I've been considering getting some of the Scepter water jerry cans for years now, but never had a reliable source to obtain them, or the prices were too high. In undergrad, my geosciences department used them on field outings and we had six or eight of them for the trucks and vans. Looking on Amazon, I found they sell both the blue commercial ones and the military style ones in subdued colors. How do these compare to the .mil ones from the same company? I've only used the military water cans, and the commercial ones have completely different fill caps, but cost half as much. These would be something to have in case of emergencies or have in the car or keep at basecamp while out adventuring.
https://www.amazon.com/Scepter-Easy-Pour-Camping-Emergency-Off-Road/dp/B0D9KNQCTZ/144-5750557-0812062
https://www.amazon.com/Liter-Heavy-Duty-Water-Container/dp/B07JQ955SV
I have some of the water 10L military versions I got back in 2017 (I checked my emails) directly from them but the store link shows invalid. They are definitely heavy but also sturdy. I honestly was surprised how little a plastic taste the developed (I forgot to rotate the water in them so they had it for like 4 yrs).
These are the best deal and best usable water containers imho. We've had lengthy discussions in the blow thread and others. The Aquatsiner is the best deal, plenty sturdy, unless you need to throw them off a 7ft tall 6x military truck or something. Then your going to have to buy the molsoec spectre version. Very expensive.
I have USGi spectre water cans and gas cans. The Aquatainer are a better deal than the spectre commercial cans. And they stack. That's a big plus for storage. Spectre might stack. But the Aquatainer square format suits storage and packing a car much better.
https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?topic=2408.0#msg45123
Those Aquatainers are stackable and have a spigot made so you can put them on their side on a counter or table to dispense a cupful of water. The main downside discussed was they are 7 gallons and at 8lbs a gallon that's heavy to move around.
(https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=5076;preview)
I don't have these but have this type of container also. Not being stackable is the downside. But they probably work better for vehicle roof or back rack transport.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81cguXSa4EL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
Quote from: Moab on January 20, 2026, 02:52:37 AMThese are the best deal and best usable water containers imho. We've had lengthy discussions in the blow thread and others. The Aquatsiner is the best deal, plenty sturdy, unless you need to throw them off a 7ft tall 6x military truck or something. Then your going to have to buy the molsoec spectre version. Very expensive.
I have USGi spectre water cans and gas cans. The Aquatainer are a better deal than the spectre commercial cans. And they stack. That's a big plus for storage. Spectre might stack. But the Aquatainer square format suits storage and packing a car much better.
https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?topic=2408.0#msg45123
They're also roughly 16 lbs heavier when full. That's a consideration when I have a bad knee and a blown shoulder. The 10L Scepter containers were just right for me, but they're almost the same price the 20L ones were 15 years ago.
Quote from: MacWa77ace on January 20, 2026, 08:40:18 AMThose Aquatainers are stackable and have a spigot made so you can put them on their side on a counter or table to dispense a cupful of water. The main downside discussed was they are 7 gallons and at 8lbs a gallon that's heavy to move around.
(https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=5076;preview)
I don't have these but have this type of container also. Not being stackable is the downside. But they probably work better for vehicle roof or back rack transport.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81cguXSa4EL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
To be clear, Aquatainers are stackable when empty. They are not meant to be stacked when full.
Quote from: RelianceThe Original Aqua-Tainer is stackable when empty for compact storage
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
Water Bricks, on the other hand, are stackable when full, carry a lighter three and a half gallons with a 1.6 gallon half-brick option, as well, and have been tested sturdy enough for humanitarian parachute drops:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGtSWcIUYLk
https://www.waterbrick.org/
They also offer a half-brick ammo can, food bricks, and brick emergency kits. I have a pile of Water Bricks I got when they first came out that have been stacked in my shed full of water. In the early years, I would go out and empty them a little for freezing weather, but I forgot to do that in more recent years and none of them have ever warped or burst from ice formation (I'll check them again after Sunday's expected ice storm). They came in very handy during the Richmond Water Crisis last January.
Also, the hole design means they can also be pole carried and the makers work with several humanitarian partners. Of the water storage options I have tried, Water Bricks are my favorite.
Quote from: Anianna on January 20, 2026, 08:19:03 PMQuote from: MacWa77ace on January 20, 2026, 08:40:18 AMThose Aquatainers are stackable and have a spigot made so you can put them on their side on a counter or table to dispense a cupful of water. The main downside discussed was they are 7 gallons and at 8lbs a gallon that's heavy to move around.
(https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=5076;preview)
I don't have these but have this type of container also. Not being stackable is the downside. But they probably work better for vehicle roof or back rack transport.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81cguXSa4EL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
To be clear, Aquatainers are stackable when empty. They are not meant to be stacked when full.
Quote from: RelianceThe Original Aqua-Tainer is stackable when empty for compact storage
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
Water Bricks, on the other hand, are stackable when full, carry a lighter three and a half gallons with a 1.6 gallon half-brick option, as well, and have been tested sturdy enough for humanitarian parachute drops:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGtSWcIUYLk
https://www.waterbrick.org/
They also offer a half-brick ammo can, food bricks, and brick emergency kits. I have a pile of Water Bricks I got when they first came out that have been stacked in my shed full of water. In the early years, I would go out and empty them a little for freezing weather, but I forgot to do that in more recent years and none of them have ever warped or burst from ice formation (I'll check them again after Sunday's expected ice storm). They came in very handy during the Richmond Water Crisis last January.
Also, the hole design means they can also be pole carried and the makers work with several humanitarian partners. Of the water storage options I have tried, Water Bricks are my favorite.
Where were you when we had this long discussion on the other thread about water jugs?! 😁 You are very much right about these. And have convinced me these are a way better option. I think the Water brick got largely ignored because of their lack of a 5 gallon option. And we were all trying to be economical with price per gallon cost of water storage.
@Anianna is very much correct. I wish we had discussed these. Additional comments below after the short comparison.
Here's a clear comparison:
WATERBRICK 3.5 GALLON vs RELIANCE AQUA-TAINER 4 GALLON. (closest equivalent)
All prices in USD. Typical U.S. retail as of 2025–early 2026. Prices vary by seller and sales.
--------------------------------------------------
WATERBRICK – 3.5 GALLON STACKABLE CONTAINER
Manufacturer: WaterBrick
CAPACITY:
- 3.5 gallons (≈29 lbs full)
PRICES:
- 2-pack (direct from WaterBrick): ~$37.00 total (~$18.50 each)
- 4-pack (Prepper retailers): ~$75–78 total (~$18–19 each)
- 6-pack (Walmart / resellers): ~$120–125 total (~$20–21 each)
- 8-pack (Prepper retailers): ~$145–150 total (~$18–19 each)
DESIGN & USE:
- Rectangular "brick" shape, true cross-stacking system
- Designed specifically for long-term emergency storage
- Multiple handholds, easy to carry and rotate
- Spigot sold separately
REVIEWS & REAL-WORLD FEEDBACK:
- Very strong reputation in prepper and emergency-storage communities
- Rare body failures; complaints focus mainly on cap seal if overtightened or defective
- Excellent for tight spaces, closets, under beds, vehicle storage
- Handles being stored on sides better than budget cans
OVERALL TAKE:
- Costs more than budget cans
- Pays for itself in durability, stacking efficiency, and space savings
--------------------------------------------------
RELIANCE AQUA-TAINER – 4 GALLON
Manufacturer: Reliance Products
CAPACITY:
- 4 gallons (≈33 lbs full)
PRICES:
- Sporting goods stores (Scheels, etc.): ~$18.99
- Survival retailers: ~$18.95–19.95
- Walmart marketplace (varies): ~$18–36 depending on seller/availability
DESIGN & USE:
- Cube-style container with built-in spigot
- Designed primarily for camping, RV, and short-term water use
- Stackable only in a basic sense (not a system)
REVIEWS & REAL-WORLD FEEDBACK:
- Very popular due to low price and convenience
- Frequent long-term complaints: cracked plastic, warped bodies, leaking spigots
- Not ideal for side storage or heavy stacking
- Works best upright, lightly handled, rotated often
OVERALL TAKE:
- Cheap and convenient
- Higher failure rate over time compared to premium containers
- Best for casual or temporary use, not dense long-term storage
--------------------------------------------------
BOTTOM-LINE COMPARISON (NO HEDGING)
COST:
- Reliance is cheaper per container up front
- WaterBrick becomes cost-competitive when bought in multipacks
DURABILITY:
- WaterBrick clearly superior
- Reliance acceptable but inconsistent
STORAGE EFFICIENCY:
- WaterBrick wins decisively (true stacking system)
- Reliance wastes space
DISPENSING:
- Reliance wins out of the box (included spigot)
- WaterBrick requires accessory
FINAL RECOMMENDATION:
- For serious emergency storage, small living spaces, vehicles, or long-term rotation: BUY WATERBRICK.
- For budget camping or occasional household use: RELIANCE IS FINE, EXPECT REPLACEMENTS.
********************************************
I disagree with some of the conclusions this comparison comes to. IMHO Water brick clearly is the better option. Cost is to close to offer any benefit financially to the Reliance. 3.5g vs 4g.
Unless your dead set on 5 gallon containers. Which on sale are as cheap as eithers 3.5 gallon cans. You may find a benefit in the Reliance 5 gallon cans. But weight is a concern I agree. I can lift a 5 gallon water jug. But not everyone can. And the day will come when I can't. And as beautifully as the Water brick 3.5g cans stack. I see no reason not go with them.
I do have some lesser quality 20 liter (a bit bigger than 5 gallon) water cans here in the Phillipines with the larger 5 inch(?) fill cap. I also have higher quality 20 liter water cans made of a very thick hdpe plastic with a smaller 2 inch cap. The 5 inch caps are a failure point. And I hate them in mine. But I will not be surprised if the Water brick version caps are much thicker, more solid and water tight. They appear to have put to much R&D into these to let a faulty cap into the mix. And there is a clear advantage 5" cap vs 2" cap. You can reach a arm and hand in there to properly clean them. Something you can't do with a 2 inch cap.
My 5 inch cap jugs leak easily. I don't even trust carrying them in a vehicle unless they are upright the entire time. My 2 inch cap thicker ones are rock solid. And I added a 5mm rubber gasket to each cap.
With the pole carry option, the excellent stacking nature, the various carry options, and the nearly identical price - the Waterbricks are a clear winner in my mind.
Thank you,
@Anianna!
Apartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Quote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
At first I was disappointed with having to buy the spigot cap separate for the Water Bricks. But I think my strategy with the water bricks would be to keep them stored with the original caps. And just buy one spigot cap to use each time I needed it. But keep them well sealed most of the time with the basic cap. I think that makes way more sense then replacing the caps with the spigot. Spigots done travel well. Or at least not as reliable as a simple cap.
This is one of the downfalls of my cheap jugs here in the Phillipines. But I have a sense they were only made for water backup on your outside kitchen here. And not really meant for transport. The one I have that leaks - leaks from the spigot. But even the main 5 inch cap on top is very flimsy. None of it is made survive even the smallest drop. But they are 20 liter and about $2. So what do you expect?! Lol.
My better made ones that just have one 2 inch heavy cap. Are very heavy weight plastic though. Easily Spectre USGI weight plastic. 20 liter and cost less than $6. Could for sure survive a hefty drop. And the cap is for sure leak proof no matter how you placed it in a vehicle or for long term storage. With rubber gaskets I added. These are my go to here. I could probably find a spigot cap. But have not looked yet.
Quote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Under the bed may be an option, as well, since they're designed to lay on their side.
Quote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 01:14:20 AMQuote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Under the bed may be an option, as well, since they're designed to lay on their side.
I have to say the "pole carry" design is genius too!
At the bottom of the homepage there is a blurb about the owner coming up with this water container while having a discussion with Jaque Cousteau's son. You can see the guy was a real explorer. This is a very well thought out design. And has me rethinking 5 gallon/20 liter cans for anything altogether. Those long wire handles also give you the ability (I would imagine) to carry more than one in a hand if you have the strength to do so. And again as many as you like with the pole holes. So your not really limiting yourself in anyway by passing on the bigger 5gal/20l containers.
Excellent analysis,
@Anianna! This is a great find!
Quote from: Moab on January 21, 2026, 12:44:17 AMCAPACITY:
- 3.5 gallons (≈29 lbs full)
PRICES:
- 2-pack (direct from WaterBrick): ~$37.00 total (~$18.50 each)
- 4-pack (Prepper retailers): ~$75–78 total (~$18–19 each)
- 6-pack (Walmart / resellers): ~$120–125 total (~$20–21 each)
- 8-pack (Prepper retailers): ~$145–150 total (~$18–19 each
It's $11 shipping per two pack direct from Waterbrick to my AO. And if you do 2 two packs its $22 shipping for both, etc etc. Plus tax. But its free shipping on the 10 pack.
These are nice, can't really figure out the spigot or automatic water dispenser options.
Did your AI exclude the 7 gallon Aquatainer for a reason or did you filter by gallons?
Quote from: Moab on January 22, 2026, 02:04:51 AMQuote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 01:14:20 AMQuote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Under the bed may be an option, as well, since they're designed to lay on their side.
I have to say the "pole carry" design is genius too!
At the bottom of the homepage there is a blurb about the owner coming up with this water container while having a discussion with Jaque Cousteau's son. You can see the guy was a real explorer. This is a very well thought out design. And has me rethinking 5 gallon/20 liter cans for anything altogether. Those long wire handles also give you the ability (I would imagine) to carry more than one in a hand if you have the strength to do so. And again as many as you like with the pole holes. So your not really limiting yourself in anyway by passing on the bigger 5gal/20l containers.
Excellent analysis, @Anianna! This is a great find!
If you're not strong enough to carry multiple by hand, I imagine you could lash some together via the pole holes and jerry rig some straps to carry a few of them like a backpack. I can carry more weight on my back than I can carry in hand because that weight gets lifted with the legs.
Quote from: MacWa77ace on January 22, 2026, 09:22:58 AMQuote from: Moab on January 21, 2026, 12:44:17 AMCAPACITY:
- 3.5 gallons (≈29 lbs full)
PRICES:
- 2-pack (direct from WaterBrick): ~$37.00 total (~$18.50 each)
- 4-pack (Prepper retailers): ~$75–78 total (~$18–19 each)
- 6-pack (Walmart / resellers): ~$120–125 total (~$20–21 each)
- 8-pack (Prepper retailers): ~$145–150 total (~$18–19 each
It's $11 shipping per two pack direct from Waterbrick to my AO. And if you do 2 two packs its $22 shipping for both, etc etc. Plus tax. But its free shipping on the 10 pack.
These are nice, can't really figure out the spigot or automatic water dispenser options.
Did your AI exclude the 7 gallon Aquatainer for a reason or did you filter by gallons?
I mistakenly thought we had purchased the 5 gallon. You are right we purchased the 7 gallon. As overall that was the cheapest per gallon basic option.
But I revised a new comparison report in all the top 5 water containers. Including the ones we've discussed here.
The new thread is here. So as to properly document one overall discussion of water containers. My choice is still the Waterbrick 3.5 gallon. But some interesting data here:
https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?topic=3008.0#new
Quote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 08:33:35 PMQuote from: Moab on January 22, 2026, 02:04:51 AMQuote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 01:14:20 AMQuote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Under the bed may be an option, as well, since they're designed to lay on their side.
I have to say the "pole carry" design is genius too!
At the bottom of the homepage there is a blurb about the owner coming up with this water container while having a discussion with Jaque Cousteau's son. You can see the guy was a real explorer. This is a very well thought out design. And has me rethinking 5 gallon/20 liter cans for anything altogether. Those long wire handles also give you the ability (I would imagine) to carry more than one in a hand if you have the strength to do so. And again as many as you like with the pole holes. So your not really limiting yourself in anyway by passing on the bigger 5gal/20l containers.
Excellent analysis, @Anianna! This is a great find!
If you're not strong enough to carry multiple by hand, I imagine you could lash some together via the pole holes and jerry rig some straps to carry a few of them like a backpack. I can carry more weight on my back than I can carry in hand because that weight gets lifted with the legs.
I didn't realize either that those holes provide a superior way to tie them down like on a roof rack or similar. Running rope thru those is about as secure an attachment point as you could get. Having offroaded alot I can see the brilliance in that design. The pole and tie down option. And like you say a make shift backpack. Which is superior to hand carrying anything. I agree completely.
Quote from: Moab on January 23, 2026, 09:32:10 PMQuote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 08:33:35 PMQuote from: Moab on January 22, 2026, 02:04:51 AMQuote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 01:14:20 AMQuote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Under the bed may be an option, as well, since they're designed to lay on their side.
I have to say the "pole carry" design is genius too!
At the bottom of the homepage there is a blurb about the owner coming up with this water container while having a discussion with Jaque Cousteau's son. You can see the guy was a real explorer. This is a very well thought out design. And has me rethinking 5 gallon/20 liter cans for anything altogether. Those long wire handles also give you the ability (I would imagine) to carry more than one in a hand if you have the strength to do so. And again as many as you like with the pole holes. So your not really limiting yourself in anyway by passing on the bigger 5gal/20l containers.
Excellent analysis, @Anianna! This is a great find!
If you're not strong enough to carry multiple by hand, I imagine you could lash some together via the pole holes and jerry rig some straps to carry a few of them like a backpack. I can carry more weight on my back than I can carry in hand because that weight gets lifted with the legs.
I didn't realize either that those holes provide a superior way to tie them down like on a roof rack or similar. Running rope thru those is about as secure an attachment point as you could get. Having offroaded alot I can see the brilliance in that design. The pole and tie down option. And like you say a make shift backpack. Which is superior to hand carrying anything. I agree completely.
It's too bad they never made an ALICE ruck shelf for the modern polymer pack frames.
Quote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 24, 2026, 01:38:49 AMQuote from: Moab on January 23, 2026, 09:32:10 PMQuote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 08:33:35 PMQuote from: Moab on January 22, 2026, 02:04:51 AMQuote from: Anianna on January 22, 2026, 01:14:20 AMQuote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 21, 2026, 09:38:33 PMApartment living has presented its own challenges for storage. I remember the Waterbricks wowing the original ZS group when they first came out nearly 16-18 years ago, then I forgot about them, right along with the gamma seals. Since I could stash them in my pantry shelf without losing space, that would be the most ideal. I also have 3x 2.5gal countertop water containers with large lids and spigots. I could just pour the bricks into the water containers to top them off if I'm sheltering in place long term.
Under the bed may be an option, as well, since they're designed to lay on their side.
I have to say the "pole carry" design is genius too!
At the bottom of the homepage there is a blurb about the owner coming up with this water container while having a discussion with Jaque Cousteau's son. You can see the guy was a real explorer. This is a very well thought out design. And has me rethinking 5 gallon/20 liter cans for anything altogether. Those long wire handles also give you the ability (I would imagine) to carry more than one in a hand if you have the strength to do so. And again as many as you like with the pole holes. So your not really limiting yourself in anyway by passing on the bigger 5gal/20l containers.
Excellent analysis, @Anianna! This is a great find!
If you're not strong enough to carry multiple by hand, I imagine you could lash some together via the pole holes and jerry rig some straps to carry a few of them like a backpack. I can carry more weight on my back than I can carry in hand because that weight gets lifted with the legs.
I didn't realize either that those holes provide a superior way to tie them down like on a roof rack or similar. Running rope thru those is about as secure an attachment point as you could get. Having offroaded alot I can see the brilliance in that design. The pole and tie down option. And like you say a make shift backpack. Which is superior to hand carrying anything. I agree completely.
It's too bad they never made an ALICE ruck shelf for the modern polymer pack frames.
They made one for the next gen. The one with the heavy plastic frame. I have that pack too. The name escapes me. The bug one when ACU came out. There was an obscure website that use to sell them for cheap and it was a shelf. It was also really big. Those packs for carrying like 200lbs or something. Even without a frame shelf those would be excellent for carrying water jugs. They are super cheap. And honestly it's hard to find a use for them. As they are so big and heavy. 10lbs iirc. But they would be perfect in this role. I wouldn't be surprised if one of those big Reliance 7 gallon jugs would fit in one.
The Molle II Large Rucksack. I think I've seen them in the last year for like $39. No one wants them because they are big, heavy and ACU. And there are a ton of them out there. You can also dye them easily with RIT dye. To a much better color.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOLLE?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Screenshot_20260124_235009_Chrome.jpg
MOLLE II Large Ruck + water jug fit (based on commonly quoted dimensions)
Sources:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck (main compartment dimensions and system info):
https://www.amazon.com/MOLLE-II-Rucksack-Backpack-Assembly/dp/B0046QT4BA
https://armynavyoutdoors.com/us-army-issue-molle-ii-rucksack-used/
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal dimensions:
https://www.waterbrick.org/product-specifications/
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal dimensions:
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/reliance-aqua-tainer-water-container-4-gallon-or-7-gallon?a=2213892
Reference sizes:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck main compartment (quoted): ~18" x 8" x 24"
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal: 18" x 9" x 6"
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal: 11.5" x 11.25" x 10.75"
How many fit (practical):
A) WaterBrick 3.5 gal:
- Realistic in main compartment: 2 bricks
- Possible total (main + lower compartment): 3 bricks (depends on divider/lower bay clearance)
- "By volume" theoretical max: ~4, but not realistic in a real ruck and weight becomes ridiculous
B) Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal:
- Realistic: 1 jug
- Possible (tight) if the ruck bulges and you stack: 2 jugs vertically
Weight reality:
- 2 WaterBricks full = already a heavy ruck in water weight alone
- 2 Aqua-Tainers full = very heavy and awkward because the jug shape fights the ruck shape
```�10�
If 4 water bricks fit, and even though it's a ridiculous weight, if your just moving them to load in a car it would work well. But even moving 2 or 3 in a ruck is preferable to hand carry by far. Anything properly mounted to your back like this will ease travel a great deal.
Another win for the Waterbricks. But I did not ask it to estimate capacity for the 3 other brands of water jug.
Quote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 10:03:11 AMMOLLE II Large Ruck + water jug fit (based on commonly quoted dimensions)
Sources:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck (main compartment dimensions and system info):
https://www.amazon.com/MOLLE-II-Rucksack-Backpack-Assembly/dp/B0046QT4BA
https://armynavyoutdoors.com/us-army-issue-molle-ii-rucksack-used/
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal dimensions:
https://www.waterbrick.org/product-specifications/
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal dimensions:
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/reliance-aqua-tainer-water-container-4-gallon-or-7-gallon?a=2213892
Reference sizes:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck main compartment (quoted): ~18" x 8" x 24"
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal: 18" x 9" x 6"
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal: 11.5" x 11.25" x 10.75"
How many fit (practical):
A) WaterBrick 3.5 gal:
- Realistic in main compartment: 2 bricks
- Possible total (main + lower compartment): 3 bricks (depends on divider/lower bay clearance)
- "By volume" theoretical max: ~4, but not realistic in a real ruck and weight becomes ridiculous
B) Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal:
- Realistic: 1 jug
- Possible (tight) if the ruck bulges and you stack: 2 jugs vertically
Weight reality:
- 2 WaterBricks full = already a heavy ruck in water weight alone
- 2 Aqua-Tainers full = very heavy and awkward because the jug shape fights the ruck shape
```�10�
If 4 water bricks fit, and even though it's a ridiculous weight, if your just moving them to load in a car it would work well. But even moving 2 or 3 in a ruck is preferable to hand carry by far. Anything properly mounted to your back like this will ease travel a great deal.
Another win for the Waterbricks. But I did not ask it to estimate capacity for the 3 other brands of water jug.
I don't know that you can get 2 Aqua-Tainers into a MOLLE II. I have a MOLLE II in M83 woodland and the first thing I did was replace the first gen black frame with a next gen tan frame, as the black frames are notoriously brittle.
I think it would hold one Aqua-Tainer at best, and you're pushing 56 pounds of water and not much else. The sleep system carrier on the MOLLE II makes it look huge, but the actual cargo area of the pack is deceptively small.
Quote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 09:52:00 AMThe Molle II Large Rucksack. I think I've seen them in the last year for like $39. No one wants them because they are big, heavy and ACU. And there are a ton of them out there. You can also dye them easily with RIT dye. To a much better color.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOLLE?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Screenshot_20260124_235009_Chrome.jpg
I got a contract run of that same ruck in coyote brown 17 years ago to use when I was a field scientist. Used to live out of that thing 2-4 weeks at a time, plus a gym bag for clothes and spare shoes.
Quote from: echo83 on January 24, 2026, 02:52:13 PMQuote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 10:03:11 AMMOLLE II Large Ruck + water jug fit (based on commonly quoted dimensions)
Sources:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck (main compartment dimensions and system info):
https://www.amazon.com/MOLLE-II-Rucksack-Backpack-Assembly/dp/B0046QT4BA
https://armynavyoutdoors.com/us-army-issue-molle-ii-rucksack-used/
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal dimensions:
https://www.waterbrick.org/product-specifications/
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal dimensions:
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/reliance-aqua-tainer-water-container-4-gallon-or-7-gallon?a=2213892
Reference sizes:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck main compartment (quoted): ~18" x 8" x 24"
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal: 18" x 9" x 6"
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal: 11.5" x 11.25" x 10.75"
How many fit (practical):
A) WaterBrick 3.5 gal:
- Realistic in main compartment: 2 bricks
- Possible total (main + lower compartment): 3 bricks (depends on divider/lower bay clearance)
- "By volume" theoretical max: ~4, but not realistic in a real ruck and weight becomes ridiculous
B) Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal:
- Realistic: 1 jug
- Possible (tight) if the ruck bulges and you stack: 2 jugs vertically
Weight reality:
- 2 WaterBricks full = already a heavy ruck in water weight alone
- 2 Aqua-Tainers full = very heavy and awkward because the jug shape fights the ruck shape
```�10�
If 4 water bricks fit, and even though it's a ridiculous weight, if your just moving them to load in a car it would work well. But even moving 2 or 3 in a ruck is preferable to hand carry by far. Anything properly mounted to your back like this will ease travel a great deal.
Another win for the Waterbricks. But I did not ask it to estimate capacity for the 3 other brands of water jug.
I don't know that you can get 2 Aqua-Tainers into a MOLLE II. I have a MOLLE II in M83 woodland and the first thing I did was replace the first gen black frame with a next gen tan frame, as the black frames are notoriously brittle.
I think it would hold one Aqua-Tainer at best, and you're pushing 56 pounds of water and not much else. The sleep system carrier on the MOLLE II makes it look huge, but the actual cargo area of the pack is deceptively small.
Remember it's quoting the 4 gallon not the 7 gallon. And it claims 1 and "possibly" 2. Iirc the main compartment and the sleeping bag compartment does have a zippered opening between the two. Or am I remembering that incorrectly? If not, you could safely cut/melt an opening between the two. But I think the safe bet is using it to carrying multiples of the smaller 3.5 gallon Waterbricks. They seem to make more sense overall for just about everything. Short of being able to survive a drop off the side of 6x military truck in the Spectre.
Iirc it also says it's unable to hold even one of the 7 gallon square Reliance containers. But I'd bet it could hold a Spectre. It's a much more forgiving shape. As is any standard Jerry can type shape.
I'm just excited to find any practicle use for this pack. They are so huge and bombproof. But terrible as a backpacking long distance pack. You are simply paying to much of a weight price. 5lbs seems to be the upper limit for a solid bug out backpack. Otherwise your sacrificing 5obs of ammo, food water etc. Which puts you largely in the civilian pack realm. But your going to have a much better physical experience. And many are built plenty tough to handle anything short of sustained daily combat. And if your operating in sustained daily combat your bug out has already failed. Lol.
Cheap, overbuilt military surplus is awesome. But rarely do we find a solid use beyond mechanized daily warfare. Which is the opposite of bugging out or operating during a paw or emergency. But for utility sake I can see this pack being used for large, short distance transport.
The best use case I could ever find was wild meat transport on the cheap. $39 for a pack that can hold and safely carry 200lbs. Is pretty awesome. But that's a short distance. Which has its place in an emergency. Moving things from house to car, to a short distance location, or just walking around with that capability on your back while scavenging let's say. It certainly would hold a car battery or two or three.
There is also an argument I have made in here about dyeing gear for outfitting a small group cheaply with old ACU gear from this era. I forget the cost but if you had to outfit a family of 4 let's say - quickly and cheaply. An old set of ACU and associated gear can be had for less than $200 per person. And some RIT dye to make it acceptable colorwise is very doable.
That may seem like a terrible idea weight wise. But if you add up a minute man "type" loadout for bugging out with an affordable long gun, mag access, survival gear etc. The cost quickly adds up. Rifle, ammo, clothing, pack, chest rig etc quickly overcomes a standard budget for a family or group of even 3 or 4 people. But it's doable with an entry level AR and a set of ACU gear.
And the colors you can dye all of it into are more than acceptable.
If you add up the likelihood of a use case where you would need this type of loadout, against how much money you'd like to spend leaving this to sit in your garage (most likely) it's not far fetched to see this is a pretty good idea. Just a chestrig in modern offerings can easily exceed $200.
If I were home I'd go see whether my Spectre or Reliance cans would fit in the Molle II large rucksack.
Quote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 10:24:28 PMQuote from: echo83 on January 24, 2026, 02:52:13 PMQuote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 10:03:11 AMMOLLE II Large Ruck + water jug fit (based on commonly quoted dimensions)
Sources:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck (main compartment dimensions and system info):
https://www.amazon.com/MOLLE-II-Rucksack-Backpack-Assembly/dp/B0046QT4BA
https://armynavyoutdoors.com/us-army-issue-molle-ii-rucksack-used/
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal dimensions:
https://www.waterbrick.org/product-specifications/
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal dimensions:
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/reliance-aqua-tainer-water-container-4-gallon-or-7-gallon?a=2213892
Reference sizes:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck main compartment (quoted): ~18" x 8" x 24"
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal: 18" x 9" x 6"
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal: 11.5" x 11.25" x 10.75"
How many fit (practical):
A) WaterBrick 3.5 gal:
- Realistic in main compartment: 2 bricks
- Possible total (main + lower compartment): 3 bricks (depends on divider/lower bay clearance)
- "By volume" theoretical max: ~4, but not realistic in a real ruck and weight becomes ridiculous
B) Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal:
- Realistic: 1 jug
- Possible (tight) if the ruck bulges and you stack: 2 jugs vertically
Weight reality:
- 2 WaterBricks full = already a heavy ruck in water weight alone
- 2 Aqua-Tainers full = very heavy and awkward because the jug shape fights the ruck shape
```�10�
If 4 water bricks fit, and even though it's a ridiculous weight, if your just moving them to load in a car it would work well. But even moving 2 or 3 in a ruck is preferable to hand carry by far. Anything properly mounted to your back like this will ease travel a great deal.
Another win for the Waterbricks. But I did not ask it to estimate capacity for the 3 other brands of water jug.
I don't know that you can get 2 Aqua-Tainers into a MOLLE II. I have a MOLLE II in M83 woodland and the first thing I did was replace the first gen black frame with a next gen tan frame, as the black frames are notoriously brittle.
I think it would hold one Aqua-Tainer at best, and you're pushing 56 pounds of water and not much else. The sleep system carrier on the MOLLE II makes it look huge, but the actual cargo area of the pack is deceptively small.
Remember it's quoting the 4 gallon not the 7 gallon. And it claims 1 and "possibly" 2. Iirc the main compartment and the sleeping bag compartment does have a zippered opening between the two. Or am I remembering that incorrectly? If not, you could safely cut/melt an opening between the two. But I think the safe bet is using it to carrying multiples of the smaller 3.5 gallon Waterbricks. They seem to make more sense overall for just about everything. Short of being able to survive a drop off the side of 6x military truck in the Spectre.
Iirc it also says it's unable to hold even one of the 7 gallon square Reliance containers. But I'd bet it could hold a Spectre. It's a much more forgiving shape. As is any standard Jerry can type shape.
I'm just excited to find any practicle use for this pack. They are so huge and bombproof. But terrible as a backpacking long distance pack. You are simply paying to much of a weight price. 5lbs seems to be the upper limit for a solid bug out backpack. Otherwise your sacrificing 5obs of ammo, food water etc. Which puts you largely in the civilian pack realm. But your going to have a much better physical experience. And many are built plenty tough to handle anything short of sustained daily combat. And if your operating in sustained daily combat your bug out has already failed. Lol.
Cheap, overbuilt military surplus is awesome. But rarely do we find a solid use beyond mechanized daily warfare. Which is the opposite of bugging out or operating during a paw or emergency. But for utility sake I can see this pack being used for large, short distance transport.
The best use case I could ever find was wild meat transport on the cheap. $39 for a pack that can hold and safely carry 200lbs. Is pretty awesome. But that's a short distance. Which has its place in an emergency. Moving things from house to car, to a short distance location, or just walking around with that capability on your back while scavenging let's say. It certainly would hold a car battery or two or three.
There is also an argument I have made in here about dyeing gear for outfitting a small group cheaply with old ACU gear from this era. I forget the cost but if you had to outfit a family of 4 let's say - quickly and cheaply. An old set of ACU and associated gear can be had for less than $200 per person. And some RIT dye to make it acceptable colorwise is very doable.
That may seem like a terrible idea weight wise. But if you add up a minute man "type" loadout for bugging out with an affordable long gun, mag access, survival gear etc. The cost quickly adds up. Rifle, ammo, clothing, pack, chest rig etc quickly overcomes a standard budget for a family or group of even 3 or 4 people. But it's doable with an entry level AR and a set of ACU gear.
And the colors you can dye all of it into are more than acceptable.
If you add up the likelihood of a use case where you would need this type of loadout, against how much money you'd like to spend leaving this to sit in your garage (most likely) it's not far fetched to see this is a pretty good idea. Just a chestrig in modern offerings can easily exceed $200.
If I were home I'd go see whether my Spectre or Reliance cans would fit in the Molle II large rucksack.
Ah, that makes more sense. Yeah, a 4 gallon would work. I was just looking at my pack and the 7 gallon in my basement and thinking, "Yeah, no way."
What I'm saying should probably be a separate thread, but I think your observations on the MOLLE II have some serious merit. I have one set up as my BOB because 1.) it was free and 2.) I think the assault pack/main ruck combination has some merit. Carrying all your big items in the MOLLE II, but being able to stash it, use your assault pack, then come back to your MOLLE II is my line of thinking.
Conspicuously absent from my line of thinking is the mechanized side of things. With no mechanized support, I can see how the MOLLE II would be a pain. There's a reason you see them hanging off the sides of Strykers and Bradleys, and not being worn around for weeks on end.
It is bombproof, but it's definitely more heavy than a civilian pack in the same bracket.
Quote from: echo83 on January 25, 2026, 01:40:45 PMQuote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 10:24:28 PMQuote from: echo83 on January 24, 2026, 02:52:13 PMQuote from: Moab on January 24, 2026, 10:03:11 AMMOLLE II Large Ruck + water jug fit (based on commonly quoted dimensions)
Sources:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck (main compartment dimensions and system info):
https://www.amazon.com/MOLLE-II-Rucksack-Backpack-Assembly/dp/B0046QT4BA
https://armynavyoutdoors.com/us-army-issue-molle-ii-rucksack-used/
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal dimensions:
https://www.waterbrick.org/product-specifications/
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal dimensions:
https://relianceoutdoors.com/products/aqua-tainer-4g-15l
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/reliance-aqua-tainer-water-container-4-gallon-or-7-gallon?a=2213892
Reference sizes:
- MOLLE II Large Ruck main compartment (quoted): ~18" x 8" x 24"
- WaterBrick 3.5 gal: 18" x 9" x 6"
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal: 11.5" x 11.25" x 10.75"
How many fit (practical):
A) WaterBrick 3.5 gal:
- Realistic in main compartment: 2 bricks
- Possible total (main + lower compartment): 3 bricks (depends on divider/lower bay clearance)
- "By volume" theoretical max: ~4, but not realistic in a real ruck and weight becomes ridiculous
B) Reliance Aqua-Tainer 4 gal:
- Realistic: 1 jug
- Possible (tight) if the ruck bulges and you stack: 2 jugs vertically
Weight reality:
- 2 WaterBricks full = already a heavy ruck in water weight alone
- 2 Aqua-Tainers full = very heavy and awkward because the jug shape fights the ruck shape
```�10�
If 4 water bricks fit, and even though it's a ridiculous weight, if your just moving them to load in a car it would work well. But even moving 2 or 3 in a ruck is preferable to hand carry by far. Anything properly mounted to your back like this will ease travel a great deal.
Another win for the Waterbricks. But I did not ask it to estimate capacity for the 3 other brands of water jug.
I don't know that you can get 2 Aqua-Tainers into a MOLLE II. I have a MOLLE II in M83 woodland and the first thing I did was replace the first gen black frame with a next gen tan frame, as the black frames are notoriously brittle.
I think it would hold one Aqua-Tainer at best, and you're pushing 56 pounds of water and not much else. The sleep system carrier on the MOLLE II makes it look huge, but the actual cargo area of the pack is deceptively small.
Remember it's quoting the 4 gallon not the 7 gallon. And it claims 1 and "possibly" 2. Iirc the main compartment and the sleeping bag compartment does have a zippered opening between the two. Or am I remembering that incorrectly? If not, you could safely cut/melt an opening between the two. But I think the safe bet is using it to carrying multiples of the smaller 3.5 gallon Waterbricks. They seem to make more sense overall for just about everything. Short of being able to survive a drop off the side of 6x military truck in the Spectre.
Iirc it also says it's unable to hold even one of the 7 gallon square Reliance containers. But I'd bet it could hold a Spectre. It's a much more forgiving shape. As is any standard Jerry can type shape.
I'm just excited to find any practicle use for this pack. They are so huge and bombproof. But terrible as a backpacking long distance pack. You are simply paying to much of a weight price. 5lbs seems to be the upper limit for a solid bug out backpack. Otherwise your sacrificing 5obs of ammo, food water etc. Which puts you largely in the civilian pack realm. But your going to have a much better physical experience. And many are built plenty tough to handle anything short of sustained daily combat. And if your operating in sustained daily combat your bug out has already failed. Lol.
Cheap, overbuilt military surplus is awesome. But rarely do we find a solid use beyond mechanized daily warfare. Which is the opposite of bugging out or operating during a paw or emergency. But for utility sake I can see this pack being used for large, short distance transport.
The best use case I could ever find was wild meat transport on the cheap. $39 for a pack that can hold and safely carry 200lbs. Is pretty awesome. But that's a short distance. Which has its place in an emergency. Moving things from house to car, to a short distance location, or just walking around with that capability on your back while scavenging let's say. It certainly would hold a car battery or two or three.
There is also an argument I have made in here about dyeing gear for outfitting a small group cheaply with old ACU gear from this era. I forget the cost but if you had to outfit a family of 4 let's say - quickly and cheaply. An old set of ACU and associated gear can be had for less than $200 per person. And some RIT dye to make it acceptable colorwise is very doable.
That may seem like a terrible idea weight wise. But if you add up a minute man "type" loadout for bugging out with an affordable long gun, mag access, survival gear etc. The cost quickly adds up. Rifle, ammo, clothing, pack, chest rig etc quickly overcomes a standard budget for a family or group of even 3 or 4 people. But it's doable with an entry level AR and a set of ACU gear.
And the colors you can dye all of it into are more than acceptable.
If you add up the likelihood of a use case where you would need this type of loadout, against how much money you'd like to spend leaving this to sit in your garage (most likely) it's not far fetched to see this is a pretty good idea. Just a chestrig in modern offerings can easily exceed $200.
If I were home I'd go see whether my Spectre or Reliance cans would fit in the Molle II large rucksack.
Ah, that makes more sense. Yeah, a 4 gallon would work. I was just looking at my pack and the 7 gallon in my basement and thinking, "Yeah, no way."
What I'm saying should probably be a separate thread, but I think your observations on the MOLLE II have some serious merit. I have one set up as my BOB because 1.) it was free and 2.) I think the assault pack/main ruck combination has some merit. Carrying all your big items in the MOLLE II, but being able to stash it, use your assault pack, then come back to your MOLLE II is my line of thinking.
Conspicuously absent from my line of thinking is the mechanized side of things. With no mechanized support, I can see how the MOLLE II would be a pain. There's a reason you see them hanging off the sides of Strykers and Bradleys, and not being worn around for weeks on end.
It is bombproof, but it's definitely more heavy than a civilian pack in the same bracket.
If you search ZS on internet archives you will find my first real bug out bag. I did not want to spend alot of money. And I was happy with cheap overbuilt military surplus.
Until I was done. It weighed well over 70lbs. 🥴 A prime example of buying your pack first (that alone is a mistake - buy your gear first and match your pack to your gear), and not adding up weights of each piece of gear prior to buying anything. Both are the two biggest mistakes most people make.
Then you realize there are steps to the process. And why there are gear weight calculators you can use for free. Because along with quality and price the biggest factor is "can I carry this?".
So you have to start with a list of items that meet your own "sweet spot". Sweet spot is where price meets the highest quality you need and can afford. Without a dramatic increase in price that usually occurs when you go after that last 10%-20% of quality.
Often when you go from 80% of the best quality to say 90% or 95% the price suddenly goes up by 50%. Or some drastic increase. It's always that last bit of this years improvement or that extra special functionality or quality that kills the price point. But you have to decide where "your" sweet spot is item by item. Maybe you do need that last 20% of quality. And spending the extra makes sense. Or maybe 60% of best quality is good enough for like something simple like a crowbar. And you can save money to spend elsewhere.
But the other consideration that goes hand in hand is weight. You can't just pick all the lightest items. You'll end up with many inferior items at a sharp price increase for ultralight. But once you get a complete list of proposed gear. You can look at alternatives in each item. And decide overall "which items can I afford to decrease weightwise - without overspending or giving up needed quality".
That's easier done looking at your kit as a whole on paper. Which items aren't as vital as others? Maybe I can ditch something altogether? Or maybe this category is so much more important - I can make due with something lighter and maybe of lesser quality in an opposing area. Or maybe I can choose a double duty item. That may not do each job as well as the two single items. But the double duty item is cheaper and lighter. And good enough.
But after not doing it on paper and spending an overall large sum of money. I quickly realized what a 10lb pack meant. I was giving up 5lbs of ammo, or water, or food, or something of equal importance. And I saw the value in doing it on paper first. With weights.
Alot of the stuff I was in love with - I ditched altogether. I had a lot of "perfect" items. That were indeed the "best item for the job". And that's where we fall down in our debates of the "the best bug out knife", "the best tent", etc etc etc. There is no best tent. There is a top ten. That all come with a price, quality and weight. But only one is right for "you". Your use case, your AO, your gear list. And your overall weight.
It not only has to do what you need it to do. It has to fall in line with the rest of your list and the overall weight. That is very singularly driven, and very nuanced. We can certainly discuss the best options in some category of item. But so many different factors go into each of our gear decisions. It's impossible to find "the best". The best for you? Certainly.
The Molle II Large Rucksack is hard to pass up though. It's dirt cheap and so bombproof you could haul rocks with it. Or water jugs or large amounts of meat. Or just to have in the truck when you run across two car batteries you want to haul out of someplace. But carrying them in your arms is impractical. As a heavy item hauler for back up it's not a bad expenditure. $39 is crazy cheap for what you get.
Lastly, I also recognized the value in modularity. Find as many weight responsible carry methods that you can add and subtract weight quickly. Mobility is vital. I use a main pack with full shoulder pads, a thin strapped chest pack (that comfortably ride the main pack) and a large USGi fanny pack ( that rides below or under my main packs waist belt). All of those can ride on my body at the same time. Without creating hot spots or uncomfortable long distance travel. Basic essential survival items are spread across all three. Everything I need is spread across all three. But in a manner that as I ditch them quickly I can still survive.
If I have to ditch the main pack - completely or temporarily. I have enough basic survival items spread across the chest pack and fannypack to survive. I keep the large essentials in the main pack. But the very basic, essential items like nav, ifak, fire, cordiage, knife, gloves etc split between the fannypack and chest pack. Even some tiny lightweight items are doubled up. A Bic and small firesteel in both. My main compass in the chest pack and a backup of lesser quality and smaller in the fanny pack as backup. A poncho which replaces the tent in my main pack. Alot of thought goes into this. Alot of research.
Even within my main pack I have modules that can be ditched or cached quickly. That I have already spent the time putting into a clear, long thought out strategy for. Separated already. As I don't want to be making those complicated decisions under duress or in a short moment. Digging thru my entire pack trying to figure what weight I can ditch.
I highly suggest splitting up your load this way. And having contingencies for dropping weight.
Now that I'm entirely off topic. I'll shut the hell up. Lol!
Moab, you're taking us back to the old ZS discussions, just like the before times. Reference gear weights, I got the lightest weight gear I could find back in the day, and they're now bulky and heavy compared to what's on the market now, 16 years later. I replaced my Thermarest self-inflating mattress with one from Klymit, that's roughly the size of my 1L Nalgene bottle. Easily 1/3 the side. For warmer weather, I get by with a poncho liner, but one of these days I'll get the Snugpak jungle bag for the warmer months. It's about the size of a football vs. the temperate three season mummy bag they made, which is bigger than a basketball. A compression sack with the jungle bag, new air mattress, and camp pillow still come out smaller than the mummy bag I have.
Quote from: Crimson_Phoenix on January 25, 2026, 11:21:59 PMMoab, you're taking us back to the old ZS discussions, just like the before times. Reference gear weights, I got the lightest weight gear I could find back in the day, and they're now bulky and heavy compared to what's on the market now, 16 years later. I replaced my Thermarest self-inflating mattress with one from Klymit, that's roughly the size of my 1L Nalgene bottle. Easily 1/3 the side. For warmer weather, I get by with a poncho liner, but one of these days I'll get the Snugpak jungle bag for the warmer months. It's about the size of a football vs. the temperate three season mummy bag they made, which is bigger than a basketball. A compression sack with the jungle bag, new air mattress, and camp pillow still come out smaller than the mummy bag I have.
That's an interesting topic on its own. When do I need to review my gear for simple age? Is it still serviceable. Is the design outdated?
If I continue to live here in the Phillipines my preps will continue to change drastically. They already have. And I was not able to bring alot of emergency items with me. Which was a hard thing to accept. Decades of research, deal finding and collection largely gone. For the sake of shipping and customs fees. Then I had a main box of survival items stolen by a local shipping company.
But also my survival and prepping supplies were geared for North America. Not a tropical island climate. Luckily many of the basics are the same. And alot of the heavy stuff is not necessary. Cold weather gear. More rugged gear. Alot if I don't need simply due to the climate. It's much more forgiving here. Even in a typhoon it's still warm. Think hammock and tarp. Not tent and stove.
Prepping is similar. But I have to recreate it. Water, fuel and food storage. Food, water, fuel, basic supplies and their containers are cheaper. But the whole thing is a different scenario. Infrastructure is screwed even without a disaster. Living off grid is a given necessity here. Setting up an off grid system (even a portable one) largely gets you out of the main drawbacks of living here.
But depth of need for dealing with sewage and sanitation was a thing I did not foresee. Even within major cities septic is largely ignored. A huge percentage of houses either dumps raw sewage right out onto the ground. (Like literally my apartments owner pipes sewage out into the field next door. And no one gives a shit. No pun intended.) Or houses have been digging new outhouses for decades on a tiny piece of property. The same property that contains their well.
Third world countries based on corruption systems don't put any priority on citizen safety. That just digs into the pile of tax dollars, who's theft, makes the entire system run. Not well mind you. At all. But that's how it runs.