pack size

Vegan.Hiker said:
I'm actually able to fit my bear canister, along with my tent, sleeping bag, and stove inside my Kestral 38L with room to spare for extra clothing. My canister is pretty compact though.
Click to expand...

good to know that it actually fits into a 38L Kestrel. That's what I usually use when I go.
Still need to get a bear canister for my upcoming Salt Creek Canyon trip end of May but I'm nor really impressed b the bulky size and heavy weight of all these boxes.
I'm really considering to get a Bearicade, even with the steep price. Because I will use the canister for future trips it might be a good investment.
 
Miss Buffalo said:
good to know that it actually fits into a 38L Kestrel. That's what I usually use when I go.
Still need to get a bear canister for my upcoming Salt Creek Canyon trip end of May but I'm nor really impressed b the bulky size and heavy weight of all these boxes.
I'm really considering to get a Bearicade, even with the steep price. Because I will use the canister for future trips it might be a good investment.
Click to expand...

Yvonne (if I may call you by your first name), I'd suggest checking out the Bare Boxer Contender. That's the canister that fits easily into my Kestral 38 right next to my tent. From what I understand it is the lightest and least expensive. Imo it also seems to be built very well.

http://www.bareboxer.com/products.htm
 
I'm chiming in because this is my favorite topic. I have an osprey ariel 65L, it has been my go-to pack for YEARS. I am mostly ultralight - tarp tent the whole nine yards. I've had a granite gear pack and many others but I return to my ariel every time. The hilarious thing is because the pack is roomy and I am small everyone always says "jen your pack looks huge" in pictures (I am sure there are more than a few of those on here) - but it's just an illusion. my pack is light, and I love the extra room for an ounce or two more. I go for tube style, no pockets. This pack will squish down for day hikes or expand for winter week of backpacking. no worries on carrying bear cannisters. the thing I like about a little extra room is you can be sloppy. raining in the morning? just cram you gear in, shove your wet tent in there in a hurry and dry it out later. no careful precise packing needed. traveling for a year and picked up a few too many souvenirs? they'll fit. it carries well and is durable. it also has a 28" frame size for the small so I can fit in as a carryon on planes. perfect for me and my lifestyle. i'll be taking it on the boat this week and to Poland for a month of backcountry splitboarding and mountaineering next week. it's not perfect for every situation, but it is damn good for most. I sent it into osprey for repair of some holes and they wanted to replace it - I panicked and had them send it back because I think it is so perfect. having said that, the aura 50 will probably be my next pack when this one officially dies.

i think the thing to be aware of is not size specifically, but weight, carrying comftability, pockets (who needs 'em!) and actual use. will it tie well to a boat? will pickpockets take everything out of your lovely side pockets? can you fit it as a carryon? will it carry all of my backpacking and climbing gear simultaneously? does it weigh as little as possible? these are the important things for me. what is the most important for you?
 
colefeet said:
The hilarious thing is because the pack is roomy and I am small everyone always says "jen your pack looks huge" in pictures (I am sure there are more than a few of those on here) - but it's just an illusion.
Click to expand...

halls-creek-narrows-3-jpg.9670


Yep! I'll admit, for how big that thing is, it has always been ridiculously light when I've picked it up.
 
What I have noticed is that small packs normally mean:

1) Less calories/fuel/first aid kit/other consumables per day
2) Smaller/lighter/absence of shelter
3) Less insulating/rain layers

All the above can cause issues when the weather turns or you need to extend your trip a little due to unforeseen circumstance. I would love to know how many of you have gone through major multi day storms using your ultralight setup. Did it work well?
 
fiber said:
What I have noticed is that small packs normally mean:

1) Less calories/fuel/first aid kit/other consumables per day
2) Smaller/lighter/absence of shelter
3) Less insulating/rain layers

All the above can cause issues when the weather turns or you need to extend your trip a little due to unforeseen circumstance. I would love to know how many of you have gone through major multi day storms using your ultralight setup. Did it work well?
Click to expand...
Right on.

I stay out of these threads, mainly because my opinion is different than most, and people get offended because of it. But @fiber has some really, really great points. Its easy to go light when you know what the weather is going to be like for a few days, but on longer trips, it can make you miserable, and even get you killed.

Go on a 10 day trip, where it rains and snows for half of it (or all of it), or where your water source is dried up, or the temperature drops 20 degrees, or where that light weight gear that isn't durable tears right at the start. Or your down gets wet just from your own body moisture, and the humidity doesn't allow it to dry out. Or when you have no gloves because its early August, and suddenly a freak wet snow storm hits as your going over a 10,000 foot pass.

And its not so much about surviving, as it is about being comfortable and enjoying yourself. I look through these posts at what some of you bring - and what you skimp on, and I just say to myself, not me. I've got burned enough before, and I don't want to go there again.

But hike your own hike. There is no rules to backpacking, no right and wrong. Just a bunch of opinion. One thing I have definitely learned over the last 15 years of backpacking, is that what I read on the internet, or in magazine articles, or what the guy at REI tells me, isn't always right. I do learn from my mistakes and experiences.
 
A small pack size or load is in no way advocating to go out without sufficient gear to do a trip safely and comfortably. Safety and comfort to some might be having a light enough load to move with less effort and less impact to the body, while to others it might be packing a chair, a 6-pack and a 4-season shelter. I think most of us are in various places in between. Not packing the kitchen sink for every trip is not irresponsible if you plan carefully. I always have a 'if the shit goes down' plan whenever I skimp on something to save weight. Saying that a small pack = insufficient gear to do it safely and/or comfortably is just as short sighted as saying a big pack = carrying 'stupid things' or inexperience. Like Joey just said, there are no rules, no right or wrong. When I see a giant pack I wince at the thought of carrying it. I'd hurt too much and move too slow, but some folks I've packed with carry those things like they're god damn donkeys and go running up mountains with those giant, heavy packs! I'm not strong enough for that, but it's cool that they are. Last point, it's pretty easy to figure out how to bring everything you might ever need and stuff it into a giant pack, it's more of a challenge to figure out how to accomplish all the same things with less stuff and still do it safely. Hence the benefit of such threads. I hope no one thinks of it as a judgement zone for people who do things differently.

fiber said:
All the above can cause issues when the weather turns or you need to extend your trip a little due to unforeseen circumstance. I would love to know how many of you have gone through major multi day storms using your ultralight setup. Did it work well?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have been through 'major multi day storms' in my lightweight* setup and it went just fine. Totally happy and comfortable. And I've had trips where I thought 'hey, a little more of this, or one of these or less of that would have been nice' and I've made adjustments to how I approach things and decide what I need for any given trip.

*Not ultralight, but it still fits fine in 38L for a cold, rainy mountain trip.
 
I'm a bit late to this party, but to the OP question - I would strongly suggest putting all of the gear you plan on taking into a large trash bag and bring it to a retail store that sells backpacks. Let one of the clerks know what you are doing when you walk in and then test out many, many packs. I recently helped a new backpacker do this (I have suggested and accompanied many over time) and it is always eye opening. Not only is it important to get size correct, packing style can be determined as well. I hope this helps.

- Rob
 
Fiber ................................. +1 :thumbsup:
Joey ................................... +1 :thumbsup:
 
Nick said:
A small pack size or load is in no way advocating to go out without sufficient gear...

...Saying that a small pack = insufficient gear to do it safely and/or comfortably is just as short sighted as saying a big pack = carrying 'stupid things' or inexperience.
Click to expand...

well said
 
When comparing staying at a hotel, camping in a 5th wheel, or even car camping to backpacking, backpacking normally means...

fiber said:
1) Less calories/fuel/first aid kit/other consumables per day
2) Smaller/lighter/absence of shelter
3) Less insulating/rain layers
Click to expand...


it's all perspective. Decide what you want to bring, then find the tool that does that job best.

I cover more ground with less pain when I go light, so that's typically what I recommend for others. That being said, everyone's needs are different, and no one pack is going to be perfect for everyone.
 
It's a fact of volume.......a smaller pack holds less than a large pack....... that can equate to leaving something home that should be taken on a trip or the other, taking too much extra on a trip. But it's the individuals choice in pack size and what you take or leave home. I don't go out to travel over most ground I can, I go for the trip, in the time I have and I plan the distance accordingly. I am not saying those who cover ground faster or farther don't enjoy the hike, that relates to the individual as well. Granted my pack weighs different for 3 nites or 9 nites, base is the same. Base weight is a balance between quality (durability), weight, cost and to some degree, how obsessed one is in 'getting to the lightest'. There is also the factor of a persons physical body, some can carry more, some less, just based on body build. Stamina and the associated pain level can play in as well.

Bottom line it boils down to the individual. But, I think it is better to say what works and is durable for me rather than say to someone else "this is what you should get or do because......."
 
I'm not even sure what the debate is here. Due to the fact that gravity exists, it's a safe assumption that most people will probably enjoy carrying less stuff within the bounds of safety and comfort. No one here is arguing against carrying whatever you need or want to get the job done in a way that makes you happy and safe. What ignited this was the generalization that using a small pack equates to being unsafe or unprepared, which is simply not true.
 
One thing that I've always wondered is the following... how does dropping 1 lb of body weight compare to dropping 1 lb of pack weight in terms of how it affects your ease of travel and perceived load on your legs/knees? I know there are too many factors for a simple answer regarding the weight loss (losing fat, muscle, or water will affect you differently), so to simplify, let's assume the body weight loss is fat (not muscle or water) lost in a healthy fashion through diet or exercise, on person of average body composition and fitness. In that scenario, does losing body weight effect you the same as dropping pack weight? Sorry if it's a stupid question, but I've always pondered this. Mostly because I need to get my butt in the gym.
 
Last edited:
I can say from lots of personal experience that those extra pounds of body weight make hiking and general moving through life much more difficult. My weight tends to fluctuate a lot. Every fall, like clockwork, I seem to pack on like 30 pounds, almost like I'm a bear going into hibernation or something. Even if I get really strict on my diet, it just happens every September-October. Then in the late winter/spring, it comes back off. This past fall add that to a bunch of lazy cocktail-fueled boat trips, little hiking due to my knee problem, and then the knee replacement and not being able to move at all for weeks on end and it was a really bad combo. Since then I've dropped all of that gain and quite a bit more and it's been incredible how much easier it is to get around and be active. It really is quite similar to the burden of lugging a backpack filled with rocks or something.
 
I can see losing either type of weight (body or pack) making travel easier, I guess I'm just wondering whether they help at the same rate. So if I lose 5 lbs, will that feel the same as dropping 5 lbs in my pack? I thought about this a lot when I spent like $500 upgrading my tent to drop about 2.5 lbs in my pack.. I kept thinking.. "Maybe I should just save the $500 and lose 2.5 lbs". I guess losing the 2.5 lbs AND carrying the lighter tent would be best though. Kind of a dumb question I guess, but I'm just surprised it's never discussed in UL books or that there hasn't been any research done (that I've seen) comparing the the effects of losing equivalent amounts of body vs pack weight.
 
Ah yeah, I follow. That would be interesting to know exactly how the two correlate. My gut feel is that you'd need to lose much more body weight to equal a pound in your pack. Probably depends somewhat on percentage, but for me, I'd guess like 3 or 4 to 1 maybe?

On the weight loss, I've just been trying to be strict with my diet and making sure I'm moving around enough. To me that means no sugar, no processed foods, low carbs and little to no drinking. Just wholesome, nutritious natural foods. Works well for me and makes me feel great.
 
All I can say is I tend to stick to American view of where we live in excess, I have the kelty 110 liter redcloud (amazing pack by the way).. And it's not that I need all that space but it sure is nice to know when i do it's there... Kinda like my car. My wife doesn't understand why I need as much power as it has. I tell her it's not that I need it, it's that its there when I want it lol... Plus years in the Army I just can't see going ultra light weight, I feel like it's cheating, plus im a gear junkie I like to have it all and I need a big bag to haul it. 50-70lb packs are what I'm used to so weight has no impact on me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top