[at-l] Need Help Choosing Backpack for AT

[thornel@attglobal.net (W F Thorneloe)]

Those are good points. The problem I see for most hikers is that some store 
clerk gets excited about getting a fat commission and sells a newbie some 
bullet proof heavy monster backpack suitable for carrying a Minuteman 
missile. They leave the store with $400 worth of 9 pound pack, which will 
turn into 60 pounds if they fill it up with gear. If you can talk a newbie 
into buying a pack without "features" and "bells & whistles," you are a 
better man than me. I like to encourage folks to get together with another 
hiker - since we all seem to own at least 2-3 packs. At the very worst, 
most folks can find a place to rent or borrow a pack for a weekend.

This gives a newbie the chance to carry too much for a weekend, and 
reevaluate what belongs in their pack as well as how little/much the 
features really mean.

OrangeBug

At 09:54 AM 4/2/2002 -0600, Christopher Willett wrote:
>A slightly different opinion.  I think there are some reasons for
>buying a pack first and then the rest of your gear.  The first is
>that most people tend to fill the available space in their pack.
>This is both good and bad as a big 7000 ci, 70 lb pack on the
>AT might indicate.  But, if you get a 3500 ci pack, even if you
>fill it, it won't be super heavy (assuming you leave the cast
>iron skillet at home).  Second, have a good cook system, sleeping
>bag/pad, tent/tarp/bivy, and nifty raingear is great, but without
>a pack, taking such things on the trail might be a bit challenging.