|
sabu
Sep 11, 2004, 7:36 AM
Post #1 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2004
Posts: 51
|
i was wondering what the ideal pack size for a multiday alpine trip would be ( in litres)? i hav reciently bought a 75 litre travel/hiking pack and i am curious as whether it would hav enough space for any low altitude mountaineering. Also would it be wise to carry a very small pack on your front to gain extra space?
|
|
|
|
|
punk
Sep 11, 2004, 5:52 PM
Post #2 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 1442
|
Multidays 50-55 Liter (~3000 - 3400 cuin)
Overnight 35-45 Liter (~2000 - 2800 cuin)
Day 30-35 Liter (~1500-2000 cuin)
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Sep 11, 2004, 6:24 PM
Post #3 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
75l is about as much as youll need.
the pack in front isnt good for mountaneering IMHO because it hinders you view, eg, you cant look where youre stepping.
|
|
|
|
|
furrymurry
Sep 11, 2004, 6:52 PM
Post #4 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 6, 2004
Posts: 205
|
How many days do you think you could go on a 75L pack? The reason I ask is I went on a NOLS mountaineering course in Alaska this summer and carried an Astraplane. It's hard for me to imagine being able to do any sort of extended trip (week or more) with much less space. I'm wanting to get a new pack, and don't really want something as big as an Astraplane, but I'm worried that if I don't go big I might regret it in the future on long trips.
|
|
|
|
|
punk
Sep 11, 2004, 8:30 PM
Post #5 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 1442
|
In reply to: It's hard for me to imagine being able to do any sort of extended trip (week or more) with much less space. I'm wanting to get a new pack, and don't really want something as big as an Astraplane, but I'm worried that if I don't go big I might regret it in the future on long trips.
Spoken like a true mountie
Anyway, think and value the function, need and importance of any item going in your pack and then revalue it again learn to do more with less 3500 cuin its more then enough almost too big
[edited for spelling]
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Sep 11, 2004, 8:46 PM
Post #6 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
75L pack for anything but expedition use is ridiculous. 60L is probably closer to what you want for a 3-4 day trip. Just pair down what you don't really need, and bring only the essentials.
|
|
|
|
|
icarus_burned
Sep 11, 2004, 9:19 PM
Post #7 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 16, 2004
Posts: 281
|
i have a 70+ pack (+ = 5 litres extra bellows pockets) and ive done 19 day alpine walking/climbing trips, on several occasions and a lot of wlaking over 2 week stretches in Scottish highlands no multiday actual climbs but carrying all foor and gear, tents etc, but im a ridiculously light packer, but i would say that your pack will be grand
|
|
|
|
|
sabu
Sep 12, 2004, 1:58 AM
Post #8 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2004
Posts: 51
|
wow 75L is big enough. i hav been on several trips .. not even mountaineering just short hikes and my pack is over flowing ... maybe im just a heavy packer. i figured on future trips if i was carrying all esentails as well as snow gear i woudn't hav enough space.
|
|
|
|
|
lehrski
Sep 14, 2004, 2:10 AM
Post #9 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 29, 2003
Posts: 86
|
75 L should be more than enough.
I did a 10 day trip this summer with a 55 L pack. I did go minimal - bivy sack, some lakes to swim in so one set of clothes etc.
It's a balance between comfort items and carrying a lot of weight.
A smaller pack that can be crunched down with straps is nice too because you don't need a daypack for climbs.
|
|
|
|
|
peas
Sep 14, 2004, 2:25 AM
Post #10 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 400
|
Smaller is better. The bigger the pack, the more useless stuff you'll bring. Weight is a huge concern with alpine climbing and mountaineering, so you have to minimize it. You'd be amazed at what you can do when you're carrying less. You can even cut a few pounds off if you judiciously choose the type of pack you buy. Most packs have too many bells and whistles that you just don't need.
And if you're using a 75L pack for short hikes, you've got to cut down. Look at all the stuff you're bringing and determine whether you really need it.
|
|
|
|
|
thewyseclimber
Sep 14, 2004, 2:36 AM
Post #11 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 179
|
75 liters should be plenty large enough for anything around a week or less, even more. I have a Gregory palisdade, it's 75 liters, and I've had no problem fitting as much stuff in as I need. I am by no means an ultralight freak or anything, because I don't have the money. Gregory, by the way, makes a heck of a quality pack. I would say that 75 liters is plenty for whatever you could possibly need. I'm not sure if mine's 75 not expanded, or if that's fully expanded capacity. This could be a helpful link though: http://www.rei.com/...REI_SSHP_CAMPING_TOC then follow the link on the right side about how to choose packs.
|
|
|
|
|
feanor007
Sep 14, 2004, 2:57 AM
Post #12 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 377
|
why go small? if you get a good pack it's no big deal to compress down from 6000cc to 3500cc, i do it all the time with my Bora 80. For day trips i got a Bora 30, but anything longer than summer overnights, i just compress down the 80 and appriciate it's burly suspension. I mean if you get some mimimalist thing you pack becomes a one use item. personally, when i shell out jack, i like to be able to use the same thing for several purposes. just my opinion though.
|
|
|
|
|
thewyseclimber
Sep 14, 2004, 3:14 AM
Post #13 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 179
|
I agree with feanor. If you get a pack that's easily compressible, why not go large, and have the extra space if you ever need it? You never know when it might come in handy...
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
Sep 14, 2004, 3:25 AM
Post #14 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
In reply to: Smaller is better. The bigger the pack, the more useless stuff you'll bring. Weight is a huge concern with alpine climbing and mountaineering, so you have to minimize it. You'd be amazed at what you can do when you're carrying less. You can even cut a few pounds off if you judiciously choose the type of pack you buy. Most packs have too many bells and whistles that you just don't need. And if you're using a 75L pack for short hikes, you've got to cut down. Look at all the stuff you're bringing and determine whether you really need it.
...I agree.... no matter what the size of your pack is... I have found you will ALWAYS fill it up.... so the smaller the better, unless of course you are naturally a minimalist.... 75L is definately enough... I'd go 60-65L with outside starps for tent/bivy, mat...
...also don't carry another pack... it just doesn't work. It will restrict your sight (as mentioned), movement, breathing and will flop around, causing you to use extra energy to correct your balance all the time....
|
|
|
|
|
vicum
Sep 14, 2004, 3:29 AM
Post #15 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2001
Posts: 167
|
In reply to: I agree with feanor. If you get a pack that's easily compressible, why not go large, and have the extra space if you ever need it? You never know when it might come in handy...
Because you tend to find that you ALWAYS "need" it...
~Arnold
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
Sep 14, 2004, 3:38 AM
Post #16 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
...that's right... while you're at it, and have the extra space, why not pack in a bottle of rum and four glasses.... hey, even a portable DVD player, a football and perhaps that big ass six man tent you've been meaning to try out... the extra space is ALWAYS filled!
|
|
|
|
|
sabu
Sep 14, 2004, 7:11 AM
Post #17 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2004
Posts: 51
|
awsome .. thanks for ur help. i'll cut down on as much as possible. i do agree that extra space gets filled very fast. i won't try the extra pack. i think i take too much cos i was brought up that way --- to be prepared.. maybe im a bit too prepared! .. thanks
|
|
|
|
|
snod_ix
Sep 14, 2004, 12:44 PM
Post #18 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2002
Posts: 63
|
Mine is around 2600 CI (Noth Face Dumpster) and its big enough that i can get a 60 meter rope, 12 draws, a trad rack, harness, shoes, first aid kit, and a couple cliff bars in there when packed efficantly.
|
|
|
|
|
lehrski
Sep 14, 2004, 4:19 PM
Post #19 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 29, 2003
Posts: 86
|
A bigger pack usually weighs a lot more so another reason to go small. My 55 L pack weighs 2 pounds; my old 75 L pack 8 pounds.
|
|
|
|
|
diamondback
Sep 14, 2004, 9:03 PM
Post #20 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 3
|
In reply to: my old 75 L pack 8 pounds.
Ouch! :shock:
I have a North Face Badlands I think is 75 and it feels like 5 pounds. I don’t think it will go longer then a week in one load but if I ever need to pack for a week++ adventure you can be sure I'll be dragging a sled. I bought it for $30 on an EMS store in a Saturday-Swap :twisted:
If I were looking for a new pack, I will buy the same size or an 80 but I would definitely pick a lighter one. I was checking out packs a few days ago and found 75 and 80 packs allegedly marketed for alpine adventure :roll: that felt a hell lot lighter than mine!
|
|
|
|
|
holmeslovesguinness
Sep 14, 2004, 9:45 PM
Post #21 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2002
Posts: 548
|
The ideal pack size is one that is somewhat smaller than your partners, thereby allowing you to justify getting him / her to carry more of the gear than yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 14, 2004, 10:18 PM
Post #22 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
75 l is ridiculously large. How much does it weigh? 7 pounds empty. That's like 4 pounds too much.
I never have understood the big pack crowd. I think they get off on punishment.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
thegreytradster
Sep 14, 2004, 10:45 PM
Post #23 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151
|
The big one only comes out of the closet any more if I'm taking ALL the toys AND a bear canister. The same 45L pack that goes craging on the weekends is plenty big for a 4-5 day trip and a light rack.
|
|
|
|
|
g
Deleted
Sep 14, 2004, 11:08 PM
Post #24 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
I got to go with Holmes, dingus and thegreytradster here. Smaller is better when it comes to packs.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Sep 15, 2004, 4:38 AM
Post #25 of 28
(4602 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
I've been trying to find a pack around 100+ liters that fits me for multiday winter trips. my Terraplane (90L) just doesn't cut it for winter stuff. It's adequate for overnighters or 3 day trips but once you start adding extra fuel and food it just isn't big enough. I can lash a lot of stuff on the outside but that kind of defeats the purpose of a well designed pack.
For warm weather stuff you should find something around 50 liters tops. If it doesn't fit leave it or give it to your partner. I hump as little as possible when I can. I always ask my partner if they would like to borrow one of my bigger packs if the one they have looks a little small. Then I give them the extra gear to carry to fill it up.
Like everyone said, if you get a pack to big it will probably get filled up. If you have self control though having a bigger pack is nice because the load carries better since you can fit mostly everything inside the pack. This is especially nice when bushwhacking on approach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
