4.5 lb. pack vs. 6.5 lb pack. Do 2lbs matter to you?

[AeroGuyDC]

I've been hiking on and off for 25 years, mostly with an external pack on weekend overnighters.

I've recently gotten serious about hiking the AT in sections, and will be buying an internal frame pack in the near future. I've tried on many different packs so far, and all of them have their pros and cons.

But when it comes down to it, weight seems to be the biggest difference. Obviously, the more durable and "deluxe" the suspension system, the heavier the pack.

As such, I have been comparing several packs of roughly the same cubes and features, but the weight range varies by about two pounds. So far, packs with thicker hip belts have been the most comfortable, but also the heaviest.

Do these two extra pounds really matter to you in the grand scheme? I understand that ultralight hikers will certainly have an opinion on this, but what about those regular hikers who value a good compromise between weight and comfort?

[bigcranky]

Two pounds of Snickers bars vs two pounds of pack weight. Your choice.

Seriously, two pounds does make a difference that I can feel on my back over the long haul.

[cheeks]

The heaviest pack you should probably consider carrying on the AT these days is the 4.5 pound one.

6.5 pounds is pretty insane these days.

[Spokes]

Amazing how much 2 lbs increases the cuss factor on the trail. That definitely falls under the bad weight category.

[sparky2000]

Keep your section hikes on the flat planes and the two lbs. won't matter much.

[fredmugs]

My two cents is pack fit is more important. I own 3 packs: a 15 ounce Go Lite, a 4.5 pound military pack, and (maybe) a 2.5 pound pack I bought at Sams Club.

The GoLite pack is designed to hold 25 pounds but it has no waist/hip support. When I had 22 pounds in it the middle of my pack was killing me.

My military pack is designed to hold god knows how much weight. I did back to back 27 mile days in NJ carrying 42 pounds and it honestly did not bother me that much.

The pack I bought at Sams Club (I even think it's a Swiss Gear pack) last year is awesome for section hiking although I don't know that I would recommend it for a thru. It has a 3 liter bladder pouch, built in rain cover, and lots of room for everything I need. I feel light and fast with that pack on.

I would go with fit foremost but bear in mind that fit in the store does not equal fit fully loaded. I've also found that where you stash your stuff in the pack makes a big difference as well.

[Pickleodeon]

I carried a heavy pack, I think it weighed like 5.5 lbs or something ridiculous. It did have a lot of padding and suspension on it, but I ended up going with a lighter pack once I got rid of rid of some of the other crap in my pack. I would say, go for the lighter pack.

[double d]

My first reaction to your question is this: is the pack made of quality material from a respected company? Second, remember that the extra 2 pounds is on your back for every step of every mile of every day (you get the picture).

[rpenczek]

Think in terms of percentage weight savings. From 6 pounds to 4 pounds or a 33% savings in weight. What if you cut 25% to 33% of your total gear weight, hiking would be much more comfortable.

I am not ultralite. I carry a water filter, canister stove and nalgenes, but I moved from a Gregory Whitney to a Granitegear Nimbus Meridian (saved 3.5 pounds) and from a Mountain Hardware 6+ pound tent to a Tarptent Rainbow II (saved 4 pounds) and I can tell you that I am a much happier hiker. In my opinion, the 2 pounds matters, especially if you work through your heaviest gear (pack, bag, tent) and are successful in cutting each of them.

[Dogwood]

You are right that all packs have their pros and cons. But, I would more closely examine the belief that a pack has to be heavy for it to be durable, have a comfortable suspension, or fit right. Also, take into account that when you start getting below a certain wt for ALL that you carry the beefiest packs with all the heavy wt features that are enjoyed become less necessary.

[Dogwood]

And, the size(volume) of the pack that's necessary typically goes down which naturally translates into a smaller less heavier wt pack.

[skinewmexico]

I don't consider myself an ultralighter, but I think it's inefficient to carry something a lot heavier for no reason. A pound here and a pound there really add up. I should add that I can't even imagine carrying a 4.5# pack, when there are so many amazing choices out there (disclaimer - I don't do expeditions / 3 week unsupplied trips). My ULA packs are as durable as most heavy packs, carry great, are made in the USA, and are substantially lighter. When I don't have to carry a lot of water, my Gossamer Gear Mariposa Plus gets the call (@ 24 oz.). I'm not giving up any comfort, and I'd really have to work to get my Big 3 weight up to 6.5# for 3 season backpacking.

[AeroGuyDC]

I don't consider myself an ultralighter, but I think it's inefficient to carry something a lot heavier for no reason. A pound here and a pound there really add up. I should add that I can't even imagine carrying a 4.5# pack, when there are so many amazing choices out there (disclaimer - I don't do expeditions / 3 week unsupplied trips). My ULA packs are as durable as most heavy packs, carry great, are made in the USA, and are substantially lighter. When I don't have to carry a lot of water, my Gossamer Gear Mariposa Plus gets the call (@ 24 oz.). I'm not giving up any comfort, and I'd really have to work to get my Big 3 weight up to 6.5# for 3 season backpacking.

By my questions, i'm sure you can tell i'm a newbie to the world of internal frame packs. :)

Your insight is intriguing, especially the part where you mention that you can't imagine carrying a 4.5# pack. When it comes to comfort, do you find that a thick cushioned hip belt is necessary? The weight range I mentioned are packs with nice cushiony shoulder and hip belts, although I have seen suspension systems that mirrored that of a daypack. My thought process has been that more cushion would equal better comfort.

Am I looking at it wrong?

[Jester2000]

I've been hiking on and off for 25 years, mostly with an external pack on weekend overnighters.

I've recently gotten serious about hiking the AT in sections, and will be buying an internal frame pack in the near future. I've tried on many different packs so far, and all of them have their pros and cons.

But when it comes down to it, weight seems to be the biggest difference. Obviously, the more durable and "deluxe" the suspension system, the heavier the pack.

As such, I have been comparing several packs of roughly the same cubes and features, but the weight range varies by about two pounds. So far, packs with thicker hip belts have been the most comfortable, but also the heaviest.

Do these two extra pounds really matter to you in the grand scheme? I understand that ultralight hikers will certainly have an opinion on this, but what about those regular hikers who value a good compromise between weight and comfort?


A lot of people on this site will tell you that it absolutely does matter, and that 2 pounds is a lot of weight. But I would say that the thing to keep in mind regarding you Pack's weight is not just the weight itself, but the weight relative to what the pack is going to carry.

Generally speaking (although not always), a heavier pack is heavier because of a beefier/more comfortable suspension system. So the question to ask is, how much does everything else weigh? If all of you gear with food and water weighs 25 pounds, then 2 pounds is a big difference, and you might want to opt for the lighter pack. If all of your stuff weighs 50 pounds, I'd get the heavier pack. Of course, if all of your stuff weighs 50 pounds, many on this site will tell you that you have too much stuff. To which I'd respond, "too much for what?" I completed the AT with a 65 pound pack. Many of the things in that pack kept me happy enough to stay on a trail for 6 months.

So certainly try to get lighter if possible, but know what makes you happy and bring it. If that adds up to a significant amount of weight, go for the heavier pack.

[Lostone]

my pack is a garage sale pack. Don't really care about the weight it was $5 and it is comfortable and big enough for my needs.

What does it matter what it weighs if it is comfortable and you are reasonable health to manage it.

I understand the entire 2 lbs X 1 million steps philosophy. With that said couldn't most of us loose 2 lbs of fat verses worrying about it in a backpack.

Ran into a big fellow bragging about his lightweight gear saving his knees, I guesstimate him to be 275. I am thinking lose 75 lbs that will help your knees.

[Mags]

2 lbs is a day of food.

Think of if that way.

[harryfred]

I have not been seriously hiking but the last two years. I have learned that you want to shave every oz. you can and stiill get the job done. Getting that pack to ride just right is equally important. A 20# pack is too much if you have a strap that digs at your ribs all day. A heavier pack does not always mean a better pack.
You are actually in a good location to prepare for a thru hike. I believe there are several REI's near you you could go to them and let them help you get your gear together. Then when you get a long weekend take the train to Harpers Ferry and hike the AT. Just out and back this will show you what you like and don't like. Now you can go back to REI and talk to them and get you gear adjusted and even replaced if needed. Go mid May to mid June and the weather is comfortable and you will meet a lot of thru hikers to talk to and get some ideas.

[Jester2000]

2 lbs is a day of food.

Think of if that way.

Yet another way to think of it is that if you have a good suspension system, you can carry 2 more days of food without it necessarily mattering.

[Mags]

Yet another way to think of it is that if you have a good suspension system, you can carry 2 more days of food without it necessarily mattering.

You already said that multiple times in this thread. I thought I'd add another view point.

Lighter overall weight means lighter overall pack. It means I can enjoy hiking all day (notice the word I and not You. ;) )


I'm lazy and weak. I sure as hell notice the weight with my heavier 7lb pound pack AND food. It does matter to me and I notice the difference. Good suspension or not. I enjoyed hauling 10 days of food more with my light pack than I did hauling 5 days of food with my heavy pack with a good suspension system. So, I thought I'd offer another perspective.

As others said, there is no reason to go heavy if you are in the financial position to do it. There is lighter gear that is functionally the same as my older gear with a good suspension system (ULA packs among others). But, again, I'm lazy and weak. I don't want to carry a heavier pack for the sake of carrying a heavier pack if I can avoid it. :)




With that said couldn't most of us loose 2 lbs of fat verses worrying about it in a backpack.



No argument there. But, this is the Internet. Just get fat and go on a thru-hike. ;)

[schnikel]

The first pack I ever bought was a Lowe Alpine that weighed in at 5+ lbs. This was fine for weekend backpacking and carried all my gear well with a nice suspension system.

It wasn't until my wife and I were hauling 45+ lbs up and down the Rocky Mountains that the heavens opened and I realized that I would enjoy backpacking a whole hell of a lot more if my shoulders weren't ready to become dislocated and my back didn't feel like it was ready to break. That was the trip that opened my eyes up to the fact that ounces do add up to pounnds, and losing pounds of weight off your back is a difference that can be felt.

When I started to plan longer hikes and began to buy better gear (most of my original gear was given to me to see if I actually would like backpacking) I realized that I could cut major weight with a different pack, and it would still be large enough to hold all my gear.

To the original OP:
The weight issue might not be a big deal to you now because you have been doing a lot of weekend trips. You said you are now doing section hikes on the AT, you would feel the difference of 2# on these longer trips, and enjoy them more IMHO.
Either way, enjoy your hikes!
Schnikel

[skinewmexico]

Your insight is intriguing, especially the part where you mention that you can't imagine carrying a 4.5# pack. When it comes to comfort, do you find that a thick cushioned hip belt is necessary? The weight range I mentioned are packs with nice cushiony shoulder and hip belts, although I have seen suspension systems that mirrored that of a daypack. My thought process has been that more cushion would equal better comfort.

Am I looking at it wrong?

I like to think that comfort comes from proper fit. I've got a GoLite Jam2 with no padding in the hip belt, and it's very comfortable when it's not overloaded. So it's a matter of getting a pack that fits you, and that may take some shopping. But I think some packs have super cushioned shoulder and hip belts because it looks good to someone standing in a store.


I understand the entire 2 lbs X 1 million steps philosophy. With that said couldn't most of us loose 2 lbs of fat verses worrying about it in a backpack.

Ouch!! If you had put a 0 after that 2, I would have thought you were talking about me!

[leaftye]

Ouch!! If you had put a 0 after that 2, I would have thought you were talking about me!

Do some multiplication and we could be talking about me.

[Jester2000]

You already said that multiple times in this thread. I thought I'd add another view point. . .

I apologize. I had only posted once on this thread, so I didn't realize I had said anything multiple times. Admittedly, my posts are kind of wordy.


No argument there. But, this is the Internet. Just get fat and go on a thru-hike. ;)

hahahahahahaha!

Hey, don't get me wrong. I like lighter weight as well. And while my AT pack weighed 65 pounds, I had trimmed my PCT pack all the way down to 50. That's not really light, is it? Probably not.

I'm always just a little concerned about people who get to their pack weight based solely on the advice of others. I much prefer the way you got where you are, and the way schnikel came around to his current way of doing things -- through experience. It may cost more in money (because of the need to replace gear), but I think it's a better way to end up where you really should be.

Perfect example: for my PCT hike, the Twister Mat I carried was a custom made lightweight Tyvek version, with a miniature spinner inside the case of my compass. Because I had learned, through experience, that a regular Twister Mat was too heavy.

[Jester2000]

I like to think that comfort comes from proper fit. I've got a GoLite Jam2 with no padding in the hip belt, and it's very comfortable when it's not overloaded. So it's a matter of getting a pack that fits you, and that may take some shopping. But I think some packs have super cushioned shoulder and hip belts because it looks good to someone standing in a store. . .

I agree with this 100%. And I think it may have already been mentioned, but getting the proper fit does involve knowing how to measure for a pack, but also trying out packs with weight in them.

[FamilyGuy]

Depends on a couple of things.

First, weight does not exist in a vaccuum. If a pack can better transfer the weight to the hips, and also keep the center of gravity as close to the mid back as possible the less the body will be forced to use energy to overcompensate for load shift. This is a fact and is oftern ignored. Carrying a 15lb load likely need not apply.

Second, if we assume that the 6.5lb pack has a better suspension capable of carrying a much higher load, then should the user want to trek unsupported for long distances then the heavier pack makes more sense.

Otherwise, all things being equal (which they never are) go for the lightest alternative to do the job and to meet your personal requirements.

[lazy river road]

My pack is heavy, (gregory baltoro 70) but out of all the packs I tried on with 35-40 pds in it, I found that to be the best fitting and most comfortable pack for me. The shoulders were nice and wide no pinching, and the hip belt sat perfectly on my a$$. I got it at REI, they were supper helpfull, walked around for like 3 hrs with several different packs with several different weights. Keep trying on packs and keep walking, when one fits buy it. HYOH :)

[Spokes]

.....Generally speaking (although not always), a heavier pack is heavier because of a beefier/more comfortable suspension system. So the question to ask is, how much does everything else weigh?
....


Jester2000, I've always found that the more pack volume you have the more stuff you'll cram into it. In other words, if there's room you'll find a way to fill it not the other way around. Voids left in a pack are so very tempting.

[Tinker]

I've been hiking on and off for 25 years, mostly with an external pack on weekend overnighters.

I've recently gotten serious about hiking the AT in sections, and will be buying an internal frame pack in the near future. I've tried on many different packs so far, and all of them have their pros and cons.

But when it comes down to it, weight seems to be the biggest difference. Obviously, the more durable and "deluxe" the suspension system, the heavier the pack.

As such, I have been comparing several packs of roughly the same cubes and features, but the weight range varies by about two pounds. So far, packs with thicker hip belts have been the most comfortable, but also the heaviest.

Do these two extra pounds really matter to you in the grand scheme? I understand that ultralight hikers will certainly have an opinion on this, but what about those regular hikers who value a good compromise between weight and comfort?

My empty pack weighs 14 oz. I don't really think about it any more - It's just what I'm used to carrying. By the time I'm on my last day of a section I'm usually carrying less weight than many dayhikers are. I can choose to hike more miles with fewer aches and pains or "normal" days in less time than I used to take 10 years ago.
Really, though, it's the lighter shoes that make the most difference.

I'm not as young or strong as I used to be.

[Jester2000]

Jester2000, I've always found that the more pack volume you have the more stuff you'll cram into it. In other words, if there's room you'll find a way to fill it not the other way around. Voids left in a pack are so very tempting.

I agree with you on this. I posted this in an older thread:


That's the size pack I'm aiming for on my next big hike. I think you'll be fine. And I agree with PJ -- having the pack and knowing the space limitations will make you consider what you need versus what you want.

It's often been said that whatever size pack you have, you'll find a way to fill it. This way, when you do fill it it won't be unbearably heavy.

In this case, I wasn't thinking so much about volume as I was about weight (although, generally speaking, less volume will force you to get lighter, unless you start buying smaller gear made of lead).

For example, the Exos 58 isn't dramatically smaller than the Atmos 65. But it is a lot lighter, and compression straps, hip and shoulder straps and suspension system are where the weight came out of. So if you were looking at the two packs and saying to yourself, "man I love how comparatively light this pack is," you should take into account what you're going to put in it. If you know that your max weight will be 30 pounds, it's a great pack and you're not going to sacrifice comfort for weight, and you're not going to damage the pack. But if you know that your max weight will be 50 pounds, I'd go with the Atmos, even though it's heavier.

Now, it's definitely a good idea to try to trim down that 50 pounds, and intentionally buying a smaller pack is a gret way to do so -- it's how I got my pack weight down by 15 pounds -- but when I did that I had the experience to know what I did and didn't need.

But I will tell you that I try to steer people away from buying 85 liter packs for the reason you mentioned -- you'll figure out a way to fill it, and it's not really going to ride well unless you do.

[DrRichardCranium]

My pack is heavy, (gregory baltoro 70) but out of all the packs I tried on with 35-40 pds in it, I found that to be the best fitting and most comfortable pack for me. The shoulders were nice and wide no pinching, and the hip belt sat perfectly on my a$$. I got it at REI, they were supper helpfull, walked around for like 3 hrs with several different packs with several different weights. Keep trying on packs and keep walking, when one fits buy it. HYOH :)

That's the model I went with. And it isn't SUPER heavy. It's about 5.5 lbs.

There are lighter packs out there of course, but I used the Baltoro 70 when backpacking in the Shenandoahs, and it was very comfortable. It seemed to move with me as I walked and held the weight very nicely, making the total weight seem much less than it was.

And I got no bruises or red marks on my hips where the belt was. Very nice pack, in spite of not being super light.

[lazy river road]

Dr. glad to hear that pack worked well for you, I havent used it on a trip yet only out for a day or two but cant wait to use it this summer. Another consideration is pack accessories, I dident want a st. stuff sack style pack, I wanted a pack that had a zipper to the main compartment, I also liked a top bag for storeing little stuff and hip belt pockets, those things all add weight but I enjoy the features. It just depends on how minimalist you wanna go?

[Dogwood]

I completed the AT with a 65 lb pack - Jester

Ugh! Is that why some call you the one legged hip displaced humpback from Harpers Ferry? Only kidding Jester! LOL.

[Jester2000]

I completed the AT with a 65 lb pack - Jester

Ugh! Is that why some call you the one legged hip displaced humpback from Harpers Ferry? Only kidding Jester! LOL.

I had a (found by the side of the road) PA trailer license plate hanging from the back of that thing at one point. I joked that it was so large I had to register it.

The funny thing about my pack was that after leaving Monson, everyone was complaining about how heavy their packs were. But mine had stayed heavy the whole time.

I wouldn't really recommend carrying that kind of weight. I had a good exterior frame pack, and at that point in my hiking experience I liked having a lot of stuff with me in camp. Every time I got rid of something theoretically useful, I ended up putting something ridiculous in the pack to replace it.

[bigcranky]

Your insight is intriguing, especially the part where you mention that you can't imagine carrying a 4.5# pack. When it comes to comfort, do you find that a thick cushioned hip belt is necessary?

Well, I have to admit that I couldn't conceive of carrying a 4.5 pound pack either. My current pack weighs just under 2 pounds empty, has a comfortable internal frame suspension, a good hipbelt, and carries 35 pounds comfortably. It's plenty big enough for Southern winter hiking, too. I'm hardly an ultralighter with a tiny 7-ounce frameless pack. But I'm not Jester, either, with a 65-pound pack for the AT. (Been there, done that. Didn't much care for it. :sun )

But it took me many years of backpacking to pare down my load while maintaining safety and comfort in adverse conditions. Part of that is experience, part is changing out gear for lighter versions. I started with a 65 pound pack for a 4-day weekend in late May. Gradually got my pack below 50 pounds, then below 40 pounds. Moved from a 5800 cubic inch 6.5 pound pack to a 4000ci 5 pound pack to a 3600ci <2 pound pack. During this transition, the rest of my gear got lighter, got smaller, or got left home. The more hiking experience I got, the more I found I could do without on the trail, or the more comfortable I became using a much lighter alternative. (Or, in some cases, I had the cash to buy a much lighter but more expensive alternative, like my sleeping bag.)

If it were me, I would look for a pack that carried all my gear comfortably. That might be the 4.5 pound pack. It might be the 6 pound pack. You might find that Exos 58 works just fine, at <3 pounds. Much depends on your total pack weight -- if you need to carry 45 pounds, then a really light 2 or 3 pound pack probably won't do that.

Oh, and to answer your specific question, for me, no, I don't find a stiff, heavily padded hip belt either necessary or comfortable.

[skinewmexico]

I hear there are some pretty good outfitters in Harpers Ferry, maybe the OP should run over there for the day. I bet they would fit you, and let you try some. Good road trip. Where I live, we drive that far to go to a drive in.

[Jester2000]

I hear there are some pretty good outfitters in Harpers Ferry, maybe the OP should run over there for the day. I bet they would fit you, and let you try some. Good road trip. Where I live, we drive that far to go to a drive in.

Hahaha! I've heard that too. But I'd call first. Store hours are kind of in flux this time of year, although regular hours always apply on weekends.

[tiptoe]

Two pounds definitely matter to me, because the more I carry, the slower I go. My son, however, wouldn't care at all. He's not of the ultralight or even light persuasion; he's a throwback to the olde days.

[Franco]

Can I suggest a different approach ?
First you should estimate the max average load you will carry. Most do 5-8 day sections at a time before re-supply.
So include in your weight whatever food you need x max amount of days.
(max avarage (?) =disregard the odd section when you may have to carry an extra liter or two of water, just suffer for that..)
Now, having all of your gear and food with you, see what packs feels comfortable to you with that weight.
For me, as an example, the 10 oz ULA Amp (frameless) works up to about around 15 lbs, so it is a day to two/three day (in summer) pack.
Over that and up to around 22-25 lbs , I use the 2.2 lbs ULA Circuit (small but effective U frame) , that works up to 5 days 3 season.
From that to about 35 lbs I switch to the Aarn Featherlite Freedom with large pockets. (different concept altoghether)
I have done 7 days with this one.
BTW, 25 inside the Circuit feel about the same as 35 inside the Aarn.
Anyway, just an idea.
Franco

[white_russian]

Love my Dana Design pack. I tried an Osprey one time and it felt like ***** compared to the Dana. If the extra weight is put into making the pack more comfortable instead of lowering the price the extra weight can be worth it. Also if you want to carry beer a strong pack is nice.

[Blissful]

I carried a six lb pack until VA and a 2 1/2 lb pound pack the rest of the way on my hike in 'O7. Those pounds make all the difference on sore legs and shoulders and on the tough terrain in NE.

[Jester2000]

Also if you want to carry beer a strong pack is nice.


I carried a six lb pack until VA . . .

The second quote coming immediately after the first made me misread it as "I carried a six pack until VA . . .", and my immediate thought was, "wow. there's no way I could have carried a six pack that far without drinking it."

[birdog]

My big four: winter conditions, temps down to 0 degrees
pack-36 oz
pad-9 oz
bag-36 oz
shelter-15 oz
total-5 lbs 8 oz
the heck with a 6.5 lb pack alone!

[300winmag]

YEP! lowering weight of the BIG THREE has been my goal since I discovered these UL sites 4 years ago.
BUT... that said there are limits.
EX.

PACK> REI Cruise UL 60 at about 3 lbs W/ side pockets added (I NEED an internal frame for comfort. Losing ounces or even 1 lb for a "frameless" pack also loses the comfort. Nuff sed.)

SLEEP SYSTEM> WM Megalite down bag & 10 yr. old reg. Thermarest Lite mattress (a good night's sleep is worth the mattress weight)

TENT> TarpTent Moment ( Yeah, 2 oz more than my former Contrail but SO much nicer in many ways.)

[leaftye]

I'm not so worried about my pack. I'm sure that by the time I finish the PCT, I'll have lost more weight than my pack/gear/clothing weighed at kickoff.

[Wolf - 23000]

2 pounds different in a pack can make a differents in other was than you think. I'll explain. Figure out how much weigth you want to carry on your back. I'm not saying to go either UL or heavy but find what is right for you. The type of pack you want to pick out should be able to handle you goal weight comfortable.

What I'm getting at is in general a heavier pack can handle pack weight easier than a lighter weight pack. The lighter the pack you have the more likely you are to lighten up your load in extra equipment not really needed. If you get the heavier pack, you are more less likely to reduce your load.

Just my two cent.

Wolf

[Connie]

I have never found a pack with a lot of padding to be a comfortable pack.

I have had large volume packs, that were comfortable. It was the fit.

I say, fit is more important.

I look for the S-curve shape in shoulder straps. I look for curve in the waistband.

Then I try it on. If interested, I bring in a duffle bag what I am going to carry in the pack and load it up. Loaded up, I hang around and walk around the store awhile. If interested in purchasing the pack, I ask the clerk for help with fitting, if I didn't get it right. If it isn't right, I don't buy it.

I no longer "go for" the high volume packs, unless it is for bulky winter gear.

I pack additional food for snowshoeing and such pursuits in a lumbar pack, worn around front.

I think I have, for the most part, abandoned really big packs, because I have better gear now.

[Egads]

yes, it matters

[garlic08]

Try an experiment. Fill a one-liter container with water. That's just over two pounds. Carry it around for a few months. You'll find out fairly soon if it matters to you.

As far as pack construction, Franco has the right idea above--select the right tool for the job. No need to bring a 6 pound pack for 15 pounds of stuff, and it would be foolish to try to pack 50 pounds of gear into a 10 ounce frameless pack. Do you chop firewood with a coping saw? Do you do trim work with a chainsaw?

[Lostone]

I agree with what you said garlic. Right tool for the job. There is no reason to take a half empty backpack


But 2 pounds in a backpack, please.

I agree that the correct and comfortable fit is more important than weight.

but then again I am one of the people that roll into a shelter and people look at my gear and laugh. But ya know something, I got to the same place as you did.

[Jester2000]

What kind of pack does everyone recommend if I'm carrying a coping saw and a chainsaw?

[leaftye]

What kind of pack does everyone recommend if I'm carrying a coping saw and a chainsaw?
ULA Catalyst. It's the only answer that won't get the ultralight mafia after you.

[garlic08]

What kind of pack does everyone recommend if I'm carrying a coping saw and a chainsaw?

This oughta do: