THE INEFFICIENT BACKPACK

[James Marco]

Yeah, One of the worst possible designs. It puts all the weight on your shoulders, spine and assorted other areas of the torso almost like being crucified. Front danglers and other pouches interfere with any climbing/scrambling. Such “tubular” designs are quite old, actually. They always create a bit of a splash and go away. Your hips/legs/feet have to carry all the weight anyway (well unless you plan on dragging a wheeled pulk all year.) I still believe that lowering the load onto your hips is more efficient than loading your shoulders and spine and hips. The parameters would dictate a hip belt as your main pack. But, these are too small, given today’s current technology. So extending up the back with a shoulder harness to stabilize a 20lb load dictates a relatively current pack design. Having a stiff backpack panel assists load transfer to the hip belt. Using a “dual-use” tenet dictates using the stiffener some other way. I use it as my sleeping pad. Once my gear is out of the pack, the pack is rolled up, slipped in the dry bag from my sleeping gear (turned inside out) and used for my pillow…again, dual use. Every piece of my gear is used over 24 hours, except my first aid kit(superglue and duct tape), a spare set of socks, and possibly my down jacket depending on evening and morning temps. Nothing left to eliminate. All I can do is buy lighter gear as things wear out. BTW, I use a Murmur as a pack. It weighs less than 12oz ounces I get rid of the sit-lite pad. The sleeping pad doubles for that, too. Not quite SUL at around 6.5 pounds, since, I usually carry a Xlight and Sven saw, too. Nice to have a little comfort and a fire every night I can.
Anyway, I also have an old neck injury that does NOT allow me to put more than ten pounds on my shoulders for more than a half hour. I would NOT use a hiking vest, though I often use my old fishing vest for SUL hikes overnight. But, I am only carrying about 6 pounds including a pound and a half of food and a pound of water.

[BCap]

It seems like everyone is now operating under the assumption that all details are known?  I’ve generally noticed that patent applications tend to obfuscate things whenever possible.  Perhaps letting Steele weigh in first might make the most sense?

[Hiking Malto]

Three pages of vague references to some revolutionary design and finally we get a sneak peak through the patent app.  I need to get back to packing up my inefficient pack for the Colorado Trail next week.  I was confident in my schedule but now that my pack is so inefficient I may need to get all new gear.  Can I get this new pack my mid next week?

[James Marco]

Malto, me too. Heading out to the NPT next week.

[Woubeir (from Europe)]

Like BCap already said, let’s first wait and let Mr. Steele first confirm that this is the right patent application.

[Bob Moulder]

It seems like everyone is now operating under the assumption that all details are known?

No offense to anyone but this is simply not something that I see myself using. As mentioned above, I have the Nathan running pack which I use for day hikes and trail runs.

And FWIW I feel the same way about Aarn packs even though I know they are fine products and have a devoted following. There are some things I don’t have to use to know they’re not a good fit for my preferences.

 

[JCH]

Like BCap already said, let’s first wait and let Mr. Steele first confirm that this is the right patent application.

Well…the patent application posted does match the description Mr. Steele provided.  And it has the name Steele on it, so unless there are 2 patents in process for a “backpack” submitted by someone named “Steele”…

[Matthew / BPL]

I like the concept of using a hydration hose with a bottle more than a bladder. I’ve DIY’ed my own setup but rarely use it and there are a couple existing products that do that on the market.

I suppose the cylinders seen in the patent application would fit some gear well but not the stuff I carry on a dayhike, overnight or multi-day trip. I do appreciate the reductive approach where the storage tubes function as “shoulder straps” as well. That seems pretty clever to me.

I’d be curious to know more about the design.

[Sam Farrington]

“Instead of complaining and assuming my intent, why don’t you just question whether or not what I provided makes sense, try my recommendations for avoiding a number of the inefficiencies and note the results for yourself.”

Water high and close to the back – Good idea. Excepting bladders, which are unsanitary as the OP states, few if any packs have this design. For ages, the hutfolk in the White Mountains have trucked heavy loads on frames which place the weight high. Disagree with those who don’t see water as heavy, if not heaviest. There is plenty of science about water consumption required for heavy exercise, and note that many if not most hikes begin with long climbs to higher elevations.

Center of gravity as close to the upper body center as possible. Good approach to an old dilemma sometimes addressed with dual packs at front and back. As a daypack, space would be adequate. But issues raised about adequate volume for a backpack apply for most if not all of us. Pack would not be great for weaker backs. Goal there is to bypass the pack by placing virtually all the weight directly on the hips over the legs. There are hip and knee replacements available, but not back ones, AFAIK. If your nickname is ‘Refrigerator,” this might not be an issue.

Weight is also centered closed to the neck, away from the shoulders. Good approach to that also. Whether the weight is primarily on the shoulders or hips, rising and falling motion during walking must be addressed. Jack Stephenson’s ‘jackpack’ sidearm design should not be confused with the Jansport and similar designs that move the center of gravity backward, and pull backward on the shoulders. The Stephenson design does not focus the weight on attachments placed on or near the sides of a hipbelt; but instead places the weight on the hipbone crests, as with most hipbelts, but without the need for a buckle pulling on the belly. There are no attachments on the SIDES of Jack’s hipbelt. And the hipbelt rotates up and down with the hips while walking.
Agree that a major improvement results with reduction of energy wasted by a pack’s inability to absorb or compensate for hip and shoulder motions created during walking.

Thanks to Greg M. for the image from the patent. Hope his will provide some reassurance to the OP that many of us have been trying to address these issues for some time. Would say to the OP that being ‘get out there’ types, some of us approach design issues less abstractly and in a more Edisonian manner, with a lot of perspiration focused on what works in practice, and what does not.

[James Marco]

“Center of gravity as close to the upper body center as possible. Good approach to an old dilemma sometimes addressed with dual packs at front and back. As a daypack, space would be adequate. But issues raised about adequate volume for a backpack apply for most if not all of us. Pack would not be great for weaker backs. Goal there is to bypass the pack by placing virtually all the weight directly on the hips over the legs. There are hip and knee replacements available, but not back ones, AFAIK. If your nickname is ‘Refrigerator,” this might not be an issue.”

Yup. Volume is a major issue for me. Food alone takes up about 60% of pack volume on a two week trip. For three weeks I switch to a somewhat larger pack at 3200ci instead of 2200. But the pack is loaded with three food bags. Each will last about a week. BTW, I agree about water weight. But any hard sided container can be painful against my back without the sleeping pad…especially so when centered.

Weak back? Well, maybe. I had back surgery last October. He removed a 3/4″ fragment pressing on my spinal chord. I can lift about 300lb for a little bit, though. Not sure what you mean about weak.

It just doesn’t make sense to put a normal hiking weight of around 15-30 pounds up high. Most of the ADK’s is hills and valleys. I LIKE weight high on level ground, but not hiking up or down or squirming around boulders or over blowdowns. Much of the weight is transfered to your shoulders and back, even carrying a load fairly low. That said, along the NCT, it would be ideal for the more level conditions there. A few climbs, but nothing more than hills, actually. Not like the cliffs, slides and rock gardens of the High Peaks of the ADKs. About 5% of the time, you are bear walking up/down something or doing borderline technical climbing.

I forgot to thank Greg myself. A good find!

[JCH]

I have never found a packing strategy that it is good for both trail hiking and scrambling.  As mentioned, on groomed trails (flat or steep), I find that packing heavy gear up top, and over my shoulders if possible, works best.  For scrambling placing the heavy gear mid-back and as close to my back as possible retains the most agility, but at the cost of not carrying as well.

All in all, like most things in life, it’s all a balancing act…pun intended :)

[Kevin B]

I think it could work as a run/fastpack vest-thing if the water was in two bottles in front shoulder strap pockets, and used the rear center area for bulkier storage (quilt, bivy, dinner food) Top shoulders compartments could carry day food packages (bars, gels)shaped to fit the curvature of shoulder top or clothing pieces like rain shell, beanie, liner glove, etc.

Seems very similar to my UD run vests but with shoulder top storage that could ‘thrust’ all over w/o compression strapping, and the biggest potential downside could be …sightlines over your shoulders being blocked by the innovative shoulder top pouching. UD puts the comparable storage areas in the expanding pockets along the ‘straps that go under your arm pit areas.

My 2 cents

[Eric Blumensaadt]

LOAD PLACEMENT:

Assuming you have a pack that fits you well load placement for heavier items like water, fuel and food generally goes close to your back and lower.

Load Placement for my Osprey EXOS 58:

1. 2 L. water bladder next to back in dedicated pouch
2. WM 3 season down bag & ProLite reg. mattress in bottom of pack
3. food bag on top of sleep system –  3 c.pot W/nested cup & bowl  on top of food
4. tent on L. side of pack
5. fuel & stove in R. side pocket
6. 1st aid, Steripen & chlorine dioxide tabs, toilet kit L. side pocket
7. bike bottle W/ electrolyte drink, map, compass, etc., etc. in front pouch attached to both lower shoulder straps, QR buckle on one side.
8. Parka & lunch on top pack pocket
9. Camera L. shoulder pouch, GPS R. Shoulder pouch

That’s about my standard pack load distribution. Note heavier Olympus TG4 camera & Garmin GPS on front upper shoulder straps & pouch W/ drink on lower shoulder strap webbing. This “front loading” helps a bit with balance and a lot with accessibility while hiking.

I’d guess an ARN pack is too hot (in front) for backpacking in the desert, IMHO. But I’ve never tried one.

[Franco Darioli]

hard to tell in most photos but there is a gap between the front pockets and the body.

Can be seen in this photo modelled by Aarn himself :

this is a team using the 22L (plus pockets) Marathon Magic . The weight of both the pack and  the pockets is on the hip belt .

 

[James Marco]

Franco, I have tried front pouches and packs very similar to Aarns. They do not work to well for climbing/scrambling/hiking in the ADKs.

[Franco Darioli]

Nothing works well everywhere…

Aarn was a climber himself, those pockets can be strapped to the side when climbing but they are not built specifically for that.

BTW, there are no other pockets that work like those, somewhat similar yes but not the same.

[James Marco]

I actually custom made a couple front pouches. The only difference was I attached them to the shoulder harness a bit higher up since I use a 1/2″ piece of elastic for a torso strap.

[Jacob]

Based on what has been posted here, I don’t think Steele’s idea is a vest; I think his idea is more like internal framed suspenders.

Imagine the tube pockets extend all the way down in the front and back to connect to a removable hip belt (designed to be worn low) that is potentially also comprised of a tube pocket. Removable stays in the back add the support we expect and transfer weight to the hip belt. Not only could the stays be adjustable in height and what not, but where the suspender straps meet the hip belt could also be adjustable so you could move the stays side-to-side, closer or further away from your spine. You could even angle the suspender straps (like a ‘V’ if that makes sense). Maybe he has an idea for removable horizontal struts of some kind. Sternum strap would be optional as well. It transforms into a vest when you don’t need the hip belt and frame.

I think there are daisy chains pictured in the patent diagram posted. With daisy chains running the full length of the suspender straps and hip belt anything that doesn’t fit in the tube pockets could be strapped to you. The heaviest items (bear can, water, etc) could be strapped with priority at the perfect height up your back. A large stuff sack could hold items like a sleeping bag, down jackets etc, just add loops/hooks to a stuff sack or get some I bet Steele will be making. Moreover, pretty much any pack accessory from any manufacturer could be strapped to the daisy chains. A clever bungee like strap system to keep it all from bouncing around could be tightened with 1 or 2 cords. Easier access to everything and easier to rebalance loads (just hook stuff in different places). Chest packs/pockets, hip pouches, trekking pole holsters, anything would work.

Since the whole bag is potentially made from just two to three tubes, it could require an impressively small and simply shaped rectangular piece of fabric to start. The bags could be made from one new-age super-fabric lined with another super-fabric and still be lightweight and maybe even affordable.

I’m with BCap as well, I think we should let Steele present his idea his way. Even if his idea isn’t Steele Suspenders I think his patent application diagram looks similar to running vests because he didn’t want people trying to steal his idea. I hope Moulder gives him the benefit of the doubt even if that is Steele’s patent.

Steele, I thought many people’s responses where genuinely funny and in good taste because they were being honest; your list of issues with backpacks is outlandish to some. Despite the tone of some people’s responses however, this thread has 92 replies as I type this. I think its clear you have struck some kind of chord with a lot of people. Stick with your idea!

[Bob Moulder]

 I think his idea is more like internal framed suspenders.

That is not mentioned in the “Claims” which is the key part of a patent.

I’m not daisy-chaining anything to my packs. Not to demean or diminish the term “OCD” but I really do abhor the notion of strapping on major pieces of gear or even having small bits of gear dangling from my pack.

But that’s me.     :^)

I’m willing to wait for this product to hit the market.

 

[S. Steele]

Jacob,

Thanks for your positive response. No hip belt intended as the pack is intended for less than 20 lb loads. The pack has ladder webbing,at the top of the pack “daisy chains” is for attachment of a sack for extended stays in the wild. The ladder webbing in front is for attaching gloves, balaclava, glasses, for changing weather conditions as well as tie down for the water hose/bib. The rear of the pack houses a bivy on one side and a poncho tarp on the other side. a balaclava, gloves and shell jacket can be located in the shoulder area for added comfort. All other gear can be stored in front where you can  access the gear as needed. one third of the load is in front while the remaining load is in the rear 1 to 1-1/2 liter water bottle, bivy and poncho tarp. When the water is depleted you have a roughly balanced load. There is no complexity to the design, it is simple, light and efficient. It is designed for light weight hiking and running. The pack is only 2 inches deep at the bivy and essentially the same overall – thin as can be and the total pack without anything in it is 7 plus ounces. In front I use plastic bottles paired together to hold my first-aid kit, fire starter, fish kit, compressed towels, stimulant of bee pollen and flares.  Two smoke bombs are paired together and a monocular round out the pairing of items. Beyond that all other essentials including food bars, water purification tabs, sunscreen, bug repelllent, flashlight, flare launcher, cell phone, etc. is stored in the front as well, all at the ready access.

A lot of speculation has followed this feed. I hope that the above has provided some clarity to yes, my patent application.

 

[Luke F]

…and flares. Two smoke bombs are paired together…

While I love a good smoke bomb as much as the next guy, what is the reasoning for carrying them while on the trail? And the flares? Are they both intended for signaling?

If I’m reading you right you mean for a stuff sack or dry bag to be added between the tubes (on top of the water container?) for light/bulky stuff for longer walks, like perhaps part of a sleep system?

[Matthew / BPL]

Stuart, thanks for explaining how you would load out your pack. I like the idea of distributing gear through these tubes.  I don’t understand how this system will provide an efficient way to carry a quilt,  pad and several days worth of food. Can you explain that please?

[Nick Gatel]

Last week I did a backpacking trip with two friends. Between the three of us we probably have close to and probably more than 100 years of backpacking experience and I would guess total trail miles in the tens of thousands.

At the end of the trip group consensus was the trip was one of the best each of us had done. The factors leading to consensus was location, solitude, weather, and the company we kept. There wasn’t any gear discussion on the trip because there were many more important things to talk about. Our packs were a version of the three bears… “a baby size pack, a mama size pack, and a papa size pack.” I don’t even know what brand one of the packs was; it didn’t occur to me to ask.

Our trail was at times faint and often somewhat difficult to find due to littlle foot traffic over the years. Blow downs and bushwhacking was plentiful enough, but not a real hinderance. Everyone was able to hike at a good pace in spite of a lot of elevation changes. No one complained about their pack and I am pretty sure no one is considering a new pack.

Pack efficiency is predicated on what you leave at home, with an eye to diminishing returns to avoid going stupid light.

[S. Steele]

Matthew: Adding a stuff sack supported by rope back to the top ladder webbing for the quilt. I question the feasibility of this unless the sack is at least 7″ dia x 14″ long. As for a pad, I enjoy sleeping under pine trees with an ample bed of needles or a soft bed of tree boughs and leaves. So, if you find a need for a pad I don’t think the pack is a practical tool. I have found that if you sleep on your side, two pieces of Thermarest z foam for example roughly 12″ X 12″ tied down to the top ladder webbing and the rear bottom ladder webs wold suffice. One piece of foam for the torso and the other for your hip and thigh. It’s enough for me for comfort. Food, pot, utensil(s) and stove are an other matter unless stored along with the quilt would present another issue. Seasonal issues are easier to deal with utilizing the pack versus going with a standard pack in late spring through early fall except in higher altitudes and latitudes.

[S. Steele]

Nick: You can mitigate the inefficiencies all you want but you can’t get away from them. Comfort, speed and endurance is what is sacrificed.

[Author]

Posts