I know the physics behind internal frame packs and they offer greater mobility over the "older" external counterparts but what if I don't want mobility and want extreme versatility and ability to haul in 100 pounds of gear? I want to see an internal pack that can do this.
External Frame Packs?
- Thread starter Barney
- Start date
ppine
Forester
I have always been a fan of external frame packs, starting with a Trapper Nelson as a kid. If you want to carry an elk quarter or an outboard motor it is the obvious choice. I have never backpacked in places where the center of gravity difference was an issue. I currently have an expensive North Face internal frame pack that weighs a ridiculous 5.5 pounds. I would trade it for an old Kelty frame pack any time. The pockets on the old frames were obvious and easy to find. The bag wasn't too big, but there was room to lash things like a sleeping bag easily. They are slightly wider than internal frame packs. Even on overnight ski trips, I have favored the external frame. Go into an REI store today and try to find even one external frame pack. I miss the days when they had lots of them and they were cheap, light, and worked like a charm. The good ones are welded aluminum.
Back to army surplus, I started with an old molded plywood packboard. Still got it matter of fact. From that I went to an external frame that lasted for many years. I don't even know if it had a brand name. If it did it was long forgotten. Grandson was the last to use it but some of the struts were breaking up so It got trashed. I've been thinking of trying to find another external as well.
steves
Member
We just did a weekend backpacking trip and 1 of the guys had a old Kelty external frame, he had no issues and never once had to adjust anything or complain. I am thinking about going back to my roots and trying one again.
wvbreamfisherman
Active Member
When we just did our section hike on the AT, my hiking partner had an internal frame pack from Cabelas, while I had my old, reliable ALICE pack.
Things I noted:
My pack was lower and wider, with loads of attachment points. Hers was tall (over the top of her head, which made for some clearance problems.
Mine was wider, which also made for the occasional "wide load" srcrape.
Her pack had only a few externally accessible pockets, while mine had several (in part because I had hung some pouches on the attachment points. I really like having external pockets, as it makes it much easier to organize things.
She had to do more digging around in her main compartment, because it was so deep.
The empty weight of my pack was about 2 lb heavier than hers.
It was much easier for me to get decent ventilation between my back and the pack than she had.
Her pack seemed to be a little easier to adjust to suit her than mine. Mine took a lot of little adjustments as we walked along to get comfortable.
It is also possible to remove the pack from the frame on and external frame pack, and use it to haul somethig else. For example, on a canoe trip you could lash a wannigan (gear box) to the frame for portaging. You could also attach a Duluth pack to the frame.
Internal frame packs are definitely slimmer and sleeker than external frame, which gives them better "eye appeal".
Also (and this is probably a function of being heavier and Mil-spec'd), her pack actually had some problems with construction failure, while mine was pretty well bulletproof. The drawstring fabric on the top ripped where it was attached to the main pack on hers, while the Velcro height adjustment thingie on the suspension kept coming loose, while the chest strap attachment (basically a plastic clip) came off, although we were able to repair it.
I just use a half-inch wide buckled strap acrodd my chest to hold things in place. It's looped around my pack straps, so the only failure point would be the buckle. I also carry a few feet of strapping and a couple extra buckles just in case.
To sum up, I'd say that internal-frame and external-frame packs are about like canoes and kayaks, Similar things that do similar jobs in different ways. Internnl frame are like kayaks, sleeker, more specialized, a bit more finiky to load, perhaps a bit higher-performance, where external frame are more like canoes- more generalized, multi-purpose, a little clunkier, do a number of things acceptably.
My $0.02, YMMV.
There are also no zippers on the ALICE pack, only flaps and straps, eliminating a potential failure point. A zipper failure in the field is usually unrepairable
Things I noted:
My pack was lower and wider, with loads of attachment points. Hers was tall (over the top of her head, which made for some clearance problems.
Mine was wider, which also made for the occasional "wide load" srcrape.
Her pack had only a few externally accessible pockets, while mine had several (in part because I had hung some pouches on the attachment points. I really like having external pockets, as it makes it much easier to organize things.
She had to do more digging around in her main compartment, because it was so deep.
The empty weight of my pack was about 2 lb heavier than hers.
It was much easier for me to get decent ventilation between my back and the pack than she had.
Her pack seemed to be a little easier to adjust to suit her than mine. Mine took a lot of little adjustments as we walked along to get comfortable.
It is also possible to remove the pack from the frame on and external frame pack, and use it to haul somethig else. For example, on a canoe trip you could lash a wannigan (gear box) to the frame for portaging. You could also attach a Duluth pack to the frame.
Internal frame packs are definitely slimmer and sleeker than external frame, which gives them better "eye appeal".
Also (and this is probably a function of being heavier and Mil-spec'd), her pack actually had some problems with construction failure, while mine was pretty well bulletproof. The drawstring fabric on the top ripped where it was attached to the main pack on hers, while the Velcro height adjustment thingie on the suspension kept coming loose, while the chest strap attachment (basically a plastic clip) came off, although we were able to repair it.
I just use a half-inch wide buckled strap acrodd my chest to hold things in place. It's looped around my pack straps, so the only failure point would be the buckle. I also carry a few feet of strapping and a couple extra buckles just in case.
To sum up, I'd say that internal-frame and external-frame packs are about like canoes and kayaks, Similar things that do similar jobs in different ways. Internnl frame are like kayaks, sleeker, more specialized, a bit more finiky to load, perhaps a bit higher-performance, where external frame are more like canoes- more generalized, multi-purpose, a little clunkier, do a number of things acceptably.
My $0.02, YMMV.
There are also no zippers on the ALICE pack, only flaps and straps, eliminating a potential failure point. A zipper failure in the field is usually unrepairable
Pathfinder1
Well-Known Member
Barney;
I know the physics behind internal frame packs and they offer greater mobility over the "older" external counterparts but what if I don't want mobility and want extreme versatility and ability to haul in 100 pounds of gear? I want to see an internal pack that can do this.
Hi...
You're not related to Paul Bunyun, are you?
I know the physics behind internal frame packs and they offer greater mobility over the "older" external counterparts but what if I don't want mobility and want extreme versatility and ability to haul in 100 pounds of gear? I want to see an internal pack that can do this.
Hi...
You're not related to Paul Bunyun, are you?
Lamebeaver
New Member
I'm surprised no one has asked what kind of gear you're going to be hauling......
If it will fit in a big internal frame pack, that's what I'd use, but it it's awkward, and old-fashioned pack board may be the only way to go.
If it will fit in a big internal frame pack, that's what I'd use, but it it's awkward, and old-fashioned pack board may be the only way to go.
IndianaHiker
Active Member
Not a fan of external packs and as far as I am concerned you all can have them. I never found on that fight right. The torso length of the pack was never right no matter how much I played with them. The old Army Alice packs always left blisters and or rubbed my skin raw from the shoulder straps. The hip belt was at best an abomination even if I could have gotten it to put weight on my hips because of the poor fit.
I do see two points about convenience in getting to your gear and trapping heat on your back. I just make sure the things I want during the day or on top or in one of the very few outside compartments. Honestly with my newer back Dueter did a great job in the design and materials used to cut down on this a lot. The is shaped away from the middle of you back. Between that and the open foam they use on the back it helps a great deal. The open foam was a neat idea as you move you squeeze and release the foam. This means it is drawing air and releasing air as you move. Keeps the back much cooler.
The carrying 100 Lbs of gear yes a external would be the way to go. However to hell with that. I am not going into combat, I ain't fire jumping, I simply am not going to carry that much crap. If going out for so many days that I needed 100 lbs of gear would spend a day or two or three hiking into a town and getting supplies. One could get way out for several days a good deal lighter than 100 lbs with freeze dried food these days. Hell I go to have fun carrying 100 lbs of gear stops being fun about the time you put that on no thank you time to hire a pack animal for that kind of load.
Now I will admit I am biased as I am not in the least bit nostalgic about gear or anything else for that matter. I am all for what ever is more comfortable, lighter weight, or just plain makes my life, and leisure pursuits easier and allows me to get out more.
I do see two points about convenience in getting to your gear and trapping heat on your back. I just make sure the things I want during the day or on top or in one of the very few outside compartments. Honestly with my newer back Dueter did a great job in the design and materials used to cut down on this a lot. The is shaped away from the middle of you back. Between that and the open foam they use on the back it helps a great deal. The open foam was a neat idea as you move you squeeze and release the foam. This means it is drawing air and releasing air as you move. Keeps the back much cooler.
The carrying 100 Lbs of gear yes a external would be the way to go. However to hell with that. I am not going into combat, I ain't fire jumping, I simply am not going to carry that much crap. If going out for so many days that I needed 100 lbs of gear would spend a day or two or three hiking into a town and getting supplies. One could get way out for several days a good deal lighter than 100 lbs with freeze dried food these days. Hell I go to have fun carrying 100 lbs of gear stops being fun about the time you put that on no thank you time to hire a pack animal for that kind of load.
Now I will admit I am biased as I am not in the least bit nostalgic about gear or anything else for that matter. I am all for what ever is more comfortable, lighter weight, or just plain makes my life, and leisure pursuits easier and allows me to get out more.
Lamebeaver
New Member
Packboards have always been popular in remote areas, primarily for packing out game.
wvbreamfisherman
Active Member
I agree with Indiana Hiker that a pack that doesn't fit is an abomination, whether it's external or internal framed.
If my torso was much longer, the Alice pack would be extremely difficult to get a decent fit. I started my last hike with a total weight of about 48 lb (too much, really) and had no real problems with carrying the weight on my hips or abrasion from the straps.
This was the first long backpacking trip I'd taken in a LONG time, but I learned a lot and will make some changes the next time I go out. The pack really gave me no problems other then getting it adjusted right.
If my torso was much longer, the Alice pack would be extremely difficult to get a decent fit. I started my last hike with a total weight of about 48 lb (too much, really) and had no real problems with carrying the weight on my hips or abrasion from the straps.
This was the first long backpacking trip I'd taken in a LONG time, but I learned a lot and will make some changes the next time I go out. The pack really gave me no problems other then getting it adjusted right.
Newanderthal
Member
- Messages
- 903
- Points
- 18
Want to haul a LOT of weight?
Jansport Klamath 85
While conditioning I would load this thing down with nearly 90lbs of gear and climb the bleachers at the high school to strengthen my legs. 40lbs or 90, it fits snug, stays secure, and rides easy.
Jansport Klamath 85
While conditioning I would load this thing down with nearly 90lbs of gear and climb the bleachers at the high school to strengthen my legs. 40lbs or 90, it fits snug, stays secure, and rides easy.
Very few recreational hikers use an external frame any more. A buddy still has one but wants to convert to an internal. A lot of younger kids still use a frame because they can pick them up cheap at Goodwill, DI, etc. Son-in Law had one given to him by another relative, only used once. He also only used it once.
However, for some applications the external pack frame is still the best option. Unusual loads fit them well such as a quarter of big game animal. I used to use a packboard to haul a quarter of an elk out. Now I just make sure I shoot the durn thing where I can get a horse or a vehicle close enough to get it.
I don't think there is much of a difference in the weight capacity. Like Newanderthals Jansport, my kelty red cloud can haul a lot of weight as well. (A lot more than I want to carry) In fact, I think the internal handled more weight easier than my old frame but that may have been adjustment too. My old frame didn't have much adjustment, it either fit or it didn't.
However, for some applications the external pack frame is still the best option. Unusual loads fit them well such as a quarter of big game animal. I used to use a packboard to haul a quarter of an elk out. Now I just make sure I shoot the durn thing where I can get a horse or a vehicle close enough to get it.
I don't think there is much of a difference in the weight capacity. Like Newanderthals Jansport, my kelty red cloud can haul a lot of weight as well. (A lot more than I want to carry) In fact, I think the internal handled more weight easier than my old frame but that may have been adjustment too. My old frame didn't have much adjustment, it either fit or it didn't.
Davefromva
Tool-Shed
I use an external Frame on a regular basis. Its a High Sierra Bobcat 65, which cost me $95 at sunnysports.com. Kelty also makes a few of them. I have been pretty happy with it. It is perfect for my winter camping trips because I can load whatever I want to the outside of the pack. Or I can pull 4 pins and release the pack and just pack the bars how I want.
The drawback the the pack is it is not snug like an internal frame pack and will shift around on you alittle. The pack can easily haul heavy loads but I couldn't imagine why you would want to do that.
External Frame packs are very versitile packs that can be changed and customized in the field which is great for many situations. Just be prepared to sacrifice the stable and snug fit of the internal frame packs.
The drawback the the pack is it is not snug like an internal frame pack and will shift around on you alittle. The pack can easily haul heavy loads but I couldn't imagine why you would want to do that.
External Frame packs are very versitile packs that can be changed and customized in the field which is great for many situations. Just be prepared to sacrifice the stable and snug fit of the internal frame packs.
I would like to get an external pack is because of the poor organization of gear with internal frames. Every time I want to get something from the middle of such a huge pack I have to take out everything that is placed above it.
Newanderthal
Member
- Messages
- 903
- Points
- 18
Gondor, one of the great things about the Klamath is that it remedies that problem. A zipper at the bottom allows you to pull the junk from below. I kept my sleeping bag at the bottom and tarp shelter in a side pocket. I could set up camp without ever opening the top of the pack.
You can see the two zipper tabs toward the bottom left
You can see the two zipper tabs toward the bottom left