UKC

So, my partner has finally decided to join me on my hiking trips again after her last experience doing so (sore feet, heavy bag etc etc weren't to her liking). 

One of the issues before was her equipment was heavy as it was all old stuff.  She definitely needs a new rucksack!  So... something in the 50-60 litre range which is as light as possible (she's tiny) but comfortable for up to multi-week trips.

She doesn't want to spend big dough on something fancy (or I'd have recommended crux, which I use even for my hiking, as its tough as hell and super light), so I guess there will be an acceptable trade off in durability if its cheaper and light... can't have it all.  She thinks she needs lots of pockets etc, but in reality I think a simple/minimalist rucksack is fine.  Water resistant handy, if that's not asking too much.

Any thoughts?  Experiences from shorter women would be extra helpful.  Deuter Aircontact Lite can be had for 100... seems a good start?

I have a ladies Deuter Air Contact Lite 35+10 for summer/short trips and the 60+10 for winter/longer trips. I'm not small (5'7") but the adjustability of the back length is great. I find them very comfortable, in fact comfort was my main preference. Even the Lite has a Deuter toughness to it.

The bags aren't over-fussy and though the main compartment can be separated into two sections, with the smaller bag I never bother to do that. Hip belt comfy with pocket and designed for female form. The 60 might be a bit tall for a short person but best thing is to try. 

Thanks for the feedback Kate.  So is there adjustment to shrink the back much smaller than how you have it?

Not much chance of trying things here in NL at the moment, but free returns solves that. 

Yes, should have mentioned that. I have mine at almost the fullest extent of adjustment, the back length can go a lot smaller than I have it.

I have no direct experience of the female version but the Osprey Exos 48 is a superb backpacking bag. On the smaller end of your scale (mine is 53 litres) but very light and a great carry. The female version is this one: https://www.ospreyeurope.com/shop/gb_en/eja-48-2018

 The website doesn't mention back length so that may be an issue.

Have a look at the lightwave packs, made by the same people as Crux. They're very comfortable and reasonably priced. 

Hi, I'm 5'3" and have carried some big packs - it is knackering on a short frame so I sympathise with your partner! 

A couple of suggestions:

You really need to try them on for comfort so it might be best to wait until the shops open again for the best result. Shoulder width comfort is just as important as back length, and this isn't always obvious in the technical spec. 

Heavy, large rucksacks on small frames can be really tiring if you're hiking miles but walking poles massively reduce the strain. Large, strong men don't always appreciate just what a huge difference poles make in spreading the load. 

Sorry I can't recommend specifics as my large multiday sack is pretty old now.

Good luck!

I’m not small (5’9”) but have long legs and short back. I have a couple of women’s Gregory packs (38l Jade and 60l Deva) that fit really well and are very comfortable with heavy loads.  

I bought a Deuter air contact lite 45+10 a few years ago, as a replacement for my 15 year old Osprey Ariel rucksack, and it has made all the difference, i really do enjoy multi day treks a lot more now. The Deuter ones are often not the lightest rucksacks, but I personally find the extra padding/comfort worth the additional few hundred grams.

The other benefit of replacing a 65l rucksack with a 45+10 one is that I have to be stricter in what I can and cannot take. Not having space for another t-shirt, set of trousers, etc also helps to keep the weight down . Having said that, I've used mine for 4-6 day solo treks in the mountains and have managed to fit everything I need in it.  

Just a thought - but if you're trying to convince your partner to try camping again, I might think about getting her a 40 litre rucksac max. She only needs a toothbrush, spoon, bowl, sleeping bag and jumper over what you would carry anyway to go camping on your own.

Nurture the enthusiasm and leave the 60 litre sack until later.

Haha... she convinced herself luckily.  I was looking at the larger sizes because ultimately it will be for multi week trips and she definitely won't be keen to buy a second one later.  Of course, for a 2 or 3 week trip we'd have a resupply point for freedried meals, but want to have it sized for a minimum of 1 week of supplies in 3 season conditions.

Moondancer also has a good point and that's exactly why my expedition sack is 57 litres, rather than 70, but I feel that 45 is just pushing it a bit far.  Lots of things strapped to the outside of a too small pack is just asking for unbalance and dampness.

And yes, we both use poles.  I'm a diehard pole advocate! 🤓

Thanks for the other suggestions everyone.  Re. The Gregory packs... unfortunately I missed a great deal on one of those from Needlesports a little while ago (about 30 mins too late before last was sold).  They seem well respected, but when I looked last night they were a little on the pricey side.

OwenM; ah hadn't thought of the lighter Crux ones.  Will investigate (though can't imagine crux ever being that cheap!  Haha).

Will also check out that Osprey tonight too.