We subjected these packs to rigorous use while hiking, climbing, bushwhacking, and snowshoeing throughout the challenging Washington Cascades, Seaward Kaikoura Range in New Zealand, the Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia, and the Eastern Sierra. They were employed daily to transport our belongings around town and to climbing crags or gyms. We compared multiple packs under demanding conditions to determine the best performers. Additionally, we employed rigorous scientific methods to measure and test these bags side-by-side, as explained below.
Comfort
We utilized each pack in various outdoor activities, including hiking, running, scrambling, climbing, bushwhacking, and snowshoeing. During these activities, we assessed how comfortably these packs carried loads and distributed weight through their suspension systems. This involved loading the packs with weights up to their maximum recommended weight, usually 20 or 25 lbs. For larger packs designed to carry heavier loads, we went backpacking and even carried several dozen pounds of rock samples out of New Zealand's mountains (one of our lead testers is a geologist). While pushing these packs slightly beyond their intended use in aerobic activities like bushwhacking and running, we evaluated how well their suspension systems ventilated and allowed our perspiring backs to stay cool. We conducted these activities with others, frequently lending out packs for them to evaluate how well they could adjust to varying torso sizes and to obtain other perspectives on their performance.
Finally, we developed a standardized calisthenics test to rigorously compare comfort levels. We loaded packs with a typical day hiking load, ensured the pack was properly fitted, and compressed each pack if compression straps were present. We then lifted each pack and performed six push-ups with rotation to side plank, 15 seconds of high knees, two pull-ups, lateral and forward leans from the hips, and left and right rotations from the hips. We even executed the CrossFit favorite, burpees. During these activities, we observed whether packs clung to our torso or slipped and how each pack limited our range of motion (e.g., when reaching up to do a pull-up). Packs that performed well in this calisthenics testing did not slip at all and only marginally restricted our range of motion.
Versatility
In the field, we attempted to use these packs for various activities. We deemed packs versatile if they performed well in multiple outdoor pursuits or at least a couple of outdoor pursuits along with travel or commuting. By carrying specialized gear like snowshoes, ice axes, and hiking poles, we evaluated whether packs had the necessary attachment points for specific activities.
Ease of Use
An effective pack should be straightforward and user-friendly. During our field testing, we assessed how easy it was to access items stored in different parts of the pack, the number of pockets available for organization, the functionality of specialized carrying attachments (e.g., shoulder strap pole holders), and the quality of the design of those features. Ease of use and versatility often compete; simpler packs tend to be less versatile. Complex packs may be useful for numerous activities but require a learning curve to unlock a pack's full potential.
Weight-to-Volume Ratio
While pack weight is significant, larger packs are almost guaranteed to be heavier than smaller packs, and we test packs for this review that range from 15 to 48 L capacity. To account for this, we calculated a weight-to-volume ratio (oz/L) and ranked packs based on that ratio. Essentially, this measures the “bang for your buck” regarding how much a pack can hold for its weight.
To provide context for these measurements, we also evaluate the features and materials contributing to a pack being light or heavy for its volume. Often, the trade-off for a heavier pack comes with a more comfortable suspension or increased durability.
Durability
We did our best to put these packs through their paces during the months we spent with them. However, we can't evaluate long-term durability without spending years with these packs. We rely on market research, our years of experience mistreating various backpack materials and construction types, and the intentional abuse we dealt these packs during our field testing to estimate their durability. This also involves direct testing, rubbing against tree bark, and dragging over rocks and gravel.
We also employ a standardized water-resistance test to evaluate how well these packs handle rainy conditions. We filled packs with towels or crumpled newspaper, put on their rain covers (if included), and then sprayed them down with a hose for five minutes, attempting to spray from all sides other than the suspension (which would be against your back). After five minutes, we removed the rain covers, checked the towels for dampness, and sprayed the packs for another five minutes without rain covers. Packs that performed well in this test did not let any water in with their rain cover on, and only a little after five minutes of intense spray without their rain cover.
