Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Products
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 11, 08, 1:24 am   #1
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: M&M
Posts: 55
28" vs. 26" suitcase - which one?

time to upgrade my really really old duffel bag.

i am torn between which one i should get. i think having a 28" will cause me to over-pack while 26" will force me to be disciplined with packing and hence not ending up with a heavy suitcase.

on the other hand 28" does have that extra room in case i do need it (if i go to cold climate like russia and need to bring extra jacket and boots for example)

any thoughts? do most intl travelers find 26" enough or is 28" the standard "issue" for intl travel for people on this site?
jkb76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 08, 8:37 am   #2
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 9,512
i go 62"
__________________
regards
jer
slawecki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 08, 2:51 pm   #3
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 702
I bought a 28" bag. It lasted me two trips; then I went out and bought a 25" Delsey. With the weight restrictions, the 28" was just too heavy even empty let alone when I filled it. Take the 25" or 26" and than you can leave the worries about it being overweight at home. Makes travel much easier.

I guess I should add that you wouldn't need to worry about a 25" bag being overweight if you just packed clothes. All bets are off if you're packing your dumbells.


I can't do 62" being my exact height. It would be too cumbersome.
jennj99738 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 08, 3:52 pm   #4
Moderator, Air Canada
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E75, SPG Plat, HH peon-by-choice (ex Gold)
Posts: 7,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkb76 View Post
do most intl travelers find 26" enough or is 28" the standard "issue" for intl travel for people on this site?
I would say most experienced international travellers use carry-on luggage.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jennj99738 View Post
With the weight restrictions, the 28" was just too heavy even empty let alone when I filled it. Take the 25" or 26" and than you can leave the worries about it being overweight at home. Makes travel much easier.
Bang on.
Braindrain is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 08, 4:06 pm   #5
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Rowe Mesa, NM - USA
Programs: DL, UA, WN, Amtrak, La Quinta Elite
Posts: 1,459
I recommend a 25 to 26-inch bag. I make long trips in all 4 seasons and my 25-inch bags (I have several collected over the years) are more than adequate even in the dead of winter. A smaller bag is easier to handle, almost certainly won't go over the new draconian weight limits, costs less, and is easier to fit into small spaces in many hotel rooms.

I never take more than one coat (well, maybe an additional shell-type rain jacket, but that packs fairly small) and if snow is possible I wear snow boots on the plane. Always wear your biggest pair of shoes and don't pack more than 2 more pair. Shoes weigh a lot and take up so much space in a bag. If you develop the right packing list, you won't need a case larger than 25-26 inches.
Dianne47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 08, 6:56 pm   #6
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ORD
Programs: AA EXP, UA - Adieu
Posts: 3,930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dianne47 View Post
I recommend a 25 to 26-inch bag. I make long trips in all 4 seasons and my 25-inch bags (I have several collected over the years) are more than adequate even in the dead of winter. A smaller bag is easier to handle, almost certainly won't go over the new draconian weight limits, costs less, and is easier to fit into small spaces in many hotel rooms.

I never take more than one coat (well, maybe an additional shell-type rain jacket, but that packs fairly small) and if snow is possible I wear snow boots on the plane. Always wear your biggest pair of shoes and don't pack more than 2 more pair. Shoes weigh a lot and take up so much space in a bag. If you develop the right packing list, you won't need a case larger than 25-26 inches.
I agree w/ all above. 28" just way too big.
masonp123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 08, 7:03 pm   #7
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: M&M
Posts: 55
thank you all for suggestions and feedback. ended up buying 26" Briggs & Riley on ebay (expandable though, just in case)
jkb76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 08, 1:02 am   #8
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Potomac, MD (DCA)
Programs: US Chairmans, AS MVPG, SPG Plat, IC AMB, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Natl Exec, Hertz 5*, Sixt Plat
Posts: 3,439
Unless you are making really long trips and have airline status that allows additional weight I think 28" is too big. I have a 28" and I routinely weigh in at 65 pounds. (Though I like the extra space for basic dive gear)
__________________
Travel Photos
uva185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 08, 2:27 pm   #9
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: YVR
Programs: Aeroplan
Posts: 854
I bought a Samsonite "Legendary Lightness" suitcase last fall and it was indeed light and looked sturdy and then bought another, four wheeler and now I see it's bottom is broken (!! how can you break that material?? airports ) I want somethign that will survive -- I am surely not flying as much as some the forum dwellers but still, I am past 20 flights this year, several of them transatlantic and I have YVR-SEA-FRA-BUD-CDG-YUl-YVR still ahead of me . So, Eagle Creek. But then, they only sell 25" and not 26" wont that be too small...? I am looking at the Switchback® Max 25 it looks like great, having a separate backpack... My carry ons are a Tumi Alpha Continental 20" and a Samsonite LP450 (yes, even a Panasonic CF-Y5 can use some memory foam protection...) so I don't have a daypack on my back at the various endpoints which sucks.
chx1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 08, 12:23 am   #10
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: DelRay,Alexandria,Virginia
Programs: KE Morning Calm
Posts: 1,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by chx1975 View Post
But then, they only sell 25" and not 26" wont that be too small...?
Are the other two dimensions equal? I recall that when I switched from a 26" to a 24" I didn't really notice any loss in volume.
Rampo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 08, 3:05 pm   #11
Moderator, Air Canada
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E75, SPG Plat, HH peon-by-choice (ex Gold)
Posts: 7,983
Yeah, height is only one of the measurements.
Braindrain is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 09, 6:46 am   #12
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: AA (current EXP, occasional PLT, 0MM); UA; US; DL
Posts: 5,216
I have 28" suitcases from the 70 LB days and find it very easy to go over the new 50 LB limits. As a result I have decided to switch to 26".

I have also decided against expandable. In principle it sounds good but again the bag may get overpacked and also unbalanced. For "expandability", I like to carry a lightweight duffle at the bottom of my suitcase; also makes a great laundry bag during the trip.

As for brands, I am struggling with this decision right now (started another thread yesterday, please reply there!). I wish Red Oxx made rolling luggage but they don't. BR discontinued model is available for around 250; Delsey Pro for 175. But I am looking for recommendations and advice for the "best value".
aktchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 09, 7:43 pm   #13
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by uva185 View Post
Unless you are making really long trips and have airline status that allows additional weight I think 28" is too big. I have a 28" and I routinely weigh in at 65 pounds. (Though I like the extra space for basic dive gear)
Ditto on this. I have a T-tech 25" and I can quite easily go over the weight limits already at that size.
osamede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 09, 3:31 pm   #14
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Berlin and Buggenhagen, Germany
Posts: 3,509
An expandable 26" is probably your best bet with the current weight limit. I bought the biggest Rimowa Alu Multiwheeler they have before the weight limit came into effect. It is extremely lightweight compared to its volume, just around 6kg for 107l. But now it's almost always too big for regular use. Still practical though when I need to carry bulky or fragile stuff.

I also got an Eagle Creek ORV Super Trunk. Among the lightest soft-sided wheeled luggage for big volume, around 5kg for also about 107l. Obviously, since this duffle is soft-sided it won't take as much room if you don't pack as much, as opposed to a hard suitcase or rolling case. I like it a lot, I must say.
tfar is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:20 pm.