Old fashioned rucksack?

[Garnett]

I'm after a daypack to take on holiday, but I'm struggling to find anything suitable.

Ideally, I'd love:-

1. Shape of something like the Highlander Forces 25 or 33l - ie big central compartment (for waterproofs, and food), large top pocket (for snacks and other junk), and two decent side pockets (for water, hats etc)
2. With an extra opening at the bottom (for ease of access to central compartment)
3. Made from decent durable fabric (nothing too thin)
4. In a decent non-military colour (bright red or orange ideally)
5. Made by a decent company with a decent rep and good customer service

If someone like Haglofs made something like that I'd have bought it already!

Has anyone got suggestions?

Thanks a lot.

 

[drliamski]

Look at stuff from aguille..

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

 

[Nomad64]

I bought an Aiguille bumbag recently - very impressed with bomb proof quality and customer service but their packs are a bit short on extra pockets and openings. They make their stuff to order so could probably do you a custom pack - wouldn't be cheap through.

http://www.aiguillealpine.co.uk/shop/89/

An "extra opening" at the bottom may be a problem unless you want one of those packs aimed at students etc. which unzip all the way around or those new MOLLE style packs which also unzip all the way around but they only seem to come in "warry" colours.

I have an old Karrimor (when they used to make decent kit) Trail 25 Aergo S pack which ticks all the other boxes; top pocket, 2x side pockets, KS60HT cordura fabric, bright red and dark green (not for sale) but do come up on the Bay of E quite regularly.

Good luck.

Edit - here's a ink to a happy camper who got the 35litre version for 99p - what not to like!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osGxznBX4Is

 

[Garnett]

Thanks for the suggestions - Aiguille look very nice (especially as made in UK) but too expensive for something that doesn't quite tick all the boxes - need side pockets and easy access.

Currently looking at Lowe Alpine which seem to be decent quality and have some suitable options (although mesh side pockets as opposed to proper boxy pockets).

Edit - just googled Karrimor Trail 25 - I used to own that very pack (in green and purple) - had completely forgotten! Such a sweet little pack. I'm after something a little bigger - 30l ideally - and with better access than just top-down, but apart from that that pack is just the thing!

 

[beachlover]

What about a Deuter Groden 32L

http://www.outdoorgb.com/p/Deuter_Groden_32L_Hiking_Backpack/?SelectedItem=679785

 

[Garnett]

Oooo! That looks like just the thing.

(I've always been a bit wary of Dueter, and Osprey because their fabrics seem fragile - but I know that's flawed thinking as my parents both have them and have used them extensively without problems).

Thanks a lot - I'm going to look at them more closely.

Edit: Gah - no additional access other that via the top. Pretty set on either a full length zip or at least bottom access. Otherwise that is just the thing.

 

[sunndog]

That Deuter pack looks like it does have a bottom zip.....looks pretty sweet actually



*edit
Nah, i bet its the rain cover zips i'm looking at

 

[IC_Rafe]

Bottom access is overrated imo. It can be handy to have an extra compartment to put your sleeping bag, but usually bottom access means that you need to keep the bag almost empty or you won't be able to fit something in it. I have the Osprey Stratos 36 which has a sleeping bag compartment at the bottom, but if i keep the pack filled, i can't get my sleeping bag in it unless i empty it out which kinda defeats the point. Same with side zips in my experience. Having a bottom zip is no longer a consideration for me. (The pack i'm talking about has both a bottom zip and a raincover zipped below that)

A fabric might seem flimsy, but the looks don't really matter, it isn't flimsy in most cases. Go by the D value of a fabric compared the weight to see how strong something really is. For example canvas might seem strong, but only because it's layered so thickly, most backpack materials are stronger or just as strong, with less weight (thickness). (Although some do take it too far and use a thin low D material, which rips easily, but those are the cheaper "lightweight" packs. A more expensive lightweight pack will have the durability needed to be used for a long time, as you noticed with your parent's packs)

 

[Garnett]

Bottom access is overrated imo. It can be handy to have an extra compartment to put your sleeping bag, but usually bottom access means that you need to keep the bag almost empty or you won't be able to fit something in it. I have the Osprey Stratos 36 which has a sleeping bag compartment at the bottom, but if i keep the pack filled, i can't get my sleeping bag in it unless i empty it out which kinda defeats the point. Same with side zips in my experience. Having a bottom zip is no longer a consideration for me. (The pack i'm talking about has both a bottom zip and a raincover zipped below that)

For a daypack, being able to access from more than one point of entry, and being able to get at everything without pulling it all out, is something I rate pretty highly. Still not finding anything that fully meets the brief - so I concede I may be alone in that requirement.

 

[rickwhite]

I have the Lowe Alpine AirZone Pro 35:45 Rucksack. Its a bit bigger than your requested but as its lightweight material, you arent carrying around too much unused weight when its not full.
This has a side access pocket in addition to the main access on top. As its not right at the bottom, it wont get mucky when you put the bag down.
I tend to have my first aid kit and other less often used stuff just inside there so that I hardly need to use it but if i do, its quick access in a hurry without pulling everything out.
Its a black bag but you may be able to find it online in a different colour.
Oh, and its got an adjustable back size too, which makes for a much easier and comfier fit!