Whenever wearing a rectangular prism with shoulder straps on back in this universe (or any other), I much prefer a sternum strap for humans made by humans (but that’s just me).
Pretty nice option for the weight, and despite its frumpiness I think it maintains a nice look. I see Bellroy still hasn't mastered the right level of friction to prevent straps from loosening by themselves (I first noticed it with the Transit 28 shoulder straps actually many years ago!)
Oh yeah - the strap slippage is especially problematic on the 38L version of the Transit Travel Pack - I never did a full review of that bag but that was one of my biggest frustrations with it - it beefed up the overly-slender shoulder straps on the 28L, but then in the process somehow made the shoulder straps even more likely to lose their place lol FWIW, on the Lite Travel Pack 30, I didn’t have as many problems with the shoulder straps maintaining their length but the “sternum strap” (aka wet noodle cosplaying as a sternum strap) …. Arrrgghghghghhghghg. sigh. I wonder sometimes if people just didn’t test it, didn’t care, or were otherwise forced to implement it against their will due to cost savings etc.? Because there surely is no way they didn’t notice the first second of wearing that the sternum strap can’t keep its position for more than a few seconds ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@TheMountainborn I often wonder how much real-world testing goes into various bags. Bellroy has been churning out so many models that I could believe that testing falls by the wayside!
Thanks for the review! About the tightness in the chest with the strap, I have the lite daypack and I can feel that, so I was afraid that was the same case with this one. Also, I completely forgot to think about what to do with my business papers (man) when using it on business trip! I guess the search continuous. Bellroy is releasing a Transit Workpack Pro 28L in october, that if they fix the straps and add a luggage passthrough looks promising.
Yasss, this chest strap needs to be seriously rethought through from the bottom, there’s just so many better solutions out there 😢 A 28L Transit Workpack is exciting!! Can’t wait for it to drop - I hope they add a (normal, designed by humans for humans) sternum strap to it this time around!!!
Yes the color of the luxrul is beautiful and it is a great decision, maybe one day they will add feet and straps. It would be nice to have a bigger bag during the colder months when we have to store gloves, beanies, scarves, etc ...
hits a lot of marks on my checklist: LIGHTWEIGHT!, clamshell opening, minimal organization, perfect size.. but the lack of waist strap and/or lifter straps, and a sad excuse for a sternum strap are kinda deal breakers for me. no water bottle holder isnt that big of a deal since you can always clip one on externally of fit a small one inside.
I know! I mentioned it in the video - the hydro homies gotta stay hydrated! In a part that I cut out for time I was wondering if they expected us to clip to the extra little two front loops using a carabiner or something 😂
@@TheMountainborn on their new pack they have this whatever that you can attach to the bag. I was expecting that we would be able to do it with this bag too
@@luegardener5921I like that idea, buuuuuut an external WBP help me realize if my WB is leaking or not. This is important when I am carrying hot coffee. I have had it leak inside bags and it sucks :)
Great job as usual. I’m surprised by your comment that this bag isn’t space-efficient (due to how they’ve split up the compartments), since most reviews mention that this bag feels way bigger than other 30L bags. Of course, you and Chase are the bag gurus, so I trust your judgement more. What do you think? Could it be due to your specific packing cubes and pouches? I have an Aer, and that one is so padded and has so many compartments that the internal capacity is really compromised (which seems to be a common theme with Aer bags). Thank you!
Hello there! Great question! So I think there’s two parts to this question - firstly, is this bag actually larger (or smaller) than its nominal liter rating (30 in this case), esp relative to other bags on the market in the same general size? Secondly, regardless of this, how efficiently does it use this actual volume (meaning even if the bag is say 35L in reality, how efficiently does it use those 35L?) The first question is one of size. Sadly, there is no standardized way to measure volume/capacity for bags, so each manufacturer implements their own methods. Some might count the sum total of all pockets (main compartment, front pocket, laptop compartment, side water bottle pockets when expanded, etc.), some might only count the main compartment, etc. They very rarely specify how they calculate capacities on their websites either so you are left guessing. Secondly, they use different methodologies to actually estimate the volume - some use a rectangular prism approximation based on the height/width/depth dimensions regardless of actual internal shape, some might fill it with some physical medium then measure how much of that it can hold, etc. And obviously some bags (think rectangular bags like luggage’s or clamshells) are easier to measure than others (think complex sloped patterned / curved bags) and some bags (roll tops, etc.) have volumes that can change, etc. The end result of this is that there is a significant degree of variation in actual volume versus whatever the nominal rated liter size is for any given bag, and this variation can be very pronounced even across bags from the same manufacturer, let alone bags of different shapes and constructions from different manufacturers. Purely on my own experience, I usually set the expectation in my head that the actual volume might vary as much as +/- 5 liters from the rated volume (so if I were to look at a dozen bags all nominally rated 35l I would not be surprised to find bags with an actual volume as small as 25l and all the way up to around 35l). Also as a consequence of this, I tend to think of bags as sized in “ranges” (so like 20-25l range, the 25-30-35l range, 35-40-45l range etc.). Regarding actual volume versus rated size, I would say that it’s probably accurate that the Bellroy Lite travel pack 30l’s actual volume is larger than 30l and it is certainly larger than some other common packs out there that are nominally rated 30L. There are also other bags out here also rated 30L that can hold more than the Lite pack, but overall I’d say it’s probably towards the larger side of bags that exist in that 25-35L range. But that is just talking about volume but doesn’t speak to the efficiency of use. IIRC, in my review I don’t think I said the bag doesn’t hold a lot (since I think it does hold a decent amount - this is mainly related to actual overall size/volume relative to nominal rated literage) but I think I mentioned that the bag isn’t necessarily the most efficient with how it uses that space (I don’t think I said it was terrible, just that it might not always be as high as one might expect) As an example of what I mean by efficiency (which I often label as “capacity to size” or “capacity to weight” ratio), perhaps the most theoretically space efficient construction of a backpack is a pure rectangular prism with only a single compartment, no padding or sidewalls and the absolute thinnest lightest material known to man as the body fabric. (Okay technically and mathematically a sphere is the most volume efficient prism possible but human beings don’t carry spherically shaped backpacks because of how we’re built so I’m ignoring that). In this ideal bag, the entirety of the capacity is 100% available to carry contents in the main compartment and it should be theoretically possible to fill just about every part of the main compartment with your belongings with basically no dead space or wasted areas. Of course, there are problems with this kind of backpack - it’s not very comfortable, it doesn’t work well when not 100% full, the contents aren’t protected, people need some minimal level of organization so they don’t need to rummage through their socks, underwear and dopp kit every time they need to find their passport, we carry laptops and cameras and those things are delicate and need padding, etc. etc. So manufacturers start implementing things like padded sidewalls (as you noted), various separate compartments (which starts robbing capacity by introducing structured walls and padding and stuff that takes away from the overall available packing volume), thick back panels and frame sheets etc. etc. All of these things start robbing away from the actual amount of stuff you can pack in the conceptual rectangular prism and this means the overall “efficiency” starts to decrease. In the case of the lite backpack, the inclusion of the built in organizer pouches (which overall I liked - after all there are more things that go into making a great bag than just absolute space use efficiency) means that if you use them, you’re left with “dead space” in the areas that exist “within” the rectangular prism of volume but “outside” of the the organizer mesh pockets you need to fit your stuff within. This is actually a fairly sizeable amount of dead space specially on the “front half” of the suitcase style opening - you easily lose several liters of capacity you can’t actually utilize because of it. So this is part of what I was trying to get at with the efficiency comment (though again, I don’t necessarily think that is the worst thing in the world - it depends on how/what a person prioritizes and their use case). Even if you filled the organizer pouches with just pure styrofoam peanuts or ping pong balls, you’re still going to be able to fit less in there than you would be able to if you didn’t use them and just filled a rectangular prism with them directly. But that’s not the only efficiency loss on this bag - the other big one is the suitcase style opening. Generally speaking, I find bags that split in half have a lower real world capacity to size ratio because the split basically means you are limited to filling two “half” volumes” versus one single “large” volume. If you imagine the converse - an efficient loading style is a top loading duffel where you basically just have a single D-shaped door at the top and you can basically fill the entire rectangular volume with stuff - you can fit large things in there, basically up to the entire height of the bag. This allows you to greatly reduce the dead space. But when you have a suitcase style split, you have a hard time loading in things that are taller than the “zipper line” of each half of the compartment. I mean, you can try, but when you try to close the suitcase, then the stuff falls out, etc. and that is why we are all familiar with the song and dance of people trying to slam their suitcases shut quickly whilst holding things in so they don’t fall out because of gravity, then trying to sit on the suitcase to squeeze it shut, etc. etc. - this is due to the space inefficiencies and size limitations introduced by the split opening. This also means there’s often a lot of “dead space” - whereas in like a top loading duffel you can just jam a bunch of stuff in from the top into the entire volume and leave very little dead space, with a suitcase split you often are forced to pack inefficiently since you just can’t fit certain stuff in very well and still be able to close the two halves. The lite pack suffers from this, especially in the left half of the split - so I found again, there tended to be some dead space that was difficult to utilize and still be able to shut the bag, which is why the overall efficiency was lowered. That isn’t to say it’s an overall inefficient bag - it’s not. It has some strong points - the right half of the bag is very very space efficient (single large rectangular prism, top loading and it also uses up more of the volume than the less efficient left half, and the bag has very thin sidewalls and backpanel (so loses less volume to structure etc versus say, an Aer bag as you mentioned). It also eschews too many multiple separate compartments which helps (and the laptop compartment is much smaller / thinner than say something like the big ones on Evergoods bags which tend to take up several liters on their own but all you’ll ever put in there is a laptop). So overall, given the construction and light materials and the light weight, I think it is really tempting to assume the bag will have very close to the “perfect” capacity to size ratio (efficiency) so I just wanted to point out that whilst it’s good, it might not be as efficient as one might imagine because of the two structural issues (sub organizer pouches and the suitcase split) that results in some dead space in actual packing use. Anyway, I hope this helps clarify slightly what I was trying to get at with some of my comments on the bag!
@@TheMountainborn Thanks a lot for such a thorough and thoughtful response! I totally see your point about space efficiency and the role that different design choices play, like the built-in organizers and suitcase-style openings. While I understand the trade-offs, I personally really appreciate a split main compartment that can fit exactly one Peak Design packing cube with no wasted space, especially height-wise. For me, that’s the gold standard, so I’d rather have a compartment that fits one cube perfectly plus another half where I still can use space to add additional stuff, than a larger one where two don’t quite fit right. I tend to carry shirts and business clothes and stacking up packing cubes results in a tone of wrinkles. And man, the lack of a water bottle pocket is such a missed opportunity, especially since there’s clearly room for it! Thanks again for taking the time to explain all this-your insights are always super valuable!
Between the bellroy and the Cotopaxi, which one do you prefer? I was looking at the Tortuga lite and Cotopaxi when this bellroy came out. Lack of a water bottle pocket was immediately annoying. But it's easily available here without the added EU cost
In my opinion, it’s a pretty big jump from 30 to 38L let alone from 26L to 38L…. In my opinion those sizes result in two completely different use cases (i.e. for any situation where you need a 38L bag the 26L bag isn’t going to cut it, and vice versa). At 38L you’re looking to replace a suitcase, not what is essentially a larger-sized EDC backpack, so if I were in your shoes I’d start by asking if I had any use cases that demanded a 38L bag (i.e. sometime where I’m traveling by suitcase that I want to shift into backpack for whatever reason). If you do have such a use case, then I think it makes sense to have a 38L bag (though personally I think there are far better options than the lite pack in the 38-40L range). If you don’t have these use cases, then there’s no need to even consider the 38L lite pack at this time IMO. The 30L vs the 26L is a trickier question. While I own it, I haven’t used the Venture Travel pack extensively (it’s in the queue just haven’t really gotten around to it yet) but basically yes, I would say the 30L lite packs more than the Venture 26. However, more than the carrying capacity, these are two pretty different packs in terms of how they are designed, their approach to organization and how they carry in use. So for me, I think that’s where I’d start with this question - do you think the different carry and organizational style of the Lite 30 will match with your needs and preferences? If no, then it’s an easy answer. If yes, then I think the next question to ask is if you really do need a bit more extra space in your loadouts than you can get in the 26L - I would start by laying out everything you usually carry in the Venture 26, then next to it lay out what you *wish* you could carry but have to give up or otherwise carry in some other bag, and see what that difference is (and if the other items are actually must haves or just nice to haves). If it’s enough that you think it warrants purchasing a moderately larger bag (and you can kind of compare your loadout to the loadout I show in this video to get a sense of what additional might/might not fit in the Lite 30) then I think you should consider the Lite 30L. If it’s just nice to have stuff or if you think you can reduce your loadout a bit to get it to continue to fit in the 26L then I think you might want to consider sticking with that (as I am a big believer in having a tightly-dialed kit). And if you’re not sure, feel free to add a comment mentioning your general desired loadout and I can try to give you a sense of if it will fit in the Lite 30 or not!
hey mountain - do you have any experience with the patagonia mlc 30? i feel like this is very similar in style to that bag, a little simpler and missing some features but cheaper because of it. I really love the mlc and wondering how this compares.
Hi constantsoro - so actually yes I do and I happened to have that in the “also consider” section but I cut it out to make the video come in under an hour. A few years ago I took a 3 week trip through the western US/Canada with the MLC30 as my only bag and was generally quite satisfied with it. One of the reasons I cut it from the review (besides for time) is because the version I have is from a few years ago and the bag has undergone some significant revisions so the current version available for sale quite different from the one that I have. That said, the tl;dr between the lite pack 30 and the black hole mini mlc30 that I have: * Many similarities as you mentioned - tuck away shoulder straps for a clean look, efficient rectangular prism shape, three way carry (shoulder/briefcase/backpack + luggage passthrough), suitcase style opening (in the older version I have - the new ones are a bit more clamshell I think), built in independently dimensioned mesh organization sub compartments, etc. * Lite pack does better: lighter by about 300g, fabric likely look better over time (versus my old version, new ones I’m not sure), cleaner, simpler look/approach and generally slightly less fussy with less zippers etc., handy top dump pocket for on-the-go travel * MLC does better: built in water bottle pocket, more robust overall, more robust load carriage system, much more internal organization esp for EDC, shoulder strap is included Overall i think these two bags are quite similar (though again, I haven’t tested the new MLC30 version that is for sale in 2024, mine is from like 2018/2019) and both make excellent choices to consider if one is interested in this general approach.
@@TheMountainborn thank you so much for taking the time to respond - great info and you continue to be one of the absolute elite bag reviewers on the platform. Thanks again!
I feel like this bag is specifically targeted at carry on travel around Australia and Asia, where carry on limits are often about 7kg. It's a niche often under-served by US/EU based bag companies. But what I don't get is the 30L capacity-that's really quite big. At that size you can easily pack a 10/12kg load into there, without even trying. If you're looking at your travel setup and want to save weight, the first place you'd start is your 30L of stuff, not the bag itself? The 38L option one is baffling to me, like what are you carrying that needs that much volume, but is light enough that your trying to shave 500gm off your bag. A collection of pillows? I feel like this bag would make way more sense at 22-25L.
Hi Frezzingaces - love this comment! Re being aimed at Australia/Asia travel - interesting perspective! I agree that very often NA/Western European bag makers get used to the rather generous carry on size and weigh limits and often lackadaisical enforcement (or lack there of) of even those constraints at the gate common for those markets when designing their bags…. And this can make for a rude awakening when a hapless traveler slinging their max-NA carry on dimension overloaded 40L pack is confronted with air routes in regions with very strict (and strictly enforced) dimensions and weight limits for carry on luggage regardless of cabin class. Given that the bag is one of the “big three” of one bag travel in terms of weight (usually bag, computer and either clothes/camera) the grams definitely matter for bags aimed at these markets. Re possibility to overpack even at 30L - yes definitely possible to fill this bag up with 10-12kg easily even at 30l and overwhelm the load carriage system IMO. That said, I’m wondering if the suitcase style opening would still be reasonably functional if they shrunk the bag down into the low 20L range? My guess is at that point the extra materials and structure etc. needed to implement the sub organizational pockets and the suitcase-style split might get out of whack with the functional size of the capacity they could provide and just end up adding weight for little benefit. ie. there’s not a lot of ways to split a 22l-25l bag into three sub compartments with a suitcase style split without ending up with some pretty teeny tiny shallow compartments that might not be usable (especially because the suitcase split is inherently a less volume efficient than a single big compartment). So if the design brief held that the suitcase style opening + sub org compartments was a critical component of the bag they were trying to design they may have had any choice but to scale it up to around the 28-30l range ish. (To be clear I am not defending it, just speculating as to maybe why they may have done it this way?) I literally LOLd at your comment about the 38L bag and carrying a collection of pillows 😂 I KNOW! The 38L version of this bag is crazy to me unless they silently added a more structure, support and hidden redesign of the load carriage etc. system in the larger one (which I’m pretty sure they didn’t based on product photos) - I wonder if they feel they had to do so just because people are so conditioned now to think that 40L = “Max carry on size” and so (especially newer one bag travelers or inexperienced packers) assume they’ll be constrained when traveling with one bag and automatically go for the largest carry on allowable size (fun fact - in Japanese we have a phrase “大は小を兼ねる” which literally means “big covers the small” - i.e. when choosing between a big and small thing, get the big one since it will “work” in both cases; needless to say I disagree with this philosophy LOL) Anyway just a guess as to why they may have felt compelled to offer this bag in two sizes, but I cannot ever imagine carrying 38L of stuff (in general) but especially in a bag designed like this …. Unless, as you pointed out, I needed to transport a collection of pillows across continents!! 😂
@@TheMountainborn That's a really good point about the suitcase style opening not working at small literage. I think your totally right that they were specifically looking to make a light, suitcase-style bag, and that forced the volume to be 30L. I feel like suitcase bags are very attractive to first time travel-backpack buyers, it just makes it look so 'travel' specific. I'd love to see them do a suitcase style in a non-lite version, with a full harness system and tougher material. Pakt needs some competition!
Maybe not the most useful answer but basically - depends on the seat type, your travel class, the airline and how full/how you’ve got the bag packed up. I would say if the bag is not fully packed up and there isn’t a bunch of stuff under the seat in front of you (sometimes there are electronics boxes etc. that get in the way) then it will likely fit under *most* airline seats including economy (though the latter might be tight). It should fit in all first/business/ almost all PE seats across almost all airlines. It will likely NOT fit under seats in really budget airlines and possibly in some small regional carriers etc but here you’re experience will really vary according to the airline etc. I would say the safest approach would be to plan on stashing this one in the overhead bin and your personal item (like a 20-24l backpack) under the seat in front of you but that in most cases you could *probably* get this one under a seat
I feel like 30L always need loadlifters and a option for a hip belt at least to lighten the load. I like Bellroy designs but I feel like they're always lacking something.
I get what you’re saying especially for heavier loadouts. My guess is that if they were to add load lifters to this particular bag they would also need to go with a much firmer (and heavier) frame sheet (the current on is super flexy and basically provides no load transference as I show in the video) so the load lifters would be effective - those two elements (straps + firmer heavier frame sheet) would probably push the weight up to the territory where it might be hard to term this a “Lite” travel pack. As I mention in the video, I think this bag works best when the total loadout weight is kept around ≈7-7.5kg ish…. for these kind of loads I think the bag works okay even without load lifters. (Above this weight it starts to struggle a bit). Additionally load lifters can be a bit fussy if rapid strap stowage/deployment is a priority (as it seems to be a highlight feature on here) so that may be one reason why they went without on this bag? Maybe more interesting is the 38L is also constructed with the same relatively svelte load carriage system (though I didn’t buy the 38L version so I don’t know personally) - I could see how that size would benefit from a more robust harness system including potentially load lifters!
Hi there! It is the official Leica leather camera case for the Leica D-Lux 8 leica-camera.com/en-int/photography/accessories/cases/camera-case-d-lux-8-leather-black
Hi @Kaisersozze - this is a custom-made Dyneema packing cube :) If you're interested in making your own gear I recommend checking out this channel - I learned and got a lot of inspiration from it (sadly they don't post too much anymore) th-cam.com/video/G8I4yC55tL0/w-d-xo.html
i feel the intended use case for this backpack is to be paired with a sling… this would solve a lot of the issues you mention: 1- lack of edc organisation is no longer an issue when the edc is stored in the sling 2- no need to pack a daybag when you’re carrying a sling already use this bag as the overhead and a sling as the underseat seems like a perfect combo, its not a goldilocks bag its a 1.5 bagger 😂 still my main concern with bellroy bags is the comfort, as they’re consistently demonstrated in the past that the harness is inadequate, time will tell if this is different
Definitely! I forget if I mention it in this video (probably in passing) but I almost always rock a small little sling with me when I’m one bag traveling - I recently reviewed the Bellroy Tokyo Sidebag 2L sling which is my current favorite companion/plane use sling that I use and I feel it pairs really well with this bag, though it’s too small to carry a device (so that would be the one thing I might still need a companion daypack for if I needed to go out and about with a laptop etc.). Much love for all the 1.5 bagger homies out there!!! ❤️☺️ Definitely hear you on the harness system and comfort question - I can’t imagine what it would be like to try to carry a 38L version of this bag with this same harness system. 😅
The Nomad Lane Bento bag is a great casual weekender style bag - I considered including it as one of the "also consider" options in my recent review of the Waterfield Designs X-Air Duffel (you might want to check out that video if you're interested in the general rectangular weekender-style/duffle style bags like the Bento). It also reminds me a little bit of the Pakt Travel Duffel as well. In my experience weekender style bags often tend to offer good capacity-to-size/weight ratios and generally look sleeker and cleaner than backpack style bags. The often (but not always) tend to offer easier loading/unloading at home/destination as well. The main downside (IMO) with weekender style bags relative to backpacks is of course the load carriage comfort versus distance and/or weight; when portaging over any substantial distance or with any substantial weight, backpack style bags quickly prove superior in terms of comfort and ease of carriage relative to any hand-carry style bag. Additionally, they don't usually make good destination-use bags (since nobody really casually walks around with 24L-30L weekenders as their main EDC bag to stop by the market or go to the coffee shop once at the destination) which means you often need to carry another bag with you. I personally enjoy both styles of bags (as you can tell from my various reviews) and I think the Bento V4 makes for a nice option especially when paired with a roller bag and or for more urban/city style travel. (or business perhaps?) Great suggestion!
@TheMountainborn thank you for the suggestion. There are too many significant differences from PAKT and Nomad Lane, and the X-Air duffle is not a suitcase style clamshell. It does not offer the access points without having to open the bag. The laptop sleeve position is not the same secure middle of the bag. It may be better suited for the infrequent traveler.
Ah, perhaps there was a miscommunication, I was not suggesting you necessarily try those bags (it sounds like you are happy with the Bento bag - great for you!), I was just merely talking about them as existing in the same conceptual space (weekender/rectangular-duffle style travel personal item).
Whenever wearing a rectangular prism with shoulder straps on back in this universe (or any other), I much prefer a sternum strap for humans made by humans (but that’s just me).
Ahahahaha - why hello there fellow human! This comment made me LOLz so it gets pinned as a reward! 😂
Please carry on doing your normal human things!
Pretty nice option for the weight, and despite its frumpiness I think it maintains a nice look. I see Bellroy still hasn't mastered the right level of friction to prevent straps from loosening by themselves (I first noticed it with the Transit 28 shoulder straps actually many years ago!)
Oh yeah - the strap slippage is especially problematic on the 38L version of the Transit Travel Pack - I never did a full review of that bag but that was one of my biggest frustrations with it - it beefed up the overly-slender shoulder straps on the 28L, but then in the process somehow made the shoulder straps even more likely to lose their place lol
FWIW, on the Lite Travel Pack 30, I didn’t have as many problems with the shoulder straps maintaining their length but the “sternum strap” (aka wet noodle cosplaying as a sternum strap) …. Arrrgghghghghhghghg. sigh. I wonder sometimes if people just didn’t test it, didn’t care, or were otherwise forced to implement it against their will due to cost savings etc.? Because there surely is no way they didn’t notice the first second of wearing that the sternum strap can’t keep its position for more than a few seconds ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@TheMountainborn I often wonder how much real-world testing goes into various bags. Bellroy has been churning out so many models that I could believe that testing falls by the wayside!
Thanks for the review! About the tightness in the chest with the strap, I have the lite daypack and I can feel that, so I was afraid that was the same case with this one. Also, I completely forgot to think about what to do with my business papers (man) when using it on business trip! I guess the search continuous. Bellroy is releasing a Transit Workpack Pro 28L in october, that if they fix the straps and add a luggage passthrough looks promising.
Yasss, this chest strap needs to be seriously rethought through from the bottom, there’s just so many better solutions out there 😢
A 28L Transit Workpack is exciting!! Can’t wait for it to drop - I hope they add a (normal, designed by humans for humans) sternum strap to it this time around!!!
Yes the color of the luxrul is beautiful and it is a great decision, maybe one day they will add feet and straps. It would be nice to have a bigger bag during the colder months when we have to store gloves, beanies, scarves, etc ...
hits a lot of marks on my checklist: LIGHTWEIGHT!, clamshell opening, minimal organization, perfect size..
but the lack of waist strap and/or lifter straps, and a sad excuse for a sternum strap are kinda deal breakers for me. no water bottle holder isnt that big of a deal since you can always clip one on externally of fit a small one inside.
I would love it, BUT Where is my water bottle pocket?
I know! I mentioned it in the video - the hydro homies gotta stay hydrated! In a part that I cut out for time I was wondering if they expected us to clip to the extra little two front loops using a carabiner or something 😂
@@TheMountainborn on their new pack they have this whatever that you can attach to the bag. I was expecting that we would be able to do it with this bag too
Use a square flat memo bottle on the front slash pocket 👌🏼
@@luegardener5921I like that idea, buuuuuut an external WBP help me realize if my WB is leaking or not. This is important when I am carrying hot coffee. I have had it leak inside bags and it sucks :)
Great job as usual. I’m surprised by your comment that this bag isn’t space-efficient (due to how they’ve split up the compartments), since most reviews mention that this bag feels way bigger than other 30L bags. Of course, you and Chase are the bag gurus, so I trust your judgement more. What do you think? Could it be due to your specific packing cubes and pouches? I have an Aer, and that one is so padded and has so many compartments that the internal capacity is really compromised (which seems to be a common theme with Aer bags). Thank you!
Hello there! Great question! So I think there’s two parts to this question - firstly, is this bag actually larger (or smaller) than its nominal liter rating (30 in this case), esp relative to other bags on the market in the same general size? Secondly, regardless of this, how efficiently does it use this actual volume (meaning even if the bag is say 35L in reality, how efficiently does it use those 35L?)
The first question is one of size. Sadly, there is no standardized way to measure volume/capacity for bags, so each manufacturer implements their own methods. Some might count the sum total of all pockets (main compartment, front pocket, laptop compartment, side water bottle pockets when expanded, etc.), some might only count the main compartment, etc. They very rarely specify how they calculate capacities on their websites either so you are left guessing. Secondly, they use different methodologies to actually estimate the volume - some use a rectangular prism approximation based on the height/width/depth dimensions regardless of actual internal shape, some might fill it with some physical medium then measure how much of that it can hold, etc. And obviously some bags (think rectangular bags like luggage’s or clamshells) are easier to measure than others (think complex sloped patterned / curved bags) and some bags (roll tops, etc.) have volumes that can change, etc.
The end result of this is that there is a significant degree of variation in actual volume versus whatever the nominal rated liter size is for any given bag, and this variation can be very pronounced even across bags from the same manufacturer, let alone bags of different shapes and constructions from different manufacturers. Purely on my own experience, I usually set the expectation in my head that the actual volume might vary as much as +/- 5 liters from the rated volume (so if I were to look at a dozen bags all nominally rated 35l I would not be surprised to find bags with an actual volume as small as 25l and all the way up to around 35l). Also as a consequence of this, I tend to think of bags as sized in “ranges” (so like 20-25l range, the 25-30-35l range, 35-40-45l range etc.).
Regarding actual volume versus rated size, I would say that it’s probably accurate that the Bellroy Lite travel pack 30l’s actual volume is larger than 30l and it is certainly larger than some other common packs out there that are nominally rated 30L. There are also other bags out here also rated 30L that can hold more than the Lite pack, but overall I’d say it’s probably towards the larger side of bags that exist in that 25-35L range.
But that is just talking about volume but doesn’t speak to the efficiency of use. IIRC, in my review I don’t think I said the bag doesn’t hold a lot (since I think it does hold a decent amount - this is mainly related to actual overall size/volume relative to nominal rated literage) but I think I mentioned that the bag isn’t necessarily the most efficient with how it uses that space (I don’t think I said it was terrible, just that it might not always be as high as one might expect)
As an example of what I mean by efficiency (which I often label as “capacity to size” or “capacity to weight” ratio), perhaps the most theoretically space efficient construction of a backpack is a pure rectangular prism with only a single compartment, no padding or sidewalls and the absolute thinnest lightest material known to man as the body fabric. (Okay technically and mathematically a sphere is the most volume efficient prism possible but human beings don’t carry spherically shaped backpacks because of how we’re built so I’m ignoring that). In this ideal bag, the entirety of the capacity is 100% available to carry contents in the main compartment and it should be theoretically possible to fill just about every part of the main compartment with your belongings with basically no dead space or wasted areas.
Of course, there are problems with this kind of backpack - it’s not very comfortable, it doesn’t work well when not 100% full, the contents aren’t protected, people need some minimal level of organization so they don’t need to rummage through their socks, underwear and dopp kit every time they need to find their passport, we carry laptops and cameras and those things are delicate and need padding, etc. etc. So manufacturers start implementing things like padded sidewalls (as you noted), various separate compartments (which starts robbing capacity by introducing structured walls and padding and stuff that takes away from the overall available packing volume), thick back panels and frame sheets etc. etc. All of these things start robbing away from the actual amount of stuff you can pack in the conceptual rectangular prism and this means the overall “efficiency” starts to decrease. In the case of the lite backpack, the inclusion of the built in organizer pouches (which overall I liked - after all there are more things that go into making a great bag than just absolute space use efficiency) means that if you use them, you’re left with “dead space” in the areas that exist “within” the rectangular prism of volume but “outside” of the the organizer mesh pockets you need to fit your stuff within. This is actually a fairly sizeable amount of dead space specially on the “front half” of the suitcase style opening - you easily lose several liters of capacity you can’t actually utilize because of it. So this is part of what I was trying to get at with the efficiency comment (though again, I don’t necessarily think that is the worst thing in the world - it depends on how/what a person prioritizes and their use case). Even if you filled the organizer pouches with just pure styrofoam peanuts or ping pong balls, you’re still going to be able to fit less in there than you would be able to if you didn’t use them and just filled a rectangular prism with them directly.
But that’s not the only efficiency loss on this bag - the other big one is the suitcase style opening. Generally speaking, I find bags that split in half have a lower real world capacity to size ratio because the split basically means you are limited to filling two “half” volumes” versus one single “large” volume. If you imagine the converse - an efficient loading style is a top loading duffel where you basically just have a single D-shaped door at the top and you can basically fill the entire rectangular volume with stuff - you can fit large things in there, basically up to the entire height of the bag. This allows you to greatly reduce the dead space.
But when you have a suitcase style split, you have a hard time loading in things that are taller than the “zipper line” of each half of the compartment. I mean, you can try, but when you try to close the suitcase, then the stuff falls out, etc. and that is why we are all familiar with the song and dance of people trying to slam their suitcases shut quickly whilst holding things in so they don’t fall out because of gravity, then trying to sit on the suitcase to squeeze it shut, etc. etc. - this is due to the space inefficiencies and size limitations introduced by the split opening. This also means there’s often a lot of “dead space” - whereas in like a top loading duffel you can just jam a bunch of stuff in from the top into the entire volume and leave very little dead space, with a suitcase split you often are forced to pack inefficiently since you just can’t fit certain stuff in very well and still be able to close the two halves.
The lite pack suffers from this, especially in the left half of the split - so I found again, there tended to be some dead space that was difficult to utilize and still be able to shut the bag, which is why the overall efficiency was lowered.
That isn’t to say it’s an overall inefficient bag - it’s not. It has some strong points - the right half of the bag is very very space efficient (single large rectangular prism, top loading and it also uses up more of the volume than the less efficient left half, and the bag has very thin sidewalls and backpanel (so loses less volume to structure etc versus say, an Aer bag as you mentioned). It also eschews too many multiple separate compartments which helps (and the laptop compartment is much smaller / thinner than say something like the big ones on Evergoods bags which tend to take up several liters on their own but all you’ll ever put in there is a laptop). So overall, given the construction and light materials and the light weight, I think it is really tempting to assume the bag will have very close to the “perfect” capacity to size ratio (efficiency) so I just wanted to point out that whilst it’s good, it might not be as efficient as one might imagine because of the two structural issues (sub organizer pouches and the suitcase split) that results in some dead space in actual packing use.
Anyway, I hope this helps clarify slightly what I was trying to get at with some of my comments on the bag!
@@TheMountainborn Thanks a lot for such a thorough and thoughtful response! I totally see your point about space efficiency and the role that different design choices play, like the built-in organizers and suitcase-style openings. While I understand the trade-offs, I personally really appreciate a split main compartment that can fit exactly one Peak Design packing cube with no wasted space, especially height-wise. For me, that’s the gold standard, so I’d rather have a compartment that fits one cube perfectly plus another half where I still can use space to add additional stuff, than a larger one where two don’t quite fit right. I tend to carry shirts and business clothes and stacking up packing cubes results in a tone of wrinkles. And man, the lack of a water bottle pocket is such a missed opportunity, especially since there’s clearly room for it!
Thanks again for taking the time to explain all this-your insights are always super valuable!
Between the bellroy and the Cotopaxi, which one do you prefer?
I was looking at the Tortuga lite and Cotopaxi when this bellroy came out.
Lack of a water bottle pocket was immediately annoying. But it's easily available here without the added EU cost
would love to see if this(30L) can fit much more than the bellroy venture 26L.... or should you just go for the live travel 38L?
In my opinion, it’s a pretty big jump from 30 to 38L let alone from 26L to 38L…. In my opinion those sizes result in two completely different use cases (i.e. for any situation where you need a 38L bag the 26L bag isn’t going to cut it, and vice versa). At 38L you’re looking to replace a suitcase, not what is essentially a larger-sized EDC backpack, so if I were in your shoes I’d start by asking if I had any use cases that demanded a 38L bag (i.e. sometime where I’m traveling by suitcase that I want to shift into backpack for whatever reason). If you do have such a use case, then I think it makes sense to have a 38L bag (though personally I think there are far better options than the lite pack in the 38-40L range). If you don’t have these use cases, then there’s no need to even consider the 38L lite pack at this time IMO.
The 30L vs the 26L is a trickier question. While I own it, I haven’t used the Venture Travel pack extensively (it’s in the queue just haven’t really gotten around to it yet) but basically yes, I would say the 30L lite packs more than the Venture 26. However, more than the carrying capacity, these are two pretty different packs in terms of how they are designed, their approach to organization and how they carry in use. So for me, I think that’s where I’d start with this question - do you think the different carry and organizational style of the Lite 30 will match with your needs and preferences?
If no, then it’s an easy answer. If yes, then I think the next question to ask is if you really do need a bit more extra space in your loadouts than you can get in the 26L - I would start by laying out everything you usually carry in the Venture 26, then next to it lay out what you *wish* you could carry but have to give up or otherwise carry in some other bag, and see what that difference is (and if the other items are actually must haves or just nice to haves). If it’s enough that you think it warrants purchasing a moderately larger bag (and you can kind of compare your loadout to the loadout I show in this video to get a sense of what additional might/might not fit in the Lite 30) then I think you should consider the Lite 30L. If it’s just nice to have stuff or if you think you can reduce your loadout a bit to get it to continue to fit in the 26L then I think you might want to consider sticking with that (as I am a big believer in having a tightly-dialed kit).
And if you’re not sure, feel free to add a comment mentioning your general desired loadout and I can try to give you a sense of if it will fit in the Lite 30 or not!
hey mountain - do you have any experience with the patagonia mlc 30? i feel like this is very similar in style to that bag, a little simpler and missing some features but cheaper because of it. I really love the mlc and wondering how this compares.
Hi constantsoro - so actually yes I do and I happened to have that in the “also consider” section but I cut it out to make the video come in under an hour. A few years ago I took a 3 week trip through the western US/Canada with the MLC30 as my only bag and was generally quite satisfied with it.
One of the reasons I cut it from the review (besides for time) is because the version I have is from a few years ago and the bag has undergone some significant revisions so the current version available for sale quite different from the one that I have.
That said, the tl;dr between the lite pack 30 and the black hole mini mlc30 that I have:
* Many similarities as you mentioned - tuck away shoulder straps for a clean look, efficient rectangular prism shape, three way carry (shoulder/briefcase/backpack + luggage passthrough), suitcase style opening (in the older version I have - the new ones are a bit more clamshell I think), built in independently dimensioned mesh organization sub compartments, etc.
* Lite pack does better: lighter by about 300g, fabric likely look better over time (versus my old version, new ones I’m not sure), cleaner, simpler look/approach and generally slightly less fussy with less zippers etc., handy top dump pocket for on-the-go travel
* MLC does better: built in water bottle pocket, more robust overall, more robust load carriage system, much more internal organization esp for EDC, shoulder strap is included
Overall i think these two bags are quite similar (though again, I haven’t tested the new MLC30 version that is for sale in 2024, mine is from like 2018/2019) and both make excellent choices to consider if one is interested in this general approach.
@@TheMountainborn thank you so much for taking the time to respond - great info and you continue to be one of the absolute elite bag reviewers on the platform. Thanks again!
hi, superb -see ya- )
Hello! Thank you so much!!! 🖐️☺️
I feel like this bag is specifically targeted at carry on travel around Australia and Asia, where carry on limits are often about 7kg. It's a niche often under-served by US/EU based bag companies. But what I don't get is the 30L capacity-that's really quite big. At that size you can easily pack a 10/12kg load into there, without even trying. If you're looking at your travel setup and want to save weight, the first place you'd start is your 30L of stuff, not the bag itself? The 38L option one is baffling to me, like what are you carrying that needs that much volume, but is light enough that your trying to shave 500gm off your bag. A collection of pillows? I feel like this bag would make way more sense at 22-25L.
Hi Frezzingaces - love this comment! Re being aimed at Australia/Asia travel - interesting perspective! I agree that very often NA/Western European bag makers get used to the rather generous carry on size and weigh limits and often lackadaisical enforcement (or lack there of) of even those constraints at the gate common for those markets when designing their bags…. And this can make for a rude awakening when a hapless traveler slinging their max-NA carry on dimension overloaded 40L pack is confronted with air routes in regions with very strict (and strictly enforced) dimensions and weight limits for carry on luggage regardless of cabin class. Given that the bag is one of the “big three” of one bag travel in terms of weight (usually bag, computer and either clothes/camera) the grams definitely matter for bags aimed at these markets.
Re possibility to overpack even at 30L - yes definitely possible to fill this bag up with 10-12kg easily even at 30l and overwhelm the load carriage system IMO. That said, I’m wondering if the suitcase style opening would still be reasonably functional if they shrunk the bag down into the low 20L range? My guess is at that point the extra materials and structure etc. needed to implement the sub organizational pockets and the suitcase-style split might get out of whack with the functional size of the capacity they could provide and just end up adding weight for little benefit. ie. there’s not a lot of ways to split a 22l-25l bag into three sub compartments with a suitcase style split without ending up with some pretty teeny tiny shallow compartments that might not be usable (especially because the suitcase split is inherently a less volume efficient than a single big compartment). So if the design brief held that the suitcase style opening + sub org compartments was a critical component of the bag they were trying to design they may have had any choice but to scale it up to around the 28-30l range ish.
(To be clear I am not defending it, just speculating as to maybe why they may have done it this way?)
I literally LOLd at your comment about the 38L bag and carrying a collection of pillows 😂 I KNOW! The 38L version of this bag is crazy to me unless they silently added a more structure, support and hidden redesign of the load carriage etc. system in the larger one (which I’m pretty sure they didn’t based on product photos) - I wonder if they feel they had to do so just because people are so conditioned now to think that 40L = “Max carry on size” and so (especially newer one bag travelers or inexperienced packers) assume they’ll be constrained when traveling with one bag and automatically go for the largest carry on allowable size (fun fact - in Japanese we have a phrase “大は小を兼ねる” which literally means “big covers the small” - i.e. when choosing between a big and small thing, get the big one since it will “work” in both cases; needless to say I disagree with this philosophy LOL)
Anyway just a guess as to why they may have felt compelled to offer this bag in two sizes, but I cannot ever imagine carrying 38L of stuff (in general) but especially in a bag designed like this …. Unless, as you pointed out, I needed to transport a collection of pillows across continents!! 😂
@@TheMountainborn That's a really good point about the suitcase style opening not working at small literage. I think your totally right that they were specifically looking to make a light, suitcase-style bag, and that forced the volume to be 30L. I feel like suitcase bags are very attractive to first time travel-backpack buyers, it just makes it look so 'travel' specific.
I'd love to see them do a suitcase style in a non-lite version, with a full harness system and tougher material. Pakt needs some competition!
Would it fit under the seat
Maybe not the most useful answer but basically - depends on the seat type, your travel class, the airline and how full/how you’ve got the bag packed up. I would say if the bag is not fully packed up and there isn’t a bunch of stuff under the seat in front of you (sometimes there are electronics boxes etc. that get in the way) then it will likely fit under *most* airline seats including economy (though the latter might be tight). It should fit in all first/business/ almost all PE seats across almost all airlines. It will likely NOT fit under seats in really budget airlines and possibly in some small regional carriers etc but here you’re experience will really vary according to the airline etc.
I would say the safest approach would be to plan on stashing this one in the overhead bin and your personal item (like a 20-24l backpack) under the seat in front of you but that in most cases you could *probably* get this one under a seat
I feel like 30L always need loadlifters and a option for a hip belt at least to lighten the load. I like Bellroy designs but I feel like they're always lacking something.
I get what you’re saying especially for heavier loadouts. My guess is that if they were to add load lifters to this particular bag they would also need to go with a much firmer (and heavier) frame sheet (the current on is super flexy and basically provides no load transference as I show in the video) so the load lifters would be effective - those two elements (straps + firmer heavier frame sheet) would probably push the weight up to the territory where it might be hard to term this a “Lite” travel pack. As I mention in the video, I think this bag works best when the total loadout weight is kept around ≈7-7.5kg ish…. for these kind of loads I think the bag works okay even without load lifters. (Above this weight it starts to struggle a bit). Additionally load lifters can be a bit fussy if rapid strap stowage/deployment is a priority (as it seems to be a highlight feature on here) so that may be one reason why they went without on this bag?
Maybe more interesting is the 38L is also constructed with the same relatively svelte load carriage system (though I didn’t buy the 38L version so I don’t know personally) - I could see how that size would benefit from a more robust harness system including potentially load lifters!
whats the camera molded leather case?
Hi there! It is the official Leica leather camera case for the Leica D-Lux 8
leica-camera.com/en-int/photography/accessories/cases/camera-case-d-lux-8-leather-black
41:18 Whats the name of this pouch? Stair?
Hi @Kaisersozze - this is a custom-made Dyneema packing cube :)
If you're interested in making your own gear I recommend checking out this channel - I learned and got a lot of inspiration from it (sadly they don't post too much anymore)
th-cam.com/video/G8I4yC55tL0/w-d-xo.html
@@TheMountainborn okay thanks
i feel the intended use case for this backpack is to be paired with a sling… this would solve a lot of the issues you mention: 1- lack of edc organisation is no longer an issue when the edc is stored in the sling 2- no need to pack a daybag when you’re carrying a sling already
use this bag as the overhead and a sling as the underseat seems like a perfect combo, its not a goldilocks bag its a 1.5 bagger 😂
still my main concern with bellroy bags is the comfort, as they’re consistently demonstrated in the past that the harness is inadequate, time will tell if this is different
Definitely! I forget if I mention it in this video (probably in passing) but I almost always rock a small little sling with me when I’m one bag traveling - I recently reviewed the Bellroy Tokyo Sidebag 2L sling which is my current favorite companion/plane use sling that I use and I feel it pairs really well with this bag, though it’s too small to carry a device (so that would be the one thing I might still need a companion daypack for if I needed to go out and about with a laptop etc.).
Much love for all the 1.5 bagger homies out there!!! ❤️☺️
Definitely hear you on the harness system and comfort question - I can’t imagine what it would be like to try to carry a 38L version of this bag with this same harness system. 😅
I can pack all that into the Bento Bag v4...no backpack
The Nomad Lane Bento bag is a great casual weekender style bag - I considered including it as one of the "also consider" options in my recent review of the Waterfield Designs X-Air Duffel (you might want to check out that video if you're interested in the general rectangular weekender-style/duffle style bags like the Bento). It also reminds me a little bit of the Pakt Travel Duffel as well.
In my experience weekender style bags often tend to offer good capacity-to-size/weight ratios and generally look sleeker and cleaner than backpack style bags. The often (but not always) tend to offer easier loading/unloading at home/destination as well.
The main downside (IMO) with weekender style bags relative to backpacks is of course the load carriage comfort versus distance and/or weight; when portaging over any substantial distance or with any substantial weight, backpack style bags quickly prove superior in terms of comfort and ease of carriage relative to any hand-carry style bag. Additionally, they don't usually make good destination-use bags (since nobody really casually walks around with 24L-30L weekenders as their main EDC bag to stop by the market or go to the coffee shop once at the destination) which means you often need to carry another bag with you.
I personally enjoy both styles of bags (as you can tell from my various reviews) and I think the Bento V4 makes for a nice option especially when paired with a roller bag and or for more urban/city style travel. (or business perhaps?)
Great suggestion!
@TheMountainborn thank you for the suggestion. There are too many significant differences from PAKT and Nomad Lane, and the X-Air duffle is not a suitcase style clamshell. It does not offer the access points without having to open the bag. The laptop sleeve position is not the same secure middle of the bag. It may be better suited for the infrequent traveler.
Ah, perhaps there was a miscommunication, I was not suggesting you necessarily try those bags (it sounds like you are happy with the Bento bag - great for you!), I was just merely talking about them as existing in the same conceptual space (weekender/rectangular-duffle style travel personal item).