|
Not exactly a question, but this guy fits in quite a bit into this small 28L bag: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEygcTUX4sQ Definitely had the experience of a bigger bag getting filled up, so the idea of a smaller bag to force you to take what you need is enticing. In terms of the 'tourist' factor, does anyone find that a smaller schoolbag looking backpack helps them blend in more? I remember that this was a topic of discussion in the thread a couple of years back.
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2011 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 05:36 |
|
|
One of my debates right now is if I should drop down to a ~32L bag. I prefer the daypack solution to the travel bag solution mainly because of walking around a lot, hiking, etc. Right now I have a 42L - for actual overnight camping etc. Just seems like most people opt for the travel bag solution or the ~32L backpack. Unless they want to look like the picture in the OP. Anyone do something similar? Or should I save my money and just put less in my bag...sort of leaning towards this option but my bag is 3pounds 10oz empty. (It's a Deuter bag)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:Kalix: is this for travel or for hiking? Trying to combine both...I'm thinking of Northern India - but I have no concrete plans as of yet. Did a trip where I was more or less in one place recently, so while I packed light I didn't need to opt for the backpack. In fact I used a duffel that had backpack straps...so wannabe travel-bag. Worked as a carry on. But this time around I envision being more on the move, and I wanted to do some trekking. Hopefully I'm not letting my imagination get the best of me. The other thought is, that when I eventually do the SE Asia trip, warm climate and the like, lots of walking, the bag would also function reasonably well there. Though I'll be honest and say I really have to read that thread before I can even comment much more. Edit: So the main criticisms to the Hiking bag it seems are 1) Unruly Straps 2) Top loading? Kalix fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Jun 4, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 02:29
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:Take a look at the Tom Bihn tri star and tell me what you think. It's no doubt an excellent bag. I actually was reading reviews on it before I posted. It's pretty highly regarded. The travel bag is much more convenient for packing/unpacking, and nicer looking though. I think it would be the way to go for Europe and really any travel where I wasn't thinking about walking a lot with the pack. The Tom-Binh site even points out that It's not recommend for extended walking - makes sense. So I think i'll focus more on the traditional backpack style. Sheep-Goats: I know you must primarily be using the Travel Pack - but how did you pack for SE Asia, for example? Did you use a backpack or travel pack?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 03:17
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:Travel pack is ideal for SE Asia. Honestly, a lot of this is just in the pre-planning stages. I haven't figured out an itinerary at all , save for a few places that are famous to check out. But to give you an idea of what I'm looking at doing: http://www.roopkund.com/ In addition, checking out more touristy places, like Agra and such. A significant part of me thinks the travel pack is probably a safe bet -- or at least a panel loading backpack. Especially if the trekking idea is put on the backburner and it just ends up being cities with walking. Mainly because there's a balance; the actual hiking, vs the normal travel. And something like the Tristar looks WAY more ideal for public transport. Seems like travelling within cities, the hiking pack isn't really that much better. I assume for walking (Ie when you went place to place in SE Asia) the travel pack was perfectly fine? (How much walking till it became annoying?) So In your experience, you find that most people leave their stuff somewhere and take a cheap-o bag for dayhikes and the like? I suppose some part of me was imagining taking ALL my stuff with me if I was packing light (even for those kinds of trips).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 05:22
|
|