Waterproof backpack? Downsides?

[Lasse]

I'm thinking about buying a new, lightweight backpack. But before I start looking at what's actually for sale, I'm thinking of what would be the ideal backpack...

One idea: why not have a comfy backpack with all needed features which is waterproof, which doesn't need any rain cover? Would this be a problem regarding airing out its contents or would this simply be better? Any reason for not buying/making one?
I'm not thinking about fully waterproof, rather rainproof, although fully waterproof (down to 2m fe) could be useful when crossing rivers or canoeing...

 

[Kerne]

I think weight would be an issue - probably weigh more than an ordinary pack and raincover combined.

 

[sirex]

I'm thinking about buying a new, lightweight backpack. But before I start looking at what's actually for sale, I'm thinking of what would be the ideal backpack...

One idea: why not have a comfy backpack with all needed features which is waterproof, which doesn't need any rain cover? Would this be a problem regarding airing out its contents or would this simply be better? Any reason for not buying/making one?
I'm not thinking about fully waterproof, rather rainproof, although fully waterproof (down to 2m fe) could be useful when crossing rivers or canoeing...

hmmm, use a £10 rucksack liner, exped i think is the one i use. Its brilliant.

 

[w00dsmoke]

Or buy a French Commando's Rubber Rucksack c160 litres (which you could roll down to whatever size you needed) with roll down top and ruck sack straps. The rucksack straps are basic but you could easily replace them with padded ones.

The only problem is that they are rarer than hens teeth. USMCPRO did sell them at one time. I bought several And I've used mine a lot. You could try some Euro surplus places and for availability. French Commando gear (as opposed to basic French infantry gear) is some of the best made gear in the surplus market, second to none.

 

[spamel]

Alpkit have a dry bag with attachments that makes it basically a small daysack/lightweight camping rucksack. There isd a pouch for a sit mat which is also the spine padding, it is a pretty decent bag. I haven't got one, but Scruff has.

http://www.alpkit.com/gourdon/

£17.50 to the door for the smallest one at 20 litres, £22.50 for 30 litres. 60 litre beast is 35 quid and looks really robust. They come in a range of colours so you can colour coordinate with your bush hat!

 

[SimonM]

I prefer to use a few roll top dry bags inside my main bag with a rain cover on the outside.

It has the advantage that I can sort out my gear easily when packing and unpacking.

Simon

 

[Tadpole]

Dry bags from Aldi for £6.99
100% water proof, 44lts roll top with velcro fastening

 

[Jared]

Suppose depends where you wanting to take it, imo.

If into thorn/wood/forest territory then dry bags inside a rucksack. Just because the rucksack will provide protection, and dry bags are cheaper to replace if they do get punctured.

 

[Bravo4]

I think the big downside with waterproof backpacks is packing away wet gear, it's in the pack w/all the dry stuff. Dry bag type packs are usually not the best load carriers if hiking is the primary mode of transport. A sophisticated "dry" backpack costs maybe double what the same pack might cost w/o h2o-proof features. Also cuts the pack options down to just a few models to choose from.

If you just need to cross the occassional body of water, a "poncho-raft" will float your pack nicely. I divide my stuff into a couple of dry bags which go into my pack. One bag for food, which sometimes has to spend the night hanging from a tree(bear country) , another for sleeping bag and a dry set of clothes and other items not needed during the day. Small stuff needed throughout the day goes into zip-loc baggies.

I've usually got a couple of large trash bags (bin liners?) at the bottom of my pack which can be useful for any number of things. Poor man's dry bags.

 

[Aussiepom]

I've had good experiences with 2 of the Golite range of rucksacks. 1 at 25ltr & 1 at 32 + 7ltr. The '+ 7' part refers to any extra bit of capacity which can be rolled down out of the way when not required.

Both are very light at 226g & 485g respectively - actual weights, not just advertised weights. Both are advertised as waterproof, but I'd be suspect of that, though they are both rainproof. Both made of a durable ripstop material (cordura?) that will stand up to scraping through brush.

I simply stick a couple of bin liners inside with their necks tied, to ensure that sleeping bag, spare clothes, etc do actually remain dry.

 

[Lasse]

Thanks for all replies guys!

Kerne, so far I've noticed the waterproof rucksacks to be either heavier or much less practical or less durable, but some bags that should be rainproof do look interesting, especially "ultralight" bags appear to use no raincover, have to find more reviews to be sure though...

Sirex, so you don't use a raincover while using the liner? Does your pack soak up a lot of water when it rains or is there hardly any weightdifference when wet? And do you put your food inside the liner as well? Might be the best choice if the weight is good... Combining durability with complete dryness...

w00dsmoke, you don't happen to have some pictures of those bags do you? Can't find any info of them packs on the web... How heavy are they? And is that 160 litres you're saying?! More looking for a liter or 50 really but if the rolling down works well and costs little extra weight... Might be interesting if I can find any...

Spamel, I'd been looking at the Alpkit Gourdon and Drydock but are they suitable for hiking all day long? I'm not looking for a drybag that can occasionally be worn on my back but to be used all the time when hiking in forests, mountains etc.

SimonM, why do you also carry a rain cover when you already pack your gear in dry bags? Which items aren't packed in dry bags than? Or is it to avoid the pack getting heavier when wet?

Bravo4, do you pack wet gear in a separate dry bag or not in a dry bag at all, loose in the rucksack, to let it air out more or less inside the pack? And you don't carry a rain cover when using all those drybags I assume?

Aussiepom, looks like GoLite doesn't produce those models any more? Unfortunately I don't really like their current product line, since I want to keep the weight as close to my back as possible, and rather high up my back. Their packs with big front pockets don't get my approval really... The basic design Crux is making is more like what I'm after.

 

[gregorach]

If you go for a truly watertight pack, all of your gear is going to end up smelling like a sweaty gym kit left in a poly bag as soon as you put a used pair of socks in there. If it's not truly watertight, it's no use - your gear should stay dry even after full immersion.

All my clean, dry kit lives in an Exped pack liner. Really important stuff (like my down bag) goes in its own drybags inside the pack liner. Damp or sweaty kit either goes loose in the pack or in side pouches. I don't see the point in a rain cover, and I've never noticed a significant weight difference after being out in the rain.

 

[SimonM]

SimonM, why do you also carry a rain cover when you already pack your gear in dry bags? Which items aren't packed in dry bags than? Or is it to avoid the pack getting heavier when wet?

Belt and braces

The rain cover I use has a reflective design built in, so is handy to use on roads and lanes in poor visibility.

I carry 3 dry bags containing:

• Spare clothing
• Sleeping bag
• Food stuff

Everything else is just packed loose inside the rucksac.

Simon

 

[Tiley]

I think the big downside with waterproof backpacks is packing away wet gear, it's in the pack w/all the dry stuff.

True North make a thing called the Zero 1 which is waterproof. It has a roll-down lid and a liner that allows you to keep your wet/mucky/smelly separate from your clean stuff. It has a capacity of about 50 litres and, while not as comfortable for long carries as an internally-framed pack, does the job pretty darn well.

I use mine for weekends and shorter trips. The disadvantage of them is that it can be difficult to compress things and get the pack nice and compact while rolling down the opening; but it's good to know that, when in a complete downpour, that annoying persistent rain or negotiating a deep bit of water, the contents of the pack will remain dry.

I do like my Zero 1 but I do tend to grab an Ortlieb Drybag or an Exped one (the ones that have a valve that allows you to squeeze out the air) and stuff them into a conventional pack if I'm going to walk for miles and miles.

As always, I've no association with True North - I'm just a satisfied customer.

 

[Bravo4]

Bravo4, do you pack wet gear in a separate dry bag or not in a dry bag at all, loose in the rucksack, to let it air out more or less inside the pack? And you don't carry a rain cover when using all those drybags I assume?

Wet stuff goes into the pack loose, doesn't really dry out there but I don't like loose items hanging on the outside of a pack, things tend to go missing or snag on brush. Wet stuff in a dry bag is a great way to grow mold.

The dry bags I use are not the heavy vinyl type used in river running but lighter in weight and less durable, they last longer protected inside a pack. There are quite a few different weights and sizes of dry bags these days. Alot of folk are replacing conventional 'stuff-sacks' with roll-down type 'dry stuff sacks'. I'm currently using Sea to Summit's 'Big River Bags', not the lightest but I prefer a little more daurability.
http://www.seatosummit.com/products/cat/3

I sometimes use "trash compactor" bags which are 2.0mil thick; much tougher than reg. bin liners. The way I see it, my sleeping bag and spare set of clothes MUST stay dry, everything else can get wet but not these items. I don't use a pack rain cover.

Here's a link to a thread on the Alpacka Packraft forum, "Packs for Packrafting" . Opinions from some (other)guys who know alot about this topic:
http://www.alpackaraft.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=101