Recommendation for a 4-5 day pack - 45-50L Sufficient?

[keithy]

Hey all - I'm looking at a new (reasonably priced - ideally under $200) pack that's between my old heavy 75/80L pack, and my lighter 33-36L packs. I have managed weekend overnighter on-trail bushwalks (in spring/summer) with my smaller 33L pack with tent, mat and sleeping bag strapped to the exterior. So I was looking at a slightly bigger pack for longer treks.

I'm not an ultralighter, but have a bit of lightweight gear in my kit. No camping above snowline, and mainly 3 season bushwalking, so was thinking a 40-50L pack might be doable for 4-5days? Or should I just get a lightweight 60L pack.

I was looking at the Osprey Kestrel 48L or something slightly heavier like the Atmos 50 that I've seen on sale under $200 every now and then, but noticed a few people here have the larger Exos 58. I've seen some other cheap brands as well, like Black Wolf or EPE sold at a few of the major outdoor retailers, but have been told they are not up to scratch. I've had a few Osprey packs, and have had great service from a warranty perspective on them (even on a 4-5 year old daypack).

Any recommendations? I like the idea of the Aarn packs with balance pockets, but they are outside my budget at the moment.

[Bubbalouie]

For what it's worth I used my atmos 50 on the OLT for 5 nights. It performed quite admirably, if you can find one in your size at a good price I say go for it.

Unless you're really huge or have a large synthetic sleeping bag 50L will be plenty in my experience.

[peregrinator]

Any recommendations? I like the idea of the Aarn packs with balance pockets, but they are outside my budget at the moment.

I like the reality of the Aarn packs with balance pockets. They're so comfortable to wear that you really could not give a damn about the difference in weight between a 45 or 75 litre conventional pack without pockets. This difference becomes utterly insignificant once you pack up and get walking. So if you have to save up for a while, I'd say do that rather than waste money on something else in the interim. I have no connection with Aarn other than being a very happy user.

[Mutley]

Any recommendations? I like the idea of the Aarn packs with balance pockets, but they are outside my budget at the moment.

I like the reality of the Aarn packs with balance pockets. They're so comfortable to wear that you really could not give a damn about the difference in weight between a 45 or 75 litre conventional pack without pockets. This difference becomes utterly insignificant once you pack up and get walking. So if you have to save up for a while, I'd say do that rather than waste money on something else in the interim. I have no connection with Aarn other than being a very happy user.

+1

I'm a total convert.

[Strider]

+2

[beean]

I think 45-50L is the sweet spot for packs, they compress well and usually expand to around 70L. If you pack smart you may be able to stretch it out to 7 days!

Osprey packs are usually very highly recommended. Never used Aarn before however I've never heard a negative review.

You could also consider Deuter, they tend to be slightly heavier but they're very comfortable.

[keithy]

All the Aarn love aside, any other thoughts on whether a 45L would suffice or is that getting a bit small for a 4-5 day outing with me not being an ultralighter.

For what it's worth I used my atmos 50 on the OLT for 5 nights.

Unless you're really huge or have a large synthetic sleeping bag 50L will be plenty in my experience.

Thanks. I did the Overland with my old 75/80L pack yonks ago, but my sleeping bag was a monster at the time, and I had no lightweight gear at all. I think back then I was doing it with 22-25 kgs with food and not carrying water. Seen the Atmos 50 for around $175 so I'll see if I can find it somewhere in stock to try it on.

I also found a Kestrel 48 for $150. And an email from mountain designs had a special this weekend with a berghaus 45L+8L for about $90 on sale (says it was Was $219.95) til Sunday, but it looks heavy at 2.05kg.

I think 45-50L is the sweet spot for packs, they compress well and usually expand to around 70L. If you pack smart you may be able to stretch it out to 7 days!

Osprey packs are usually very highly recommended.

I was thinking I could still attach my mat and tent outside as well, and have more room for water/food in the pack if I needed.

Of course, I'm happy to take donations to try out Aarn packs...

[Scottyk]

The 45-50L pack might be big enough but it really comes down to the variables
- the likley weather you are encountering
- the kind of terrain you are walking in (can't strap much to the outside if you in scrub or scrambling)
- the equipment you have

For Tassie (where I am) I would think it would be ok for overnighter in summer but winter you might want to be able to carry more. All that depends on the walk you are doing of course.

[Empty]

Not having a shot at you Keithy but just reflecting on my memory of attitudes amongst experienced walkers (way back when) that anyone carrying gear on the outside of thier pack was a bit of a novice. Not sure what the current thinking is but I have always made sure my kit is inside my pack. I am an aarn convert by the way(sorry, donation not forthcoming).

Of course, 20 years ago we also frowned on anyone who went into the bush with footwear other than leather boots. I gave up on boots years ago and never looked back. So to each his own I suppose.

[Ellobuddha]

Whats your total gear weight? I think it will make a big difference to what sort of.pack you should look at.

I have an Exos 58 and love it but wouldnt want to overload it. They are also not really built to take heaps of gear strapped outside. Straps are pretty light compared to others.

[keithy]

The 45-50L pack might be big enough but it really comes down to the variables

Understood. I posted earlier, mostly for 4-5 day bushwalks on trail, 3 season, under snowline. If I did more winter walking, I'd go with my older heavier pack. I have never done a full gram check of my gear, but even comparing my old kit to my newer kit, I can see the weight/size savings already (old goose down bag - 1.2kg, new bag 650g; old cook kit 1.2kg, new cook kit 750g; old goretex jacket 1kg, new goretex jacket 400g), so I figured I might manage with a smaller pack.

And something I could take for the 6 day Southern Circuit Stewart Island walk (huts so I can leave the tent behind).

Not having a shot at you Keithy but just reflecting on my memory of attitudes amongst experienced walkers (way back when) that anyone carrying gear on the outside of thier pack was a bit of a novice. ...
Of course, 20 years ago we also frowned on anyone who went into the bush with footwear other than leather boots. I gave up on boots years ago and never looked back. ..

Sure, I've seen the same debated on other forums for quite a while now. As I don't have an intermediate size pack, I strap my solo tent sans pegs/poles (around 800g), and mat (about 650g) which are light enough to be lashed to the external of my smaller packs without throwing the weight off. It works for me, and I haven't lost anything yet, and mostly with trail walking and not scrub bashing haven't snagged anything either. Mind you all are secured to a secondary point on the pack as well.

But that's funny about bushwalking snobs. I've always thought it's more important to get out there and walk, rather than what you wear (as long as it was practical, and safety first of course).

I have an Exos 58 and love it but wouldnt want to overload it. They are also not really built to take heaps of gear strapped outside. Straps are pretty light compared to others.

. I noticed the thin, light weight straps on the Exos, but I thought if I went the Exos 58, I probably could fit everything inside rather than attach it to the exterior. The heavier Atmos 50 might be around the same capacity, given it has the external cinch straps for a mat/bag at the bottom of the pack.

[icefest]

Sure, I've seen the same debated on other forums for quite a while now. As I don't have an intermediate size pack, I strap my solo tent sans pegs/poles (around 800g), and mat (about 650g) which are light enough to be lashed to the external of my smaller packs without throwing the weight off. It works for me, and I haven't lost anything yet, and mostly with trail walking and not scrub bashing haven't snagged anything either. Mind you all are secured to a secondary point on the pack as well.
But that's funny about bushwalking snobs. I've always thought it's more important to get out there and walk, rather than what you wear (as long as it was practical, and safety first of course).

I think that the reason behind this attitude is that people who carry the closed cell foam mats often end up leaving a breadcrumb trail behind.
It's more a problem on the less open walks where you are brushing against branches all day, but getting into the habit on open trails means that when these walkers move to harder walks there is less likelihood of rubbish on the trail.
I was following a group of two on Mt Anne recently where I would find a 2x2cm scrap of pink hiking mat on the ground every few km.

[keithy]

It's more a problem on the less open walks where you are brushing against branches all day, but getting into the habit on open trails means that when these walkers move to harder walks there is less likelihood of rubbish on the trail.
I was following a group of two on Mt Anne recently where I would find a 2x2cm scrap of pink hiking mat on the ground every few km.

My reply was more to the comment about disdain for non-leather boot wearing walkers. But yes, I can see the issue there. That would annoy me as much as people who don't bury their poo.

My thermarest mat folded and rolled is only around 10" in length, and doesn't extend outside the width of the pack, and taking my smaller packs, is strapped to the top of the pack, just behind my head.

[DanShell]

My reply was more to the comment about disdain for non-leather boot wearing walkers.

I resemble that comment

I recently passed a group of young'er than me people and one of the young ladies I noticed had a sniffle.......for the next few kilometres I saw a tissue every few hundred metres.....Off topic I know but we must be careful what we are leaving out there.

I have a 50ish ltr golite jam pack id sell at reasonable price if someones after a light weight frameless pack......

[Empty]

Not so much snobbery but more that everyone in the group needed to be adequately and similarly equipped. The thinking was that someone without boots could roll and ankle putting others in jeopardy.

In a similar way gear carried on the outside of a pack could be damaged or lost potentially compromising the group. The boot thing is a separate topic but certainly at risk gear on the outside I think is best avoided. Tents are very lightweight and just not worth risking getting snagged.

Icefest makes a valid point and I have witnessed similar bits of blue foam littering the bush as well.

Good luck with your search.

[Mark F]

With good gear and on the edge of UL I mange perfectly well for 3 seasons trips of up to 7-8 days with a 40 litre pack with everything inside. I managed even when carrying an REI Quarterdome (2 person 1.7kg) and 3/4 of the food for two on the OLT. 45-50 litres should easily fit the requirements.

[Moondog55]

Just get all your gear together including the food and water for the time away and actually see how much volume you need.
External pockets and HD stuff sacks can add much needed carrying volume without leaving CCF breadcrumbs behind.
My own thinking is that 50 litres is a little small, my summer pack [ old external frame Macpac] is 65 plus a back pocket and it's only just OK; although it does have a HUGE extendable throat

[Franco]

As I mentioned many times before, there is no real standard for measuring pack volume so a 50L pack from one brand could be a 55 or 45 from another.
Some of the difference has to do with external pockets and or hoods (they may or may not be included in the given volume) others are just about rounding up or embellishing.
So ,like Moondog, I would also suggest you put all your stuff together WITH food and see what sort of volume you need.
You could fill a plastic bag with your gear (AND FOOD) then go to a shop fill your empty plastic bag with clothing or something to take up the same volume and find a pack that can hold that.
I emphasise food because I have seen many showing off their tiny packs without any food inside and well, just 4 days of food takes up a pretty good percentage of my pack.
By food of course I also mean drinks (tea/coffee/milk..) as well as your water.

[madmacca]

Hey all - I'm looking at a new (reasonably priced - ideally under $200) pack that's between my old heavy 75/80L pack, and my lighter 33-36L packs. I have managed weekend overnighter on-trail bushwalks (in spring/summer) with my smaller 33L pack with tent, mat and sleeping bag strapped to the exterior. So I was looking at a slightly bigger pack for longer treks.

One of the key things about bushwalking is to keep your sleeping bag dry at all costs. The more it is protected deep in your pack, the better. If you need to strap your bag to the outside, you need a bigger pack even for weekenders. Say around 40L.

When it comes to longer trips, plan on about 2l per person per day of food, although excess packaging or poor menu planning may push this figure higher.

[keithy]

Thanks. I have not yet put a gear list together, just going by roughly what I use in the past. I'll have to do a volume test and see. But I went out today to see whether I could find a store that stocked the Exos 58 with limited success. I think a few in town have it, so I'll have a look later this week. It's hard to gauge the size of packs online, even with pics and videos. In some it looks way too big for my use, and in others it looks like the size of my small packs.

If you need to strap your bag to the outside, you need a bigger pack even for weekenders. Say around 40L.

My new sleeping bag is small and relatively light as posted earlier, so that goes at the bottom of the pack. I usually strap the tent and the sleeping mat to the outside of my small pack. The reason I did that is to make do with stuff I had, and use a 32-36L pack and not take my older bigger pack for 2 nighter trail walk. Are you including water in your 2L/person/day for food? I haven't weighed my stuff, but I was thinking I take maybe over 1kg food/day.

[Moondog55]

The cheapskate old fart asks why not just use the bigger pack you already have and simply not fill it up?

[stry]

No fun MD - simply no fun

I can comfortably go three days (that means up to four days food) with a 57L One Planet Shadow.

That is fully equipped for Victorian winter weather, but not snow. (don't like snow !) The only compromise in the gear in that load is Pertex rain pants instead of my heavier and bulkier Event pants. I think the heavier pants would fit. Food averages about 850 grams per day. Nothing hanging off the outside at the start, but will usually end up with a top under the bungey on the back.

I can also get two to barely three litres of water in there as well, but prefer not to.

[north-north-west]

The cheapskate old fart asks why not just use the bigger pack you already have and simply not fill it up?

Probably the weight.
Although (being a tightarse) I agree with you.

[whynotwalk]

Another suggestion ... The Cactus Patrol Pack caught my eye in relation to your query. It's currently on special on-line http://www.cactusoutdoor.co.nz/packs-bags/alpine-packs/patrol-pack.html. Cactus are in Christchurch, NZ, and they make awesome and very strong packs (and other gear).

I love the (Kiwi) reviewer who said of the Patrol

A most triumphant example of back haulage equipment. ... The pack keeps its rigidity very well under load compared to others on the market. On top of that we do a lot of bush bashing through tough scrub and rocks.. the patrol just cant get enough of it. I have tried unsuccessfully to wreck it over the last year, but I came off second best. Like a faithful labrador it sits at my heals gagging for the next mission. Its a journey of companionship. I better go before I get too emotional..Patrol forever, forever patrol.. (4 out of 5 stars as there is no beer fridge)

Now you can probably dismiss this on price grounds, even at the reduced price ($379NZ), but it's the kind of pack that will outlive most of the other lighter weight packs being mentioned.(I have no commercial interest in Cactus ... I've just used their gear, visited their factory, love their attitude.)

cheers

Peter

[keithy]

The cheapskate old fart asks why not just use the bigger pack you already have and simply not fill it up?

Just on weight - my old pack is just on 3kg empty. I did take it on the Overland many moons ago. But yes, that is still an option.

I've been trying to find a store with stock of the Ospreys to see whether the Exos 58 is too big for me, but haven't found one in the burbs. I'll have a look in the city stores on the weekend.

[Moondog55]

$300- buys a lot of champagne and 3 kg isn't all that heavy if it carries well

[stry]

And if you make a start on the champagne before carrying the 3kg pack, even better

I also have a OP McMillan, which is around 3kg empty. It carries as well as I could expect when it grosses 18/20kg and the 3 kg does its job well.

Despite that, I do prefer to save pack weight if I can, and only use the McMIllan when I need the capacity. Fortunately I have options, and if I can save .5 to 1 kg with the pack, that's good for me.

If I could have only one, it would be the McMillan and bad luck about the weight. Unfortunately, I have bought others since the McMillan and the champagne option is no longer on the table for me .

[Moondog55]

I would just like to say the IF you have the funds to purchase and the required storage space there is absolutely nothing wrong with having too many rucksacks or tents or stoves or sleeping bags or?

"Hello My name is Ted and I suffer from GAS"

[madmacca]

I would just like to say the IF you have the funds to purchase and the required storage space there is absolutely nothing wrong with having too many rucksacks or tents or stoves or sleeping bags or?

"Hello My name is Ted and I suffer from GAS"

Gear Acquisition Syndrome?

[Moondog55]

Korrekt
I suffer from the dreaded syndrome as do many others here