View Full Version : Internal vs. External Frame Pack
Seems like everywhere I go the outfitters are pushing the internal frame packs (and I am have zero success finding one to fit properly). I happened to be at a used sporting goods store and slipped on an old (and disgusting) LL Bean external frame pack just for comparison. It fit really well and was very comfortable.
Whats the big draw to the internal frame vs. the external? Or should I press on with trying to find a new external frame pack that is comfortable?
Footslogger
10-11-2005, 13:15
Whats the big draw to the internal frame vs. the external? Or should I press on with trying to find a new external frame pack that is comfortable?============================
Go with what fits best, is most comfortable and holds all your stuff. The internals tend to be narrower and taller as opposed to the externals that tend to be wider. If you're doing a lot of mountain trail hiking the internals will allow you to squeeze through a lot easier and they are also worn more closely to the back, making them less likely to sway back and forth.
The big difference intially was that the externals had smaller pack bags and more pouches on the outside whereas the internals were one big bag that you stuffed everything into. That's changed somewhat these days and a lot of the internals now have add-on pouches which makes them sort of a hybrid.
'Slogger
Two Speed
10-11-2005, 13:43
One thing an external can do that an internal does poorly is ventilate across your back. Not important for winter hiking, but a real plus for me during warmer weather. Used to be able to get mesh back bands for external packs. Haven't seen them advertised recently, though.
BTW, for me "warmer weather" is spring & fall. It's just too darn hot to hike much in Georgia during the summer.
I find my external frame pack is more comfortable, is more suited to heavy loads, stands up straight when I lean it against something, the pockets and zippers give me access to all my stuff without emptying the pack, lets me strap stuff to the frame to free up room inside, lets me strap wet stuff to the outside to keep the stuff inside dry, and even though it's a cheap no name brand ( I got it at the Salvation Army for a song ) it still has three way adjustments on the shoulder straps. I have wide shoulders and a short torso, but it fits like a dream.
It's easy to replace the components ( shoulder straps and hip belt ) when they wear out.
I think one of the reasons you see so many internals out there is fashion. I used one for years, still have it, and it just isn't as versatile and comfortable as my external. Maybe the newer models are better.
Two Speed
10-11-2005, 15:22
. . . Whats the big draw to the internal frame vs. the external? Or should I press on with trying to find a new external frame pack that is comfortable?I'd say the big draw is fashion, just like Stupe said. Other hikers may a different opinion.
What I'd recommend you do is find the pack YOU like. One thing I'd recommend against is looking for a really big pack. If I've got 5,000 cubic inches available I tend to fill it with 5,000 cubic inches of crap, whether or not I need it. :datz
If you can, why don't you rent or borrow a couple of packs and try 'em out for a couple of weekend, maybe three or four day trips and decide what suits your style of hiking? BTW, if that crappy old LL Bean pack is really cheap, why not try it out? If you decide you like it, well, dang, more money available for higher quality boots, sleeping bag, rain gear, pizza at trail towns, etc. If you don't the Boy Scouts can always use it.
Blue Jay
10-11-2005, 16:08
One thing an external can do that an internal does poorly is ventilate across your back.
This and actual suspension is why I will never use an internal frame even if I have to fabricate my own external from old ones, if mine dies before I do. Externals are very hard to find because they are heavier, which is now sacrilege. Like foot wear, use what feels the best to you, no one can tell you what that will be.
sierraDoug
10-11-2005, 18:28
My pack is over twenty-five years old, an external frame Trailwise (by defunct Ski Hut of Berkeley, CA). It's 4lb 8 oz. Not as heavy as a lot of internal frame packs out there. Lighter than most with the same capacity. Though if you're going light or ultralight you wouldn't need or want that much capacity. Anyway, I'm replacing my gear piece by piece with lighter modern stuff and the new pack will be last. I look forward to less swaying around, but not to losing the fantastic ventilation my old pack has.
Try some new Kelty and other brand external frame packs and see if you can find something really comfy. The internal frame dominance is mostly a lame fad. Very few of us go off trail, or in narrow canyons, or jog with a pack on. The old ones can still be seen on the trails worn by happy people who've been hiking for years.
Two Speed
10-11-2005, 19:11
. . . The internal frame dominance is mostly a lame fad . . . The old ones can still be seen on the trails worn by happy people who've been hiking for years.Don't know that I'd call internal frames a lame fad although I think you're onto something about people using old packs they've come to know and trust. I've used an external for years, and will continue to use it, but that doesn't change the fact that there are good internal frame packs out there. Personally I reserve the right to select the gear that I feel is most adapted to the trail conditions I expect to find. If my external fits the bill, I'll carry it. If I find an internal that works for me I'll carry that.
I have a Kelty external, 3900 cu. in. and I love it. It holds everything I need and then some. I also have an internal frame, a ULA P-2 and love it too. Got it for the light weight. Both have advantages depending on the conditions of the hike. I'm short, so I tend to like the less bulky internal frame better for long distances.
Thanks for the feedback!
I think I will expand my pack search into the externals a bit and see if I can find something comfortable. My priority is to find something that is comfortable and fits well - if it ends up being an external then so be it :sun
That old LL Bean one I tried on was really really disgusting (smelled like there was a dead animal in it, had some mold stains, and all the straps were starting to fray - and they wanted $85 for it. NOT! lol......
stickman
10-11-2005, 20:23
The weight is an issue, as Blue Jay said, but the main advantage for an internal is that it is "worn" close to the body, not "carried" on the back. That gives a lot more stability to the internal frame pack for things like backcountry skiing, climbing, scrambling over really bad terrain, etc. For example, you would be hardpressed to do backcountry skiing or even snowshoeing with an external. I think that's how they started, then they became fashionable. I have used both, and still rue the day I sold an old style Kelty Tioga external about 20 years ago.
Stickman
sierraDoug
10-11-2005, 20:46
I definitely plan on getting a smaller, lighter internal frame pack before next summer, but I'll never get rid of my Trailwise external while I'm still able to go backpacking. It would be next to impossible to replace. Maybe internals aren't "a lame fad", I just think pack makers ought to offer good modern externals (that don't weigh a ton) as a great option to all those people who stay on trails most of the time.
And now for something completely different...
http://www.neotrekk.com/
2lb. 12 oz. external frame pack
Blue Jay
10-11-2005, 21:43
That gives a lot more stability to the internal frame pack for things like backcountry skiing, climbing, scrambling over really bad terrain, etc. For example, you would be hardpressed to do backcountry skiing or even snowshoeing with an external.
Since you're a southerner, I'll cut you some slack. It's exactly the opposite. For backcountry skiing or snowshoeing you really need a pack with suspension for all the up and down and scrambling over bad terrain, not some dead weight lump that bounces around on your back.
Toolshed
10-11-2005, 21:52
I love my trusty 1972 Camp Trails Lake Cruiser Ext Frame. I have taken good care of it over the years and added things like a hip belt, overhead bar and new shoulder straps, but I Absolutely will not (squeak, squeak, squeak) go out for more than an over night with it.
I have been spoiled since 1992 with Internal frame packs and the comfort they provide. I can hike faster and further with an IF as oppoesed to an EF.
EF's are great for short trips when hunting or fishing, but for true long distance backpacking, I prefer an internal.
I think it really is a matter of personal preference. I've got an old JanSport D-3 that is very comfortable. I found a big North Face internal (can't remember the model name) on a good sale and picked it up for comparison. I find that the packs are very close in comfort. The IF has a hydration sleeve, which I like very much. The EF has more pockets, making it easier to organize the little stuff. I switch back and forth, depending on my mood. Which is more important, being able to quickly locate little stuff, or being able to drink from a tube? Tough decisions.
i like the externals my self just more room for hanging stuffhttp://www.geocities.com/jimmywinn3/pic5.jpg
I think that the best of the newer designs for the internal frame packs are the ones that use a framesheet. Kind of like an updated version of the old packboard, but these are actually comfortable. They tend to be lighter weight than the externals, but still give a lot of support to your load.
When we did our thru in '89, I started out with a Jansport D-3 and my wife started with her OLD, external frame Jerry pack. Just before Pearisburg, she fell and broke the frame on her old pack, we patched it up, made it into Pearisburg, hitched into Blacksburg and got her a Kelty External, she hiked with it a few days and she didn't like it at all. Went back to Pearisburg, hitched again into Blacksburg and she picked out a Gregory Casin (sp) internal frame which she used for the rest of the trip. I swapped out my D-3 for the newer Kelty and off we went.
The Gregory was sold off a few years ago and when we were going thru or old equipment in anticipation of getting back into hiking, I found that my old Kelty, which had been hanging in the garage for lo these many years was no longer in hikeable condition. Strap holddowns had rotted & cracked, waterprofing comming off of the inside of the pack, etc.
So, off to several of our local outfitters, yes there is more than 1 in the Tampa area, to scope out new packs. I, thought I would get another external frame, based on the fact that I sweat alot when hiking and thought that the external would be cooler (a relative term when hiking in 90 degree weather). Much to my suprise I settleed on a Northface Crestone 75. Yes, I know it's a heavy pack at 6.5#, but my Kelty was over 7# empty. Of all of tghe packs I tried, the Northface fit ME, the best and felt right. The proof is in the pudding, we're leaving Oct 29 to N Ga to do the Springer Approach trail and some other overnighters during the week so I'll know if I made the right choice in switching from an external to an internal.
RLC_FLA
GA->ME 89
"It is easie to be forgiven, than to get permission"
Seems like everywhere I go the outfitters are pushing the internal frame packs (and I am have zero success finding one to fit properly). I happened to be at a used sporting goods store and slipped on an old (and disgusting) LL Bean external frame pack just for comparison. It fit really well and was very comfortable.
Whats the big draw to the internal frame vs. the external? Or should I press on with trying to find a new external frame pack that is comfortable?
The problem is that as time goes on, fewer and fewer companies are making external frame packs. And that's a shame, because they are usually much cheaper than internal frame packs. Kelty is about the only firm still making an external frame pack.
I suspect that it's all driven by marketing. Internal frame packs are pushed because they ride closer to the back, and therefore, better suited for going through the bush when off trail. But how often do you really do that? It's exactly the same mentality that sells SUV's that never leave the pavement.
If you find an external frame pack that fits you, and works for you, then by all means, buy it and use it.
For what it's worth, I thru-hiked with a Kelty Trekker external frame pack.
stickman
10-12-2005, 20:37
"Since you're a southerner, I'll cut you some slack. It's exactly the opposite. For backcountry skiing or snowshoeing you really need a pack with suspension for all the up and down and scrambling over bad terrain, not some dead weight lump that bounces around on your back>"
No need to cut me slack. I speak from a fair amount of experience on cross country skis and both kinds of packs. A proper fitting internal frame pack, snugged up nice and firm, is WAY better than an external frame in all but the lamest terrain. Lean sidewise a litttle with an external frame pack on, and its going to slide sidewise. Try that with an internal, and its just like an extension of your body. Try it sometime.
Blue Jay
10-12-2005, 23:42
Lean sidewise a litttle with an external frame pack on, and its going to slide sidewise.
Adjust the straps correctly, try it sometime.
Two Speed
10-13-2005, 08:42
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10623&page=2&pp=20
Post #29. Just further proof that external frame packs are inherently superior to internal frame packs! :banana :banana :banana
All kidding around aside, Blue Jay and Stickman, you two need to take a breather. Blue Jay, if you don't like internal frame packs, heck do what I do: don't carry one. Stickman, if you prefer internal frame packs do what I don't: carry an internal frame. Like many gear choices, this is a personal one and I don't believe anyone can demonstrate that either style is inherently superior in all situations. HYOH.
Blue Jay
10-14-2005, 01:50
Just further proof that external frame packs are inherently superior to internal frame packs! :banana :banana :banana
All kidding around aside, Blue Jay and Stickman, you two need to take a breather. Blue Jay, if you don't like internal frame packs, heck do what I do: don't carry one.
I never said externals are superior. For most people, clearly they are not, as few people buy them. I was disputing an extremely misleading statement about a very specific application.
alalskaman
10-14-2005, 03:09
Obviously, all a matter of taste...I personally absolutely HATE any feeling of being pulled backwards...so tend to prefer an external, with the load up real high..that way a slight lean forward balances it out.But of course makes it miserable for going under limbs, etc. Lately have gotten one of Aarn's "bodypacks" which is I-frame but with sort of "mammary" pockets in front...I love it....no backwards pull at all. But that's just me...as the cowboys used to say, let everybody kill their own snakes. Bill
heres a little action for one of my keltys It was enjoying the views kyhttp://www.geocities.com/jimmywinn3/pic11.JPG
stickman
10-15-2005, 12:47
I was at REI this morning and stopped to look at backpacks. The product information flier they have says the following:
"A majority of todays backpacks use an internal-frame design....The body hugging nature of internal-frame packs enhances balance and freedom of movement. This is ideal for mountaineering, skiing, scrambling, and hiking in rough terrain." There is additional information on their website, which corrorobates this but also lists the advantages of external frame packs for other applications.
All I was trying to say was that I have skied with both internal and external frame packs, and much prefer internals. The load is lower, closer to your spine, you have lots of compression straps to stabilize the load inside the pack and compress it down to a tight package, etc.
So, being accused of making an "extremely misleading statement" seems a little harsh. But Dudes, I know one size doesn't fit all and personally don't care how others hike or ski. We all HOOH, hopefully with goodwill towards all we encounter.
I'm done with this thread. Someone else can have the last word.
Stickman
Lumberjack
10-15-2005, 14:20
Im just shocked that kelty's top line external's would weigh in at 7 lbs in this age of UL hiking. Very sad.