Norwegian rucksack

S

Seahawk

Joined
Oct 2, 1999
Messages
245
Has anybody tried the surplus Norwegian Rucksacks that are being sold at sites like Brigade Quartermasters? It is similar to the German Mountain Ruck that was discussed here not too long ago, however, the Norwegian Ruck has an external frame. Any feedback would be appreciated.
 
I've had numerous Norwegian rucksacks through out the years, and have used them on everything from daytrips to month long journeys. The manufacturer is almost certainly the firm of "Bergans", the military packs being virtually identical to those offered on the civilian market in Scandinavia. They are well made, rugged packs. I find the design better suited to shorter trips, and started carrying a full frame type pack on trips lasting more than a few days. One weak point is lack of external attachment points for a tent, sleeping bag, etc. This was the primary reason for my switching to a full frame type. I currently own two Bergans packs, and I use them quite a lot. BTW, I'm in Maine too, near Machias, where are you?
 
Bergen "kidney killers" are well made, very tough, and totally obsolete. Modern carrying systems (and even the military finally came around over 150 years late) transfer roughly 75% of the load to the pelvis via a padded waistbelt and system of struts and have much superior padding on shoulder straps. If the bag is something to store the stuff in the vehicle and carry short distances, anything will do. If you plan on carrying serious loads substantial distances, consider a modern pack. (The original patent for load-bearing equipment that shifted most of the load to the hips was issued in the 1860's [wood structs to a broad canvas ammo belt], but the U.S. military thought it, like magazine rifles, was a bad idea. The Surgeon General of the Army refloated the idea in 1917 but the military still thought it was a bad idea and stuck to haversacks well past Vietnam [Has anyone here seen ALICE?]. Oh well.)
 
Seahawk- the pack in the link you posted is virtually identical to what I have, only mine are grey. As Thomas affirms, not the ideal pack for huge loads or extended treks, but they do have their place in life.
 
Thomas, I understand what you are saying. I don't intead to carry heavy loads with that pack. Since many daypacks lack a frame and only have a 1-2in waist belt, it does not seem like they transfer too much weight to the hips. Since they can be picked up cheap and the German ruck got good reviews here, I thought with the frame I could add at least a similar waist belt or maybe event a padded waist belt from a Camp Trails or Kelty external frame. If it worked, I would have a cheap day pack, if not I would have a cheap bag for the truck, short trips and carrying stuff to and from work.

X39 have you tried to modify any of your packs with a hip belt? What is the maximum load you have comfortably carried in one.
 
As most light infantrymen know, there are a few things one cannot skimp on... first being boots, the second being a good ruck. If you plan on ever actually walking with it for any extended period of time, get the best fitting, lightest and well balanced ruck you can afford or steal... If humping the pack around isn't a big possibility, then you can go cheap.
 
The most I've lugged a Bergans pack continuously (meaning no vehicle rides) was a week long back country trek over the continental divide in the back country of Montana. I was carrying about 45 pounds. It would have been a far more enjoyable trip with a more modern pack, and it was after this trip that I picked up a Kelty frame pack, which was a vast improvement for extended treks. As I said earlier, I still use the Bergans packs a lot, mainly because they are far less bulky and more vehicle friendly than a full frame pack. For day trips with a light load, the Bergans pack is perfectly adequate, and a far cry better than the glorified book bags a lot of people carry. The Bergans pack can also be worn while riding a bicycle or motorcycle, don't know whether that is an issue for you or not, but good to know. I have also found the Bergans carries well while cross country skiing, but I've never used the Kelty in that role, so I can't offer a comparison. I've never considered putting a belt on one, I've got the Kelty for the heavier loads, so why bother?
For the price and your intended use, I'd say you'll do okay with one.
 
Hi folks... I've been in the norwegian army, so I've tried that rucksack a lot... Many things can be said about it, but when properly adjusted, it's usable. But long trips is a bad idea... Been using it for long trips (20-30 miles, 15-20kg), and that's definately not anything I would do again...
:yawn:
 
I can second that. My advise, buy another rucksack. The only reason I ever used one was that I had to.

Tor
 
Calling that pack "usable" is stretching it as far as I can; it is built on entirely outmoded ideas. I have carried that blasted thing for a lot longer than I would have wanted to, and it does pretty much all the wrong things to your back: it pulls your shoulders back and presses your hips forward.

Bergans does, however, make the best heavy load rucksack I have come across, the 130 liter PowerFrame. 'Course, it'll cost about 30-35 times as much as the old military version. Estimate you can comfortably carry at least 3 times as much weight with the PowerFrame, though.
 
Thanks for the replies. I had been kicking around some ideas for modifying gear and look at the Norwegian pack as an inexpensive item to experiment on. I have other daypacks to use and so far have served me well. However, since I've never tried to modify anything before I was looking for something that I wouldn't regret spending the money on if it didn't work out. If I do decide to experiment on this pack or any other screwy idea I have, I'll post the results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top