Folding kayak with storage in hull?

[DLee]

It's certainly a good thing we can play amongst ourselves, ha.

DN, I see what you mean... yeah, that that'll probably work... might look a little like an A-10 Warthog... but that aint so bad either. You guys definitely win the award for the coolest, massively packed, expedition grade, rigged out, tricked out, kayak I've seen.

Now... what more do you guys need to fill two larger bags back there?

I happened into a well stocked hardware store today and they had a few internal frame packs in the back. There was a 50L Kelty that would have easily fit into the stern of my T9 (I'd measured the rear cockpit rib before leaving home that morning), that was kind of a surprise. So snugging that into an AII probably wouldn't be an issue at all providing you didn't try to cram it in fully loaded.

It made me wonder if I could leave my boat tucked into woods and go hiking for a few days with the backpack... I think I would worry about the boat too much to find that enjoyable.

d

[DoiNomazi]

Yes, on the warthog look... but our yak would always loose any beauty contest. We are OK with that because we absolutely love our boat, regardless of the criticism...

Our fav backpacks are the British made Karrimor. Internal frame, rugged, mil grade, made for the boys in the field, with a brilliant zipper that changes their shape and capacity by 40 L or so. If we'll ever need them on a water trip with a lot of splashes, we'll stick in a SealLine ILBE and strap them on decks fully loaded. Depending on water and surf conditions, loading and unloading on the water can be funny. In heavy surf half of the boat can be filled with cold salty water before the zippers, or hatches, can be closed...

On our next paddling trip we'll have a rigid fiberglass tandem that is not large enough for all the gear we're taking... Still analyzing options for the deck bags. As always, we'll take what we'll need to be independent for two weeks.

Unlike the OP, in spite of the relative remoteness of the area, we won't leave the boat in the bush. I wouldn't feel comfortable to leave the yak behind either.

[chrstjrn]

This is where a hardshell would shine: I wouldn't feel comfortable leaving my wood and fabric boat stuffed into the bushes whiel I went hiking, either. Possibly an inflatable, and possibly an Oru, but by contrast a fiberglass or rotomolded boat wouldn't give much concern.

Reference the packs you guys are discussing, they would all be considered far too heavy by modern backpacking standards. For tossing around in our boat-voyaging context, however, they, might be quite appropriate. And as I've said before, I wouldn't seriously consider shoving a packed backpack into the end of a boat-- I would put the contents in dry bags and flatten the pack, which would making packing everything quite simple.

[DoiNomazi]

I can draft a whole list of older gear that is more rugged and reliable than the newer modern standards gear... Everybody seems obsessed with weight. I'll be happy to carry the extra pound if I trust and zi like the gear, be it a kayak, a wetsuit, a pfd, a tent, a sleeping bag, a lantern, a stove, you name it.

Reliability and endurance are far more important than weight. Our obsession with weight forces the manufacturers to compete in shoving off weight. I don't need a lighter Long Haul Mark II Commando and I wish Mark doesn't change the frame or the hull. But he might, because he feels pressured to offer a lighter version.

I carried 74 lbs in my Karrimor and I trusted the pack. It didn't break while descending on rough walls...

and btw I am not young anymore...

[john allsop]

I have found out that removing the frame on my rucksak allows it to fit better in the Klepper. Also i take what i NEED and keep the load as small as i can.

[DoiNomazi]

We know that our needs (what we think we need) don't always coincide. Each of us relates to past trips and experiences. There are many variables and possibilities, but without a more concrete description of the trip the OP is considering, we can easily drift into an endless sea of hypotheticals...

Cheers.

[gbellware]

Doi,

We are on the same page. As a cyclist I am obsessed with weight, especially rotating mass. Convention is that people are willing to spend $100 per ounce (or in extreme cases per gram) of shaved weight.

But I don't pay any attention to weight in my camping kayak (Klepper quattro). Folding chair, two sets of sails, three-man tent, 5 gallon water can, and I am so over freeze dried anything. I don't know the physics of momentum and energy transfer/expenditure but I am pretty sure that it makes little difference paddling a 600 lb. kayak than it does a 400 lb. kayak. There is probably some science at work here that someone can explain, if there is a scientist on the forum I would love to learn more.

g

[chrstjrn]

Think "barges". The preferred way to move bulk goods is by water. That is why canals were developed, and they are still used that way in many places. In the US, the Mississippi and and the Great Lakes are used this way. Carrying weight on a boat is a different animal from carrying it on you back. But if one's intention is to switch between backpacking and boating, or to combine them, then the priorities of backpacking come into play. Again: OP was not specific.

[DoiNomazi]

@Chris +1 on both points.

[xeniv23]

Instead of a 65 liter bag filled with undifferentiated stuff.....a number of 8, 13, 20 and 35 liter bags, well marked as to contents, will serve you much better. Trying to shove a 65 liter bag over and through the frames into a small space is futile. I use a 65 liter bag as a deck bag and it serves well for the purpose. Smaller bags can be packed in the reverse order of need and will often save you a fair bit of trouble looking for just what you want without deconstructing the entire load. Once you settle on a loading scheme that works do it the same way every time and that way you avoid memory traps and that awful feeling that you forgot something. I have some experience with this.....