>>2327508I’m probably the only person here who was backpacking when external frames were still the standard (in the 1990’s, when I was in high school, though they were on the way out). People switched to internal frames (which at the time were only being marketed as technical packs) because they were taking less stuff and their gear was getting lighter. A lot of people got it wrong; an internal frame 80L pack has lost the plot. It’s going to be heavy, and that load will never be as in-line with the wearers center of gravity as an external frame.
I think anything above ~55L should be external. Beyond that size, packs don’t get taller, they just get wider and thicker. Some get lower, which is absolutely retarded. And any loads greater than however much (my base weight has been below 15lbs for a solid two decades now, so I can’t really say) should be external as well. And by “should” I mean it would probably be more comfortable.
But yeah, that was the beginning of the “internal frame bad” mentality. People jumping into a trend (mimicking light weight bags without lightening their loads), gear manufacturers meeting a stupid demand (producing enormous internal frame packs), and everyone getting it wrong. It’s crazy that it still exists 15 years later.
