Waterproof sacs??!!

My important bits are in dry bags, not only to keep them dry but so i know where any item i might want to lay hands is, so waterproofness is neither here or there really.

The only exception would be if i snatched a couple of hours out in the evening where i might want to quickly throw a FAK, camera and a snack etc in a 15/20lt sack, the reason i'll be buying a Gourdon when Alpkit have them back in stock.

A bit of water repellency for the reason Kate states above doesn't go amiss though. 

Include a little history in your walks. Pecsaetan - Ancient Derbyshire, Staffordshire and South Yorkshire - http://pecsaetan.weebly.com/

As above. 

I've seen sacs with sewn-in waterproof pack covers that stow in a pouch.  If I bought a sac with one I'd cut it off.

Same as above re not needing the pack itself to be waterproof, but does need to be non water absorbant.

I do use pack covers for multiday trips, and prefer the ones that come with packs as they tend to be designed to fit that pack better than generic ones, and blow off less. Ideally I'd want a pack designer to supply a pack cover that was fitted by more than just elastic cord round the rim, and was fastened in multiple points. Its just so much nicer once the tent is up to drop the pack cover as an extra bit of groundsheet in the porch and have a dry(ish)pack in the tent.

Every now and then someone makes a range of waterproof sacks, and lots of people shout "Hooray, a waterproof sack at last!" and then next year they've vanished again...

It's clearly possible to make them, but we actually have to ask ourselves how much point there is, especially since we can be sure there'll be a fat price premium.

Picture yourself on a blustery day, strolling along in the sun with your 100% waterproof pack on.  Hang on, here comes the rain, so you take out your waterproofs in time and get suited up.  After 20 minutes of good wetting the sun comes out again so it's time to stow the waterproofs... but they're dripping, and if you put them in your 100% waterproof pack then all your dry stuff will get wet and you'll get a pool in the bottom that won't drain out.  If, later on, you get your tent out and that gets a good soaking overnight then the problem gets worse.

And if you thrutch up a granite chimney and wear a hole in the pack then you've spent a lot on waterproofig that doesn't work any more, while if you rely on a liner that's a non-issue, and a liner also allows you to keep wet and dry separate inside the sack.  So if I'm going to use a liner anyway, why bother paying extra for full waterproofing?

I do use fully waterproof Ortlieb cycle panniers... but more because the fitting fixtures and overall design are more to my liking than anything else more than they're waterproof.  I still use liners inside, to compartmentalise and keep dry from wet and clean from dirty.

In summary, on paper it sounds fantastic, in reality it's a bit of a meh that costs a lot.

Pete.

Amy Spencer 2 wrote (see)

 Does anyone look for that on the label when buying? or is it a given from top name brands??

Include a little history in your walks. Pecsaetan - Ancient Derbyshire, Staffordshire and South Yorkshire - http://pecsaetan.weebly.com/

i wouldn't expect or trust any water repelancy claim on a sack. dry bags inside is the only way.

tough yet lightweight is what i look for.

the best bag i've ever had is the osprey mutant. not sure if it was sold as being water repellant.

Pretty much a given that the basic material will be the best part of waterproof, but will leak through the seams.  At least a given from anyone I'd buy a pack from...

Pete.

Spiritburner wrote (see)

As above.

I've seen sacs with sewn-in waterproof pack covers that stow in a pouch. If I bought a sac with one I'd cut it off.

I a;ways went the route of rucsac liners, but bought a Freeflow 20 (Berghaus -Amy...) about 3-years ago and it did have such a cover. I found that I did use it and it worked pretty well. I bought it for cycle commuting, but changed to panniers, so rarely use it. Mind you, my preferred daysac is currently a drybag (alpkit Gourdon20), which has the advantage of being a "big" 20 litres, if that makes sense...

Keith Davo wrote (see)

The Lightwave Ultrahike claims to be "virtually" waterproof - seams welded or taped apart from the back panel. I've used mine on three multi-day trips so far and it hasn't let in any water so far as I've noticed, however none of these trips were affected by prolonged heavy rain,

Yeah. I have a Lightwave Fastpack 40, and it's one of my absolute favourite rucksacks, I love it. It was also described as "virtually waterproof", and let in water on a really horrible winter's day in the Mamores. Well, to be honest it was only a half day because we gave up half way up Stob Ban and went into the Morrisons in Fort William to dry off under the hand-driers in the toilets.

My Fastpack leaked. And of course because it is actually reasonably water-resistant, I ended up with a lovely little puddles in both the top pocket and the main compartment.

I still love the rucksack. It's just not "virtually waterproof"!

I've not had experienc of "proper" waterproof bags, the type that are like dry bags with straps. I'd have thought that they were completely waterproof and look good for ghyll scrambling and other water activities.

In my opinion it's nice for conventional rucksacks to have some degree of water resistance, such as lids that cover the bag well. I always use a liner and dry bags, so it doesn't matter if the bag isn't fully waterproof. However, I would like to see the bottom of rucksacks made from tough, waterproof fabric with taped seams to prevent water ingress if you put it down on wet ground. It's not essential, but could be quite useful. 

As for waterproof covers: useful for keeping the fabric dry but not essential if you have a waterproof liner.