[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
Oper8ing backpacks
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons

Thread replies: 71
Thread images: 15
File: oper8ingbp.jpg (301 KB, 756x1000) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
oper8ingbp.jpg
301 KB, 756x1000
Okay, /k/omrades, this needs to be adressed. We're all talking about how to survive if SHTF and we all got ideas of loadouts with guns, knives and vodka.
However, I have no idea what /k/omrades keep all this stuff.
Show me your oper8ing backpacks, share pros and cons and maybe recommend some brands that make good, long lasting, backpacks.

Pic is a Swedish LK 35 which i plan on getting soon. The metal frame looks uncomfortable as fug but all the people who have tried it says that it unburdens the shoulder and put more weight on the hips. The capacity is 35 litres, (9.2 gallons for you burgers out there) hence the name LK 35.
>>
>>28472153
For me I use the USGI medium ruck, don't have pic of actual bag on me at the moment. It's got the room for pretty much everything I need and it has a frame of sorts.
>>
>>28472153
This kind of depends anon. There are a lot of choices for good ones, but even packs can be role specific. If you're leaving town and never coming back you'll need something able to carry as much as possible, a frame is recommended. But if you're in around a vehicle or homestead you probably won't need to carry an ILBE. You could get away with a 3 day pack or assault pack. For me I know I'm just a short trip to the homestead so I don't need a big huge pack. And when I get there I'll be gardening and working on the well and such as well as pulling security. So on the days I'm wandering the property hunting shit bags, I'll just be carrying a small pack with ammo, water, food, and some extra medical supplies.
>>
File: 1452264764682.png (1 MB, 756x1000) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1452264764682.png
1 MB, 756x1000
>>28472153
I have an LK 35, it's surprisingly comfortable because of the canvas horizontal padding (dunno what they're called). Haven't gotten to use it innawoods much yet but it seems sturdy af.
>>
Does anyone know the quality of Red Rock backpacks? They have a pack that's what i'm looking for I just dont know if they're a good brand
>>
>>28472153
One of the most simpel bugout rucksack would probably be the BW Gebirgsjäger Rucksack, but it definitevely needs the isolationmatrress. But i personally think it can be improved very much, there are not many possibillities to strap something extra onto it.
>>
>>28472590
>i personally think it can be improved very much, there are not many possibillities to strap something extra onto it
wtfamireading.McD
>>
>>28472404
Sure, I get that. What I was wonddring was more if someone knew some specific brand that makes good, solid, backpacks. Most of the equipment that are talked about here on /k/ is very brand-specific. Everything from weapons (duh) to boots (Salomon, Red Wings) to clothing (5.11) etcetera. How come noone discusses backpacks to the same extent? Is all backpacks equal and whatever generic brand works?
>>
>>28472153
The LK 35 is really comfortable and light somehow even though it has awful straps but doesn't hold much. I have two as loaner packs.

I usually use an Alice large which is pretty heavy at 8-9 lbs base when I backpack, I'm gonna be getting the down east 1606 frame upgrade with mountaineering straps. That should be 6.

Internal frame packs are much lighter, even like mystery ranch classic is 4 lbs but they have worse ventilation and make you bend forward more when you walk.

Alice large makes you lean forward too though because the straps kinda suck.
>>
I use an Osprey because... It looks normal.
>>
>>28472857
Well, a lot of the guys on here don't get out where they need a pack. There's even some that don't leave the house. Most on here will just go tot the range or gun shop though so the only time they'll use a pack is if they traveler or school/ work. Some do get out in the field. I've haven't used a lot of brand name packs in the field, but I will say my favorite pack when I was in Iraq was a surplus Russian Veshmeshok I bought from Russian surplus website that no longer exists. When I would move from FOB to FOB it was me, my OTV, a footlocker and my veshmeshok.
>>
>>28472404
This, when traveling I use a 5.11 rush 12.

No frame bags are best for loads under 10 pounds either UL or tacticool.
>>
>>28472920
>Well, a lot of the guys on here don't get out where they need a pack.
Good point. Really destroys the /k/ommando feeling though.

>surplus russian backpack was your favourite
Wow, really? I was always under the impression that militaries made stuff just good enough, they had to be expendable and easy (and cheap) to replace.
>>
>>28472879
How has it been holding up? I've been thinking of Ospreys for the same reason.
Can you imagine to go innawoods in it?
>>
>>28473303
I was contracting so I got to use whatever I wanted so long as I paid for it. And though I could have gotten better, it served me very well to the point I didn't think I needed anything else. My only beef was the button on the pouch on the back had to be resewn on when I tried to force a book to large in the pouch and I also replaced the twine with 550 cord that synches the main compartment closed.
>>
>>28472861
Why ALICE though? Was it something you had or just personal prefrence? Do you have any reasons to pick it over a MOLLE?
>>
>>28473340
Huh, makes sense.
I've never served and I'm more of a gearqueer than anything else, so I can't really say all that much about much.
However, since I thought the LK35 was the only exception to cheap military gear, and when someone who served says that russian surplus works great, I've changed my mind a bit.
Thanks /k/ommando. Doing Gods work.
>>
>>28472153
I mostly use Kifaru, Arcteryx, and Hill People packs. All apex tier brands. Shits amazing.
>>
>>28473395
>Arcteryx
I've seen them around but honestly thought you only paid for the looks. Thanks man.
>>
>>28472153
I have an LK35 and it's surprisingly comfortable. I really like mine.
>>
Anyone got any opinion of Chrome Industries? Their backpacks seem functional enough for daily use, going to uni etc. Maybe not innawoods though.
>>
>>28473387
Just to make it clear, I was a contractor and in no way enlisted in the military. I'm not stealing anybodies valor. But yeah, that twice my age canvas sack held just enough for me to get around when I needed it. I recently sold off a bunch of Soviet gear that I didn't need/ use and the one thing I kept was that sack for no other fact that it worked well and has a lot of fond memories attached to it. Pic of what I'm talking about for kiddies.
>>
>>28472438
Looks nice as fuck and like you could carry a decent amount of weight in there without being over encumbered. I always liked backpacks with the metal frames but I haven't used one that had canvas support straps like that.
>>
>>28473424
Oh, you pay for the dead bird. And over pay really. But their kit is absolutely top end. Some may dislike it because of the cost. Some may dislike it because they asociate the brand with skiiers or suburban soccer moms on a weekend hike through the state park.

Their quality is unsurpassed.
>>
File: 20160108_185223.jpg (2 MB, 2448x3264) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
20160108_185223.jpg
2 MB, 2448x3264
I also have one of them. I find them very comfortable, especially when it comes to carrying heavy stuff. The frame distributes the weight evenly and prevents stuff from poking in your back.
Also can you attach various things to the stringbands on the outside.
It has a neat innerpocket at the backside to store smal and fragile things.
>>
>>28473448
Good clarification. I personally don't care since here in Sweden, soldier's valour isn't really a thing, it's a job like anything else.
What I meant was that you atleast have some real experience, unlike me who only go innawoods for day-hiking.
>>
>>28473504
Huh, where are you from and where did you buy your bag? It seems to be missing the Three Crowns.
>>
File: 1324503195002.jpg (210 KB, 489x500) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1324503195002.jpg
210 KB, 489x500
>>28472153
>LK35
falling for this meme, i bet you watch mcfagbushcraft too
>>
>>28473652
Care to share your experience?

>mcfagbushcraft
Who?
>>
>>28473681
not him but, its 70 year old technology

The only people you would ever see with these innawoods are youtube tier autists. When buying surplus gear you have to realize that the military is always 20 years behind the civilian market, and by the time it becomes surplus its 30+ years outdated. But this isnt even surplus, its vintage military gear. You are choosing form over function which will get you killed in any real emergency. You will be much better served spending your money on an osprey pack or something similar, where companies have spent an extra 70 years designing and perfecting the design. Getting a pack like the lk35 is like wearing 8"+ full leather boots innawoods over modern waterproof hiking boots, its just silly and makes you look like you have no idea what you are doing.
>>
>>28473958
You do realize that those packs were going for like 20 bucks right?

That's why I bought a couple as extras.
>>
>>28473987
>You do realize that those packs were going for like 20 bucks right?

that doesnt change anything I said, besides, you can get modern packs sub $100 and those would serve you infinitely better
>>
The LK35 is comfy, its sturdy and it works.

>>28473958
Air is billions of years old and I dont see you bitching about breathing it.
Why change a winning concept.

Also, dont ask me why I know this, but the LK35 is god damn near perfect for making a flamethrower...
>>
>>28473958
This is a massive oversimplification.

A FILBE is a brand new pack and it's got the same lift issues as an alice large while weighing more, the only advanced thing about it is the comfy straps.

Eberlestock GIIs are even modern internal frame packs and they still weigh 5lb 6oz BEFORE adding extra pockets to the outside.

You can easily rig up an ALICE large with a 1606 frame that weighs about the same and carries more.

Most new designs are internal frame which is better for a lot of peoples' needs, but does have it's own disadvantages which is why stuff like NICE, 1606, MOLLE, get made for militaries.

Yes, old surplus shit tends to be outdated, I'm not defending the LK35 except as a super cheap option, nor am I defending the alice frame and straps, those are pretty bad too, but MUH MOUNTAINEERIN' TECHNICAL PACK SUPERIOR, is an ignorant stupid idea that shows you don't know much about backpacks.
>>
>>28474026
>sub 100
>same things as 20
>failed to address that I wasn't using them myself but using them as loaners.

Do you even backpack?
>>
>>28474030
>Air is billions of years old and I dont see you bitching about breathing it.

Air wasnt designed by humans to accomplish a task and hasnt had major improvements since its creation. Your straw-man argument is not only invalid but silly.

>Why change a winning concept.

They havent, if you look at modern packs, its the same concept. What they have done is improved it everything about it.
>>
>>28473357
A few reasons, my dad has always used an Alice large since his 75th Ranger days so that's what I learned on, the molle seems overly bulky and the bags are too square and floppy and can only have external organization if you attach pouches.

I love PALS webbing and use it on everything from my work briefcase to my day bag, but when I'm in the backcountry what I want is a light spacious top loading bag with big pockets on the outside so I can keep organized.

The Alice frame and straps suck though, 1606 is master race, designed by the same company that made the MOLLE frame.

I wish I could find a HSGI T.R.A.S.H. those are neat, it's an alice large but with PALS instead of pockets and a zip open front, it's probably a bit heavier than an alice though for not much benefit other than slightly more modularity.
>>
>>28474132
Oh also, I like strapping shit onto the top of my bag like bear cans and ground covers, the MOLLE way of doing things is to attach a sleep system carrier under the pack and put shit like that in there, doesn't seem as good especially considering you are supposed to put the weight high on your back.
>>
>>28473958
I have an LK35 and it's great, comfortable, easy to use, waterproof and pretty durable. There's nothing about its design that isn't function except the lack of a waist belt but that can be added. I do not know how it compares to modern packs since I have not used any, but I am very happy with it.
>>
>>28474081
>>28474073
>Do you even backpack?
>shows you don't know much about backpacks.

I thru hiked the AT last year and the CDT this year, while I realize that doesnt make me an expert in backpacks, I do have more experience than most here. Anyone who would choose a vintage military pack over a modern pack has not done any serious hiking and will not last long in a shtf situation like op was asking. That was my point.
>>
>>28474189
I would keep the base weight in the lightweight category (sub 20lb), but I don't see anything wrong with using an LK35.

Plenty of people do long trips with unmodded alice larges carrying 50+ lbs.

It isn't ideal but it works.

What makrs you think it wouldn't work?
>>
>>28474189
I hear this attitude a lot from people who have only ever gone with other people who are into the hobby and only ever used internal frames.

I agree that people will lean toward modern internal frames as they get more experience, but other stuff works just fine.
>>
>>28474245
>>28474274

>What makrs you think it wouldn't work?
see
>It isn't ideal but it works.

> but other stuff works just fine.

thats my point, you can cowboy up and deal with anything, but you cant pretend that its better
>>
>>28472284
ACU pattern
>>
>>28474351
Nobody is saying an LK35 is better.

I do think the external organization of an Alice is pretty nice though, but only the bag is nice, everything else on it is super outdated.
>>
>>28474373
>Nobody is saying an LK35 is better.

I know, but here is what OP was asking

>I have no idea what /k/omrades keep all this stuff.
>Show me your oper8ing backpacks, share pros and cons and maybe recommend some brands that make good, long lasting, backpacks.

>Pic is a Swedish LK 35 which i plan on getting soon. The metal frame looks uncomfortable as fug but all the people who have tried it says that it
>unburdens the shoulder and put more weight on the hips. The capacity is 35 litres, (9.2 gallons for you burgers out there) hence the name LK 35.

My point is that if you dont own a pack that you are going to be forced to work with, it would be better to just save a bit more and get a modern pack.
>>
>>28474416
>muh cheep

But yeah.

I've heard good things about these:
http://www.mysteryranch.com/legend-pack
>>
>>28474189
>blah blah rape my face
>>
File: 20150204_141217.jpg (2 MB, 3264x2448) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
20150204_141217.jpg
2 MB, 3264x2448
Medium ALICE master race reporting in
>>
>>28473632
Iam from Germany and i bought it off Ebay.
The 3 crowns are on the inside of my Rucksack.
>>
File: 20160108_205539.jpg (2 MB, 2448x3264) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
20160108_205539.jpg
2 MB, 2448x3264
>>28474537
Forgot the photo.
>>
>>28473958
/out/ here, the LK35 is a legit pack if you are into bush crafting It is dirtcheap, sturdy, practical and flexible. If you add a hip belt it will be on par with modern packs. In fact, the workmanship is of higher standard than many modern packs.

I wouldn't want to go mountaineering with it, but for a bushcraft weekender it is just perfect.

>SKS is also 70 years old, still does what it ought to do.
>>
File: kelty-redwing-32[1].jpg (270 KB, 1089x1400) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
kelty-redwing-32[1].jpg
270 KB, 1089x1400
>all this wacky milsurp

Everyone should just buy this bag. Everyone.
>>
>>28474653
>/out/ here, the LK35 is a legit pack if you are into bush crafting

bushcrafting wasnt what op was asking about

> If you add a hip belt it will be on par with modern packs

no

> In fact, the workmanship is of higher standard than many modern packs

thats just delusional

> but for a bushcraft weekender it is just perfect.

please read the rest of the thread

>SKS is also 70 years old, still does what it ought to do.

straw-man arguement, please see >>28474416
>>
>>28472486
They're really good for the price, desu
>>
>>28472590
This. Rugeed as fuck, and the sleeping mat (thin as fuck tho) is also the frame.
My favorite weekender backpack.
>>
>>28474815
Rugged*
>>
How do you hold your guys' rifles with your packs?
>>
>>28474893
Straps

Some bags actually have stuff specifically designed for a rifle.

Check out the Alps Outdoorz Commander
>>
>>28474554
>>28474537
pretty slick man
>>
>>28472153
Get a decent civilian, hiking-tier backpack. Nothing beats that.

Don't fall for "muh surplus", "tactical" and "ballistic nylon". Quality hiking packs are light and sturdy as fuck, miles ahead of most of the shit that is sold to the military, and whose only advantage is to come in different camos.
>>
>>28473315
not him, but i opr8 with one

as long as you don't expect to use it as a sled down a rocky hill, or drag it through tons of briar it holds up just fine

Plus you can stow a much greater number of items, heavier items, have equally as strong if not stronger (tacticool manufacturers know neckbeards will never use their 9 pounds of molle for anything besides shitposting on /k/), lighter, far more comfortable because it's meant to actually be worn and carried
>>
>>28472153
Depending on your budget and need it migth be worth seeing if you can find the Jäger version of the bag. Which has a i belive 95L bag (If you need that much). That version of the bag has a Built in hip Belt. Which makes it easier to carry large loads. As i hope you are aware of it is not super waterproof. If you get the 35L buy an extra hip belt and add to the bag. But over all it is a decent bag. I have carried on with ca 13-17 kg of load a total of 200-300km.
>>
>>28474893
eberle makes a lot of bags with padded slots for guns but a lot of people think the back padding feels weird
>>
I just use a typical backpacking pack because I'm not tacticool.

Winter pack weighs 45, summer is 35.

I have three modular bags that all combine. I supplement my EDC with a small trauma kit on short trips from camp. Day hikes/fishing runs/hunting calls for my 24hr pack, which has water, food, and small tarp. The final pack is all my extra gear. Tools, purifiers, snares, etc.

I hike with it often, when I go hunting I usually head up 4-5 miles with all gear, set camp, then operate with just my 24hr pack.

I can live off of just my BOB for a week. There are things in there to gather, fish, hunt, and purify if I need to last longer.

The key to a good bag is to use it often.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAtzN_ScKXY
>>
>>28474893
I haven't done it yet, but I'm planning to do a coyote hunting trip in national forest wilderness and I'll just strap the unloaded rifle horizontally to the top of the pack.
>>
>>28475115
What about external organization?

That's what I like about both PALS bags and ALICE bags.

But yeah, most tacticool shit is way too heavy.
>>
File: lacokulanga-2.jpg (71 KB, 498x640) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
lacokulanga-2.jpg
71 KB, 498x640
>>
Mystery ranch 6500
>>
>>28474893
Mystery ranch, Markhor, or straps.
A lot of big mountain packs have some nice straps for skis and a gun fits in them with little adaptation.
Currently I have, in capacity order a Rush 12, TT Mission and an old as fuck hiking 80 to 90 liters backpack enough huge to sleep into it.
I'll go with pic related soon maybe.
Thread replies: 71
Thread images: 15
Thread DB ID: 380476



[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at wtabusse@gmail.com with the post's information.