35L too small?
For a thru-hike? Going light, no fluff other than a book. I'd like to know if, for most people, it would be too small.
That completely and totally depends on exactly what gear you want to put inside it. "Going light" covers a wide range. Also, how manufacturers measure their pack volumes can vary -- for example, a ULA pack lists only the interior volume, but the external pockets will hold a huge amount of gear.
What are you taking for gear? Does it fit in the pack you want?
I carry little but like somewhat more volume so I don't have to compress things so much, which can actually save weight and reduce wear and tear. Also I like putting my blue foam pad inside like a cylinder, which makes the UL Pack more rigid, but does takeup alot of volume inside rather than out. I have the Large Jam2, which is a good pack, not perfect, but I am happy with the volume. 3200ci = 50 litres I think.
I will say that smaller packs can be better for trail running, or when balance is more important, but don't save weight. Extra volume is a good thing, to a point.
Yes, for most people it would be to small. At risk of repeating conventional wisdom "Get everything else, weight it, put it in a pile. Now go look at packs."Originally Posted by theycallmej
When I downsized my pack I used a stuff sack to estimate size. You may be able to just find a 35L stuff sack or dry bag (or garbage bag) and see if everything fits.
For the record those of us with 50L packs are sometimes mistaken for expeditious daytrippers. Be careful or someone may ask where you parked your car.
Math was never my favorite subject but...
Get a box that measures about 12X12X14. That is 2016 cu. in. or about 32.5 liters.
If your stuff fits in the box without too much trouble, I'd say 35L will work for you. Mind you any pack that small that is comfortable will probably be heavy for its volume, comfortable suspension is nearly the same weight on any pack no matter volume.
I would have to be out for a very short trip or in 'spartan' mode to make 35 work. I think 45 is better because it is easier for me to pack things looser and quicker. But, YMMV, if you like the smaller pack, it is not too much trouble to use a stuff sack tied under the top lid as an overflow container until your food sack shrinks down to size in a day or two.
In ultralight hiking it is weight not volume that matters. Make sure the pack fits and your gear rides comfortably. Test the pack. Exchange it if it doesn't.
I can't imagine doing it w/ less than 55L. If you get it packed, I'd like to see your inventory. Thanks in advance.
I have an 85 liter pack but it is heavy at 6 lbs. I don't know if this would be a huge hindrance to me for hiking-- that's the big reason I was wondering if I should downsize a good deal.
The thing is, I couldn't conceive having enough stuff to fill up all the room in my pack, it would be gargantuan. I don't even touch the outer pockets and I don't even have the main compartment full.
It is possible for hikers will experience.
Wolf
A tall kitchen garbage bag is 50L, will all your stuff fit in there?
All fit right into a 50L bag without a problem-- I'm not including food though, that might fill it up completely.
First thought is that you might make it work if you do a May start but getting all the cold weather gear (including a heavier bag) would be pretty tough.
My suggestion would be to load up your 35L pack and go for a 4 day hike and see how it goes. You can approach a long hike on the AT just like a string of 3-4 day section hikes all strung together.
When you have been on the trail for a few weeks & the hiker appetite has kicked in, the biggest & heaviest thing in your pack will be your food bag. When you are figuring out a suitable pack volume make sure you leave plenty of room for food. Waaayyyyyy more than you think you would need for a normal 3-4 day hike
Like someone already mentioned, it is weight not volume that counts. Some things, like crocs & foam sleeping mats take up a lot of space but don't weigh much at all. It's kind of silly to buy a small pack & then have stuff strapped on the outside where it will get wet, dirty & shredded.
The most important consideration for a pack is fit & comfort. It doesn't mater how small or light it is if it rubs your shoulders raw. Get your gear together, plus equvalent weight of food & water & try some out.
I am a firm believer that a completely stuffed pack, one which is crammed to the gills, where you are almost stretching the material/zippers/straps to contain your gear will make a horrible ride - It won't feel good on your back - It will feel like you are hiking with a stiff box. Not only is it uncomforable, that but you risk stress damage to the pack and perhaps even your gear.
If you can be mindful enough in not filling spare volume with needless gear, then you might want to consider going up a bit in volume which would allow excess capacity for those times you need it, (extra clothes, food, heavier sleeping bag...) but also flexibility in cinching down the pack for times when you don't.
.....Someday, like many others who joined WB in the early years, I may dry up and dissapear....
Depends on what you carry. Using minimalist type gear during 3-season weather 35L would be on the edge. At that point it'll come to food choices. If you pack very dense food 4-5 days of food shouldn't be much of a problem. I carry a GoLite Jam, listed at 50L loaded with tarp, quilt, bivy sack, 0.9L ti-pot, raingear, wind gear extra boxers and sox, fleece pants and jacket, long sleeve baselayer, couple random nick-nacks, 2 2.4L platys (1 in each side mesh pocket), and various items like sunscreen, hydropel, bodyglide, multi-tool. Even with all that stuff i could probably still carry a complete extra change of clothes, and another 4-5 days of food (if i really had to)
ZC
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
