User Review: Kelty Trekker 3950

Kelty Trekker 3950
Above: The current Trekker 3950, which may differ slightly from the version reviewed.

Reviewed December 4, 2004 by RG

Rating:
Design: External frame pack
Size: 3950 cu. in.
Number of Pockets: 5
Max. Load Carried: 35+ lbs.
Height of Owner: 5' 6-1/2"
Price Paid: $100

I don't know if I'm really qualified to "review" a backpack, but I used to backpack a bit when I was a teen. I don't remember what pack I had, but it was an external frame, probably not too expensive (I remember that it was bright red). It worked, but I have to admit that I didn't give it much of a workout, just a few weekends on the AT.

This past summer, I decided I'd do some hikin' and campin' in the Adirondacks. I planned to carry stuff in, set up camp and do a couple of day hikes over the weekend. I bought the Kelty Trekker 3950 because it looks traditional and the salesman recommended it as a good, sturdy pack. I think I may have bought the wrong size, though, as I am fairly short (5'6-1/2") and have a short torso (17"). Maybe the Trekker 3900 ST ("Short Torso") would've worked better for me. I've got the Trekker 3950 set to its second-shortest setting, but when loaded up for a weekend's worth of camping, the pack's weight seems to sway around quite a bit. I got blisters on my feet hustling into Marcy Dam to make camp, which I don't think was the fault of my boots, as I've never had blisters before or since (but who knows?). I probably could have packed better -- maybe better weight distribution?

The Trekker's materials and durability seem just fine. The look is great, if you're the traditionalist type. I just can't seem to get very comfy with this pack loaded up. I tried a $99 house-brand internal frame pack at EMS that fit me like a good suit, but I know I could never carry as much stuff in a pack like that. I'll tweak some more and post here again if I get better/different results.

Save & Share