Packing backpack 50 lt for one 8 days in NZ.

Thank you so much guys. I'll let you know after the "store experience".... ;-D

Hi Guys! At the end I did.... I went to the store and try all my stuff in a 65 lt... After a long discussion with of the guy that was helping me at the I decided to stay with my 50... I just fixed my appareal in a different way than before and unstead of taking 2 trousers with me I will take just one that I will wash in loco after a couple of days of usage... 65 was way to big and too bulky for me... If I will have problem I can always put my sleeping bag outside and to protect it I can buy a cordura bag that is waterproof... hopefully would be all right! Thanks again!

If you have the gear food etc and it all fits then all good. Do remember though that the store guy gets paid for selling stuff not giving advice. He could sell you a nice down jacket that fits in a wine cask for $99 or he could sell you one that is equally as warm but fits in a beer can for $495. Guess which one his boss wants him to sell

hahahahaha totally agreee with you geeves!

I reckon an Osprey Exos 58 is perfect for NZ tracks. It has a good harness, is ideal for up to about 16kgs and weighs 1.2kg empty.

The Exos was certainly popular on the Routeburn last week - at least 5 of them. Do try one on fully loaded though, I found I could not get past the feeling that it was pulling me backwards, no matter how I loaded it and adjusted it. The osprey Atmos AG worked better for me, quite a bit heavier but similar concept with air gap between pack and your back, and very very comfortable to carry.

Bohwaz what quilt do you use. I am still using a Fairydown Featherweight sleeping bag with it open most of the time.Especially since huts have had a tidy up and are a lot warmer.

For our OP, in my opinion a 50 litre sack for the Routeburn would certainly be ample, if not carrying around the rest of the gear for his trip, and it's definitely worth leaving that behind somewhere. I used Osprey Exos 48 ltr sack on the Stewart Island NW Circuit recently with 10 days food (though tramp took me much less), cooking gear etc. and it was just about big enough. A very comfortable sack, pretty popular too, and I saw one person using the same sack on the NW circuit, and a few using it on a couple of later shorter tramps I did. Yep, possible to go with 65 litre or plus sack, but you'll find you'll just try to but more inside it. I find less is more. As a few of the earlier posters mention the size of a sleeping bag makes a difference, and that's right, I use a down sleeping quilt with a separate liner, which packs down to nothing and is comfortable in a very wide range of temperatures.

no , IT'S WHATEVER WORKS FOR YOU. the size of pack you get is determined by the type of gear you have that you need to fit in it.... with the right gear , yes a 50 litre pack but if your gear is heavier bulkier gear then you get faced with a squeeze and shove fest trying to get everything into a50 litre pack often make sure the gear you're going to take fits in without any dramas because other peoples gear could be quite different to your own. i've had ultralighters just bash me over the head verbally about whats wrong with my pack size and how theirs is the best option... the reality is, people have the right to use what gear they have and use the pack size they want. people go on about 60 litre packs being to big, but back in the day almost no one had 50 litre packs and a pack wasnt too big unless it was 100 litres and 80 litre packs were as common as mud, and i still see people today, some of them experienced with 100 litre packs, happy as larry carrying around the kitchen sink. remember some people skimp to use their small packs, if you want to get to the hut or campsite and have extra luxuries to keep you comfortable or occupied then you'll be looking at a bigger pack. a lot of the people with the smallest packs are tramping with purely tramping and or camping kit, no reading materials. minimal electronics, no pillow, miminal extra clothes or they can function in cold weather with hardly any clothes when you might need extra clothes and a bigger sleeping bag to stay warm in the same conditions.... have the experience you want to have some people are as much about the camping experience as they are about the tramping experience, the longer the days you have the less fussed you'll be about having reading material at the end of the day and a journal to write in a pack of cards and several courses of more tasty elaborate food to eat for dinner, but if you like spending long hours at the hut or campsite your priority might be to have all those things, and its just as valid for you to do that as someone who's kit is more minimalistic.... some people see it as sacrilege to take a coffee percolator, for others its an important piece of gear that they want to take to make their tramping a more pleasant trip... some people are happy to pack in heavy yummy tinned deserts, fresh fruit and vegetables to have a fresh meal... for others thats just a ridiculous weight and bulk to pack in.... theres a whole range of experiences different people are after when they go tramping.. and a small pack isnt going to cover all those experiences.... some people see a big pack as a sign of an incompetent novice tramper,,,, someone i know posted a photo online of them walking with a big pack on and someone commented on the ridiculous size of the pack, the reality was it was a bigger pack than they normally take but they were using that trip to test out different clothing items to see how warm they were so they could make the right selection for future trips they had planned.... but they'd been labelled that their selection of pack was wrong . i've got tramping pack sizes ranging from 40 litres up to 90 and i've used them all on different trips, at times i've used the 40 and gotten away with it, but i hated the fact it was a mission to fit my gear into it, it was right at the limit of what i could use with the gear i WANTED to take.... i could have taken less gear and i knew that before the trip, but i took the gear i WANTED on that trip to have the experience i wanted to have.... maybe you have a big camera with big lenses and they have to fit in the pack if it rains. and you need the space for that. maybe you have a waterproof camera and dont need it in the pack or take no camera..... at a certain point it becomes a self defeating argument about how long is a piece of string, dont believe other peoples arguments if you dont know exactly what gear they are taking...

Thats a pretty good summary of things. 50 will do the job but everything you have needs to be thought about for bulk etc. Some ultralighters might say 40 is 2 much Some might struggle to fill a 30 but these guys are regular customers of SAR If you are buying all new gear and can afford to why not aim for 50. I used to use a 100l pack which was full. When I upgraded to an 80 I struggled to get everything in even for weekenders. Then upgraded to a 75l that now would easily hold the 10 days food and not all squashable dehy either. Next pack could be a 60 but the one Ive got is going to last another 5 to 10 years so it will only be half full for a long time yet