, I stick some aluminum rods in there to make a u-shaped internal frame. Fantastic pack for the price.

 

[Nick]

Oh boy, didn't mean to start a controversy here.

Darn you and your controversies!

But seriously, live plucking sounds awful. I'll definitely look into the latest synthetic options next time I'm in the market for a bag or coat.

 

[Opi]

there are some synthetics now with warmth to weight ratios and compressibility

A great example would be the Patagonia Nano Puff jackets. Synthetic, light weight, packable, toasty warm, dries faster than down. And only a little bit heavier than the down jacket.
I can see that same technology put into sleeping bags. Still maybe slightly heavier bag but nicer for those wet conditions or trips.

 

[steve]

The nano puff is a great piece of gear, but it definitely isn't lightweight. Specs show it at 12 oz w/o hood. A mountain hardwear ghost whisperer is nearly half that weight at 7 oz.

I'm not saying synthetic isn't great, it is. Aside from the whole staying warm while wet, I still haven't seen synthetic gear that outperforms my down gear. I don't get my down gear wet, so ability to insulate when wet is a non-issue for me. The gap is definitely closing though.