For quite some time, the consensus within the recreational and military industries has been to carry the weight of a pack on the hips rather than the shoulders, hence an ever more imposing hip belt on most modern packs. Upon looking at the history of the trend, we found out that such packs were designed originally to accommodate women, prompting us to look further into their suitability.
For the past two years, we therefore studied the effects of various backpack systems on over 1,000 Berserkir, and the results really surprised us.
Stress on lower and upper back
The backpacks that shift weight onto the hips turn out to cause more stress on the lower and upper back than a system supported primarily by the shoulders. We assumed this was dude to upper body instability when weight sits on hips.
Instability in difficult terrain
Berserkir experienced more injuries on difficult terrain with hip systems in contrast to shoulder systems, attributed to decreased stability with a hip system.
Tendency to carry higher loads
Berserkir who used a hip system carried on average 3.4 more kilograms of gear, in contrast to those using a shoulder system. This was linked to the perception that a pack which weight is carried on the hips could be heavier, together with difficulties assessing weight until further use when carried on hip.
Increased comfort originally, decreased comfort over time
At first, hip systems were more comfortable to carry. However, after a few hours, shoulder system turned out to be more comfortable and easier to carry.
Stress on neck
Hip systems also caused more stress on neck than shoulder system, probably due to the rigidity of packs locked at the waste preventing natural body movements.
Conclusions
Overall, we concluded that hip systems were originally designed for women, and are therefore unsuitable for men and the male body. For every day use and lower loads, a back pack with no hip system and no rigidity seemed most appropriate. For combat or expeditionary use and higher loads, a pack combining both a hip and shoulder load, without an emphasis on the hip, with some level of adaptable rigidity, seemed most suitable.