|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 21,810
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 21,810 |
It has probably been covered before, but what are the pros and cons of internal frame packs vs. external frame packs. I' always used an external frame, but before I b a new one, I want to get some opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 500
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 500 |
Yes, it's been covered so a search may help. It's getting harder to buy a good external frame backpack for ordinary backpacking. Internal frame packs have just about taken over the BP market. There's still some excellent choices in external frame packs for hunting or carrying bulky/heavy loads.
You'd have to let us know what use the pack is likely to see. To catagorize a pack as an "internal frame" pack covers so much ground as to convey almost no meaning at all. You can readily find internal frame packs that are itsy bitsy and designed for tiny loads up to packs that will control and support more weight than any person should try to carry.
The pros and cons of external vs. internal frames are easier to discuss if you tell us what you plan to do with the pack.
In all likelihood, for most uses, you'll have several good choices of different internal frame packs and very few choices for good, presently made external frame packs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,975 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,975 Likes: 1 |
djs: This post will generate some controversy, but not as much as in the past. I started backpacking over fifty years ago when the only packs available were canvas haversacks and knapsacks and frames were wooden with canvas panels. They had canvas shoulder straps and no hip belts. I upgraded to an external frame as soon as they became available. I used several varieties including "S" frames, hipwire frames, lightweight aluminum frames, and semi-rigid plastic panel frames. I managed to bust the shelf on a meat hauler frame the first time that I put an elk hind quarter on it. ![[Linked Image]](http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww288/KCKeen/Climbing/1983KCComoLakes.jpg) I am pretty set in my ways and slow to change so when internal frame packs first hit the market I thought that they were just some fad for weenies. So I didn't buy my first internal frame pack until about twenty-five years ago. Once I learned how to use it, I was hooked. I now own several internal frame packs of various size and strength and use the pack best suited to the task. I gave away a couple of external frame packs and discarded a couple more. But there are still a couple that sit in the shed gathering dust. ![[Linked Image]](http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww288/KCKeen/Climbing/1999shasta1.jpg) There is now little doubt that an internal frame is more comfortable for general backpacking specially when carrying loads less than 30#, which is the max that most modern backpackers carry. Many carry less than 20#. ![[Linked Image]](http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww288/KCKeen/PA310004.jpg) There are still some people (and I suppose there always wil be some) who have not yet switched over to an internal frame pack. To many people it seems counter-intuitive to use an internal frame pack for hauling heavy loads but when used properly, an internal frame pack is considerably more comfortable than an external frame pack even for hauling meat. It takes a while to learn to use the adjustments to max out comfort, but once you get the idea, you'll never go back to an external. The quality of your backpack will make the difference between backpacking comfort and backpacking misery. Start by eliminating everything but those packs that have the very best suspension systems on the market. Kifaru, Mystery Ranch and Osprey all make superior suspension systems. Then make sure that the pack fits you. It doesn�t matter how good the suspension system is, if it doesn�t fit, you will be miserable. Unless you are going to use the pack for a specific purpose, like ice climbing, all the other features are just whistles and bells for the tourists. All the flashy gimmicks and nifty features in the world can�t make a lousy suspension system carry well or make a poorly fitting pack comfortable. I use to think that I needed a big pack. But after fifty years of backpacking and hundreds of trips, I have learned to use a small pack and keep it as lightweight as I can. A big pack can weigh three pounds more than a small pack. Also if you use a small pack, it forces you to carry less stuff because excess junk simply won�t fit into a smaller pack. My biggest pack has a capacity of 6,400 cu.in. and it weighs 7#, but I no longer use that for general backpacking. I only use it for hauling out elk hind quarters. My general use backpack is an Osprey Exposure 66. It has a volume of 4,000 cu.in. and weighs less than 4#. It�s no longer in production and has been replaced by the Atmos series of Osprey packs. The biggest difference between internal frame packs and external frame packs is comfort. Internal frame packs balance better than an external frame pack, and internal frame packs conform to your body instead of forcing your body to conform to the pack. Internal frame packs will fit closer to your back and that reduces the backward pull of the pack so you can stand up straight. Internal frame packs have lots of adjustments and you can fiddle with them throughout the day to distribute the weight to different muscles and give other muscles a rest. KC
Wind in my hair, Sun on my face, I gazed at the wide open spaces, And I was at home.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,716 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,716 Likes: 1 |
Hey, but it reads well for the crowd that doesn't plan on shooting anything. I own four old dana packs - terraplane (internal), alpine (internal), terraframe (external) and longbed (external). All four have carried meat. Loaded with a one-trip deer/sheep plus camp load (north of 130# if you're even remotely responsible about meat salvage), there really is no contest. External in a landslide. Loaded with a half deer/sheep plus camp load (partner hunt - 90# or so), it's even money. I had both the alpine and the terraframe (frame only) with on this year's moose hunt. The pack to the river was an easy 3/8 mile on firm ground, so I tried loading the alpine with as much loose meat as it can carry. Bottom to top, 5500+ ci of meat. The 150# + load was manageable, but the subsequent 120-140# hindquarter and shoulder/ribcage loads were markedly better on the terraframe. Getting into these packs and standing up while solo was a bit of a trick... Yutzing around over hill and dale "hunting", or to concentrate gear while road hunting, then yes, something smaller will probably work. The Mystery Ranch boutique hunting daypacks that have same chassis as the big packs can actually do some good, but if you have to add any bulk (i.e. camp and clothing) to the meat and hunting gear load, you'll quicky run out of places to tie things. Better in than out. Externals have their place. That place is way back in with something really heavy to carry out. Sounds like a backpack hunt.
djs:
This post will generate some controversy, but not as much as in the past.
I started backpacking over fifty years ago when the only packs available were canvas haversacks and knapsacks and frames were wooden with canvas panels. They had canvas shoulder straps and no hip belts. I upgraded to an external frame as soon as they became available. I used several varieties including "S" frames, hipwire frames, lightweight aluminum frames, and semi-rigid plastic panel frames. I managed to bust the shelf on a meat hauler frame the first time that I put an elk hind quarter on it.
I am pretty set in my ways and slow to change so when internal frame packs first hit the market I thought that they were just some fad for weenies. So I didn't buy my first internal frame pack until about twenty-five years ago. Once I learned how to use it, I was hooked. I now own several internal frame packs of various size and strength and use the pack best suited to the task. I gave away a couple of external frame packs and discarded a couple more. But there are still a couple that sit in the shed gathering dust.
There is now little doubt that an internal frame is more comfortable for general backpacking specially when carrying loads less than 30#, which is the max that most modern backpackers carry. Many carry less than 20#.
There are still some people (and I suppose there always wil be some) who have not yet switched over to an internal frame pack. To many people it seems counter-intuitive to use an internal frame pack for hauling heavy loads but when used properly, an internal frame pack is considerably more comfortable than an external frame pack even for hauling meat. It takes a while to learn to use the adjustments to max out comfort, but once you get the idea, you'll never go back to an external.
The quality of your backpack will make the difference between backpacking comfort and backpacking misery. Start by eliminating everything but those packs that have the very best suspension systems on the market. Kifaru, Mystery Ranch and Osprey all make superior suspension systems. Then make sure that the pack fits you. It doesn�t matter how good the suspension system is, if it doesn�t fit, you will be miserable.
Unless you are going to use the pack for a specific purpose, like ice climbing, all the other features are just whistles and bells for the tourists. All the flashy gimmicks and nifty features in the world can�t make a lousy suspension system carry well or make a poorly fitting pack comfortable.
I use to think that I needed a big pack. But after fifty years of backpacking and hundreds of trips, I have learned to use a small pack and keep it as lightweight as I can. A big pack can weigh three pounds more than a small pack. Also if you use a small pack, it forces you to carry less stuff because excess junk simply won�t fit into a smaller pack.
My biggest pack has a capacity of 6,400 cu.in. and it weighs 7#, but I no longer use that for general backpacking. I only use it for hauling out elk hind quarters. My general use backpack is an Osprey Exposure 66. It has a volume of 4,000 cu.in. and weighs less than 4#. It�s no longer in production and has been replaced by the Atmos series of Osprey packs.
The biggest difference between internal frame packs and external frame packs is comfort. Internal frame packs balance better than an external frame pack, and internal frame packs conform to your body instead of forcing your body to conform to the pack. Internal frame packs will fit closer to your back and that reduces the backward pull of the pack so you can stand up straight. Internal frame packs have lots of adjustments and you can fiddle with them throughout the day to distribute the weight to different muscles and give other muscles a rest.
KC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 618
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 618 |
Vek, I notice both of the externals you mention are the Danas. Of course I've said it before, but the Dana externals are head and shoulders above any pack I've carried (lowa, kifaru, gregory, osprey) for loads over about 50-60 lbs. I wonder if the same is true of "normal" externals?
It's been a lot of years since I carried a normal external (camp trails freighter, peak 1 plastic), and I just don't remember myself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,759
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,759 |
It's been a lot of years since I carried a normal external (camp trails freighter, peak 1 plastic), and I just don't remember myself.
Both of those externals - CT Freighter and Peak 1 are pretty pathetic, even with lighter loads. I still have my old Freighter, its rotting away in the shed. MtnHtr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,860
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,860 |
KC, is that an Alpenlite frame pack?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,716 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,716 Likes: 1 |
Barney's and Dana are head, shoulders, and belly above older kelty/REI/camptrails/coleman/jansport externals. I don't think one can mention the bottom tier externals in the same context as anything you'd consider using for hunting these days. It certainly isn't difficult to procure a barney new or dana from ebay or craigslist.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,921
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,921 |
I got around ten packs laying around. Tried them all one time or another but always keep going back to my Barney's external frame with the Barney's pinnacle bag. Still my favorite. ![[Linked Image]](http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i144/bearstalker/085.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,831 |
Externals have their place. That place is way back in with something really heavy to carry out. Sounds like a backpack hunt.
HAHA oh so true. After 3 years of using a Mystery Ranch NICE 6500 pack I am heading back to a Barney's Pinnacle. For the weight its hard to beat the volume and how well they haul the 120+ loads. Sure its not quite as comfy as say an Osprey or Arcteryx with just 40-50 lbs but the amount of comfort more the internal pack offer at that load range is barley noteworthy. But load it up with over a 100 lbs and the Barney's quickly becomes more comfy for me. Even the NICE 6500 is more comfy slight with just "going in" weight but the Barney's is still comfier FOR ME when coming out with real loads. When I crunch the numbers of 10 lbs and 6500 cu in for a MR NICE or 7800 uc in and 7.5 lbs for a Barney's Pinnacle it makes it hard to say no. Yes I already have a Kifaru KU 5200, but in my testing with 100 lb packs the Barney's is more comfy than that pack anyways. Which is ok as I bought it mainly for my wife to use as she'll likely never pack anything over 75 lbs. Which means if we are coming out with a sheep I'll easily be over 120 lbs. Maybe I like to be overly optimistic in my hunting and use a pack based on the weight and comfort for the trip out (hopefully loaded down with an animal) rather than the pack comfort based on the weight going in, but I've come to the point where I'll trade not QUITE as comfy Barney's External frame pack going in over a not as comfy internal frame when coming out with an animal. Rarely do I cuss my pack weight going in. Its when I am coming out with weight is when my pack fit and function really matters to me. That said pack fit like most things takes precedence and just because external works better for me with 100-130 lb loads than internals doesn't mean externals are the only way to go. Many (most) would rather rock internals for packing out loads and I was one of them up until the end of last season with 3 different 12+ mile 100 lb extractions from the field. For backpack hunting I have found that is what works for me. For dayhunting out of a backpack (which I don't really consider backpack hunting) where I might be hauling a say a bear hide back to the truck or something then the internals are what I prefer for their lighter weight and sleeker design when hauling 75-80 lb loads for relatively short distances (3-5 miles).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,643
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,604
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,604 |
I've never had a real internal frame I thought was sufficient. In my mind most hip belts are way over padded, and that keeps them from actually gripping your hips and doing what they should.
I have a jansport external (not a D series, it's a really mini frame, with a foliage ish cordura back) that I got at a thrift store that is my favorite pack for loads in the 50 lb range and the hip belt is so minimal. I suspect I could carry 65 -70 with it. I also have a ULA epic, that is the mot comfy pack in the 30 lb range I have seen. I'm going to try to reinforce the frame and build a MR style bag for hunting, to get it in the 75 lb range.
The MR crewcab , while solid wouldn't hold on my hips since the hipbelt was so hard. I carried 110 in it and it was ok but not for me. Likewise, I briefly had the badlands ox, and frame wise it will carry the 150 or so (I put people in the sling and carried them up the stairs) but the hipbelt was to big as well, and the pack weighed closer to 8 lbs than I wanted.
IMO when a pack gets that heavy, then you really want to supplement it with a lighter pack for day hunting , then you are stuck without a way to carry the weight etc, and it becomes more of a hassle than it is worth.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,683
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,683 |
maybe it's just the way we hunt up here, but my experience dang near mirrors Vek's, bearstalker's and aklanche's. I don't have as many packs as some guys have listed on here, but I do have a MR NICE 6500, Kifaru KU 5200 (just got it and still testing), McHale ((don't recall model) and yes a Barney's that's hauled more heavy loads than it or my old body should have. if I know there's a good chance I'm going to have to haul most of a sheep and my gear off a mountain and make a 12 mile trek back to the truck, or gonna have to haul moose quarters cross country, I'd reach for the Barney's every time. maybe it's just the familiarity, but that ole pack and me are no strangers to heavy loads together. ![[Linked Image]](http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee62/1akhunter/hunting%20pics/loadedandreadytogo.jpg) have to look close to see the sheep horns lashed to the top of the frame, but they're there and lotsa meat in the pack ![[Linked Image]](http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee62/1akhunter/hunting%20pics/bringinghomethebaconwelluhsheep-1.jpg)
I'm pretty certain when we sing our anthem and mention the land of the free, the original intent didn't mean cell phones, food stamps and birth control.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,975 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,975 Likes: 1 |
KC, is that an Alpenlite frame pack? take a knee: Yes that's an Alpenlite pack. That photo was taken a long time ago, maybe in the early eightys. KC
Wind in my hair, Sun on my face, I gazed at the wide open spaces, And I was at home.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,975 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,975 Likes: 1 |
alaska lanche:
It's been a long time since I carried 100# loads in a backpack. I prefer to carry more loads that are smaller. I just don't have what it takes to do that kind of hauling any more. Getting old I guess.
KC
Wind in my hair, Sun on my face, I gazed at the wide open spaces, And I was at home.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,831 |
alaska lanche:
It's been a long time since I carried 100# loads in a backpack. I prefer to carry more loads that are smaller. I just don't have what it takes to do that kind of hauling any more. Getting old I guess.
KC
While not exactly fun many times its part of the gig that has to be be done. When you are 20 miles back making two trips often isn't an option since it would require so much longer to make two 50-60 pound loads vs. one 100-120 pound load. Like I said its not fun but sometimes needed so might as well use the 1 ton truck instead of the half ton for the trip out even though the half ton takes the bumps a bit smoother on the way in 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418 |
I'm with the guys voting for external frame. That's all I've ever used here in Ak. but my experiences pretty well mirrors theirs. The closest "experience" I've had with an internal pack was the one my partner bought. Offhand, I don't recall the manufacturer but it's one of the well known/popular ones. On our last trip into the Brooks, that pack damn near killed him. We were coming out, unsuccesfully, I might add and he was loaded down so heavily that the pack wouldn't allow him to stand upright. The entire trip he had to walk bent over. Not good. He now has a Barney's frame coming and is gonna use it on this year's trip. I won't own an internal frame. In addition, I carry my rifle strapped across the uprights of my frame. It's very easy and fast to throw off my packboard and get to my rifle should I need to. Never could understand a guy carrying a rifle in his hands in the mountains.
Just my experiences of quite a few years in the bush.
Bear in Fairbanks
"Unless you're the lead dog, the scenery never changes."
Amazingly, I've lived long enough to see a President who is worse than Carter.
And finally,
Gun control means using two hands.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,554
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,554 |
I've been using my Osprey Aether 70 for my back pack hunts and just recently picked up a Molle type meat hauler. I am planning on strapping it to my Osprey and using the frame for my day hunts. Once I connect on a ram then I will have the frame to pack out the meat, head and cape back to camp.
Last time I shot my ram I used the Cabelas Feighter version and I could not keep that heavy load on my hips and it was really uncomfortable, but luckily I only had about a mile to pack it back to the 4 wheeler. I eventually broke the aluminum frame on it and that's when I decided to try the Molle type packframe.
That's ok, I'll ass shoot a dink.
Steelhead
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 500
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 500 |
All the discussions above bring up an interesting issue. The packs built for backpacking are increasingly designed to carry lighter smaller loads than would have been the case 20 years ago. For hunters who may have to carry large loads over rough terrain, increasingly it's harder to buy a suitable pack from a mainline pack maker.
I held onto my old Kelty Tioga R until just a few years ago because it would allow me to haul big loads with low drama. It fit, the suspension was heavy duty, and the frame was very strong. I added a better hipbelt and none of my lighter packs could match it for those heavy loads. It was a pretty mainstream pack when I bought it. Nowadays that kind of load carrying capacity is hard to come by without buying from a specialty maker.
Very few packmakers ( who don't otherwise directly cater to the military and hunter market)build any kind of pack with a realistic expectation that someone will stuff 80 lbs or more in the pack and carry it.
I haven't seen many cheap packs that will take the kind of beating a hunting pack has got to take. It doesn't seem to matter what kind of frame- cheap fails. It used to be that you could buy a better pack for comparable money by buying an external frame. I don't think that's necessarily true anymore. It seems as if external frame packs are divided into the super cheap pile and then the specialty mfg packs which are not cheap at all.
It doesn't help matters that you can't just waltz down to sportmart and try on a good hunting pack or get competent help in getting the pack fitted. Even a great pack that's badly fitted will just torture someone. We've all seen the poor schmuck walking bent over because the pack is fitted or adjusted wrong.
I now use an internal frame pack for backpack hunting. Technically, it's' an internal frame design but with all of the design elements tweaked for carrying a heavy load, it's more of a hybrid. It works better on rough terrain or in the brush than my old external frame ever did. I sure don't miss the top heavy carry, the the sound of the frame scraping on stuff or the frame hanging up overhead in low brush or limbs. I don't know if it would do as well as a Barney's pack. The limit is me. My knees and ankles will pack it in well before the pack makes me suffer.
If I'm choosing a pack for ordinary hiking or backpacking, it's going to be an internal frame pack. If I was recommending a pack for someone who intends to carry heavy loads of meat, long distances over rough terrain- then I'd recommend they pick a heavy duty pack from a specialty maker who caters to hunters. And get the thing fitted correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 50
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 50 |
Some of my best backpacking buddies worked for the Appalacian Mountain Club (AMC), running the huts in NH's White Mtns. ALL of the supplies for those huts are packed in on their backs, 100-150+ pound loads and all with external frame packs.
Because the trails to the huts see so much traffic, there is plenty of room for the external frames w/out getting hung up on branches (which I believe is the only drawback to external frame packs).
In my opinion, if you are mostly hunting open country & need to carry 100+ pound loads, the external frame can't be beat.
|
|
|
|
|
546 members (270cowboy, 1minute, 2500HD, 1badf350, 280Jeff, 12344mag, 59 invisible),
2,331
guests, and
1,337
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,170
Posts18,503,120
Members73,993
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
