| Re: messenger bags?
In article <3627qiF4qqv7cU1@individual.net>, Matt O'Toole
<matt@deltanet.com> wrote:
> Messenger bags and backpacks each have their good and bad points. A messenger
> bag is much easier to get into and more convenient for shopping, etc. But in
> my
> experience, no matter how well designed they are, messenger bags still load
> your
> body asymmetrically, which can cause neck soreness, etc. Good backpacks can
> carry bigger loads in comfort, if you can stand your back getting sweaty.
> Personally I use a backpack, because I happen to have one that I like. I can
> comfortably carry 20-30 LB of canned goods and produce, which I don't think I
> could with a messenger bag.
Yes, backpacks have their uses also: For big shopping trips I strap on
a 60 litre capacity backpack--the messenger bag is inadequate in these
cases. And, normally, for light loads--a lunch, for instance--I favor a
light day (back)pack; the heavier, waterproofed courier bag is
overkill.
Still, I've never donned a backpack that was more comfortable than the
mess. bag. Your point about its loading the back assymetrically is well
taken, but that hasn't proven a sore point in my case. Indeed, I find
the mess. bag's load is distributed more comfortably; this bag is
designed to wrap around my back rather than hang inflexibly from the
shoulder. Where a back pack pulls at the shoulders and perches the load
higher, the mess. bag sits lower and more sympathetically to the body's
movements. This saves strain on the arms and shoulders.
But, of course, all messenger bags are not created equal--as I
mentioned this bag was not an off-the-shelf item.
>
> BTW, Timlbuk 2 does custom messenger bags too, as well as their standard ones.
> You can get just about any color you want. The suggestion to look for a
> Patagonia bag on sale is a good one too.
>
> If I commuted or otherwise hauled stuff daily, I would probably have racks and
> panniers.
>
Nothing beats having nothing on your back.
luke
|