Main TOM BIHN website
 
emailus@tombihn.com

COMMUNITY FORUMS

Welcome! We're glad you are here. This is the place to ask for bag advice, help other people out, post reviews, and share photos and videos.

x

First, select your desired search engine:

  • Google Search
  • Original Forum Search Engine

User Tag List

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    87
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Western Flyer as a backpack alternative...?

    I'm a bad judge of size.

    I'm looking for a carry on bag that will fit under the airplane seat and has backpack straps, but I find a typical backpack's shape difficult -- the top always sticks out awkwardly and is floppy if not full, and if I have to pull it out to remove something, it's hard to bend over to keep tucking the straps back under, but if I don't, the straps just get everywhere. (Do I sound crazy right about now?) Anyway, I like the structured shape of the WF, and the idea of being able to hide away the backpack straps after getting on the plane. Is that easy/quick to do?

    Has to be able to fit my Nintendo Switch in its case, cables and chargers, power bank, Kindle, a folder with some papers, a small notebook, a change of clothes, some other odds and ends. One possible problem I see is that I don't typically like dyneema exteriors, but the ballistic nylon is heavier than what I'm accustomed to.

    Or...is it just too big for what I need? I don't mind underpacking it. I really need backpack straps.

    Thanks!
    Last edited by Juliana; 12-01-2018 at 07:28 PM.

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    SF Bay area
    Posts
    757
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It certainly sounds like a WF could hold your stuff easily...

    To hide the backpack straps, you unclip each one and shove the straps back into the back of the bag and zip it closed... 30sec or less if you have no mobility issues... you don't even have to zip the back section back up if you want to make it even faster.

    As for weight, the ballistic is only 7oz heavier than the halcyon on this bag... the ballistic is also a lot stiffer than halcyon for a while, until it ages/loosens up
    Steel/Island A45&Pilot; Steel/Solar WF&CP; Blk/Canyon S19; Navy/NWSky A30; Blk Halcyon/NWSky SA; Olive/Canyon Luminary

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    129
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the weight difference between the two is negligible. If you don't like floppy backpacks, you will want the ballistic. I switched to ballistic from halcyon for that specific reason.

    That said, the WF is not a true backpack (lack of padding, organization, etc) though it can be carried like one and its comfortable enough for airport walks and the like. If you travel frequently and want a single bag for clothes and such; its a good bag. If you are primarily interested in a backpack with hide-able straps, there are better options out there IMO.

  4. #4
    Forum Member Perseffect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    788
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For the use case you mention, this is exactly why I love the WF. It feels less bulky to me than a stuffed S25 due to its boxy shape.

    And I love the Ballistic nylon to retain the shape as well as the packable shoulder straps. So easy to use it in transit, especially under an airplane seat or overhead in plane/train.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Aeronaut 45 (Navy/NWS) & (Black/Steel), Tristar (Steel/Island), Cadet (Steel/Island), Synapse 25 (Black Halcyon/Iberian), Synapse 19 (Grey/UV), Ristretto 13 (Steel/NWS), Ristretto 11 (Navy/Steel), Co-Pilot (Steel/Wasabi), Small Cafe Bag (Navy/Steel), Daylight Backpack (Burnt Orange), Daylight Briefcase (Black Halcyon) PLUS more 'bits' than you can shake a stick at!

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,921
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Western Flyer would be ideal for your needs.

    I have its bigger cousin, the Tristar, removing and putting the backpack straps back on is a cinch, very easy.

    Other Forum members have shown in pictures and commented that the bag fits wonderfully under the seat.

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    237
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Packed decently, the WF will fit the wide dimension under most narrow-body plane seats, and will fit the narrow dimension of aisle seats and regional jets, or seats with entertainment systems underneath. When it's packed tight, you might have to shove it in a bit. I still haven't had to move it to the overhead, just a little less leg comfort.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    160
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It might depend on your use case. The items you've listed don't take up a lot of room, so the WF might be over sized for what you need. If you want something smaller, that still has hideable backpack straps, would the Stowaway work for you? I don't have one so I can't comment on it's carryability, but dimension wise, it's pretty close to my Pilot, which fits under the seat at lot better than my WF would. When I travel with the WF, it just automatically goes in the overhead. With my Pilot, it automatically goes under the seat, even though it's my only bag.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •