I have been looking for a new bag to replace my worn-out over-the-shoulder messenger bag, and I'm thinking about a backpack. It seems to me that one with pockets <u>inside</u> for money, cc, passports, tickets, etc. would be as secure as a money belt, and could also carry camera accessories and day trip supplies.

Any thoughts?

I'm sure you can find such a backpack, but I would still keep extra cash and passports in a money belt. Such valuables would never be as safe in a backpack as they are in a money belt under your clothing. As for tickets, most are electronic so if you lose your printout, it's easy enough to get another one from any computer.

I use a backpack syle purse whenever traveling. I agree with PM that you still need the money belt even when there are inside pockets, just for the slight chance that the whole bag could be lost or stolen. But I love the backpack style, much easier on my shoulder/back, and I think a little harder to just grab it than a shoulder bag. The ones I use are larger than most purses but smaller than a regular backpack. I think the backpack syle can hold more than something that looks about the same size but is a shoulder bag style.

Does anyone agree that a backpack isn't secure? It seems to me that a thief would have to either a) get the backpack off you - a daunting task considering both your arms are holding it on - or b) open it, rummage through your bananas and GameBoy cartridges to find the inside zipped compartment with the right goodies in it, unzip it, remove the stuff, and make a getaway.

I don't get it.

I don't know if I would use a backpack as a substitute for a moneybelt, but then I don't take everything with me when in town, leaving most valuables either in the safe in the room or the hotel safe.

My favorite daypack is one sold by Rick Steves on his website. It's extremely light and extremely durable. The zippers are terrific. It has an inside zippered pocket. There's ample room inside the main compartment to carry camera, light jacket, guide book, map, sunglasses, munchies, etc. It's got two outside mesh pockets on either side for water bottle/small umbrella/whatever.

This daypack is the best one so far and I've tried a lot of different bags/packs/pockets/vests. It's been used extensively over three continents since I acquired it earlier this year. Highly recommend it!

Oh, yes, one more thing, it's also washable. I hate transporting dirt from one continent to another.

What do you do with the backpack
- while you're eating
- while you're in a museum
- any place that you take it off
You can do it, but it wouldn't do for me...

In light of how most people have to leave their backpacks with trusting strangers so many times you shouldn't leave money, passports and expensive cameras in them.

As for buying a backpack. I bought a new one a few years ago, packed everything in it to see how it worked and found out it was increadibly difficult to use and get at things inside. Fortunetly I brought it back for a refund and used my old one without all the bells and whistles, and much more convienient.

For years, when my kids were young enough that I needed both hands free, I carried a medium-sized black leather backpack with inside pockets. I loved it, except that I sometimes found it awkward to have to pull it around and tuck it under my arm on a crowded bus or subway. It had very sturdy drawstrings at the enclosure, and a magnetic clasp, as well as zippered interior pockets. It would have been very hard to get into, and I was never concerned about concealing money or credit cards or passport or anything else anywhere but in the inside pockets. I bought it at a leather store on the rue Dauphine.

I do not see the logic in thinking a backpack is as safe as a moneybelt. As already mentioned, there will be times when you remove the backpack in public, but you would probably not do that with a moneybelt.

A few years ago I was travelling w/a group in Russia. While we were in St. Petersburg, apparently someone crept up behind a member of our group and removed their expensive camera from the backpack. I can see how a very sneaky, professional thief could do this. However, nobody is sneaky enough to get underneath my pants without my knowledge.

To clarify the last sentence in my post, I wear the money belt just under my pants. I Fodor's doesn't think I'm trying to be nasty.

I bought a German army surplus backpack (brand new) from Cabelas catalog online ($19.95) for a forthcoming trip to Asia. It has all sorts of pockets, straps, and gadgets. Lightweight, very well made. Will let you know how it works out. If you are looking for outdoor stuff at a reasonable price, field tested, and guaranteed, check out Cabelas.

I found a rucksack for $14.95 - but it looks more suited to a trip to the Continental Divide than the Louvre. Is that the one you mean?

I recommend the Baggallini messenger bag, available from ebags.com. While you're at it, buy the 5-currency bag as well. The messenger bag is more comfortable than a backpack and has all the security you need: wide strap that can't be cut easily, pocket facing the body where you can put valuables, deep center pocket for camera etc., fitted outside pockets for pens etc., cell phone pocket in the strap, and double zippers that can be locked. Just used it for three weeks in Alaska--I'll never travel without it again!

I really love my Rick Steves backpack but would never place valuables inside as it is not always allowed inside museums, etc. and must be stowed. My husband carries the money belt...hmmmm..... here's a link.

http://travelstore.ricksteves.com/ca...Id=8&amp;id=18

I don't think it has to be an either/or proposition in terms of backpack or money belt. You can, and should, have both. That way the back pack doesn't have those items you absolutely cannot afford to loose (passport, credit cards, ATM cards) in case you need to leave it somewhere - like going into a museum. The very few times I've had to do that I just take the camera out and there's nothing valuable left so I don't worry about it. But if you can find a style that is a bit smaller (than say the Rick Steves one) and looks more like a purse, like the one St Cirq describes, then you might not have to hand it over all that much. Mine is like that and usually museums let me carry it in as long as I wear it on the shoulder rather than on my back.

P_M, maybe you had it right the first time. I carried a money belt (pocket) which was attached to the inside of my underwear. Nobody got in my pants to get at that thing. They didn't get the money either.

HA!! Very funny, jor!!

BTW, my last post was supposed to say &quot;I hope Fodors doesn't think I'm trying to be nasty.&quot; Somehow the word &quot;hope&quot; escaped from that sentence. I hate it when that happens....

I agree with isabel that it doesn't have to be either/or. I have also found a backpack to be easier to carry than a handbag, but my passport, cash, and spare credit/ATM cards are in the money belt. I'm sure Robespierre will find one that works.

I don't know but on my first trip to Paris I used a regular backpack and after walking 15 miles my back hurt me bad. I then went and bought the &quot;healthy backpack&quot; and omg it was worth every penny that I spent. You can wear it like a messenger bag and it is so light it feels like you have nothing in there.

irreplacables (wallet, passport, etc) should always be kept on the person...not in a bag of any sort.

a secure bag is fine for a camera and other things but not for the items mentioned above.

Thank you for your post, walkinaround.

Do you have statistical, personal, or logical justification for it, or is that just an opinion?