Best Backpacking Backpacks of 2023

Few backpacking backpacks manage to strike a perfect balance between toughness, compartmentalization, comfort, and weight, but in the Atmos (click here for the women’s version the Aura AG 65), Osprey has gone and done just that.

(Very) nearly…

While the Atmos is among the heaviest packs in our review, it performs so well in every other metric that we had no choice but to hand it our top spot.

The feature that almost single-handedly sets the Atmos apart from its peers is the pack’s game-changing “Anti-Gravity” suspension system. There are plenty of packs out there that use suspended spacer mesh in the rear panel, but this system goes one step further by covering your entire back – from the gear hauler strap at the top right down to the waist and hipbelt.

By creating a more extensive air channel between your back and the pack this system makes the Atmos one of the best-ventilated packs we’ve ever worn and superbly comfortable.

But this backpack’s got a lot more going for it than the suspension system alone.

It’s also made with ultra-durable 210D and 510D nylon fabric, has a plethora of compartments and pockets, and has a fully adjustable harness and hipbelt to give you a more dialed-in fit.

At 4 lbs. 6 oz. for S/M or 4 lbs. 8 oz. for L/XL, the Atmos is the third heaviest option on our list after the Osprey Aether and Gregory Baltoro. However, much of that added weight goes towards the pack’s mightily impressive feature set, which includes an integrated rain cover, floating top lid, an internal FlapJacket for weather protection, curved zip access to both side panels, and removable dividers and straps.

The HMG Southwest is, without doubt, the toughest pack we’ve ever put through its paces. We’ve lugged it on adventures that would have torn lesser packs to shreds, and each time it came through entirely unscathed.

The Southwest’s toughness comes courtesy of its 100% Dyneema composite construction, which not only makes it able to deal with all kinds of rough treatment on the trails but also capable of carrying far heavier loads than nylon-made packs of the same size and weight.

The 2400 Southwest is also one of the lightest packs in our review, tipping the scales at a tiny 2.02 lbs. If you want to go even lighter, you can opt for the white colorway (1.88 lbs.) instead of the black, but the white version’s thinner materials mean doing so results in a hefty drop in ruggedness and durability.

Compared to other packs on our list, the Southwest is a very basic affair. It has minimal back padding, one large main compartment, and only three pockets, two of which are on the hipbelt. However, given the pack’s intended end use of ultralight backpacking or thru-hiking, it would feel harsh to hate on it too much for sticking (pretty much perfectly) to its bottom line.

In a head-to-head with our list’s other ultralight pack, the Gossamer Gear Gorilla, the Southwest is a little heavier despite having a lower capacity. We also found the Gorilla’s more substantial padding made it a more comfortable carry with heavier loads, while its extra storage options made it more convenient. The Southwest, however, is more durable by far.

For gram-counting minimalists, there are few packs out there quite as suitable for you as Gossamer Gear’s Gorilla 50.

This Gorilla weighs just under 2 pounds but offers 50 liters of interior storage in addition to 5 generously sized exterior pockets – one kangaroo pocket, two hip belt pockets, and two huge water-bottle pockets. It also has plush padding in the shoulders and the back panel, and if you want to go even lighter, the internal frame and rear cushioning can be removed.

Compared to our favorite ultralight pack, the HMG 2400 Southwest, the Gorilla is less durable. While its 70/100D Robic nylon fabric will be plenty burly for gentler adventures and more careful users, the Southwest’s Dyneema construction makes it a better choice if you’re prone to treat your backpacks to a fair share of rough and tumble on the trail.

The Gorilla, however, is also much cheaper. Those extra storage options and all that cushioning also make it a better option if comfort and convenience are higher on your list of priorities than toughness and longevity.

If you’re looking for a mid-range option that does most of what its pricier peers do, minus a few bells and whistles, then the Deuter Aircontact Lite is well worth a place on your shortlist.

This 60L backpack has a more streamlined design than other backpacks in our review, weighs a relatively lightweight 3 lbs. 14 oz., and is surprisingly tough for such a light pack. It also has a wealth of interior and exterior storage options and effective load transfer features that enhance comfort when you’re carrying extra gear.

But how does this Aircontact Lite compare to the other low-cost models on our list, the Gregory Optic, REI Co-Op Flash 55, and Osprey Rook? The Aircontact is the priciest of the bunch, but it’s made with burlier materials than the Optic and Flash 55 and has a wider – and more sophisticated – array of features than the Osprey Rook.

Compared to the winner of our review, the Atmos, the Aircontact boasts a similar set of organizational features. It has a large sleeping bag compartment, an elasticated inner compartment, 2 hipbelt pockets, a large stretch-mesh pocket on the front, an expandable top lid, mesh side pockets, helmet holder loops, and ice tool attachments.

The Atmos’ Anti-Gravity suspension system, however, makes it a far more comfortable carry, even if the Aircontact’s X-Frame load-distribution system is fairly impressive for such a reasonably priced pack.

The only way in which the Aircontact lets itself down is in the padding in the shoulders and rear panel, which is a little too thin for all-day comfort with loads over around 45 pounds.

The Gregory Optic (women’s version Octal) is a great pack for buyers looking for an affordable, lower-capacity pack for a weekend or shorter multi-day trips in the wilds.

There are plenty of great budget packs out there, but this one wins our vote because it makes the fewest compromises of the bunch. The Optic weighs in at just 2 lbs., 7.5 oz. (medium), making it a fraction lighter than the REI Co-Op Flash 55 and more than a pound lighter than the similarly priced Osprey Rook and Deuter Aircontact Lite.

Compared to these other low-cost packs, the Optic is also a more comfortable carry thanks to its AeroSpan suspension, dual-density FocusForm shoulder harness, and nicely padded supportive hipbelt. It also boasts a pair of large hip belt pockets and an integrated rain cover – features that are far from standard in UL packs or packs in this price range.

And the downsides?

Well, the Optic’s lack of a sleeping gear compartment and zippered side pockets mean it’s less than ideal if you’re the type of backpacker who likes to keep things neat and tidy. Its 100D/210D nylon construction and fairly flimsy buckles, moreover, make it one of the least rugged packs in our review.

Nevertheless, if you’re looking for the best lightweight backpack for buyers on a budget, this one’s impressive suspension and surprising comfort levels make it a serious contender.

While previous iterations of REI Co-Op’s Flash 55 always left a little to be desired, the latest version is one step closer to challenging our favorite UL packs, the HMG Southwest and GG Gorilla.

The design of the Flash 55 has undergone a bit of a makeover. There are now four large external pockets, a handy roll-top closure, and a handful of removable features (the top lid, shoulder strap pocket, hip belt pockets, and compression straps) that let you trim weight down further when need be.

And despite cutting the weight of the Flash down to just 2 lbs. 10 oz., REI has somehow managed to make it more comfortable than ever before, even when you’ve maxed out the 30-pound recommended load capacity.

Compared to our review’s other UL packs, the GG Gorilla and HMF Southwest, the Flash is heavier and slightly less durable. However, its suspension system and plush padding make it a more comfortable carry and its organizational features are far superior.

The only real downside to the Flash is the limited adjustability – because the straps and hip belt are fixed in place, there’s less scope for achieving a dialed-in fit.

The Osprey Aether (click here for the women’s version the Ariel AG 65) is our go-to backpacking backpack for longer multi-day trips when we want a little more in the way of comfort and convenience than a UL pack can offer.

At 5 lbs. 3 oz. (large), this 70L backpack is the heaviest model on our list, a couple of ounces heavier than the Gregory Baltoro and 11 oz. more than the Osprey Atmos. However, it has 5 more liters of storage space than both these packs and is a fraction cheaper than the Baltoro.

Like the Atmos, the Aether scores very highly in the comfort stakes owing to its use of Osprey’s oh-so-lovable Anti-Gravity ventilated mesh back panel, which we found provided a more precise fit by contouring to the shape of our body and centering the weight over our hips. The harness is also fully adjustable and a “Fit-on-the-Fly” hip belt allows for further fine-tuning.

Storage-wise, the Aether is a bit of a dream.

In addition to a huge central compartment, there’s a zippered sleeping gear compartment, ice tool loops, Stow-on-the-Go trekking pole attachments, a hydration reservoir sleeve, dual front panel zippered pockets for easy-access storage, a huge kangaroo pocket, dual-access water bottle pockets, and zippered front access to the main compartment.

A few additional, non-standard features also give you the option of lightening the pack’s weight and make the Aether a little more versatile than many of its peers – namely, a removable divider in the sleeping bag compartment, removable sleeping pad straps, and a floating lid that can be whipped off and deployed as a daypack.

The Gregory Baltoro (women’s version the Deva 60) has been one of our favorite backpacking packs for several years. It’s tough, well-thought-out, far more practical than most of its peers, and so comfortable that it’s almost a pleasure to wear, even when carrying a full load.

The Baltoro uses a Rotating Load Transfer Disc that allows the hip belt to pivot and enables it to conform to your natural movements for enhanced agility and stability. This does an excellent job of distributing the load weight and makes hiking on bumpy trails and in trickier terrain a lot easier.

The Baltoro also features a grid-lock system that allows you to adjust the straps either vertically or laterally for a custom fit that will conform to most body shapes.

With regard to organization, the Baltoro leaves most of its competitors in the shade. In addition to a wide opening and spacious main compartment, it boasts a large front pouch, a huge U-shaped zipper panel that lets you access your gear from any side, two external top lid pockets, and side zipper pockets for water bottles, cameras, or even a bear canister.

The removable hydration sleeve also converts into a daypack with shoulder harnesses and an accessory pocket.

This compartmentalized design not only helps to keep things tidy and provides easy access to your gear, but it also helps to stabilize the load by encouraging an even weight distribution and centering your load in the optimal position.

Compared to the other heavier backpacks on our list, the Osprey Atmos and Aether, the Baltoro’s slightly less durable and a fraction more expensive, but also a little more comfortable when lugging heavier loads.

The Osprey Rook 65 is essentially a pared-down version of our review’s winner, the Osprey Atmos.

If you’re a “cup half empty” kinda person, then this pack’s lack of Anti-Gravity suspension and dearth of storage options as compared to the Atmos will make the Rook seem a poor cousin. If, however, you’re a “cup half full” kinda person, then its favorable price tag, lighter weight, and comparable burliness and capacity make it, all things considered, a bit of a bargain.

The Rook is the most affordable option on our list, costing less than even our top budget pick, the Gregory Optic. Compared to the Optic, the Rook is a far more durable and rugged pack owing to its use of super-burly 600D and 1000D fabric, and also offers an extra 14 liters (large version of the Optic) of storage.

On the downside, the Rook’s fairly rudimentary suspension system and light padding meant it felt less comfortable when carrying loads over 25 pounds. It also weighs almost a whole pound more than the Optic, meaning it’s not ideal if traveling fast and light with ultralight gear is your thing.

If you’re wavering between the two, then, the Optic’s a better choice for ultralight backpacking but the Rook’s a great alternative if you want a little extra space and a tougher, more durable pack.