Backpacks- Internal or External Frame?

raylaconico

raylaconico

Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
4,030
What do you guys prefer? I bought my internal frame pack in 1999 and I'd like to get a new one now. I'm thinking of getting an external frame pack. I used to go backpacking with this lady who carried an external frame Jansport backpack. Whenever we had to cross streams, I always want back and carried her pack accross because she was afraid of falling. Her pack somehow felt lighter and more comfortable than mine even though she had more stuff in it. This is why I'm thinking of buying one. I just thought I'd get some opinions on the pros and cons of each type from you guys. Also if you have a particular brand and/or model that you recommend and why. Thanks!:)
 
Check out the Kelty Super Tioga which are discontinued but still available from a few places. Approx 4950ci and really nice. I just got one on ebay a few weeks ago. Nutnfancy has a review of them on youtube as well.
 
Internal frame. Look at packs from Gregory, Mountainsmith, ArcTeryx, Deuter, Osprey, REI, etc. Internal frames carry better and closer to the body for rough terrain.
 
I've been eyeing the REI Flash 65. It only weighs 3.2 lbs. and can be made into a lighter summit pack by removing the frame and top lid.


How could an external frame weigh less with all that framing? I would look at the packs you are interested in, then compare there weight, that will simply tell you which one is lighter, the rest is in what you pack into it. Also, if you're buying from rei, they will pack one with weights for you and let you walk around the store all you want to see how you like it.
 
Ray, if you plan to stay on decent trails, an external is fine. We do a lot of climbing, scrambling and off-trail stuff, so the internal frame packs are more suited with better balance (they still need to be loaded right) and minimize the clutter on the outside. I have some higher end packs (Kifaru, Arc'Tyrx), but I've grown to love Osprey packs as has my wife. They have excellent features we both like, they're pretty light, tough and excellent suspension. I won't knock external frame packs...my deployment ruck is still an old but modified Large ALICE ruck; she's great, but they just don't balance like an internal frame. There are some hybrids out there. Kifaru and Mystery Mountain are two that I can highly recommend. If you plan to do a lot of backpacking, don't skimp as you'll being cursing it every step!

ROCK6
 
Several years ago Backpacker magazine did an article on external frame backpacks and although there aren't nearly as many choices, they found that they are really comfortable, cooler on your back because the pack isn't pressed up tight to your body and they often have lots of pockets instead of one big chamber. This can be good or bad depending on how you organize things. I think Kelty was a top choice, but it was a few years since the article.

Like Pilot1 said, internal frame backpacks are better for rough terrain and narrow trails. Externals are often wider and tree limbs seem to grab them more often. The weight isn't as low and central like most internals are so it might feel different when scrambling. Because of the way the weight is placed, they can give you a more upright walking posture which may be just right for you.
 
I stuck quite determinedly to my external frame pack when the first flush of internal frames came out. I was using a Karrimor Arctic. It was comfy[ish] with a really heavy load, the most waterproof fabric I've ever encountered, and didn't concentrate heat on my back. It was shockingly unstable though for anything other than just a head down arse up haul in a straight line. That made it very taxing at the time when I needed to taxed least.

I went through a few in the interim but I've now arrived at a Macpac Cascade that I have been using for a long time. Whilst it lacks some of the luxurious looking padding I've seen on other makes what is there works well for me. It is very stable, not cumbersome, and transfers the weight to the hips well. Actually, I find the lack of over-padding of the back a blessing. I don't get that clammy limpet stuck to me feeling as much as I have with others.

Apart from that I love the simplicity of the layout. That makes it far more versatile to me than a plethora of little pockets and blah blah. Having something that I can squeeze down, with a couple of separate pockets for critical items, that can also be expanded to huge for bulky items like rope is useful.

I love the fabric too. Only the bottom section is a double layer of nylon, for abrasion resistance, the rest is their own Aztec fabric that sheds water well.

While this is a undoubtedly a heavy pack when empty compared to others, the all important perceived weight doesn't accrue as quickly when you start to really load it as some others I've tried. This factor is more interesting to me that just weight. It's clear why they got the reputation they did Down Under as load carrying for protracted adventure. [Although I understand Macpac has been sold – could be great as in bargains for all – could have taken a QA nose dive, dunno].

Anyway, here's mine and a link to some bits about packs in general.

http://www.bushwalking.org.au/FAQ/FAQ_Packs.htm#Theory

ilkdiss8nbvxssurt35e32i0-a759.jpg

nyr46643gep7739e9-h606.jpg
 
Everything else being equal, externals arent going to be lighter than internals. Now if you are holding a $400 external and a $70 internal, there is no doubt in my mind the external materials are lighter and therefore the pack will be lighter. The point is, if weight is the only issue- then it isnt a good reason to chose an external over an internal.

If you are looking at quality external frames (of which there are few) then they will perform just as well as a good internal frame- *for some people*. This is more of a subjective issue- go try a bunch of packs and pick the one that fits right. As already mentioned, external frames hold their overall shape no matter how little is in it, and therefore can reduce maneuverability.

Newer internals also have attempted to deal with the air circulation on the back issue...

In the end, again, go try a bunch and see which you like.
 
I just recently picked up a Osprey Atmos 65. What a great pack! Lightweight, plenty of space for my uses, comfortable straps, great fit. Overall :thumbup:.
 
I used to be a hardcore external pack hiker.

A few years ago, I tried a Gregory internal frame pack, and now you couldn't pay me enough to go back!
 
Hey Ray - the latest edition of Backpacker had a gear guide - with positives and negatives to Internal and External. Let me find that for you.

I agree with Grampa (on a lot of things oddly) and I would not go back to external if you paid me. A WELL FIT backpack - however - is the trick. Make sure one fits you. I would wager the females pack WAS lighter and it probably fit you well.

Get professionally fit by a person with a TON of experience - and you will always have a good pack.

TF
 
Some of the modern externals look really great, and they are light and strong. I was thinking of switching from my internal back to an external for long trips. I like the way they sit further away from the back and let air flow through. they also usually have more pockets, and I like the outside lashing space.
 
I like both but both of my externals are heavier.

I usually take internals anymore because they are smaller than my externals and I find the larger pack I take the more tendency I have to fill all available space:rolleyes:
 
I prefer internal frame for they are very comfortable and less cumbersome however a good external frame does offer some advantages mainly more eternal storage (tie on a sleeping pad and it saves room elsewhere) but a good internal will have enough points that can support the weight/strain as well.
 
Thanks for all the input guys!:D
When I said her pack felt lighter, it was just that. It felt lighter. I know it wasn't actually lighter because she always carried a bunch more stuff than I did. I just thought that because of the pack and how it was, made it "feel" lighter and easier to carry. It was a few years ago though. I'll have to try both. I know most stores will let you walk around with a wieghted pack so I'll have to do that. Thanks again:thumbup:
-Ray
 
For stability and comfort an internal (modern frame) is far more comfortable than an external one.
 
Pilot1 said:
Internal frame. Look at packs from Gregory, Mountainsmith, ArcTeryx, Deuter, Osprey, REI, etc. Internal frames carry better and closer to the body for rough terrain.
Click to expand...

All great choices. External frames generally weigh more
 
I have always preferred external frame because it ventilates better and I overheat easily while hiking. External frame packs are generally better for regular trail use, while internal frame packs are better for rough off trail scrambling. I use a Jansport Carson now, and you will see it in action in July if you come with us.

It is hard to find an internal frame pack with the same full features as the Carson that weighs less (it is 4900 cu in and weighs 4 lb 12 oz). If you actually compare the lighter internal frame packs with the Carson, you will find that they do not have the pockets, front loading, etc. The lower weight comes at a price. And even comparing the same type of pack, the lowest weight is not necessarily the best thing to go with. Lower weight often comes at the cost of the suspension system, and the lighter packs often do not carry as well.

If you want I can bring mine over to your house so you can check it out, along with my son's internal frame (Jansport Klamath II).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top