military bergan vs non-military rucksack

[sandsnakes]

I am looking to upgrade my rucksack and have been looking at all sorts of kit. I fancy a copy of the military bergan in flecktarn... sad I know, but I like the pretty colours!

So a few questions to those who have used both in anger. What are the merits of of the 110L bergan over the non military versions, which is more comfortable?

Would you advise a 80/90L version rather than the larger one?
What are your experiances in general?

Sandsnakes

See you at the moot. Let me know if you want to do the poultice course I am running.

:umbrella:

[Graham_S]

civvy bags are generally more comfortable, but the military bag is more robust.
and I might take you up on the poultice course!
Did you do the same thing last year? I think we shared the same campfire a few times.

[sandsnakes]

Yes I did a display last year, this time I will bring enough kit to actually teach. Also it will cover some basic herbs and acupressure.
The course is called 'Bush Aid' I will only be using herbs that can be found in the UK/kitchen.

Thanks for the heads up about packs, any thoughts on size?

Sandsnakes

[Graham_S]

Size of pack is very subjective. The more room you have, the more stuff you take.
I've never needed more than 75l. Usually I use a 45l pack with side pockets.

[sandbender]

What are the merits of of the 110L bergan over the non military versions, which is more comfortable

Military packs are usually made by the lowest bidder and products are selected by individuals who will never have to tab 30 km or more with one on their back :(

Although I have no personal experience of them, many people on this forum have good things to say about Kifaru...

http://www.kifaru.net/MGpacks.htm

Lowe alpine also produce a range of military backpacks, which use the same back system as their Alpine range...

http://www.lowealpine.com/Products/SearchMenu.asp?ProductTypeID=2 2

If you plan to travel any real distance with a heavy load and hope to have a healthy old age, a civilian design will 'usually' be a better choice, however there are many poor pack designs on the civilian market too, try before you buy if you can.


Would you advise a 80/90L version rather than the larger one?

90L or 110L are huge bags, do you really need so much?

I've used packs of all shapes and sizes and the largest I now own is a 70L and it only comes out for really long journeys where I may need to carry lots of food and water.

[pothunter]

Hi Sandsnakes

Just an observation go for og if its a bergen and buy a separate camo cover, this will give far more versatility and wont bring unwelcome attention.

Try Snugpac's 70 litre Rocket Pak it has two built in covers in the bottom pocket. I have two sacks 'big sack' has everything but the kitchen sink and lives it the truck, when I go out most of the time I just decant what I need for the day or so into a 30 ltr. sack.

Pothunter.

[Graham_S]

The best piece of advice I can give regarding rucksacks, is to go to a large outdoors shop and try some on.
any decent outdoors shop will load up a pack with stuff (ropes are popular) so you can feel the pack laden.
If it's not comfortable in the shop, it'll be a nightmare on the hill.

[Chris G]

I have a Wynnster 85 litre ruck sack which is about 12 years old. Although little use it's still fantastically comfy and takes almost everything inside with straps for everything else outside. It's too big for a day/weekend so I've just ordered a Forces 44 rucksack which being about half the size will be ideal for those times.

Chris

[Mastino]

I have an old trusted Vulcan and the big advantage of a large pack is that you can easily reduce it's volume and size by using the side & top straps. When I compare the vulcan in 'strapped down' version with the Sabre 45 it's hard to notice the difference.

[robadams]

I would stay away from issue packs, having used them throughout my army career I always preferred a military version of a Civvie sac. You can't go far wrong with a berghaus as a first try, they are basic but very tough and can be picked up very cheaply on ebay if you can wait a while.
One option is a cyclops roc approx 60 litres, this is based on a climbing sac and has no side pockets. This means it is a slim rucsac and will not easily get caught on branches and bushes. you can extend the capacity by adding side pockets or strap roll mats, bivis etc to the sides.
The other option is the crusader 65-80 litres, pretty much the roc with zip off pockets that convert into a daysac. I have been using these for well over 20 years and they work for me. I have had plenty of other rucsacs, issued to me and bought by myself and keep going back to the crusader. sold my DPM one on ebay and bought a green version in great nick for £30, 2 weeks later.
The final option is the vulcan, 100 litres and a monster. Great sac but then you are tempted to pack all you own and regret it very quickly. Plenty of these come up on ebay.
The most important thing to be aware of is the fact that they come in different frame sizes 1-4, depending on the model.
Size 2 - 5'3" to 5'8".
Size 3 - 5' 9" to 5'11".
Size 4 - 6' to 6'6".
size 1 is found in the sacs designed specifically for women.
They fit close to the back and the frame can be shaped to your back. The plus of this is the stability over rocky ground, the minus is a sweaty back, only a problem if you are stopping and starting and don't like the cold feeling.
When buying, look for a small white tag sewn on the back, between the shoulder straps with a little number on, this refers to the frame size.

I could probably knock up some photos of my crusader if you want.

Hope this helps and prompts some more posts on rucsacs.
The added beauty of the roc or crusader is the fact that they have side compression straps that enable you to reduce the size of the pack and the crusader has extra compression straps on the lid to pull in the sac even further. The problem with a 45 litre sac is that you then have to buy a larger sac for longer trips, meaning more cost.
I have used my crusader without side pockets as a patrol day sac and so long as the back length is not too long it makes a great overnight sac. I admit it means the pack is slightly heavier than a true 45 litre sac but you have the added versatility of chucking some fire wood under the lid for a quick and easy fire towards the end of the day. Some people place their roll mat inside first in order to bulk out the pac and to keep it dry in the rain.

Others may offer other opinions on the merits of this but it works for me.

[sandsnakes]

Thanks chaps, informative as ever! Looks like I am going for the 65-80 range as I never do long trips, also I am just going to have to learn to pack less stuff!

Sandsnakes

See you at the moot, mail me if you want to do Bush Medicine course

:)

[SimonM]

I have the karrimor sabre 60 - 100 and I find it very comfy in use and very versatile with all the adjustment straps and zips. It is a heavy bag tho, tipping the scales at about 3.5kg empty!

Like others I wouldn't recommend military bags, unless you are on a very strict budget that is. Also IMHO it is not advisable to get cammo rucksacs, especially if you intend to use it abroad.

HTH

Simon

[featherstick]

Cyclops roc here, 20 years old. Frame snapped once on a long walk in Iberia (Lisbon to Madrid, rough camping. 6 weeks, since you ask). Repaired by a new age traveller who had a full workshop in the back of his van, complete with compressed-air powered drills that he ran off the brake cylinders.

Only problem is that it's top entry only, so if you don't get your packing right, you end up with everything on the ground around you.

Don't buy an issue rucksack, you'll regret it.

[sandsnakes]

Ok chaps your advice as been well recived. If any of you see a decend sack betwen the 65-80l size in flecktarn or tropentarn let me know.

You may ask why fleck or tropen, well when I was at school splotched vests were all the rage, sadly I was not cool enough to wear one (hippies 'r' us). So as an indulgance in my later years I am going for the hippy splodges. Whats the point of doing this if you cannot indulge the inner child?


Sandsnakes:D :lmao:

[scallywag]

A rucksack that is 80/90L is big. 110L, OMG, that is hudge!!! It’s not a good idea to buy such if you don’t really need it.
There is this general truth, the bigger sack, the heavier load. Period. There’s sth about humans that forces us to take irrelavant gear just because we have enough room to pack it :) The most reasonable choice is sth around 45/50L. If the sack is good, u can always compress it or add pouches to get some more capacity. 50L is what I got + two side pouches (10L each) and that’s more than enough. If there’s sth bigger like an axe or rope, or foam mattress or whatever I attach it outside (molle webbing plus alice on the belt).

This is my latest choise, I think is gone stay with me for a long while.
http://www.wolverine.com.pl/en/w50_od_II.htm
It looks military but stays comfortalbe and stable. If anyone has bad experiance with the comfort maybe the sack was just to military :)
To be honest, the Arizzon Wolverine Brand should be a serious threat to Kifaru rucksacks. Comparable quality, comparable functionality (IMO even better when compereing Wolverine W50 II Gen and Kifaru Multi-Mission) but dramatiacally differnt cost! Wolverine is half the price. The reason it’s not well-know? It’s a Polish brand that hasn’t fought its way through yet. I wish them luck.

As to military-nonmiltary – my personal choice is military; sacks are tougher and usually has many molle straps which you don’t have in civilian ones. It all depends on your needs actually – if you stay on the track, never force through bushes, don’t need additonal gear than well, civilian is fine.

[durulz]

I used to use (and still do, on occasion) a German issue flecktarn rucksack. Mine was/is an original rather than a copy. They claim they are 60L sacks, but I think that's a bit optimistic. I would say they are about 50-55L.
I REALLY liked it. I found it comfortable and just the right size. Only stopped using it because we started to de-military how we looked. The waist straps are a little thin, but I never used them anyway.
You can get them at www.flecktarn.co.uk
I also have a Highlander Forces 66. This, for me, is spot on. I use it as my Winter sack - when one needs to carry more stuff. I still use either the smaller flecktarn one or a civi one I got from Millets in the Summer.
If you ebay 'flecktarn' then there's a seller on there who sells copies of flecktarn stuff. Despite being copies, they are good quality (bought one or two bits myself - I also used to be seriously in the flecktarn pattern). And he does copies of both the smaller, issue, rucksack as well larger sizes.
You might also want to look at East West Trading: http://ew-trading.com/shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1
They specialise in odd bits and pieces.

[durulz]

Here's one:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Ex-German-Army-Surplus-Canvas-Flecktarn-Rucksack-75ltr_W0QQitemZ310112901602QQc mdZViewItemQQptZUK_Collectable s_Militaria_LE?hash=item310112 901602&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1301%7C66%3A2%7 C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318
This is exactly like the one I have. As I said in a previous post - take the 75L claim with a MASSIVE pinch of salt - it's more like 55L. Well worth the twenty quid asking price.

[rik_uk3]

The army Bergen is a big pack, but not that big if you don't use the zip on side pockets. They are a good pack I've found to be comfortable and you don't HAVE to fill it up.

£22.50 delivered.

http://www.britishmilitarysurplus.co. uk/ishop/1069/shopscr87.html

It all depends on what you want, you can spend hundreds of pounds on a Kifaru pack but can you justify that amount (if you can indeed afford it)?

There are lots of good packs around as others have sais, go and try some out

[BushTucker]

I have bergans ex airforce other arms and find them very strong but, I always go for my Highlander 80 litre o/g if I am out for a few days. I find it so much more comfortable adjustable and bigger.

[w00dsmoke]

The army Bergen is a big pack, but not that big if you don't use the zip on side pockets. They are a good pack I've found to be comfortable and you don't HAVE to fill it up.

£22.50 delivered.


You really cannot beat that. I often use a hip pad that slips into the bergan back on the outside to make it comfier. A lot of folk say big =bag. I diasagree, big just gives you the optioon of taking more if we need to. Most bushcrafters I kow are total gear freaks and love their toy's, absolutley nothing wrong with that at all, but when you go to play in the wilds you often need the space for these especially when it's for a few days or more.

For example, my sleeping bag will take up half the size of an issue bergan (I have a bulky homemmade liner), it's nort heavy just bulky, which only leaves two side pockets and some space in the bergan for everything else which is not a lot of space once you add spare clothes, cooking kit, billhook, saw, knfe, FAK, bivi kit etc...

Now I never walk huge distances anymore, but I'd rather have the option of walking a 3 mile trip from car to bivi site once with all my gear rather than twice...

So my advice would be decide what you intend to carry the most often and use that as your guide.

[southey]

I use my issue bergan all the time and don't have any real problems with it, i often walk long distances and only suffer if iv'e not been carefull of how iv'e packed it, but i'm sure it's the same with any other bag, one point though if you do look or a mil bag try and ind a long back bergan, there used to be a lot of hyp in mil circles about trying to get a short back bergan the benifit being that it sat higher on your back almost resting on your shoulders witch ment it cleared your webbing and didn't push the pouches into your skin, and if you had to go prone with it on you could still lift your head without your helmet getting wedged, also with a long back the hip belt is in the proper position to give you the right support. having a dpm bag isn't that bad as you can always cover it with a water proof cover in any pattern.

[Sussex Man]

Over the years I've tried most bergans going, I must agree with rob adams, Berghaus has always come up best !
Lowe Alpine- over complicated back system, heavy (i had a 100ltr +), cheaper than most, very hot back !!! sold it after half a year.
Plce, not very well made, comfortable up to 15-18lbs, boring dpm colours.
Karrimor Sabre's gets close to the berghaus, but i didn't like the fussy design with too many loops etc, and expensive.
Alice pack, now you either love these or hate them, I love them, get a large pack model and keep the frame with it. They are heavy,old fashioned but robust and simple- just what you need- also you can carry large heavy objects on the frame if needed.logs etc.

Then my personel choice is the Vulcan, I estimate that iv'e walked over 1500 miles with it, usually a third to a half full, I never got bergan burns on my back, it has never droped a stitch, it has been thrown on trains, planes and boats, i've used it in Norway at -30 and the following year in Morroco in +45 degrees. I wash it now and then with gear proof and it comes up like new, pretty waterproof, and og rather than dpm.
Probably the last pack I will buy.

So for a night out- either a 40 litre Berghaus aniversary cyclops (blue) or an Alice pack or my old alpine jobby.(BB's highland pack ???)
extended journeys or cold weather trips the Vulcan every time.

[Nat]

Personally i like the PLCE longback. I've had a few and yomped with them. Carry alot of kit if you're using public transport to meets etc. BUT they draw alot of attention, especially in our current climate.

Karrimor Sabre series, i've had the 45 and 60-100 and hated the 60-100 (old version without side pocket zips) but the 45 with side pockets did well for a 4 day camp and without pockets for a long distance hike. But they are heavy.

Civvie packs i've had are the TOG 24 55 rucksack which has held out ok so far, and a few of the cheap and nasty ones which lasted one trip.

Highlander Forces Rucks are good, robust and cheap. One of my tests of rucksacks is to chuck it off the Wain stones on the North York Moors and pull it up using a rope. If it stands that then i'm happy with it and the Highlanders, PLCE and Sabres survived.

However, the best rucksack i've ever had and unfortunately had to let go so i could pay for a custom knife from Bernie Garland, is the Berghaus Vulcan. Fantastic piece of kit even if the zips were upside down.

[Northern Giant UK]

I use the (Highlander) forces 88, I'ts tough, large and very adjustable (good for me as I have a very long back). Not the cheapest at around £60 but good value for money IMO.

Kev

[rik_uk3]

You really cannot beat that. I often use a hip pad that slips into the bergan back on the outside to make it comfier. A lot of folk say big =bag. I diasagree, big just gives you the optioon of taking more if we need to. Most bushcrafters I kow are total gear freaks and love their toy's, absolutley nothing wrong with that at all, but when you go to play in the wilds you often need the space for these especially when it's for a few days or more.

For example, my sleeping bag will take up half the size of an issue bergan (I have a bulky homemmade liner), it's nort heavy just bulky, which only leaves two side pockets and some space in the bergan for everything else which is not a lot of space once you add spare clothes, cooking kit, billhook, saw, knfe, FAK, bivi kit etc...

Now I never walk huge distances anymore, but I'd rather have the option of walking a 3 mile trip from car to bivi site once with all my gear rather than twice...

So my advice would be decide what you intend to carry the most often and use that as your guide.


Much how I feel too (although I'm not a back packer these days), the Bergen is very well made and the colour is fine, I've got an OG and a DPM I don't mind the cammo at all. Your spot on about the sleeping bag space, my winter bag half fills the Bergen. I've been at many a meet and seen people with 40-65 litre packs and yes they work, full to bursting and often, have gear strapped all over them so why not just use a tidier pack in the first place? I've seen all sorts stapped on or even hanging off packs, things like Kelly Kettles and billy cans:rolleyes:

My 35 litre pack is perfect for day trips though;)

[jungle_re]

i use an PLCE inf bergan, i have carried heavy loads (120 lbs) over long distances and have not surffered from the bergan (only the weight ;) ). My kit is fairly light now and would agree a non down winter bag and bivy take up slighy over half the bag. day sack wise, i ordered a Karimor Hot earth but they changed the name and delivery a Sabre 30 instead over 10 years ago; it been through the ringer and still going strong.

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh247/jungle_re/IMG_0209.jpg

Had to replace a buckle this week, ready for another 10 years faithfull service

[drewdunnrespect]

plce standed issue rucksack every time due to the comfort and size and i say that perfectly hapy with no modifacations

[Shewie]

I`ve tried a few different packs in the last few years and I`m finally happy with my current one. I had a short back PLCE which was good but uncomfortable when fully loaded. Masses of room but it wasn`t the one for me. I then tried a Vulcan in size 3, which at 5' 10 I should have been okay. But I found it sat too low on my hips and gave me a bit of discomfort after a short while. Again a huge pack and a nice bit of padding in the back but this was also quite sweaty with poor ventilation. I then had a Snugpak Rocket pack for a few days but then sent it back, I didn`t know at the time it was supposed to sit so high above a webbing rig.
I`ve now got a Sabre 75L after trying one out for a weekend, and it`s the most comfortable pack I`ve ever used. It`s got too many straps and buckles in my opinion but they can always be removed. Along with the side pockets it`s plenty big enough for any of my trips.
It`s got a superb back system and the overall quality I think is worth the hefty price.

Just my thoughts as everyone has their own opinions.

Try and get down to a shop and try them on fully loaded if yuo can.

[Tiley]

As a mere civvy, I've never tried an issue pack but I have tried the Berghaus and Lowe Alpine ones made for the military. I suppose it comes down to strength in the long run. Packs used by the services are going to be put under a huge amount more wear and tear than your average civilian ones and therefore have to be built with that in mind. Making them straightforward to use and 'squaddie-proof' is essential; making them reasonable enough for a soldier to consider buying one is another consideration. Because of the built-in strength, light weight is compromised but with light weight gear, durability is always compromised. Thrashing around in the woods and the wilds as we do as bushcrafters, I reckon I'd rather have a slightly heavier pack on that I know is going to last the course.

Of the two that I've tried, I rate the Berghaus Vulcan higher than the Lowe Alpine - but only just. They are both well-made and comfortable - the Berghaus tipping the scales on the latter.

I am conscious of the endless debate about looking like a frustrated commando when carrying it but, if it does what I want it to and blends in inoffensively with my surroundings, who cares?

There are other packs out there that will do the job and probably more comfortably but, in my opinion, the military-style packs tick the boxes for me.

Just a few thoughts.