Lightweight Expedition Pack

The HMG 4400 series is a bit under 80 liters, but still plenty big and spacious. The Paradox Unaweep is available in 4800 cubic inches which would be more than big enough, but if you're just looking for lots of space and not carrying heavy loads the suspension is probably overkill.

I just chose the Seek Outside paradox 4800 for two weeks in Alaska. They also offer it in a 6300 size but the 4800 is pretty big.

Was just looking at these recommended packs and it looks like they're all external framed instead of internal frame. Or am I missing something? Sorry for being such a newbie.

Eric

internal framed packs don't have as much room as external framed backs because the frames take up room…internally. Love my Seek Outside Unaweep.

They are external frame packs, but a new evolution of external frame packs that fit close to the body like an internal frame.

In recent years the line has been blurred between internal and external frame packs with packs like the Exped Lightning, Osprey Exos Series, Z-Packs Arc Series, etc all technically having the frame external of the pack.

These are not the external frame packs of yesteryear that fit very rigid (not that there is anything wrong with that). For that "style" external frame pack, the Luxurylite is more traditional in its frame style.

The Stone Glacier 5100 would be worth considering as well Eric.

Another vote here for Hyperlite Mountain Gear (HMG) 4400 series packs. The Porter used to be their beefiest pack, but now all of their 4400 packs have the same belt, stays ('frame'), framesheet, and harness. Really nice packs and not external frame at all.

Check out the Southwest and Porter – I'd recommend the black 150D cuben instead of the white 150D – just ask for it since it's the same price.

hyperlitemountaingear.com

I will check that pack out: And thank you all for the education with respect to external frame packs. There is much for me to learn for sure!

Eric

A shameless plug.

I'm selling a like new HMG Porter 4400 – see post below:

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=105580&skip_to_post=891857#891857

Sorry Eric you don't have PM set up or I'd have sent you a PM.

White (or other light colored packs) do get dirty and that bothers some people but black packs get hot in the sun. The only reason this is a big deal is they melt chocolate etc easier. I used to have a black pack and chocolate would melt at 60*f in it. Not so with a light colored pack.

Get real Belgian chocolate (higher cocoa-content). :-)

Seekoutside Unaweep and evolution are both the most comfortable packs I have ever used.

Compressed for a day hike

"Seekoutside Unaweep and evolution are both the most comfortable packs I have ever used. "

Me too

Almost no difference between black and white packs for heat retention.

Lol

"Almost no difference between black and white packs for heat retention.

Lol"

Isn't it the case that white reflects sunlight, while black attracts it?

When my dog lounges in the sun the white parts of her coat are cool to touch, while the black patches are very hot.

My pack is now black. Was green. No noticeable difference. Fabric does not retain heat like flesh or metal. Black makes the best shade. Any who, enough drift.

Maybe its me but I tend to defer to scientific logic over dogmatic pronouncement. Black does absorb more solar energy than white, by no small measure. The laws of physics still apply – even here. Smiles.

Oh . . . I can also give a very hearty +1 to the HMG Porter 4400. I regularly haul 50-60 lbs in it. It now has many miles in it without a flaw, other than lots of dirt stains.

Derrick

Derrick, I warrant you Sir to complete the scientific method for BPL to determine whether black pack fabric is significantly warmer than white and whether that affect its contents, the wearer, or my chocolate.

Yes Monkey but by how much? And will you notice wearing the pack?

I think not.

I recall this topic coming up in a recent thread… maybe it was the ZPacks Arc Haul since at the time only black dyneema was offered. Long story short, users with black packs did not notice any difference with a black pack in regards to contents, and I think it did in fact have to do with chocolate and whether or not it would melt. Fabric temp will be higher of course, but it apparently doesn't matter very much to the contents and there is also a layer of CF inside in the case of HMG packs.

It is also easier to see inside the pack if it is white. Easier to find stuff

See also Cilogear, although it may be just a little bit outside of the desired financials/size requirements.

Thanks again everybody for the additional suggestions. I think what I am going to do for now is hold on purchasing such a pack until I actually get a chance to see if my current Osprey Atmos 65 does the trick or not. No sense in purchasing another bag if current equipment can do the job.

Sorry for having taken up everybody's time on this post. It has been informative and opened up my eyes to new possibilities though

Have a great rest of the weekend folks.
Eric

Eric,

1.Try putting some aftermarket side pockets on your pack. This can add up to 1,000 cu. in. You may need to buy or make some narrow webbing and buckles to strap the pockets on the pack.

2, I think the Atmos 65 has bottom straps like my EXOZ 58. Put your bulky parka in a waterproof roll top stuff sack and strap it on the bottom. If it has no bottom straps buy some 1/2" webbing and matching QR buckles and have a shoe repair or awning shop sew them on where you'd like them.

The Atmos 65 will haul at least 50 lbs. and that is beyond what most of us are willing to hump.