Forum Index > Gear Talk > Lightweight Packs for Heavy Loads
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
wildernessed
viewbagger



Joined: 31 Oct 2004
Posts: 9211 | TRs
Location: Wenatchee
wildernessed
viewbagger
PostWed Apr 11, 2018 10:31 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
My daughter is assimilating my Osprey Volt 60 for her wilderness ranger job.

--------------
Living in the Anthropocene
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
andypandy
Member
Member


Joined: 31 Jan 2014
Posts: 24 | TRs

andypandy
Member
PostWed Apr 11, 2018 10:48 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
https://seekoutside.com/backpack-frame-extensions/
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
iron
getting old



Joined: 10 Aug 2008
Posts: 6050 | TRs
Location: kenmore
iron
getting old
PostWed Apr 11, 2018 3:38 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Stefan wrote:
Cut off the bells and whistles.  That's what I do.

stefan just waits until his back has enough holes in it that stuff falls out to lighten his load. win win.

--------------
man, you go through life, you try to be nice to people, you struggle to resist the urge to punch 'em in the face, and for what?

--- moe sizlack
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 8841 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu Apr 12, 2018 3:46 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve wrote:
If you're staying on trail, get an external frame pack.

^ you should be able to find a decent external frame on CL pretty cheap if you pick through the ads and take your time. $25-$40 will get you a nice big Kelty or Jansport. hauling upwards of 50-60 pounds is not an issue with them.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Backpacker Joe
NWH Joe-Bob



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 22832 | TRs
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
NWH Joe-Bob
PostFri Apr 13, 2018 6:57 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
McHale

X10 up.gif

--------------
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."

— Abraham Lincoln
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
D. Inscho
Not bored yet...



Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 862 | TRs
Location: Bellingham,WA
D. Inscho
Not bored yet...
PostTue May 15, 2018 6:32 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I finally had to replace my 23 year-old Dana Astalplane (7200 cu) and needed another load monster.  This led me to the Osprey Xenith 105.  I sacrificed a bit of volume but saved a couple of pounds in pack weight.  The suspension is substantial with heat-molded hip belt.  My typical 60 lb load feels more comfortable than the Dana, though I still have it to carry the propane tank up to the fire lookout dizzy.gif

--------------
http://david-inscho.smugmug.com/

The key to a successful trip is to do the planning during work hours.       --  John Muir
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
RumiDude
Marmota olympus



Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 2414 | TRs
Location: Port Angeles
RumiDude
Marmota olympus
PostTue May 15, 2018 10:37 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Most external frame packs are 5+ pounds, so I am not thinking that is going to fit the bill for going lighter. I can say an external frame is a comfortable pack for hauling heavy loads. Also most external frame packs have lots of bells and whistles.

One caveat with externals is that they can really be frustrating if you are negotiating blowdown because they seemingly catch on everything. Also because the center of gravity is so high, any dynamic move over steep terrain or such (like climbing around a root-ball) is tricky.

All in all, an external frame pack is probably not going to reduce your weight like you are wanting to. You might as well stick with your present pack, which you said carries the load comfortably, than to move to an external which is less versatile and not accomplishing your goal of weight reduction.

Rumi

EDIT: I have owned several external frame packs including the Kelty Super Tioga. Once I made the leap to internal frame packs I never went back to using an external. YMMV

--------------
Valhalla Outdoors
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve
mere tourist



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12305 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
mere tourist
PostWed May 16, 2018 8:00 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
OP is asking for something that does not exist, to wit, "a light load hauler that carries [a 40+ lb. payload] really well." A pack with structure sufficient to carry a 40+ lb. load comfortably, with stability and without resulting in undue fatigue has a minimum threshold weight, and it's >2 lbs. In other words, if a lightweight pack lacks sufficient structure and stability for the payload, one will suffer from lack of comfort and expend significantly more energy stabilizing the load than he or she would carrying a pack that's 2-3 lbs. heavier but with sufficient structure for the load. I cringe when I see someone with a 2 lb. UL pack filled w/ a 35 lb. payload flopping around, forcing the hiker to constantly correct body position in response to the shifting load. That constant correction requires energy and is unduly fatiguing. All it takes is one long hike with a 50 lb. payload in a McHale or an external frame pack or a mass-produced IF pack that happens to fit just right (which requires quite a bit of luck) to understand the limits of UL packs.

The better question: What packs carry >40 lb. payloads efficiently, comfortably and free of unnecessary fatigue, and what are the lightest of those packs? Even this question puts too much emphasis on weight. 2 extra lbs. of structure is negligible if that's what it takes to get sufficient stability and prevent unnecessary fatigue resulting from flop-correction.

I will double down on my claim that -- if you are sticking on trail -- a (properly fitted, of course) 5 lb. external frame pack with a 45 lb. payload will take less energy and carry more comfortably than any 2 lb. UL pack. Again, if you carry a payload that exceeds a pack's design limits, a lighter pack sucks up more energy, hastens fatigue and is less comfortable. Light weight does not always mean less effort. Compare, e.g., walking across a long (say, 30 minutes) moderately steep scree slope with 1 lb. soft running shoes vs. 3-1/2 lb. light mountaineering boots. Anyone will fatigue at a far lower rate in LMB's due to their additional torsional rigidity.

I agree with Rumi that an EF pack is a PITA in brush, when negotiating off-trail terrain or getting around blowdowns. EF packs suck in those conditions. That's why my previous comment was qualified with "if you stay on trail." If you plan to get off trail or encounter blowdowns, the answer is a very well-fitted IF pack with sufficient structure for the payload. IME, no mass produced pack carries heavier (i.e., 30+ lbs.) loads anywhere near as comfortably and stable as a 4 lb. McHale SARC. You might get lucky and get a mass produced pack to fit just right, but it won't carry as well as a custom pack. ETA: Although most mass produced packs can be adjusted for torso length (at a cost because the adjustment mechanism introduces some lack of stability vs. custom pack fixed torso length), they are not adjustable for shoulder width. Also, mass-produced pack belt circumference is fixed.

ETA2: For larger loads, McHales bypass/bayonet system is superior to mass-produced IF pack so-called "load lifters" -- no contest. This may not a big issue with some EF packs, where the torso length can be adjusted such that the shoulder straps break over the trapezoid without crushing them. Breakover vs. wrap + load lifters (or on McHale bayo/bypass system: wrap + bypass strap) could be the topic of an entire thread. I like both, depending on payload. For payloads <40 lbs. a perfectly fitted fixed torso length pack with breakover is a joy in rough terrain, scrambling, climbing and skiing. For heavier loads, the McHale wrap + bayo introduces wider load distribution. A McHale bayo/bypass pack (e.g., SARC P&G) can be set up in either mode, which is sweet (but IME requires some mechanical acumen). I often start a long trip in bayo/bypass mode, then as the load lightens (food eaten, wine consumed) I switch to breakover mode by removing bayos and bypass straps and lengthening main stays, thus converting to breakover mode. (FTR, Dan may not use the term "breakover," but that's how I think about it.) This is easier to show than tell.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RumiDude
Marmota olympus



Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 2414 | TRs
Location: Port Angeles
RumiDude
Marmota olympus
PostWed May 16, 2018 10:20 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve wrote:
OP is asking for something that does not exist, to wit, "a light load hauler that carries [a 40+ lb. payload] really well." A pack with structure sufficient to carry a 40+ lb. load comfortably, with stability and without resulting in undue fatigue has a minimum threshold weight, and it's >2 lbs. In other words, if a lightweight pack lacks sufficient structure and stability for the payload, one will suffer from lack of comfort and expend significantly more energy stabilizing the load than he or she would carrying a pack that's 2-3 lbs. heavier but with sufficient structure for the load.

Totally agree!!! (Also agree about the LMBs on scree.)

Rumi

--------------
Valhalla Outdoors
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Chief Joseph
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Posts: 4547 | TRs
Location: What Verlot Forgot.
Chief Joseph
Member
PostThu May 17, 2018 5:26 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve wrote:
¨OP is asking for something that does not exist, to wit, "a light load hauler that carries [a 40+ lb. payload] really well.

Exactly what I was thinking. I had a Granite Gear pack that weighed around 2.5 lbs but if I tried to carry more than 25 lbs with it, the pack was very unstable and uncomfortable.

I now have several Gregory packs and although they are a bit heavy, their suspension systems work very well to stabilize the load and are very comfortable.

I think a reasonable guide is that a pack can comfortable carry 10 times it's own weight. I have carried 50 lbs in my Gregory Baltoro that weighs 5.5 lbs and it felt like a lot less weight than I actually carried.

--------------
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Chief Joseph
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Posts: 4547 | TRs
Location: What Verlot Forgot.
Chief Joseph
Member
PostThu May 17, 2018 5:30 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
McHale

McHale packs are not light and cost more than most hikers are willing to pay. I hiked with a guy who paid $700 for his McHale, it weighed probably 6 pounds and was ugly AF...sure most don't care how their pack looks but still.

--------------
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 13708 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostThu May 17, 2018 5:46 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Light weight and load capacity do not really go together well. My dead bird bora 80 will easily carry well over 20 K but weighs close to 4 K. My wife’s Mchale will carry 20 K with comfort and weighs about 2 K and that is about as you can go for that weight. A granite gear or ULA with plastic stays weighs just over 1 K but will me painfull with over 10 K. MHale makes packs for climbing which will carry 35 K with comfort that weigh 3 K or so if that is what your friend has. As for ugly any pack that is comfortable and carry’s the load I need is beautiful regardless of looks. cool.gif His packs cost more but a tailored suit costs more than ready to wear.

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tomlike
Member
Member


Joined: 22 Jun 2010
Posts: 366 | TRs

Tomlike
Member
PostThu May 17, 2018 7:42 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I already posted this but the Seek Outside packs weigh about 3lbs and comfortably carry 30-50 pounds on a hybrid internal/external frame.  They claim they are capable of carrying 100lbs, and I personally know people who use them for hunting (the company's original target market) and can back up this claim. The hip belt and shoulder straps are more comfortable than anything you will find off the shelf.  They are waterproof, super durable and look great.  Made in the USA too, so MAGA if you buy one..

Before I owned a Seek Outside I would lust for a McHale (even if I couldn't afford it).  After a couple  of summers  bushwhacking around the Olympics on week long trips I don't see any reson to ever consider switching packs

https://seekoutside.com/divide-4500-ultralight-backpack-olive-green/
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Gear Talk > Lightweight Packs for Heavy Loads
  Happy Birthday Timbertoes, cascadetraverser, Leopold!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy