Here at EasternSlopes.com, we do love our “monster” backpacks. When you’re carrying in multiple tents, or sleeping bags, or stoves, or whatever for testing, having a HUGE pack makes it easier, more comfortable, and safer to carry the load. Apparently, however, we’re not the only folks that like BIG backpacks. Readers tell us they use them for family or group trips, with the biggest and/or strongest person carrying extra to lighten the loads of the others. This evens out the average speeds of the group, making everybody a whole lot happier. And, multi-day trekkers (especially winter campers) who like to carry some extra gear and food for comfort tell us they like being able to stuff everything inside. The big packs balance better with everything inside, and, when the weather turns lousy, a rain cover actually works, rather than sort-of-maybe fitting over most of the pack and leaving lots of gaps for water to get in.
How big is a monster pack? The average backpacker is told that a 60L pack is a “multi-day” pack. We don’t agree; our bias is always toward having a larger pack with a better suspension that’s better balanced. We’ll carry two more pounds that way rather than be a little lighter and unbalanced…at the end of the day, you’re a lot less tired with a load that sits correctly over your natural center of gravity and doesn’t threaten to pull you over sideways when you duck under an overhanging branch. So, for us, 70, 80, 90L packs are all good. But the REAL monsters start at 100 liters. They’re few and far between, but they’re some of the most useful things we own.
But then appeared the Bergans of Norway Alpinist 130 Backpack ($449). Yes, that’s 130L, or almost 20% larger than any of our other monsters! To put that in perspective; we found that a 36L pack can easily work for ultralight overnights. That’s not all that much more than the extra space in this pack!
So, of course we had to try it. And we got the shock of our lives. Publisher David Shedd, a “strong like ox, dumb like ox” workhorse, was the first to take it out, loading it with over 100 pounds to carry gear into a fall group basecamp. He quickly found out that there’s a BIG difference between a 90-pound pack and a 100+ pounder. He couldn’t get it on and stand up without help! Once on and adjusted, however, he found that the pack made the load ridiculously easy to carry; no back strain, no neck strain, no sore spots on his hips or shoulders the next day. That’s unheard of in our experience; with a load that large, no matter how good the pack is, we always feel it the next day, but all he had was tired quads.
As the winter rolled on (or, in the case of this winter, OVER us), the reports came back in; universally, testers raved about the fit and the comfort of the Bergans 130 for carrying large loads. Of particular note was the well-designed “head notch” that allowed the load to be pulled in and aligned more with our bodies’ center of balance; it significantly reduced the tendency of the pack to pull us backward. With the relatively narrow overall shape of the pack, it basically became an extension of our spines…brilliant!
However, with that narrow form came the one drawback of the pack; it’s TALL. In order to create that much space without going wider, Bergans had to build a skyscraper. That height, in fact, is what first gave publisher Shedd the problems; it wasn’t so much the weight that he couldn’t get on his back, it was getting the correct leverage to get it vertical and on without help. That’s a solvable issue (especially since it’s pretty unlikely that anyone is going to be carrying a load like that when they’re going solo). The bigger problem is using the pack on narrow trails, or in the backcountry; it catches on every overhanging branch. We’re used to ducking a little lower under fallen trees when we have on a pack, but we had to duck a LOT lower with this beast.
But, that didn’t keep our testers from requesting the pack for big trips. We learned to get help from our companions (who were carrying lighter packs, of course) when we had to navigate overhanging limbs…”Duck about 2 more inches, you’ll be fine!” It was a small price to pay for making one trip into a basecamp instead of two.
Bergans didn’t skimp on features, either (although we’d love to see a zippered camera pocket on the hipbelt). One that we REALLY appreciated was the included rain cover. With a pack this large, we’re not sure that any of our usual Outdoor Research or Sea to Summit pack covers would fit. Given that the pack is so monstrously tall and narrow, we didn’t bring it into our tents at night, either. It would be like sharing the tent with another person! Instead, we put the rain cover on and just let it sit outside, regardless of the weather. It actually became a handy storage area for the stuff we didn’t need all the time; stuff it in, put the cover back on, and everything was protected and out of the weather.
Another highly acclaimed feature was Bergans’ take on the “mini-pack” that seems to be a standard feature on most larger backpacks these days. Most of todays’s large packs have a removable top lid pocket with a hipbelt so that it can work as a lumbar pack. They are always small, usually a pain in the neck to get off/on the pack, but better than nothing. Mountainsmith has had an integrated daypack as part of the strap system on many of their packs, which is a better solution, but still pretty small. Bergans? They created a decent sized daypack by having the large side pockets zip off and zip together. Better still, they not only gave it shoulder straps, but a hip strap. It became a favorite for carrying lunch on XC ski or snowshoe excursions from base, and solved the problem of carrying lunch, fishing gear, and bug spray on backcountry fishing expeditions. Aside from looking a bit like you’re wearing your lungs on your back, it’s a functional solution; certainly the best we’ve found.
Bottom line: we simply have never found a pack that allows us to carry this much weight this comfortably. Period. It’s not cheap, but the value is there, from design to materials. You need to evaluate YOURSELF to see if it’s for you; carrying this much bulk and weight requires you to be in good shape, be strong, and have very good boots to protect your feet and ankles. And, prepare to have a friend help you put it on when it’s fully loaded; because of the leverage it can produce, you could hurt your back before you even get started. But once it’s on…you’ll be amazed at how much you can carry!
Hi,
Thanks for your review of the Alpinist 130L. I’ve been in the market for a new pack since mine fell apart on my last trip of the season last September. I’ve routinely carried an extremely heavy pack (my first aid kit comes in at 15 pounds on long trips), and I’ve had a difficult time choosing a new one. My old pack was a Lowe Special Expedition (7300 cu in) that only lasted 29 seasons (guiding in the Arctic). Now to decide between the 130 and the 110…