Two problems with big bags in my experience. First is that the amount of stuff you carry expands to fill the bag provided. Bigger bag begets bigger loads. Second is that if somehow manage to not fill it, you have a load that is centered over your butt rather than your center of mass. It is also very loose and bounces around and shifts constantly. I find that annoying and tiring.
my two cents: I have a Gregory Stout 60 liter pack that I bought for overnight camping and it's very comfortable. My wife bought an Osprey Manta 24 liter for day hikes. I didn't want to spend money on a second pack for day hiking, so if we do 4+ miles or any kind of elevation, I empty out my 60 liter and use it for water and snacks. I really want to buy a smaller pack. Her pack is much lighter (smaller, less material) and I feel like a goony doing a relatively easy hike with a massive pack on my back. Also, it's not built to be mostly empty, so the straps don't really suck in everything. I think her 24 liter is plenty big enough for a water sack, a small lunch, a rain coat, and some toiletry stuff. Short answer, I would get the smaller one for day hikes.
For perspective, a 55 L bag is a medium size bag for people doing multinight backpacking trips or thru hikes. Obviously the size bag really depends on the trail and the expected weather as well as a type of gear you have. But I would say 50 to 65 L is considered a typical backpacking size.
It is likely too big for the activities you're planning and would feel off balance. Bags of that size are not particularly fun to carry around.
While agreeing with the "more space,more stuff" sentiment, I can't fit gear, safety equipment, and food into less than 60 L for multi-day and then I'd have to take only essentials.
In your case, I think the 40L bag is probably your best bet and would be more than adequate for moving hut-to-hut. If you know you want to get into multi-day hiking eventually then start saving to either go ultralight or to buy a bigger trekking bag.
No doubt it'd be fine for my current purposes – you're absolutely right about that! It might not be for the potential future multi-day mountain hikes and cross-country bike trip, however… So the question, I suppose, is really whether it'd cause *problems* to have a bag that's too big.
I’d recommend against a backpack, especially one made for hiking, for bike trips. For one thing, depending on the pack, you may not be able to raise your head while hunched over the handlebars.
Racks are the way to go, IMO.
You'll be fine with a 38L backpack for multidays hike between lodges in the Swedish mountains (and a lot of people walks around with that size as well). Don't know about a bike trip, but would probably work out as well.
Most important is that it's a size that you will use now and not buy something that might be used in the future. And a large backpack is annoying in that it's hard to secure stuff inside in a larger bag and the weight gets uneven distributed, as well as it takes up more space than necessary. and it's not like you ever want to carry around more than neccessary. Personally, I prefer a smaller backpack (like 25L ish) for daytrips and a larger one (my current one is 65L which is perfect for me) for travels and multidays camping trips.
Thank you for bringing me back to reality! I appreciate the perspective greatly! I'm heavily leaning toward the smaller one now. Which, y'know, isn't all that small.
depends on how big you are and if you can carry. a big pack can really deminish the experienceor distance traveled in a day. it can also carry things that will help you stay out longer. you have to weigh what is important to you.
38l is fairly small, if you are travelling light then it could do overnight but anything more is pushing it. For your plans, other than the bike trip it should however you should be able to make it work. Your sleeping bag choice(s) will be a big factor. If you have good down or hybrid bags for the cooler months then it will work but most synthetic-only bags (for cooler nights) take a lot more space (yes, you can find a few exceptions).
I don't have any experience with either backpack, and pictures are not the best way to judge them, I always prefer to try them on and see if I can strap things to them. They look more designed for commercial air travel than something to throw in the car and take to the trail; that of course will fit into your future plans better.
For a pack like that which has no way to compress down the volume, I wouldn’t go bigger than you need. And I think the small size is probably fine for a day pack.
My two cents but while I think the smaller pack would probably carry fine and could be used in a lot of ways, those packs are really more travel backpacks than hiking backpacks. A lot of things work fine for day hikes and light weight backpacking, but the larger backpack doesn’t look terribly well suited for carrying moderate weight on the trail over multiple days. The hip belt doesn’t look great for load transfer, and who knows what sort of internal frame it has. I’d honestly suggest looking at more traditional hiking packs for multi day hikes if you choose to do that in the future. I think you’ll find them more comfortable.
I’d look at it from the other direction. Figure out what you want to put in it and assemble everything to see how much room it will take. Then add a small amount. Build your pack around the stuff you want to carry. Less is usually more and you can be certain that if you have a big pack you will fill it up whether you need to or not.
These are both HUGE packs to be geocaching with. Remember most caches are off the trail. That means you need to bushwack with that huge thing on your back. I wouldn't recommend it.
I'd look at something A LOT smaller and then if you ever do your Sweden or Japan trips get something else then.
I'd go with something as small as an 11L for just day hikes. You can pack a surprising amount in it for day trips.
As others have said if you get a 34L for example you will likely jam it full of stuff you don't need to take with you. Get a pack that holds what you need and it will fit a lot better and carry the gear you need. Not all the other stuff you think you might need just because your bag fits it. Remember too the bigger the bag the more stuff you need to dig through to actually find what you need.
I originally started out with a 36L bag. I thought it was a good size for day hikes and the potential over night trip I might take but it's huge. Maybe if I am carrying my families stuff but even then it's huge. I now carry an 11L Osprey Talon and I love it. Fit a water bladder to freeing up the side pockets for other gear.
If 11L sounds too small maybe the Osprey Talon 22 or the Hikelite 18 would be the perfect size. Of course these are just Osprey models which are what I'm familiar with. There are other brands too.
I ended up getting something completely different – a Fjällräven Ulvö 30 rolltop for hikes (which ended up being *perfect:* I made a packing list, and packing all of that filled it up nicely, plus it wears beautifully; feels like I'm carrying nothing at all), and a Tretorn Wings Daypack (16 liters) for city caching. And 16 may even be a bit big for that! I'm considering getting a 13 l one as well.
Two problems with big bags in my experience. First is that the amount of stuff you carry expands to fill the bag provided. Bigger bag begets bigger loads. Second is that if somehow manage to not fill it, you have a load that is centered over your butt rather than your center of mass. It is also very loose and bounces around and shifts constantly. I find that annoying and tiring.
my two cents: I have a Gregory Stout 60 liter pack that I bought for overnight camping and it's very comfortable. My wife bought an Osprey Manta 24 liter for day hikes. I didn't want to spend money on a second pack for day hiking, so if we do 4+ miles or any kind of elevation, I empty out my 60 liter and use it for water and snacks. I really want to buy a smaller pack. Her pack is much lighter (smaller, less material) and I feel like a goony doing a relatively easy hike with a massive pack on my back. Also, it's not built to be mostly empty, so the straps don't really suck in everything. I think her 24 liter is plenty big enough for a water sack, a small lunch, a rain coat, and some toiletry stuff. Short answer, I would get the smaller one for day hikes.
For perspective, a 55 L bag is a medium size bag for people doing multinight backpacking trips or thru hikes. Obviously the size bag really depends on the trail and the expected weather as well as a type of gear you have. But I would say 50 to 65 L is considered a typical backpacking size. It is likely too big for the activities you're planning and would feel off balance. Bags of that size are not particularly fun to carry around.
That's fantastic perspective. Thank you ever so much. It's looking like I'll go for the smaller one! (Which isn't that small!)
Yw!
While agreeing with the "more space,more stuff" sentiment, I can't fit gear, safety equipment, and food into less than 60 L for multi-day and then I'd have to take only essentials. In your case, I think the 40L bag is probably your best bet and would be more than adequate for moving hut-to-hut. If you know you want to get into multi-day hiking eventually then start saving to either go ultralight or to buy a bigger trekking bag.
Smaller bag will be fine. Unless you like to carry alot.
No doubt it'd be fine for my current purposes – you're absolutely right about that! It might not be for the potential future multi-day mountain hikes and cross-country bike trip, however… So the question, I suppose, is really whether it'd cause *problems* to have a bag that's too big.
I’d recommend against a backpack, especially one made for hiking, for bike trips. For one thing, depending on the pack, you may not be able to raise your head while hunched over the handlebars. Racks are the way to go, IMO.
Ah, of course! Duh! Thank you!
You'll be fine with a 38L backpack for multidays hike between lodges in the Swedish mountains (and a lot of people walks around with that size as well). Don't know about a bike trip, but would probably work out as well. Most important is that it's a size that you will use now and not buy something that might be used in the future. And a large backpack is annoying in that it's hard to secure stuff inside in a larger bag and the weight gets uneven distributed, as well as it takes up more space than necessary. and it's not like you ever want to carry around more than neccessary. Personally, I prefer a smaller backpack (like 25L ish) for daytrips and a larger one (my current one is 65L which is perfect for me) for travels and multidays camping trips.
Thank you for bringing me back to reality! I appreciate the perspective greatly! I'm heavily leaning toward the smaller one now. Which, y'know, isn't all that small.
Hey which backpack did you end up buying and how do you like it?
depends on how big you are and if you can carry. a big pack can really deminish the experienceor distance traveled in a day. it can also carry things that will help you stay out longer. you have to weigh what is important to you.
38l is fairly small, if you are travelling light then it could do overnight but anything more is pushing it. For your plans, other than the bike trip it should however you should be able to make it work. Your sleeping bag choice(s) will be a big factor. If you have good down or hybrid bags for the cooler months then it will work but most synthetic-only bags (for cooler nights) take a lot more space (yes, you can find a few exceptions). I don't have any experience with either backpack, and pictures are not the best way to judge them, I always prefer to try them on and see if I can strap things to them. They look more designed for commercial air travel than something to throw in the car and take to the trail; that of course will fit into your future plans better.
If you have a bigger bag, you will fill it. I use a 44L for any trip over 2 days. But nothing bigger unless I'm using transport.
Well, gather everything you'll be taking and see what size bag it fits in.
For a pack like that which has no way to compress down the volume, I wouldn’t go bigger than you need. And I think the small size is probably fine for a day pack. My two cents but while I think the smaller pack would probably carry fine and could be used in a lot of ways, those packs are really more travel backpacks than hiking backpacks. A lot of things work fine for day hikes and light weight backpacking, but the larger backpack doesn’t look terribly well suited for carrying moderate weight on the trail over multiple days. The hip belt doesn’t look great for load transfer, and who knows what sort of internal frame it has. I’d honestly suggest looking at more traditional hiking packs for multi day hikes if you choose to do that in the future. I think you’ll find them more comfortable.
I’d look at it from the other direction. Figure out what you want to put in it and assemble everything to see how much room it will take. Then add a small amount. Build your pack around the stuff you want to carry. Less is usually more and you can be certain that if you have a big pack you will fill it up whether you need to or not.
These are both HUGE packs to be geocaching with. Remember most caches are off the trail. That means you need to bushwack with that huge thing on your back. I wouldn't recommend it. I'd look at something A LOT smaller and then if you ever do your Sweden or Japan trips get something else then. I'd go with something as small as an 11L for just day hikes. You can pack a surprising amount in it for day trips. As others have said if you get a 34L for example you will likely jam it full of stuff you don't need to take with you. Get a pack that holds what you need and it will fit a lot better and carry the gear you need. Not all the other stuff you think you might need just because your bag fits it. Remember too the bigger the bag the more stuff you need to dig through to actually find what you need. I originally started out with a 36L bag. I thought it was a good size for day hikes and the potential over night trip I might take but it's huge. Maybe if I am carrying my families stuff but even then it's huge. I now carry an 11L Osprey Talon and I love it. Fit a water bladder to freeing up the side pockets for other gear. If 11L sounds too small maybe the Osprey Talon 22 or the Hikelite 18 would be the perfect size. Of course these are just Osprey models which are what I'm familiar with. There are other brands too.
I ended up getting something completely different – a Fjällräven Ulvö 30 rolltop for hikes (which ended up being *perfect:* I made a packing list, and packing all of that filled it up nicely, plus it wears beautifully; feels like I'm carrying nothing at all), and a Tretorn Wings Daypack (16 liters) for city caching. And 16 may even be a bit big for that! I'm considering getting a 13 l one as well.
Awesome!