UKC

Who has one? And what size do they have?

I want to get one as big as possible but need to be able to lift the thing too...Is the extra large too large?

I'd be using it for long trips to the Alps with lots of gear but also for weekends away.

Any comments welcome

In reply to phmcguin: I have a medium (70l) one and its fine for weekend trips in a car etc but I would want a bigger one for extended trips

In reply to phmcguin:

I have extra large (140L) I really like having a massive bag, I can just chuck all my junk for a week or more away. It's only heavy if you fill it with heavy stuff I've never been unable to lift mine and nobody forces you to fill it up, (they have compression straps). I'm normally all for going lightweight but the ease of having all your stuff on one place at base camp (hence the name) beats it in this instance.

go for the XL you won't regret it.

In reply to phmcguin: I have the large. Its 90 litre. Most of the expedition gear i pack in it is light and its fairly easy to carry on your back with the rucsac type straps so if you are talking about weekends etc then its probably going to be ok. But if you are going for longer or don't have to carry it around yourself (driving etc) then go for the 140 litres and you'll likely be glad of the extra space.

In reply to andrewm1000:
My medium is just a bit small for anything other than a light week away with climbing gear - I've managed a week's skiing kit in it (with helmet) but only just. I'd go for the large if I were buying again.

Whatever size you buy, you'll fill it though!

In reply to hindu:

Ain't that the truth - it is so convenient to just chuck things in.

In reply to phmcguin: I'd have a think about how you're going to use it.

I have an extra large and two large ones (as it were). The XL was bought first and was enormously handy for trips to the USA, back when the baggage allowance was 75 kg; just chuck everything in and get yourself down to the airport, job's a good 'un. But now baggage restrictions have become a little tighter and many carriers will force you to pay extra not just for baggage that weighs more than it should, but for large-size bags too. The XL may cost you extra to ship by plane.

The baggage size restrictions seem to come in most commonly at a total size (H x W x D) of 62" and the L duffel just scrapes under this. So for my next trip instead of one XL and a hefty surcharge there'll be two L's and nothing to pay. If you're going to be doing a lot of travelling by plane it'd be worth finding out more about the restrictions the carriers you're likely to use put on baggage size before you spend your money.

When not travelling the XL contains all my climbing gear, rucksacks and all, in one handy place and the two L's are full of bedding.

T.

In reply to phmcguin: Save yourself some money and buy Mountain Equipment ones from Cotswold - they've got huge discounts on these online or instore.

I find one massive one (I've got a 140L one from Mountain Co-op) too big - I reckon two slightly smaller ones make more sense, e.g. 100L and 40L, or 2x 70L.

Whatever size you go for, you pay a lot to have a TNF logo on them. The makrey for duffles is no longer cornered by TNF - the Me ones are seriously rugged pieces of kit too, and half the price.

In reply to phmcguin: I'd agree with Nick - ME's the way to go. My 100 l ME duffel's a great bit of kit which is still bomb proof despite being used regularly all over the world for the last 3 years.

In reply to Tallie: The mountain equipment ones have shit shoulder straps. I've got a Tatonka barrel http://www.nomadtravel.co.uk/catalog/view/tatonka-barrel-bag completely bombproof and has good straps. I have a large and I think it's more like 100L than 85.