1

I use a travelpack similar to the Osprey and none of them are as comfortable as a regular backpack. If you're only going from train to hostel, they're great but for wearing for more than a mile, they don't work very well. The best one, in my opinion, is the MEI Voyager. It has a real suspension with stays and a real hipbelt that, with the stays, puts the weight on your hips. If you plan very much hiking, I think you need a pack that was intended for that. Good luck in your search.

2

I have a 35L backpack and it's great. I travel for months at a time with it.

A 35L will meet any airlines carry on requirements (as long as you don't fill it with bricks) and is light enough to be very comfortable.

Mine is a Kelty Redwing, but pretty much any 35L will do.

Good luck.

3

Unless you need to carry a spare suit and shoes with you I would not say that somebody contemplating getting a 46 liter pack is "an extremely light packer"... I just came back from 2 week Middle East trip with EVERYTHING stuffed into a 24 liter pack, including a system camera with 3 lenses and a messenger pack, as I was allowed only one piece of luggage, under 8 kg. It was 7 kg.

Look at real backpacks under 35 liters, Osprey Stratos 34 is our family favorite.

4

We've carried Osprey Kestrel 32's all over Europe for as long as 6 weeks at a time.

5

And check (if possible with some real weight) what it feel to YOuR back, not everybody"s.

6

We have a Porter 46, a NF Terra 45, and NF lite 30L and a Gregory 24L. The 46 is not as comfortable as the 45L, but it all depends on how much you will be carrying it ..... around the city etc, fine .... long hikes, not great.

Petrus .... I don't doubt you ...... but you seriously packed everything into a 24L? What did you take? I think I pack a minimum ... but no way would I fit into a 24L. I guess it depends on activities. Usually I do hiking etc...... just curious.

(I can usually get the 45L on as carry-on)

Edited by: DubinNYC

7

Petrus .... just checked out your link .... impressive.

I'm definitely going to reevaluate my packing ....... but only one pair of shoes? As we hike a lot, we bring rain jackets, sometimes pants, and fleeces for the summits .... so sometimes we bring extra stuff that we only need for specific activities. Also ... nice to have room for souvenirs etc.

Anyways ..... food for thought..... thanks

8

If one committs to packing very light certain sacrifices have to be made. Last year I spent three months traveling around the Middle East. The two previous years I spent months traveling through India and about ten countries in Central / Eastern Europe.

On each of those trips I took only the one pair of shoes I was wearing. I purchased a light hiking type shoe that versitile enough to wear in all terrain and weather. For me it worked fine. The value of always traveling around with a small, light pack far outweighs the occasionally inconvenience of not having a thing or two I might like at the time.

9

While I agree that travel packs are rarely as comfortable as backpacking packs (honestly, design fail. Thinner straps cannot save that much weight) I recently acquired Osprey's new Farpoint 40 ( http://www.moosejaw.com/moosejaw/shop/product_Osprey-Farpoint-40_10198017_10208_10000001_-1_ ) and I must say, I'm in love.

I spent HOURS prowling the interwebz looking for the following:
1. maximum carry-on size (I use it a lot for business trips, when I'm earning the dollas to pay for my travels. For casual travel, I also love the REI Overnighter, though it lacks a hip belt http://www.rei.com/product/827994/rei-overnighter-pack)
2. comfortable, zip-away hip belt/suspension (oxymoron?)
3. Panel loading (I am far too disorganized for a top-loader)

This bag fits everything, I mean everything. It's actually a problem, I always am tempted to stuff 'er like a Thanksgiving turkey, but I never can!
It also has outside pockets, an internal FRAME! which makes it soso comfy, lockable zips, tablet/netbook sleeve, a decent compression (though the external's not as good as the Porter 46, I am willing to sacrifice for the internal compression ). And the bag itself is so light!

Some things I preferred about this bag over the Porter 46, which I also considered:
1. organization--the way I pack, I have a "clothes compartment" with internal compression and an "everything else" compartment that really helps keep things in place. The Porter made me worry that all my stuff would fall straight to the bottom in a black hole of change, lint and dirty underwear.
2. comfort--this has a frame, whereas the porter's foam back would buckle against your back if packed too heavily. Plus the hipbelt is far more comfortable (padded, not just fabric).

I haven't had it long and have only taken it on a few short trips to Napa wine country/Monterey, so I can't speak to its durability, but the Osprey brand is generally well respected.

Let me know if you have any other questions--I haven't seen any reviews for this bag on the internet and bought it rather nervously--but it's a lovely creation!

10

In 11 responses I don't see where anyone has actually addressed the carry-on issue.

First, carry-on has THREE factors to consider. Size restrictions, weight restrictions and contents restrictions.

Size wise, some airlines require that you meet EACH dimension requirement and others only require that the total dimension when length, width and height are added together be met. A typical total dimension is 45 inches and many 35 L packs do not meet that. Limits as low as 39 inches exist(Pacific Air). So any comments that anything will meet any airline requirement is foolish. You must check each airline individually as there are great variances in their requirements.

Weight wise, again, there are great variances with limits as low as 5kg/ 11 lbs. Here is a decent list of both dimension and weight restrictions. http://rickseaney.com/airline-carry-on-baggage-chart/

Contents wise, today's strict rules regarding what you can carry on to a plane make it difficult to travel with just a carry-on bag. Restrictions again vary a great deal and at a moment's notice. A restriction for liquids to be less than 100ml for example is common. Here is an example from the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority:
"Containers of liquids, aerosols or gels in your carry-on must be 100 ml/100 grams (3.4 oz) or less. All containers must fit in 1 clear, closed, resealable plastic bag no more than 1 litre (1 quart) in capacity."

The OP asked for answers to his question, not, 'What is YOUR favourite pack?'

The answer to the question is that you must check the carry-on limits of each airline and each countries airport security authority. There is no one size fits all answer.

11

I now have a daypack (24-34 liters) and a small messenger pack for cameras etc. I have always been able to take them both as carry-on, or once when flying with "absolutely only one piece" airline I was able to stuff also the messenger pack and its contents into the daypack for the flight. If, for some reason I could not take both, I have all valuables in the shoulder bag and check the daypack as a checked baggage.

I do not really see the 100 ml liquid limitation at all, what do I need to carry in big bottles that I can not get at the destination? Beer?

12

The 100ml doesn't bother me either Petrus but I believe it is an issue for a lot of people. A 100ml bottle is around 3 oz. and that's not much in terms of shampoo, shaving cream, hair gel, the list goes on and on. Nor can you take multiple containers of the same thing if they must all fit inside a 1 quart ziploc bag.

But the 100ml rule was only given as an example of a typical restriction. You can't even carry a little key chain size swiss army knife on board. I've had one confiscated. I've also had the 'guts' taken out of a Zippo lighter and confiscated. They let me keep the outside case. LOL

The reality is that air travel is becoming more and more restrictive every day. We can argue it is for our own good or whatever but it is only going to become more restrictive as time goes on and some of those restrictions are going to apply to carry-on. I'm sure there are discussions going on everywhere about how to stop ALL carry-on.

For now, the 3 limitations are size, weight and contents. Not arguable. Sometimes you can get lucky and they don't check exact size and weight, sometimes you don't get lucky and you have to check that 35L bag. No way to know for sure but no way to know that the OP's criteria of "must be able to carry on" will be met unless it is down around 20L and weighing under 5 kg. loaded. If carrying any possible restricted items inside, be prepared to have them confiscated or be forced to check the bag.