Overnight backpack size?

[Karl May]

I'm new to the backcountry skiing, and have gotten most of the stuff needed, but am now looking at getting a backpack. I have done a ton of research, and have sort of narrowed it down to either the Deuter guide 35+ or 40, or the Osprey 38. Anyone have any oppinions on these packs, as well is if these will be large enough for overnight trips? From what I've read, they sound like they're more appropriate sizewise for hut trips, so would appreciate you oppinion on whether these would work for overnight camp trips. Thanks in advance.

[Hugh Conway]

Take what you currently own - tent, pad, sleeping bag, stove, food, clothes, booze lovesheep, lovedolls, doubleheadeddildos, whatever you are bringing along. Measure how big they are. Buy approriate pack. I'd suggest closer to 50L, imo.

[gregL]

You're talking about spring touring? If you're already an experienced ultra-light backpacker you might make a 38-40 liter pack work. If not, I'd say 50 or 55 liters is a reasonable place to start. Like Hugh says, take all the stuff you plan to carry and see if it'll fit.

[zeroforhire]

Yep. Totally depends on your setup. If you are into ultralight hiking, then you could get away with 40L, but just do yourself a favor and buy a Cilogear 65L worksack. Packs down to 30 ish liters, and expands to close to 75L. Problem solved.

:-)

[harpo-the-skier]

my Cilo 45l works for a couple of days of spring touring. I use my Ciloe 60l when I have to carry a bear canister in the summer.

[That was Pontus]

My North Face Patrol 34 does fine for multi day hut trips if I pack smart. Tenting would require rethinking current gear selection (my old Thermarest Prolite isn't all that warm or compact), talking with partners (get bent if you think I'm carrying the shelter for both our asses), etc...

[Karl May]

So what would you use a 35-40 liter backpack for? It seems a bit big for a daypack.

[snapt]

I keep hearing a lot of good things about the First Ascent Alchemist pack. Expands from 40 to 55L to go back and forth from a general pack to day pack. Seems reasonably priced too.

[reynolds.trailrun]

So what would you use a 35-40 liter backpack for? It seems a bit big for a daypack.

I think you have this size stuck in your head. Maybe that size is not adequate for anything? Too big for a day pack and too small for an extended outing? No need to zero in on size because of size. Get what works with what you have and plan on doing. Again, it may work fine for you depending on what has already been mentioned. For 1-2 day tours a 35-40L pack works great for me but that stems from my ultralight backpacking background. I also have friends that use something 25-30ish for day packs and generally use 50-60ish for 2 days out. Whatever works.

[Karl May]

I think you have this size stuck in your head. Maybe that size is not adequate for anything? Too big for a day pack and too small for an extended outing? No need to zero in on size because of size. Get what works with what you have and plan on doing. Again, it may work fine for you depending on what has already been mentioned. For 1-2 day tours a 35-40L pack works great for me but that stems from my ultralight backpacking background. I also have friends that use something 25-30ish for day packs and generally use 50-60ish for 2 days out. Whatever works.

Yes, I probably do have this size sort of stuck in my head, mostly probably because I think backpacks over 40 liters will make skiing difficult. I don't know, I'm pretty new to this besides research. I'm only looking for an overnight backpack as well, but then I guess, two nights doesn't take that much more stuff, just some extra food.

[Kai]

40 liters will work if you have lightweight gear. If you can sleep in a floorless pyramid tent, get a high quality lightweight down bag, and only take what you really need, 40 liters will be fine for a multi-day trip.

If you want to carry a big dome tent, have a synthetic bag, and a full length thermarest, etc., then you will need a bigger pack. I tend to go light, and 40 liters is about the right size for my needs.

[Karl May]

40 liters will work if you have lightweight gear. If you can sleep in a floorless pyramid tent, get a high quality lightweight down bag, and only take what you really need, 40 liters will be fine for a multi-day trip.

If you want to carry a big dome tent, have a synthetic bag, and a full length thermarest, etc., then you will need a bigger pack. I tend to go light, and 40 liters is about the right size for my needs.

That's more the way I would like to BC ski^^^.
Does anyone have any input on whether the deuter guide backpacks are good? I'm leaning more toward the 45+ now, and they can also go up to ~55 liters, which would give me plenty of room

[Meadow Skipper]

The Osprey Variant 52 is a very nice overnight bc skiing/climbing pack. Check it out.

[Karl May]

And it can carry skis in a-frame style, or no? website didn't really clarify.

[Meadow Skipper]

Yes.....

[Hugh Conway]

That's more the way I would like to BC ski^^^

Instead of fixating on a listed size just go to a shop and try some packs. The difference in "skiability" and "packability between a 40 and a 50 may not be much, at all. The 50 may in fact "ski better' and pack smaller.

[BFD]

what HC said. I bough a Mountain Hardwre 46 Direttisima. Now use it for my everyday ski pack. Have a hard time believing I spent $250 on it.

[XXX-er]

Bora 40 for a day pack/overnight ski pack, a pack with the extendable top sleeve you can get a bunch more gear in and a pack with a good suspension system can handle it, I figure the pack may be a little heavy but lots of room good ability to hold skis

[Karl May]

Instead of fixating on a listed size just go to a shop and try some packs. The difference in "skiability" and "packability between a 40 and a 50 may not be much, at all. The 50 may in fact "ski better' and pack smaller.

Yes, I was planning on doing that.

[GeezerSteve]

First priority: A pack that fits right, carries skis well and is stable when skiing and scrambling. If you can afford a McHale, get one and you'll never regret it. A McHale LPB with bayonets can double as a technical day pack + overnighter/2- to 3-nighter. A smallish McHale SARC with bayos can double as an overnight + multi-day pack. Etc., etc.

There is no magic size for an overnight pack because overnight payloads vary with weather, gear requirements, party size and party supplies. If in doubt, go a bit bigger. On a well designed pack, well-placed side compressions straps render a 55L pack into a perfectly fine 45L or 40L or even a 35L pack. In some ways, a well designed 55L pack compressed down to 35L carries better because the payload is on a shorter lever, i.e., closer to your back. Assuming the pack fits you, overloaded packs usually carry like shit but underloaded (but compressed with well-placed compression straps) usually carry great. Also, different packmakers use different methods to measure volume, thus advertised "volumes" are often misleading and meaningless.

[Karl May]

First priority: A pack that fits right, carries skis well and is stable when skiing and scrambling. If you can afford a McHale, get one and you'll never regret it. A McHale LPB with bayonets can double as a technical day pack + overnighter/2- to 3-nighter. A smallish McHale SARC with bayos can double as an overnight + multi-day pack. Etc., etc.

There is no magic size for an overnight pack because overnight payloads vary with weather, gear requirements, party size and party supplies. If in doubt, go a bit bigger. On a well designed pack, well-placed side compressions straps render a 55L pack into a perfectly fine 45L or 40L or even a 35L pack. In some ways, a well designed 55L pack compressed down to 35L carries better because the payload is on a shorter lever, i.e., closer to your back. Assuming the pack fits you, overloaded packs usually carry like shit but underloaded (but compressed with well-placed compression straps) usually carry great. Also, different packmakers use different methods to measure volume, thus advertised "volumes" are often misleading and meaningless.

Thanks Big Steve. Have been reading alot of your posts in different threads on backpacking, and love your knowledge on it. I've also looked at the McHale packs, and though they're really intrigueing, I dont' think I can justify the cost right now.
Are there any backpacks that compress really well besides McHale that you could tell me? I've been looking at the deuter 45+, which I liked because it can become 10 liters bigger, and can then probably still be compressed down from 45 liters to about 40. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer]

There are a myriad of threads on this subject if you search. AKBruin recently had a very long thread about this. First priority it getting something that fits your body frame. For a pure single overnight, 40L is fine IMO. For multi day, 50L is fine. But it really depends on what you are taking and how you pack. HC's advise is good.

[Nick_C_123]

Any decent pack should compress down to daypack size if need be. For me 40-50L is a pretty small pack for overnight and is pushing it. Plenty of people use them but I'm over it.

Keep in mind that packing everything in a smaller pack over the course of a couple hours while getting baked in your living room is one thing. Fitting everything back in while back down to camp exhausted after a 12 hour push is another thing. A larger pack allows you to toss everything inside and eat a sandwich (or get baked) while your friends try to puzzle it all out and end up looking like retards with a bunch of shit strapped to the outside - sleeping pad, crampons, pads, stove fuel bottles, etc.

Really the only difference (besides a marketing gimmick) between an overnight and a couple to few day load should be a couple liters of food, fuel, and spare socks. So buy a pack you can use for both. The weight savings of a smaller pack is minimal but the load carrying and load packing difference is huge.

Personally I go a bit bigger but that's just me. I hate to be that guy with a bunch of crap strapped to the outside of the pack. An osprey 65 is my overnight to couple day pack. For big trips with rope, rack, guiding 1st aid kit etc. I bring a 110L - seriously. But I fit everything inside - even the foam pad sometimes.

That's just my preference/opinion and I'm sure someone will curse me out for it (c'mon Hugh)

[rod9301]

35-40 is pretty small for an overnight. I second the McHale packs. I have a 35 McHAle and I use two of their pockets, strap on either side of the pack, and this is perfect for an overnight or a couple of days, with just the pad on the outside.
Deuter makes great packs, and I had an Osprey 60 or 65, worked well, but it was pretty tall, so I kept hitting my helmet on it.

I would go with a 35-40, this is the perfect size for a day pack, and add the Mc HAle pockets ((10 l each).

Often you will carry skis and boots on the pack, so the frame and Belt are very important. I looked at Mammut packs in the 35 range, and I thought that they have a great suspension.
In general, don't try to save the weight in your pack. A pack that carries poorly will kill you.

[hutash]

Any decent pack should compress down to daypack size if need be. For me 40-50L is a pretty small pack for overnight and is pushing it. Plenty of people use them but I'm over it.

Keep in mind that packing everything in a smaller pack over the course of a couple hours while getting baked in your living room is one thing. Fitting everything back in while back down to camp exhausted after a 12 hour push is another thing. A larger pack allows you to toss everything inside and eat a sandwich (or get baked) while your friends try to puzzle it all out and end up looking like retards with a bunch of shit strapped to the outside - sleeping pad, crampons, pads, stove fuel bottles, etc.

Really the only difference (besides a marketing gimmick) between an overnight and a couple to few day load should be a couple liters of food, fuel, and spare socks. So buy a pack you can use for both. The weight savings of a smaller pack is minimal but the load carrying and load packing difference is huge.

Personally I go a bit bigger but that's just me. I hate to be that guy with a bunch of crap strapped to the outside of the pack. An osprey 65 is my overnight to couple day pack. For big trips with rope, rack, guiding 1st aid kit etc. I bring a 110L - seriously. But I fit everything inside - even the foam pad sometimes.

That's just my preference/opinion and I'm sure someone will curse me out for it (c'mon Hugh)

This is pretty much how I think. Just go a little bigger and not worry about it. I admit I am lazy and hate packing at camp, and just want to throw things in and go. Not saying this is the only or right way to go, but just the option I prefer. Besides, I prefer comfort, so the whole ultra-light trend is just not for me.