Osprey Transporter 95 Travel Duffel Bag - Large Water-Resistant Luggage for Adventure Travel, Camping & Outdoor Gear Storage | Perfect for Backpacking, Hiking & Airline Checked Baggage

QUICK SUMMARY: The 95L Transporter is too big if you are doing more than carrying it from luggage claim to the car. You are better of going wiith the 65L + a small wheeled carry on for the additional 30-40L. With the 95L, you'll likely end up with 40+lbs loaded (if you fill it) which is too much to carry >0.5mile without a hip straps. The 65L is way more flexible and useful.DETAILED SUMMARY:I have the Osprey Transporter in BOTH the 65L and 95L. I originally bought the 65L as it is small enough to be carried on (if you don't fill it out and no one looks at the exact dimensions) but it can carry enough gear for up to a week in the summer. Then, recently, I had a weeklong trip in the fall/winter where I needed a range of gear for hiking and dress clothes for business and we would be travelling exclusively by planes, trains, and walking in Europe. I didn't want to drag a wheeled suitcase through train stations and trains. . I knew I couldn't get away with the 65L so decided it was a good opportunity to justify a 95L that would also be great for ski trips where I have a lot of gear. At first, I was pleased with the 95L Transporter - it held a ton of stuff, was durable for check-in, waterproof, and pretty easy to pack (it does collapse as you are trying to load it). I loaded it with about 40 lbs and off we went to Europe. My wife, in contrast, was traveling with a 26-inch hardsided wheeled suitcase which I ended up carrying on, through, and off the trains and up / down stairs along with my Transporter. The Transporter was MUCH more convenient for that purpose. That said, at 40 lbs, it made me unstable on moving trains. And it took a while to pull out and attach the straps at the airport where she could grab her luggage and go. When we reached Zurich, we had a 1/2 mile walk to the hotel. Both of us were pretty unhappy dragging / carrying our luggage. My misery was made MUCH worse because I forgot to connect the load balancing straps at the top - that puts way more load on your shoulders. The great thing about this pack is that if you adjust the load balancers and tighten the chest strap, it does take a lot of load off your shoulders. But 40lbs is too much to carry for 0.5-1 mile distances without a hip belt. I admit I was much more comfortable on the way back to the train station (when I had the load balancers connected ).When I got home, I did an experiment before unpacking. I repacked everything in my 65L Transporter + a small roller carry-on. It worked out to 25 lbs in the 65L Transporter and 20lbs in the carryon. I could then check the Transporter and take the carry-on on the plane - less risk of ending up without clothes if luggage gets lost. AND it was far more comfortable to walk with the smaller, lighter transporter and roll the carryon. The roller carry-on could then be small enough to easily go up and down stairs, put on trains, etc.So - my takeaway - I kind of wish I had just stayed with the 65L Transporter. I'll probably use my new 95L for ski trips where I need a ton of gear and am only going from baggage claim to the car. But it really is too big if you have to carry it long distances. Otherwise, I'd go with a small 4-wheel carry-on + the 65L.