Why are some backpacks smaller, but hold more liters?
January 8, 2013 6:49 AM Subscribe
Why are some backpacks smaller, but hold more liters?
I had purchased
this 38L pack and when it arrived, I realized I needed more space. So I found
this 60L pack which is noticeably smaller, but more storage. Is this due to the number of pockets? Why else is it physically smaller but can hold more?
Side question: I'm traveling for a month in Asia so I'm assuming 60L is enough. People who have done this before, is it annoying to have a pack with no external pockets so you can regularly stow stuff? Or is that beneficial for preventing pickpockets?
(Any other backpack recommendations or advice would be great too!)
posted by deern the headlice to travel & transportation (15 answers total)
A lack of sidepockets can be annoying at times, but a minor annoyance as anything you need really frequently will be in your pants/jacket pockets anyway. Plus, that pack seems to have a top pouch. Also remember that the convenience of a side pocket compared to reaching in your bag is small when put in the context that you'll have to remove all the buckles to take off the pack (and vice versa) to reach either of those.
posted by MangyCarface at 6:58 AM on January 8