Rucksacks: Half Full or Bursting at the Seams?

[suburban bushwacker]

I've noticed a current trend towards smaller sacks stuffed to the gills, with pouches attached to the outside. Where as I tend to go for a bigger pack compressed around the load.

Is there something I'm missing?
Or
Is the lure of pouch collecting just too strong?

Cheers
SBW

 

[Nova & Pinky]

I assumed the pouches were mainly for ease of access, but I could be wrong?

 

[suburban bushwacker]

Ease of access is great, but my understanding is the load stability lessens fatigue?
Apart from tarp and hammock i keep the rest inside the pack so I'd like to hear from someone who has tried both

Cheers
SBW

 

[Tilia]

i have a 65L bag, in winter is pretty full, but in summer only 3/4, than i don't compress my sleeping bag and it will be full
i like a big bag with a low weight better than a smaller bag that is to stuffed, probably its a personal preference

 

[suburban bushwacker]

Tilia

Me too
I have a recurrent fantasy where I find a HOOJ amount of cash dumped in the woods - I like to have capacity in case it ever comes true!

 

[ex-member Raikey]

me too,..

i like a bit of space to play with,...

i cant remember the last time i went out and didnt come back with something ,...a piece of spalted wood, a bag full of cramp balls,...whatever,..

i even carry a rolled up stuff sack in my coat pocket wherever i go for the same reason,...

i do get called skiprat sometimes but i take it as an endearing term even if thats not the intention,...hahah

cheers

Stu

 

[sasquatch]

I went from big bergens to smaller bergens with loads on the outside using pouches or strapped on, it does have an impact if you're putting any distance in. I now prefer a bigger bergen even when it's nearly empty, I just bulk it out with a wool overshirt and stuff. Saying that in the winter I put plce pouches and a Berghaus pouch on it, it's a Cyclops Roc so that takes it up to about 95L. Plenty of room for the kitchen sink if I want!

It is nice having a tarp and ipk in one pouch and a brew kit in the other, instant access to what you need without opening the bergen if the weather takes a turn when you stop.

 

[Nova & Pinky]

We just bought a 66L bag to do just that - we previously used a 35l and a 48l, but don't really like squeezing stuff in or strapping it outside, so will be trying 66l and 48l instead. Hopefully oodles of room for 'stuff'!

 

[resnikov]

i do get called skiprat sometimes but i take it as an endearing term even if thats not the intention,...hahah

I get called a magpie but I prefer the term womble

 

[Highbinder]

I like the lid straps to be cinched down all the way on my rucksack, which gives me a bit of freedom if I need to carry extra. On my last hike I had it stuffed and it was a real pain when I was adding/removing layers. A bit of room at the top of the main compartment makes life much easier. I quite like the rucksacks that have the shockcord on the outside. Nothing worse than having NO space to put something. Usually it's my jacket... get's stuffed into any nook..

I like pouchs tho! I just bought one of those maxpedition man purses, the Jumbo versipack, which I think'd be able to fit all my small camping items. I can see the appeal of having things to hand rather than rooting around large pockets as I do now. I was thinking that plus one of the large rolltop waterproof rucksacks (like this from alpkits) would be a nice compromise! All the comparitively light stuff, sleeping bag, tarp, hammock, clothes (can't weigh more than 4-5kg) can go in the bag, everything else in the manbag. Best thing is between the two it'd be a whole kilo lighter than my current rucksack (which weighs 2.5kg by itself...)

 

[suburban bushwacker]

lighter than my current rucksack (which weighs 2.5kg by itself...)

Ah Kifaru!

 

[sapper1]

I have a 50L sack and everything fits inside,I don't like stuff strapped to the outside,not even pouches.
I find it better to have it all inside with room to spare rather than jammed solid.In an ideal world I'd be able to remove anything from anywhere in the sack without taking anything else out(dream on!).

 

[Tilia]

i dont mind one or two pouches on the outside just for things i need quick
first aid kit, poncho, waterfilter or snacks, but most stuff should be inside the bag imo

 

[John Fenna]

Half full is my bushy option - it makes packing it all up in the rain so much easier!
That and having room for all the stuff you make or forage while you are in the woods...

 

[Suffolksteve]

I have all of my stuff crammed into a 35 litre pack at the moment but I still need a couple of bits to go into is so am guessing either a new rucksack of around 50 litres is required or using the 65 litre one I have that is storing all my spares.

Personally I prefer a smaller rucksack with compartments so its organised and looks less like a wacking great big camping bag.

 

[789987]

i have a 35l one for summer with the bivvi and a 90l for winter or when im out with the big tent. i prefer everything inside rather than tied on.

 

[ex member coconino]

My main bag is a 65L which is only ever full in the winter but even then not exactly bursting at the seams. If I need more room to carry stuff out (like those huge wads of cash which can apparently sometimes be found in woods), I shift gear to the outside straps. Inside, I generally pack six or seven "lumps", including a shelter lump, sleeping lump, dry-bag-of-clothes lump, and a small bag which organises the bitty gear for use around camp and when wandering.

 

[gordonmac]

50ltr, 80% full most of the time.

 

[3bears]

*cough cough* molle addict....

 

[ex member coconino]

Thinking about this a bit more, it's much easier to pack smaller at home when gear is dry and clean than when closing down a camp when the opposite is often the case, so having spare capacity is mighty useful in this respect. Packing up a camp in the wind and rain is probably my least favourite aspect of this whole malarky.