100L rucksacks

[cathy]

Hi

I am thinking of upgrading my 85L rucksack to a 100L sack. The Berghaus Vulcan seems popular with this community, but I am also wondering about the Berghaus Atlas and the Snugpack Bergen. I have tried a Regatta Survivor II, but personally didn't find it very comfortable or stable when full.

Does anyone have any opinions on these three as regards comfort when carrying heavy weights? Also I am finding it difficult to get definitive information on whether they have an optional divider to form a bottom compartment with an access zip at the bottom; if they have load lifter straps; chest/sternum straps, and in the case of the Snugpak, if they have adjustable back systems or are available in different back lengths.

I intend to try one before I buy one, but very few local shops seem to sell any of them and certainly not all of them, so I want to narrow it down before I travel to try one.

I'd be grateful for any advice.

Thanks
Cathy

 

[Longstrider]

Hi Cathy, and welcome to the forum.
I recently bought myself a new bergen and opted for the Lowe Alpine "Saracen".
http://www.lowealpine.com/Products/...uctGroupID=955&Position=2&SpecificActivityID=

Oodles of capacity, especially if you fill the removable side pockets too. (They say it's 90+(2x20) litres. The side pockets detach and can be used as a day pack. (As far as I know it's not PLCE compatable, the straps for the "day pack" option come fitted to the rig) Compartment sepaerator between upper and lower section of main space is of "break through" type, and absolutely loads of scope for hooking/ strapping gear on the outside due to there being no shortage of straps and loops at all. I actually ended up with two of these packs (Don't ask, it's a long story! *LOL*) so I'll be putting one of them up for sale on the Members Classifieds very soon if you are interested.

 

[lardbloke]

I think you have the right idea anyway. This is not much help on the type of pack but just make sure the pack right for you.

Get hold of the rucksacks in the first place
see if they have all the right bits for you
try it on to see if it is comfortable without weight
is it adjustable for your body (back length)
then try it again with weight and jump around a little bit

For larger packs I like the belt to sit across the hips so the legs take a lot of the weight rather than the back. I use JackWolfskin's range of the large packs (80-125 litres) and are worth a look. They have seperate compartments etc (that shouldnt be a defining factor). The stability of large packs under burden is quite a science. They have to be adjusted continously over the journey until they feel right and your body has to have the strength to carry such a load (i.e practise before the journey).

 

[ozzy1977]

Is the snugpak bergen compatible with the issue plce stuff

 

[Lithril]

Hi Cathy, welcome to the forum, MacPac make some great gear and very comfortable, although I've recently had a look at a Kifaru pack and if I can get my hands on one that'll be my next upgrade. Military spec but probably the best design I've seen.

I've got to ask, how long are you going away for to need a 100L bag, I usually make do with a 35L for a weekend, occasionally if I'm taking a group out I'll use my 70L by thats quite rare now.
All the best

Matt

 

[cathy]

Thanks for all the replies so far. I shall look into the Lowe Alpine, Macpac and Jack Wolfskin packs mentioned - I have never seen any of them in my local shops (but that's not saying much).

The Snugpak bergen is PLCE compatible, and I have just received a reply from Snugpak confirming that it is only available in one back length which isn't adjustable and that it does not have load lifter straps. I suspect it is like the Webtex bergen and is designed to sit on top of webbing, so for civvies like me it will ride too high on the back and the weight won't sit on the pelvic girdle properly.

So apart from the other suggestions I have narrowed it down to the Berghaus Vulcan and Atlas (which I can find very little info about). Sadly Berghaus have yet to reply to my query to them.

I am not looking for a pack for any particular trip, but general trips, mostly to the Welsh mountains for varying lengths of time. However, it is winter, so I am carrying spare bulky clothing and a bulky winter weight sleeping bag. I like to carry my tent inside my rucksack, not dangly off the outside. I also go to avoid civilisation so I am not popping into shops or pubs, so I need to carry a lot of food and water. I also like to enjoy the great outdoors and carry books, binoculars, camera equipment etc. I know different people have different opinions about how much to carry and I have been told that it is dangerous to carry more than about 10kg, but I am of the opinion that it is a personal thing and people should carry want they want as long as they are strong and fit enough to do it. Also if one is intending to do bushcraft things then there is a whole load of other stuff to carry - that birch bark canoe isn't going to get squeezed into a 35L daysack now is it?

So if anyone out there can give me more details of the Vulcan and Atlas (better yet a direct comparison) I would be very grateful.

Thanks
Cathy

 

[Andy]

Most of the women I know who use a big pack go for Lowe Alpine. Though I think the womens versions tend to be a bit smaller then mens in capcity. There are companies who will make one to measure if you want to carry a lot of weight without getting pains.
I agree that the amount you carry does depend a lot on the person. I try and keep to about 1/3 of my weight or less but can carry up to 1/2 if needs be (haven't done this over large distances though

 

[bushtuckerman]

I have the vulcan, i'm afraid i can't compare it to the atlas, but given the choice i went straight for the vulcan, it looked more solid and more suitable for walking through woodland etc as it doesn't ride too high. It is good, and has more straps than you can count, i was still finding new ones for quite a while after buying it.

This pack is very stable: I am 5'4" and weigh 7 1/2 stone or there abouts, at christmas i took it home from uni with loads of stuff including work, laptop, books,clothes and various other stuff inluding lunch, and it must have weighed at least half my weight. I only had to walk a mile or so to the train station though, so can't comment on how it performs with extreme weights over long distances. I have walked 14 or so miles with it packed to about a third of my weight and it coped with that, it was very easy to adjust while walking etc (and it should be given all the bl**dy straps!), sure i was quite achy at the end of it, but on the return journey i had learnt to use it better and it didn't hurt nearly as much. Bear in mind that i have NO stamina!

I decided that i didn't want an adjusable rucksack, so this pack was perfect since you can get it in 3 different sizes relatively easily off the internet (i was lucky to find the size 2 - for heights 5'3" to 5'8" - in a shop).

The divider isn't exactly optional but it's as good as, since it's just an elasticated drawstring which you can (and i do) leave undone. I don't bother with the sleeping bag compartment because i don't want to get into the habit of using it and weaken the pack as a whole (it doesn't have straps which go over it as i believe the atlas does), so i forget it's there. The zips are beefy though so will not break in a hurry. If you do want to use the seperate compartment then it works, and tbh i wouldn't worry too much despite what i've said because the zip really is the dogs boll*cks, it's not the most easy sleeping bag compartment to access from the outside though, since the zip goes horizontelly across the pack.

"load lifter straps; chest/sternum straps"

yup, both...must do, it has thousands

I have heard of this pack lasting people 20 odd years...so it's heavy basically, i think about 2.5kg. tough material anyhow. it takes some breaking in, i'm still doing that.

My reservations:

-unsupported sleeping bag compartment
-bit chunky
-internal frame (it's aluminium and is actually quite solid though)
-takes ages to break in, the nylon is not cushioned for us civvies, but the well designed hip belt just about makes up for that, just wear clothes with some cushioning for your shoulders and/or hips, which should be possible since you're gonna be using it in the winter mostly


the atlas might be more civilian friendly but for durability and suitability the vulcan wins i reckon (haven't even touched an atlas though).

I like it, i paid 144 for it and am about happy with that, you never know, it might be worth far more than that to you if it suits you well.

hope that helps.

-ian

 

[cathy]

WOW! Thanks so much for all that info Bushtuckerman, that was very comprehensive. I don't think anyone who has the Vulcan has really criticised it. Perhaps the lack of information that I can find about the Atlas is telling me something. It does look as if I shall be off to try out some Vulcans.

I am wondering about the hydration sleeve, Berghaus claim it has one, but someone mentioned on a forum (maybe this one) that they couldn't find it. It doesn't matter, as I can make my own - just curious.

The only other thing that concerns me is the bottom compartment - I do use it to access sleeping stuff without digging through all of the pack contents. Does the zip just open across the front or does it open 3/4 of the way around? The zip looks very low down, so I am wondering if there is not much room to get a bulky winter sleeping bag in and out of the bottom, or indeed to store it, is the bottom compartment only as high as the zip or does it extend above it?

Anyone out there got an Atlas?

Thanks again.
Cathy

 

[leon-1]

Sorry to complicate matters even more, when youre looking at different packs also have a look at ones made by The North Face, I used to have a Badlands and have carried more than 100 lbs in one for a good period of time, it is split with access to the base through a zip, there is also acces to the main compartment through a zip on the front so you do not have to open the lid of the pack. The top compartment can be removed and used as a bum bag and ther are quite a few compression straps ranging from the ones on the sides to the ones on the top/hood of the sack so that you can extend the hood higher for carrying more if required.

The other guys have mentioned Lowe Alpine, (I owned a Cerro Torre) they are very adjustable and stable when you are using them, the back system that some use (parallux I think) is very similair to that used on the Badlands pack and I would say that it is one of the most comfortable carry sytems that I have used.

I used the Vulcan when it originally came out, they are a big pack and you have a tendency to pack big when using one. I don't know what the new ones are like, but the old ones did not give access to the base and were not split level.

Another one that may be worth looking at is Karrimor (if you can still get them), the Jaguar SA65 was a very good pack (the SA stood for Size Adjustable), the harness could be easilly adjusted. If you can still get Karrimor and they still use the SA system then they are also worth looking at as they used to be split level sacks as well since that was one of your criteria.

 

[Graham_S]

if you can find one, the karrimor condor is worth getting (i think it was replaced by the sabre range). it was the direct competitor forthe vulcan back when berghaus/karrimor were fighting for dominance in the uk outdoor scene.
the S.A. used to stand for self adjustable as the basic idea was for you to be able to adjust the harness while on the move without removing the pack. i've still got my jaguar 75 and i've used and abused it for 16 years without damage.

 

[jason01]

if you can find one, the karrimor condor is worth getting (i think it was replaced by the sabre range). it was the direct competitor forthe vulcan back when berghaus/karrimor were fighting for dominance in the uk outdoor scene.
the S.A. used to stand for self adjustable as the basic idea was for you to be able to adjust the harness while on the move without removing the pack. i've still got my jaguar 75 and i've used and abused it for 16 years without damage.

I didnt mention the Condor because I think theyve been discontinued for some time and of course Karrimor as we know it is gone, had mine for hmmm quite a long time now I think about it, been a great sac, very comfortable on me, they were expensive back in their day! While a fixed back is good as long as its a perfect fit sometimes its nice to just move the weight around a bit to alleviate an ache after a few hours walking and the Condor has the flexibility to do that. I love mine and its showing no sign of giving up the ghost yet 60-80L + sidepockets. The 60-80 is achieved with zipped gussets and while this is a useful emergency extra load space I prefer not to use it with the gussets open as a rule because the shape and balance is not as good.

 

[CM Burns]

hi cathy - you mention that no-one criticises the Berghaus Vulcan - well I have!!!!!

I had a Vulcan for years - VERY mediocre comfort/carry, hard wearing though. I cut mine up significantly in order to reduce the weight!

Berghaus, Karrimor etc simply do not compare with the top US makers - I suggest that you take a look at Osprey packs which are readily found in UK outdoor stores - far, far superior to the likes of a Vulcan.

Additionally, you need to take a close look at all your kit as there is no way you will enjoy lugging a full 100L pack over hills. Aim for 70L max and reduce weight where ever possible - for instance why do you need to carry loads of water??? In Snowdonia clean water is always close by - especially in winter! - so no need to carry more than 1L!

 

[Graham O]

Since finding this website and forum, I've been following some of these threads with interest. I haven't bought a big rucsac in many years, probably 20+ and am amazed at the weight of rucsacs these days. They are regularly 2kg+ and some are 3kg+. I understand the belief that weight = toughness = longevity, but those weights are silly. If you think about it, when you are outdoors, the one thing you carry which you don't actually want to carry is your rucsac. You want what is in it, but the rucsac itself is a necessary evil. So why carry all that weight? I have a Karrimor Jaguar 65 and a 75l Haston Vallot. The latter is a very old design, but it weighs less than 1kg and after a lot of use all over the world, is still intact. Battered and faded yes, but torn, ripped or worn out? No way.

The contrary arguement is that the more "technical" back systems increase comfort when carrying heavy loads. Of course with a 3kg sac, you need a comfortable back system just to carry the rucsac!

A friend of mine once said that he fell while descending Snowon and "would have broken his back if it wasn't for the big pack he was carrying" He then admitted " but if I hadn't had such a big pack, I probably wouldn't have fallen in the first place"!

 

[weekend_warrior]

Cathy,

Lowe Alpine to great sacs that have all the features you listed - try the Junction 32 outlet at Castleford in Yorkshire. The reason I suggest there is that I just picked up a Contour 55+15 with all those features for £39!! They had quite a few 100l items there too at vastly reduced prices - you might wanna give them a call, regardless of where you are, I found them very helpful

Junction32 site

As usual, I have no affiliation, vested interest etc... etc...

If you happen to be nearby, Craghoppers outlet at the same site is worth a visit - cheap EvEnt jackets, trousers and good shirts all nice and cheap..

 

[bushtuckerman]

No problem Cathy, happy to help.

What is most important is that the pack fits you well. I, quite frankly, was lucky to be able to try a good (not excellent) rucksack several times before buying given the poor variety of shops near me, i don't have a car. I didn't know much about rucksacks and have nothing to compare the vulcan to. I didn't want the hassle of buying rucksacks online and sending them back because they didn't fit, which would have been likely given my small frame. If you have the option of trying lots of different ones on then you're best advised to do so.

My impression was that you would use a 100L pack quite often and that it would often be full when in use, since you already have an 80L, and that you're wanting to carry lots of heavy stuff (like books). If that's not the case, and you are replacing it for all tasks then maybe something a little more versatile is in order, it has compression straps but they don't decrease the weight of the pack itself, obviously. I may be wrong but i think some of the replies suggest that you shouldn't be carrying such weights (it certainly requires fitness), i was replying assuming that you would be. The vulcan can be uncomfortable for three (possibly more) reasons:

1. It is built (i think, but may be corrected!) for army type use
2. It is comfortable in terms of spine position when carrying a lot, but not necessarily in terms of muscles and skin, so should be worn with padding of some kind
3. it is not a top of the range pack, despite its price tag, and is rather old in design

I am wondering about the hydration sleeve, Berghaus claim it has one, but someone mentioned on a forum (maybe this one) that they couldn't find it. It doesn't matter, as I can make my own - just curious.

The only other thing that concerns me is the bottom compartment - I do use it to access sleeping stuff without digging through all of the pack contents. Does the zip just open across the front or does it open 3/4 of the way around? The zip looks very low down, so I am wondering if there is not much room to get a bulky winter sleeping bag in and out of the bottom, or indeed to store it, is the bottom compartment only as high as the zip or does it extend above it?

As far as i can tell they (berghaus) are either being cheeky or have several different types of vulcan (but apart from the general upgrade of adding a sleeping bag compartment i don't think that's the case), because all i can find at the bottom of mine is a velcro attachment to the divider with a gap behind it, which, if we're very generous could call a hydration sleeve, but 2 litres is pushing it. To be honest i just though it was part of the construction of the divider, but it could be what they mean, i was unaware it was supposed to have one until you mentioned it! I wouldn't bother using it as one personally.

You can use the bottom compartment, by all means, but it's just not as nifty as newer ones, i haven't tried putting very large bags in it, but it is deceptively wide. i have put a bag in it that packs (uncompressed) to about 20 by 34cm, and i compressed it a bit and it fits quite easily. The zip does go 3/4 of the way round, to the hip belt on both sides.

If i had the choice i would have a lighter pack (it's actually 2.9kg ), but it's the best i could easily find. I am very happy with it generally. Basically one size doesn't fit all, and as already said you need to try a few on. The reason it impressed me was because, despite the odd bruise to start with, when i put it on for 5 or 10 minutes and then took it off, my back actually felt better aligned! and as if by magic i had good posture, but i'm sure this is also the case with other, better rucksacks.

hope that's useful, happy hunting.

-ian

 

[hawsome34]

The rucksack you buy is pretty much a decision made using your back, hips and shoulder slope.

Karrimor: do a good back system that can be pretty much tailored to you, and I like the ease of adjustment whilst your wearing the pack. It also has the added bonus of little tabs that show you were the shoulder straps should sit when wearing it. I generally wouldn't go for anything over 80l, as you must be carrying far too much kit in order to fill it. The more modern sacks from Karrimor, have a zip that runs across the front of the sack which can make packing easier. I know absolutely loads of people who have been on treks for months, and carried the bag full to bursting, and it has coped really well, no stitching defects etc.

Lowe Alpine: Again a very good back system, only adjustable in steps though. Very comfortable. And versatile. I used one for 3 months, very comfy, reliable and good padding on the hip belt.

Macpac: A very nice bag a combination of the features on the above 2 sacks.

Whatever you do get a sack with as few straps hanging off it, less to snag, and makes you pack better. Also nearly all the weight should sit on your hips, and the straps are there to hold it in place.

My advice is to try to borrow a sack and use it over a weekend, fill it to the maximum you would ever carry. And go for a few long walks in hilly terrain. Dont forget to loosen the incline straps when you go up the hills, and tighten on the flat and downhill. I went through about 6 different sacks before I found the one that best suited my frame, and stature. And finally settled for a macpac glissade.

Oh and when you buy it, give the straps and seams and good pulling and stretch as much as you can instore, if it breaks or tears, they'll change it rather than tryna deal with it in the field.

A good pack should not make you sore, or rub unless you are jogging with it on. It should only ever give you an small ache like you've done all your Xmas shopping and walked the couple of miles home without a rest. Shoulders and hips warm, then light and fresh when you take the weight off.

As for Vulcan, a very tough bag, thats about it.

 

[KevB]

Hi Cathy
I agree with all the info Bushtuckerman has given. I have owned a Vulcan for 3 years now and have been very pleased with the comfort and design.
I'm not slagging any of the other sacs mentioned here since they are all good models. My Vulcan replaced a very old and battered Karrimor Haston Vallot.
For the past few years I've completed a number of winter backpacking weekends in preparation for a long distance trail in the April of each year. I would certainly agree that a 100 litre sac is very useful in the winter when as you say, the extra clothing, bulkier sleeping bag etc is required.
I have tried on occasions to leave off the Vulcans side pockets and just use the main sac. Although I can cram everything into this space, it means that not all of the gear required during the days walk ( waterproofs, brew kit, food, etc) is easily available without unpacking a 'layer' in the main sac. This in itself is not a problem unless of course its raining hard on and off (waterproofs on/waterproofs off etc) or you're tired nearing the end of a long day! - then it becomes a chore. Keeping all these bits in the side pockets leaves them more easily accessioble and doesn't expose the main compartment to the weather when you access them.
At tired and damp periods during a trip it can be a real bind to have to pack your gear very precisely in order to get it into your 'minimal' sized pack. Having a liitle bit of extra space as leeway helps on these occasions.
Forget the old adage 'If you've got the space you'll fill it'. As long as you are disciplined about your gear from the outset there's no problem with taking stuff you dont need.
I 've refined my winter backpacking weight to around 38-40lb. This includes 4 full days rations and 2 litres of water plus the weight of the Vulcan! I'm only 5'4 and 9 stone but I find this a reasonable weight to carry. Yes I know I could go much lighter by spending large amounts on Ultralight gear etc but I like to know that the gear I do have is durable, can cope with bad conditions and wont need replacing too often - another reason for choosing the Vulcan.
Since I've owned mine - 2 more of my backpacking pals have replaced their ageing sacs with Vulcans and been equally impressed.
It is a personal choice but I dont think you'll be disappointed if you end up with a Vulcan.

 

[bushtuckerman]

I should also have explained that i did not get a 100L sack to carry large weights, i just wanted the large volume in a managable shape and size. I can fill it even with minimal gear if it's winter: sleeping bag and mat (i put this on the inside to keep things tidy), spare clothing, waterproofs, bivvy, food, water and emergency/possibles kit. But despite that, i do also do quite abit of travel by train, and so it's useful that i can carry very heavy stuff when i don't have to walk so far. I did not want to spend money on two new bits of gear so i bought one.

 

[CM Burns]

those who sing the praises of the likes of the Vulcan, Karrimors etc - I suspect have never used the top packs from the USA, I have and my Vulcan really is rubbish in comparison to them. Ospreys are light years ahead in design and therefore comfort, not generally any lighter though. Osprey packs are often available at discount prices in UK if you watch out for outdoor site sales... oh and Macpac are overated too - take a look at the design of their waste and shoulder straps which leave a lot to be desired (and yes I destroyed a macpac pursuit over a 5 yr period)

but why not go ultralight - 20lb packs for winter are easily achieved and ITS CHEAPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

there is this huge problem in that virtually everyone thinks ultralight is super - expensive - for example the Ray Jarding quilt is super comfortable, versitile and suitable for 3 season use - less than $100!!!

if you commit to lightweight gear and use it properly then it is capable of coping with any conditions that you would likely want to experience. check out the many US sites where there is a popular move to this approach - astonishing trips are being achieved using superlight gear - and remember their mountains are much, much bigger than ours, these trips are in to real wilderness areas.