Giant-ass expedition backpack (>100L) recommendations?

that guy named sebwrote:

Haul bags can carry up to 45kg reasonably well.

If you actually need to carry huge loads look at hunting packs. The Stone Glacier Terminus 7000 comes up as comfortable up to 150lbs according to one review. 

Backcountry hunters carry loads that climbers couldn't imagine. 

Yeah I have heard amazing reviews for the terminus line, and they are reasonably light and up to 140 liters

Well, okay, as someone who.has given birth, how that weight is carried is hugely noticeable. Babies are far easier to haul around inside, than out (although maybe awkward as hell at 9.5 months) even though that's a lot less weight, as a newborn, than at 9 months. And, children have been slung on hips since hips were invented, so I'd consider that validation for getting the packs with weight distribution praised. I think that's the criteria for any pack, but geez, if you've bagged an elk or something, then even more so?

I'm still curious just what sort of objectives require the weight, though? Just a long time out, so lots of food and such in addition to gear? Or does this get into winter type 2 fun? I mean, I lived with a photographer for 40 years, so I understand the huge amount of extra stuff for Jimmy Chin sorts of things, but otherwise?

Remember, I'll never get to do any of this, EVER, so don't yell at me for being interested.

Thanks! Helen

I recommend you look into the virtues of alpinism, Hoss.  

Old lady Hwrote:

Well, okay, as someone who.has given birth, how that weight is carried is hugely noticeable. Babies are far easier to haul around inside, than out (although maybe awkward as hell at 9.5 months) even though that's a lot less weight, as a newborn, than at 9 months. And, children have been slung on hips since hips were invented, so I'd consider that validation for getting the packs with weight distribution praised. I think that's the criteria for any pack, but geez, if you've bagged an elk or something, then even more so?

I'm still curious just what sort of objectives require the weight, though? Just a long time out, so lots of food and such in addition to gear? Or does this get into winter type 2 fun? I mean, I lived with a photographer for 40 years, so I understand the huge amount of extra stuff for Jimmy Chin sorts of things, but otherwise?

Remember, I'll never get to do any of this, EVER, so don't yell at me for being interested...

As a starting point, to give you some perspective -- I would probably carry ~40-45lbs on a week-long summer California backpack, including food & a few liters of water. I'm not car camping, but it's not reallt deliberate UL, either. My FA & emergency kit is beefy, and I need a hefty sleeping bag & mat to avoid locking up everything connected to my left sciatic nerve. My base weight is just kinda... Normal, I guess?

But I haven't done a plain square backpacking trip like that in years. I've moved on to some more ridiculous stuff:

 • I have helped an astrophotographer friend carry 30lbs of camera gear... up a roped technical route to a 12k' summit... In Winter.

 • Did you know that it's illegal to take water from any natural source inside Joshua Tree National Park? They have a few plumbed campsites at Cottonwood, but every other legal water source is either outside the park, or you hump it it yourself... A person under high exertion needs about a gallon a day. How many days of water can you carry into the deep backcountry, scrambling up & down canyons in the Coxcombs or the Little San Bernardinos, or camped at the edge of the Wonderland's restricted day-use only zone? For every additional 8lb you can figure out how to carry, you gain the privilege of an extra day out there.

 • Do you visit places in Winter that are 3-4 days from the nearest Winter trailhead? On top of your base weight, you'll need heavier clothing, heavier sleeping system, heavier tent... More fuel & food, and maybe even more water so you don't have to stop & melt snow in your stove so often... You can ski it, but that means also adding the weight of skis, bindings, boots, poles, ski cramps, skins, helmet, goggles, etc. God forbid it's on deep fresh powder, and you need those fat (heavy!) 105s so you're not sinking up to your waist with every kick.

 • How about a serious technical route, deep in the wilderness, that merits real protection? Harness, helmet, rope, snow pickets, trad rack, ice tools, screws, AID RACK! etc... Unless you decide to free solo it...  Now for me, I'll figure out a way to carry the extra weight, rather than put my life at risk. I also understand that it's a free country, and a lot of people do rationalize that tradeoff -- but I think those people should probably at least consider packing clown paint, so that their outsides can better reflect their inner ridiculousness.

Each of these examples could blow your gear weight up to 60+ lbs, depending on the particulars, and maybe how much gear you can share across a bigger team.

It gets even heavier when you combine multiple complications into one trip -- deep backcountry aid climbing on undocumented routes, or a Winter multi-pitch climb with a long ski approach.

This past Winter/Spring in California, we've had to contend with much longer approaches, after a bunch of public agencies gave up on plowing the mile-deep snow filling our mountain roads... They didn't have enough snow plows to make a dent in it, so they just prioritized the main highway arteries. Some of our approaches added 10-20 miles of road skiing.

Or I guess you could just not go on these nutty trips -- keep everything simple, easy, and light on gear weight. That's a perfectly valid attitude that I can respect -- even as I'm packing my ski pulk and dreaming about what I'm gonna name all my sled dogs.

Anyone try SWD big wild before? Does it suitable for big load? 

Ryan Lynchwrote:

As a starting point, to give you some perspective -- I would probably carry ~40-45lbs on a week-long summer California backpack...... 

It sounds like you need a few different backpacks. 

that guy named sebwrote:

It sounds like you need a few different backpacks. 

Right now, I've got eight packs... and there are times when it doesn't feel like enough.

Jimmy Strange wrote:

It’s standard thinking that 10-12 days winter or big alpine gear weighs 25-30kg each for a team of 3, filling an 80-90L pack.

That makes sense, if you can sucker two friends into that kind of trip.

Side note, have you ever tried to figure out the logistics for one of those as a solo trip? I don't rope solo outdoors for other reasons (safety) but it's a neat planning exercise.

Besides having to carry all of the gear by yourself, your climb will probably also take longer -- which means even more food & fuel weight.

I've heard of hunters and soldiers carrying >100lb loads on foot & on skis in the mountains... I think the heaviest I ever seriously tried was ~80lb, but under my Xenith it felt like I could barely breathe. Maybe it works better with a fancier pack -- or they just train up to it, little by little?

Anyone remember the Dana Designs Astralplane? It was like 7000 cubic inches and pretty well regarded. I had a smaller Dana, the Glacier, which carried heavy loads very well. I think Mystery Ranch (mentioned up thread) was started by the same dude, Dana Gleason. 

McHale packs are the best load carriers in the world.  However, they are expensive and take a long lead time to purchase.   I have a couple of McHale packs.  Really great for truly heavy loads.

https://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/index.htm

For off-the-shelf packs, I recommend the big packs from Seek Outside.  Not quite to the level of the McHale, but very effective at big load hauling.

https://seekoutside.com/goshawk-6300/

Jimmy Strange wrote:

Solo would be add about 20%.

An optimist, eh?

I think it'd vary considerably. Putting numbers on it assumes a lot -- and you know what they say about assumptions.

Soldiering loads are often very heavy but to different equations, both hypothetical and actual. 

Not sure what you mean -- having trouble parsing your sentence.

I wasn't speaking to *why* those folks carry such heavy loads -- only that I've been told that they do manage to carry extraordinary weights, at times, for long distances on foot.

Balewrote:

Anyone remember the Dana Designs Astralplane? It was like 7000 cubic inches and pretty well regarded. I had a smaller Dana, the Glacier, which carried heavy loads very well. I think Mystery Ranch (mentioned up thread) was started by the same dude, Dana Gleason. 

Most comfortable huge pack I ever carried was an Astralplane. I can’t believe no one selling packs today has ripped off the Arcflex suspension design, it was incredible.

I’d recommend a used one BUT… almost every Dana pack I’ve seen from that era has a waterproof coating that is turning sticky and stinky. It’s a huge bummer to see perfectly functional packs become unusable just because of the failing coating. 

James -wrote:

Most comfortable huge pack I ever carried was an Astralplane. I can’t believe no one selling packs today has ripped off the Arcflex suspension design, it was incredible.

I’d recommend a used one BUT… almost every Dana pack I’ve seen from that era has a waterproof coating that is turning sticky and stinky. It’s a huge bummer to see perfectly functional packs become unusable just because of the failing coating. 

Aren’t all the big mystery ranch packs based on the astralplane?

sticky packs= polyurethane hydrolysis, not exclusive to Dana at all.

Didn't mean to imply it's a problem exclusive to Dana. Happens to a lot of packs of that age and it's something to check carefully before buying an old pack.

The Mystery Ranch internal frame system is called "Astral Frame" but is very different from the old Dana ArcFlex system in the original Astralplane pack.

Thanks, Ryan, and others!

Really, we're talking type 2 fun, or, professional (soldier, geez, ammo and arms also), or....

My own son, dunno why I forgot. SAR guy. That pack carries enough to fully take care of the SAR individual for several days in the field, with winter or summer pack variables, then the additional stuff that they add on, depending on the mission, and who is tasked with which parts of that mission, and what team they are on.

Rescues, or recoveries, it's a lot of special equipment on top of that, and inconvenient locations too, which is why SAR is dispatched, challenging conditions, terrain, weather ....

Anyway, thanks much! It's always interesting, all of this.

And, really, is there any such thing as too many packs???

Best, Helen

Old lady Hwrote:

...

And, really, is there any such thing as too many packs???

NO... And you may also need a ski pulk, jussayin...

You've gotten some solid recommendations, but only replied with snarky answers and offered no thanks for the people who've tried to help you. 

Why not shut the thread down at this point? Are you just keeping it open to make more attempts at being witty while pissing off the ones with real experience who have tried to help? 

Its obvious this youth is arrogant, ignorant, and inexperienced.  We've all been a couple of those things.  I dont think anyone is taking him very seriously.  There is knowledge of human psyche and interaction to be gained, and the entertainment value of a bum fight to be enjoyed.  

I am still curious to hear a specific objective for a pack over 100L.   

NateCwrote:

You've gotten some solid recommendations, but only replied with snarky answers and offered no thanks for the people who've tried to help you. 

Why not shut the thread down at this point? Are you just keeping it open to make more attempts at being witty while pissing off the ones with real experience who have tried to help? 

Thank you, NateC, for pointing that out. My apologies for offending you.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE for your ideas, recommendations, and warnings. I'd never heard of some of these brands before, so your replies have really opened up a lot of possibilities.

(Nate, I'm not sure what you mean by "shut the thread down" ... Do people generally lock their threads, after a certain point, in order to stop the conversation?

I figured it wouldn't hurt to leave the conversation open -- but if that's what's expected around here, I don't really care either way.)

Ryan Lynchwrote:

Thank you, NateC, for pointing that out. My apologies for offending you.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE for your ideas, recommendations, and warnings. I'd never heard of some of these brands before, so your replies have really opened up a lot of possibilities.

(Nate, I'm not sure what you mean by "shut the thread down" ... Do people generally lock their threads, after a certain point, in order to stop the conversation?

I figured it wouldn't hurt to leave the conversation open -- but if that's what's expected around here, I don't really care either way.)

Locking threads is lame and selfish, imo, as there is still other people who may be having conversations, even years later, on a topic, even if the OP never shows their face again after the first post, lol!