About Best for Backpacking

Best for Backpacking is an independent, research-driven gear media company that produces gear reviews, head-to-head comparisons, and buying guides for backpackers. Our coverage is published under Brooke Wilder, the named editorial persona we publish our research under. This page explains how we work, why we built it this way, and how we keep the editorial side honest.

The premise

Most gear publications work by reviewing what manufacturers send them, on the trails their editors happen to walk. That model has produced a lot of great writing, and it has also produced a lot of conflicts of interest, a lot of "I tested this on a thru-hike" claims that don't survive scrutiny, and a lot of recommendations colored by free product and brand relationships.

Best for Backpacking takes a different approach: we evaluate gear by synthesizing the evidence already in the public record.

For any given product, hundreds of data points exist, manufacturer specifications, independent lab tests, long-term owner reports on forums and retailer review sections, head-to-head reviews by other publications, durability reports years after a product released. The job of an editor is to weigh those sources, find the signal in the noise, and translate them into clear guidance for someone deciding what to buy.

Brooke does exactly that, every time.

Why research, not field tests

Best for Backpacking is a research-first publication. Brooke Wilder is the named editorial persona we publish our research under; she isn't a real person. The editorial process that produces work under Brooke's byline follows the principles described below, run by our team in Chicago, Illinois.

We chose this model for three reasons:

1. Evidence over personality. Backpacking media is saturated with personality-driven coverage. An editor who explicitly does not field-test gear cannot fall back on "I trust this because I trust the person reviewing it." We have to earn trust by showing our work, sources, methodology, limits.
2. Scale of synthesis. The number of long-term owner reports, lab tests, and reviews that exist for a popular pack like the Osprey Atmos AG 65 is in the thousands. Reading and weighing them is exactly the kind of work a research-driven process can do well at scale, where a single editor on the trail cannot.
3. The whole field, not one trip. A single editor with 100 trail miles knows one pack on one route. We weigh what 200 people who have carried a pack report, across seasons, body types, and conditions, and we tell you where their experiences converge and where they split. That is a wider, fairer picture than any one trip can give.

How we evaluate gear

Every review on this Site is grounded in:

• Manufacturer specifications (weight, volume, dimensions, materials, suspension type, etc.)
• Independent lab tests when available (Outdoor Lab, Treeline Review standardized tests, university or military testing reports, etc.)
• Long-term owner reports from forums, retailer review sections, and gear-focused communities, with a preference for owners reporting after substantial use (months or seasons, not weeks)
• Third-party editorial reviews from established publications, weighted by the publication's track record and methodology disclosure
• Manufacturer recalls, warranty claims, and durability reports where they exist

For each evaluation we describe the evidence we found, flag the gaps in that evidence, and reach a recommendation. If the evidence isn't sufficient to recommend or warn, we say so rather than fill the gap with prose.

What we don't do

• We don't field-test gear. No carries, no trips, no "I took it up Whitney." Field tests by a single editor are valuable as anecdote, not evidence. If you want trail anecdote, there are excellent writers and publications who do that work; we link to them where their reporting informs ours.
• We don't take free product in exchange for coverage. Because we don't field-test, we have no operational use for review samples.
• We don't take sponsored placements. Manufacturers cannot pay to be reviewed, ranked, or recommended.
• We don't tune recommendations to commission rates. See our Affiliate Disclosure for the full breakdown.

How we make money

Affiliate commissions from retailers like REI, Amazon, and Backcountry, paid by the retailer when a reader follows one of our links and completes a qualifying purchase. The reader's price is unchanged. The retailer commission funds the editorial system and infrastructure that produces this Site.

We are transparent about this trade-off and discuss it in full on the Affiliate Disclosure page.

Editorial limits

No research process is perfect. Ours has specific known limits:

• We can describe weight, volume, and specifications precisely; we can describe long-term durability based on owner reports; we cannot tell you how a piece of gear feels on day one in your hands. That part is yours to determine.
• Research and synthesis can still produce factual errors. We work to flag the limits of our evidence on every page, and we correct errors fast when they're reported. If you see something wrong, please tell us.
• We do not provide safety advice. Backpacking carries inherent risk. Our role is to inform purchasing decisions, not to substitute for proper training, judgment, and experience.

Contact

We read every message. For corrections, questions about methodology, or anything else, use our contact form.

Where to follow along is laid out below.

Operated from Chicago, Illinois, USA.