- Outlet Anciennes collections, fin de séries, articles commandés en trop grande quantité, … découvrez notre sélection de produits à petits prix Profitez-en !
- Fan de randonnée, adèpte du camping ? Visitez notre boutique randonnée et camping et retrouvez des milliers de tentes, sacs de randonnée, sacs de couchage, vêtements... et faites votre choix parmi les marques Columbia, Coleman, Gerber, High Peak, Lafuma, MILLET, Victorinox... et beaucoup d'autres.
- Plus de 10 000 ebooks indés à moins de 3 euros à télécharger en moins de 60 secondes .
Osprey Porter 46 Travel Pack - Black
Les clients ayant consulté cet article ont également regardé
Quels sont les autres articles que les clients achètent après avoir regardé cet article?
Offres spéciales et liens associés
Détails sur le produit
Voulez-vous nous parler de prix plus bas?
Si vous vendez ce produit, souhaitez-vous suggérer des mises à jour par l'intermédiaire du support vendeur ?
Descriptions du produit
En un tour de main, ce sac lÃ©ger se transforme en sac Ã dos grÃ¢ce aux pratiques bretelles. Style Ã©purÃ© et poches de rangement fonctionnelles.Le sac ultime planifierait votre vie, protÃ©gerait vos biens et se porterait comme un rÃªve. Dites bonjour au Porter 46. Plusieurs poches Ã l'intÃ©rieur du compartiment principal permettent Ã votre charge de rester simplement organisÃ©e. Le voyageur passionnÃ© de technologie apprÃ©ciera la poche avant, qui comprend un manchon rembourrÃ© avec accÃšs rapide pour ordinateur portable ou tablette. Les sacs polochons traditionnel n'offrent qu'une compression trÃšs basique et une faible protection pour votre Ã©quipement. Alors que le systÃšme StraightJacket avec mousse intÃ©grÃ© dans la paroi sur le Porter compresse et protÃšge toute charge que vous pouvez mettre dedans. Lorsque vous accÃ©dez Ã un Porter vous apprÃ©cierez Ã©galement les parois latÃ©rales semi-rigides, qui vous ÃŽtes la frustration de la recherche Ã l'intÃ©rieur de votre sac. Enfin, le Porter offre des niveaux de confort de transport avec le harnais de dÃ©ploiement rapide et ceinture sans prÃ©cÃ©dent. Un pas en avant pour notre hÃ©ros de la conception de sac.
Commentaires en ligne
Meilleurs commentaires des clients
Et il est particulièrement pratique pour se bouger avec flexibilité.
Très solide, avec des fermetures éclair de qualité, il est aussi extrêmement bien organisé.
Je peux mettre mon ordinateur dans la poche extérieure, ce qui est particulièrement pratique lors des contrôles de sécurité aux aéroports.
Il dispose de plein de rangements et permet d'optimiser au mieux son espace. Je le conseille aux backpackers qui voyagent beaucoup comme moi et n'utilisent jamais de bagage en soute.
Très content de mon achat.
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)
Based on the glowing reviews, the Osprey Porter 46, Farpoint 40 (size S-M), and Farpoint 55 (also size S-M, with a length of 24") all seemed like possibilities. My first inclination was toward the Porter 46, but I couldn't make up my mind without a side-by-side comparison. Noting that I had the possibility of free returns on two out of these these, I ordered them all. When I had them all together, I filled some packing cubes, got my laptop (which was going to have to come on the trip), and set about trying them all.
The basics: The Porter 46 is like a semi-firm duffle bag, with hide-away shoulder straps and a passable hip belt. The Farpoints have an internal, light-weight frame, shoulder straps, and a more supportive hip belt hidden by a zippered flap. The Farpoint 55 has a daypack that zippers onto the main pack, but can also attach in front of your body, to the shoulder straps.
The Porter 46 won out for us, pretty much hands down. It had these advantages:
+ Semi-rigid side walls. The firm sides make it much easier to pack, and give it a feeling of greater depth--like packing a little travel suitcase.
+ More rip-resistant in appearance. The bag looks like it could take a pretty good beating, whereas the Farpoints (particularly the Farpoint 55) are made of much lighter material.
+ Organizing pockets. The Porter 46 has a zippered pocket along each sidewall, and a number of organizing pockets (for laptop, e-reader, pens, documents) in the front compartment. If you are a traveling professional, this is a definite attraction. And it was just obvious that the better accessibility here was going to make security and immigration that much easier.
+ The hide-away shoulder strap system is pretty awesome; I did not like the whole zippered-compartment-thing of the Farpoints.
+ You hardly have any loose straps. Not so much an issue with the Farpoint 40, but the Farpoint 55 seemed to have them flopping all around.
If we were going to be doing more hiking about, then I would reconsider the Farpoints. The hip suspension is definitely better, they are of lighter construction, and the packs squeeze everything closer to your center of gravity. The zip-away day pack on the Farpoint 55 is certainly an intriguing feature. If you know how to pack light and tight, and are going to be on your feet a lot, these would probably be better choices.
Some have commented that the Porter 46 should not have been designed with the laptop sleeve in the front, where it throws more weight off your center of gravity. Perhaps. On the other hand, it does make your laptop more readily accessible for security checks, and it does function as a nice flat surface that the compression straps can leverage.
The Farpoint 40 at first struck me as the perfect fit for wifey, especially with the better suspension. But then I remembered how she much she usually packs, and I knew there was no way she was going to be satisfied with the 40. The Porter 46 at least gives her the option of packing more, if she really feels it's worth carrying.
Our trip is in November, and I'm usually pretty good about updating my reviews if something interesting comes up. If I don't, assume that we both found our bags perfect for this trip!
UPDATE 2015-01-27: A great trip, and both our Porter 46 bags proved to be the perfect choice! They are easily converted to/from backpack mode, hold lots of stuff, are strong and well-made, and are aesthetically pleasing, too (although when loaded, they don't stand up when left on their side--a consequence of the compression design). My comment about the laptop sleeve stands: it's great for a small laptop or tablet, but leave anything larger at home.
We paired up the Osprey Day Lite packs with these, which we also found to be a great choice for our little excursions. But while they do attach to the larger Porter 46, I found the attachment process awkward. Plus, it's not really an optimal solution unless you are carrying relatively little in the Porter; otherwise, the bags just protrude too much, and straps hang down and flop all over. But they have a nice handle on the top (formed by the shoulder straps), which makes them very easy to tote around when you've got the Porter on your back.
Why I chose the Osprey: even though it wasn’t the largest of the three, it was still large, had good back support, good construction (see specifics below), it wasn’t horribly expensive, and it looked sharp. There is also the added bonus that you can attach a daypack to the front so you don’t have to carry two bags. I practiced packing in it with packing cubes for a 2 week trip and it was amazing. I fit so much in it.
What mattered to me, in order of importance:
-the most space possible in a carry on
TLS Motherlode 3299 cu. in.
Osprey Porter 2772 cu. in.
Tortuga 2,685 cu. in.
- hip straps to distribute weight to hips – The Osprey has real hiking bag straps, but the Tortuga’s straps have pockets, so this one was a little harder.
The TLS just had a thin strap that won’t really do much, so it really lost there.
-not hard on my back: The Osprey won this one hands down. They have a great reputation of making bags that are good for your back. And since I was in two car accidents last year, this one is kind of a big deal.
All three options had all of the following things that mattered:
-front opening zip like a suitcase
-compression straps/expansion zipper
-at least one or two external pockets
- durable: Or at least they better be, I don’t want to spend money on crappy luggage.
Nice to haves
- convertible to shoulder bag – Tortuga lose here. They all have stashable straps, but there is no over shoulder strap. The Osprey you have to buy it separately but it’s still an option.
- Ripstop Nylon – TLS Motherlode loses this one.
- organization inside – TLS Motherlode really wins this one. A lot. There are pockets and dividers all over inside that bag. It’s crazy!
- not ugly – The Tortuga is ugly. It just is. The Motherlode is basic, it looks like a backpack, but it comes in five colors. I didn’t love the Osprey at first, but it grew on me. And I liked the red a lot.
- not horribly expensive – Tortuga lost. It’s two hundred dollars. The other two are about the same, between 100 and 130.
**Travel Cubes pictures are included in link, that review includes a full list of what I packed in the bag. 6 Sets Packing Cubes Travel Luggage Packing Organizers Compression Pouches(Blue)
Post-trip update: The Osprey served me well. I fit SO much in it. Everything on my packing list, plus some extras, and more souvenirs than I thought. I checked it on the way home, and because I could stow the straps, the airline could check it normally instead of doing something special with it like they usually do with backpacks. Also, the little straps to help lift the shoulder straps (forgive my lack of technical backpacking lingo) helped a ton in addition to the hip belt.
Also, I saw someone with a Motherlode in the airport, and it was much prettier online than in person. (But I could be biased)
I researched a number of bags and eventually narrowed my search to the Porter 46, the Farpoint 40 and 55, and the Tom Bihn Aeronaut 45.
With regard to the Farpoint models, the 55 was actually very comfortable, and I liked the design of both the primary pack and the zip-on day pack. The ultimate issue I had with the pack, however, was that it was slightly too large to qualify as a carry-on. I had read multiple reviews of travelers having success in making it past the gate as a carry on, but I read quite a few where people were forced the check their luggage as well. Just with the eyeball test, it also appeared slightly too large to me to work as a carry-on. The problem I had with the 40 was that it did not provide me the maximum capacity for a carry-on. I may not always use a full pack, but I wanted the option to have as much carry-on space as possible if I did need to take a full load for some reason. Thus, I eliminated the Farpoint 40 as well and narrowed my search to the Porter 46 and the TB Aeronaut 45.
I next moved on to compare the Aeronaut and the Porter. The Aeronaut is a very highly reviewed bag, but comes with a hefty price tag as well ($280.00). I live in Washington, so that would also include sales tax of over 8% and a shipping cost of $10. My price for the bag would have thus been close to $330.00. It also does not come with a shoulder strap, so the total cost with an "absolute strap" would have been closer to $365. I felt as though this was a significant price to pay, but I was willing to consider it to have a long term solution as a reliable carry-on travel bag. I had also heard great things about the Tom Bihn guarantee, but when I reviewed the actual terms of the TB guarantee vs. Osprey's All Mighty Guarantee I was a bit more impressed with how broad Osprey's coverage was on their products (and I could find slightly positive feedback online as to how well Osprey stand's behind their products). Given the Porter 46 (at $130.00, which I could get from a local retailer to avoid shipping costs) was significantly cheaper than the Aeronaut, I decided there would have to be a significant benefit to purchasing the Aeronaut over the Porter 46 to justify the cost.
With regard to the Porter 46, it is worth noting that I read a number of reviews about the recent model stating that Osprey had eliminated anchor points for attaching a shoulder strap, as well as complaints about the padding on the waist strap and lack of pockets for storage. When I went to look at the Farpoint at a local retailer, however, I also took a quick look at the Porter 46 and noticed there did seem to be decent (if somewhat minimal) padding on the waist strap, and that it did have anchor points for a shoulder strap. It also had significantly more pockets and storage options than the photos I had seen online. In doing further research, I found that Osprey had updated the model at some point in late 2014, upgrading a number of the major complaint areas of the previous bags. In my opinion, these upgrades constituted major improvements without which I likely would not have purchased the bag (including the addition of more pockets and external storage options, anchor points for a shoulder strap, additional padding on the waist strap, and additional improvements on the back pack strap system to improve comfort). It is also my understanding the improvements led to a price increase from $100 to $130. Something worth noting for people looking for this bag to make sure they get the proper model. I liked how spacious the main compartment was on the Porter 46, and I felt as though the additional exterior pockets were in good locations for my travel preferences, and were the right size for my needs. I filled the Porter up with other items in the store and threw it on my back as a backpack, and it felt very comfortable walking around the store for a brief period of time. I felt as though the amount of available, packable space between the Aeronaut and the Porter was comparable, and the compression system on the Porter was impressive as well.
When all was said and done, I did not feel as though there was a justification for paying almost $200.00 more for the Aeronaut pack and purchased the Porter. I also liked the external pockets on the Porter more than the Aeronaut, and felt the quality of workmanship (and guarantee behind the product) was very similar as well on both. As such, I purchased the Porter 46 and have been pleased with the purchase. I will note that the Porter does not come with a shoulder strap if you want the option to carry it over the shoulder as a duffel bag, and my online research led me to conclude that the Tom Bihn shoulder strap is really the class of the market. As such, I did add the $30.00 absolute strap to the Porter so my total cost was approximately $165 all said and done (which is less than half of what the total expense would have been for the Aeronaut with the strap), and would definitely recommend getting a shoulder strap for the Porter to have a third carrying option.
UPDATE: I just wanted to write a quick update on this bag as I continue to LOVE IT and use it constantly. I use it not only for travel now but also for day hiking trips. I have found that you can actually stick a water bladder in the pouch on the top of the bag for day hiking and it works relatively well as a hydration pack, although that is obviously not the intended use. This is the only real luggage bag I take with me on overseas trips of 2-4 weeks and it continues to work great for that purpose, and I have never had an issue using it as a carry on in a large number of travels. It is also worth noting that when one of the small clips on the front of the bag broke while traveling (the only issue I have ever had with the bag) I contacted Osprey and they shipped me two clips for repairs that were waiting for me when I arrived home. Top notch product and top notch customer service. I continue to highly recommend this bag. It is one of the best values out there.
So, as I mentioned in a comment to this review, I repurchased this backpack because I wanted to see if I could sit it lower on my hips and call the fit good enough. Also, after looking around the travel backpack market, I realized that there aren't so many choices for us short-torsoed gals, so I'm going to have to make some compromises.
I ended up comparing this backpack, the Farpoint 55 (S/M), and the Farpoint 40 (S/M). The two Farpoints fit exactly the same and I decided against the daypack, so I'll just refer to the Farpoint 40 from here on out.
The result is that even with the hip belt slung as low as it can go, the Porter 46 is still too big. I've put up another photo and you can see that the straps still angle up from my shoulders a bit. I measured the torso length at about 17.5", so that makes sense (I'm about 16"). That said, it's comfortable enough; I don't think it would bother me for casual walking distances.
The Farpoint 40 fits much better and measures only 15.5" for torso length. You can see that the straps actually wrap around my shoulders a little bit, and it definitely feels more comfortable. I do think it's a bit harder to pack with the soft sides, and it does feel more cramped as well, which you would expect given that the S/M size is actually only 38 liters, an 8 liter difference from the Porter 46.
So I haven't decided which backpack I'm going to keep yet, but I'm actually leaning towards the Porter 46 right now. I don't have to do much walking with this pack (just plane to hotel and back), but I do have to bring an entire winter season black tie outfit (wool coat, floor length gown, shoes, clutch) in addition to my regular clothes. So space is winning out over comfort right now. Also, I'm thinking the Porter 46 will be more generically useful to the family as my husband could use it too; the Farpoint in S/M would be too small for him.
Plus, I like the color better. I know, that's a silly reason, but ... :)
I posted a few more pictures:
- Me with the Farpoint 40 (the blue backpack)
- Me with the Porter 46 again, slung lower on the hips
- Torso length measurements for the Porter 46 and the Farpoint 40.
I will update once I decide which one to keep. I am sorely tempted to keep both, they are both so beautiful, but I think that would be excessively indulgent. :)
# Original review, titled "Torso length way too long" and given 3 stars:
I really liked this bag. It's huge. It's an awesome bright color. It's has many design virtues that make it an awesome travel bag, which others have already extolled better than I can. I was really looking forward to using it for my annual trip to Los Angeles.
But the torso length is way too long for me. We had a good laugh when I first put the backpack on; my husband joked that it's nearly as tall as I am. But once I fastened the waist belt, it became obvious that it just wasn't going to fit right, and given how much I plan to pack into this bag, I'm probably going to need the ability to transfer some weight onto my hips. If it had been a near miss, I would have happily kept it, but as you can see, it doesn't even come close. I cried a little -- I really like the color.
I'm 5'2", a little under 150 pounds currently, and my torso length is about 16". My next try is the Osprey Packs Farpoint 55 Travel Backpack, Caribbean Blue, Small/Medium; I'll update on how that works out once it arrives.