Pack for 40+ pound loads

I just carried 40+ pounds in my Porter over the weekend. It carried about as well as anything with that much weight ever does. The load was really imbalanced–I had two fly rods, a float tube, flippers, extra layers for staying warm in alpine lakes, and my normal gear all packed away. I'm not sure I'd say the carry was amazing, but it was about what I'd expect for a load like that (both weight and poor balance). I was more than fine with it for the 7 miles of biking and 5 miles of hiking each way.

FYI, it's a 3400 Porter with a custom version of the Ice Pack belt (which I feel has a slight edge over the standard Porter belt for carrying ability). It was made this last fall, so it's got the newer features and design.

Honestly, though, I doubt you could go wrong with any of those packs. I'm seriously looking at a Paradox Evolution or Unaweep for the upcoming hunting season, and the design of the Exped Lightning looks top-notch.

Both the Porter and the Lighting are decent packs. I ended up with a Lighting and a Porter I couldn't sell (might be open to offers on a barely used Porter)

I really think it comes down to the hipbelt. The hipbelt on the Lighting is more padded, the lumbar pad is bigger and the belt is curved rather then just angled up like on the Porter. Personally I preferred the Lighting but it probably has as much to do with body type as pack design.

Edit – If the older Porter wasn't for you I think the Lighting would be a better choice. I don't think the fit of the new Porters has changed a lot other then a longer hipbelt. The Lighting has a 24 inch frame and load lifter that actually work so I think it would take the weight off your sholders nicely.

I am biased as I have been using a Mchale since last Autumn.
It fits and carries far better than anything I have owned in the past.

I still have a UL pack for summer though.

Philip Werner at Sectionhiker.com is planning an 18 day trip through the Whites with a Mariposa. The Gossamer Gear Gorilla has nearly the same suspension, and last week I went through the St. Regis Area (around the horn so to speak) with 30 pounds. It easily carried that load (and more) across some rather difficult portages, being only a couple weeks out from "ice-out." I would visit Philip's site. Depending on weather you want to head out for two or three weeks (unsupported,) these packs are really great in the 30-45pound range. I usually use a Murmur for 1-2 weeks. provided I am just hiking. Even it will handle 25 pounds, easily.

You may also want to look into the Ultra Series of packs from Kuiu. They cater mostly to the backpacking hunter crowd, but because of that, their packs are made to handle substantial weight. Their videos show it carrying well over 100lbs on the frame. While everything is advertised in camo prints, they can also be order in a sage color if you want something more discreet. Unfortunately it looks like they're all on backorder right now.

I've recommended it a few times but I love my Arcteryx Altra 65. Fairly lightweight (for a bag of this size), amazingly comfortable, and if you climb, you likely know how good of a reputation the brand has and how well they stand behind their products. It's far from a climbing pack, but in terms of being able to carry a heavy load for a distance, it gets my pick.

I tried the lightning 45 out (in my living room) and sent it back as I didn't think it'd work for climbing. The pack doesn't become merely uncomfortable if you remove the aluminum stay, it becomes unusable. It is too stiff to climb with and basically the complete opposite of modular/strippable. I have an HMG ice pack 2400 and it's great, but I would recommend the 3400 as it only adds a few oz.

Have you looked at the new patagonia ascensionist packs?

http://www.patagonia.com/us/product/ascensionist-pack-45-liter?p=48000-0

I've had a Paradox for a few months now. I've had loads between 80 and 100 lbs. and it carries as good as anything I have owned which is a 90s Mchale and a Dana Arcflex. The waterproof bag is a huge plus. I also have a Kuiu Ultra which handles 40 lb. loads well but the Paradox is substantially better, for me, on bigger loads.

I love my GG Mariposa. It is a fantastic pack. But its limit to carry well without slipping and excessive weight on the shoulders is about 30 pounds. I love my ULA Circut. It is another excellent pack. But it also limits out around 35 or 37 lbs tops. So this year I went retro. I purchased a Kelty Super Tioga which is 5500 cubic inches and an external frame. I got it from Backcountry Edge for around $150. I've used it several times this winter with weights over 45 lbs and it handled well. I am very happy with it. However, for those doing mountaineering or bushwacking in dense forests, external frame packs have some drawbacks. The Gregory Baltoro 65 and 75 have received great reviews and rated as Best Buy from Outdoor Gear Labs. It is known for its great comfort and weight handling abilities. You might want to check it out.

Good luck and good hiking.
Rodney

I'm sorry, but the Arc'teryx Altra and the Gregory Baltoro? 5 and 6 lbs. respectively and $350-450 to boot. How is that an advantage over a 7 lb. Dana? If you're willing to drop that kind of coin, then why not save significant weight and go with a version of the HMG Porter (3400, 4400, or custom) or Paradox? You'll save at least 3 lbs. over the Dana. Or, save even more and go with the Exped Lightning.

I'm sorry, but I just can't see the use for packs that put a serious amount of weight into extra pockets and mass market features that have nothing to do with suspension and carry.

I should also add, that I plan on doing the same thing above with my Porter this weekend. We're planning on fishing another lake in Glacier's backcountry, and I have no hesitation about using the Porter again. That said, if I had a Paradox Unaweep, it might be a debatable issue. Really, you have lots of options in the 3 lb. range and below.

Clayton, comparing a 2lbs to a 5lbs bag you save a total of 1.5% body weight, essentially equivalent to what you lose when having a large bowel movement. However, if in that extra 3lbs, the load is transferred more effectively and comfortably, it may feel significantly lighter, and cause less fatigue over the same distance traveled, despite its increased weight. Ergo, a lack of net weight decrease can still yield a dramatic benefit. Comparing just numbers is like taking a drag car and a Porsche to the Nurburgring and saying the dragster has to be faster around because it has more power.

My suggestion of the Altra was just that, a suggestion. For me, it was the most comfortable bag I tried, dramatically more so than any of the UL bags I had a chance to come by. Maybe for most other people it isn't a good choice, but I had good luck with it, and thought it was worth mentioning.

You might want to check out the new Six Moons Design Fusion 65. 39oz, good size, looks beefy, $230. Not sure if 40lbs plus works, but they will let you know.

Hey, Rodney, it sounds like you have an older pre-2012 model. This verion of the Mariposa did not do well with 45 pounds. The newer versions are *much* better.

I just had opportunity to climb Mt. Shasta solo with a Cilo 45L worksack. Due to it being just me I had to carry an excessive load that included a pair or snowshoes. The pack devours gear, is relatively light, very customizable, and comfortable. I had a 46lb. load and wasn't in any real discomfort. Attaching bulky items to the outside is so easy with the Cilo packs. I had crampons, ice axe, snow shovel, snowshoes, and tent poles secured to the outer pack. On summit day I compressed it down to ~20 liters and removed the HDPE frame and stay for weight savings. It worked real well and I anticipate it will also be ideal for snow camping.

Agreed! A 45L Worksack from Cilogear sounds like it would fit your needs well.

A few things. I agree that a "conventional" pack that is 4+ pounds is probably not what I am looking for. I think there are enough sub-3 pound options that are comfy at that weight to not need to go heavier. I also don't usually take my pack ON the climb with me. Typically I have a small summit bag (I have a Zimmerbuilt for that) that works MUCH better than a compressed large bag. I have not found a large pack that climbs well, nor have I been on a route that required a larger pack. My trips are typically base camp to climb back to base camp, occasionally with a light bivy on the climb. I have a Cilogear pack, and it is my go-to ice climbing pack, but it is not as comfy as my HMG Porter. Maybe I will just have to order a few different packs, fill them up, and try them out and send back the ones that don't make the cut. Thanks for the input and suggestions. FWIW, I don't see how an UL pack like the Gorilla could be comfortable at those weights. Tolerable, maybe, but I am looking for a bit better than tolerable. I need something with a REAL frame and good transfer to a hipbelt with minimal frame collapse. Thanks again.

I decided to go with a McHale. I don't think it's possible to go wrong with a completely custom fitted pack from an artist like Dan. My wallet will hurt for awhile, though. Now to decide on the model…

McHale LBP. The Paradox packs look interesting but a McHale is the good standard.