FainaAgain

Giulia, you paid $15 for a bag that you can get for free at the airport??????????

No, thanks, I am a budget traveler. Or at least rationalize my spendings.

GiuliaPiraino

FainaAgain,
The bag actually came with the set of Pitotubes which I hated. However, if I did have to buy it seperately I would, I really, really like the quality and it's no more expensive than a nice nylon toiletry bag you'd buy at the drugstore. Since we travel exclusively carry on, (no exceptions according to my better half), I don't mind spending a little more on the accessory items.

GiuliaPiraino

Also, there are other TSA approved zipper bags that are cheaper like this one from Travelon that I bought for my husband who could care less. I picked one of these up at Shapiro Luggage in the mall for only $5 (no bottles included), again well worth it to me to not have to deal with a bursting ziplock.

http://www.irvs.com/itemd.asp?ItemNo...V%20AD%2002037

I guess the expense of buying a zippered bag makes less sense to people who check their bags and put just the bare minimum in their ziplock. For me, ALL of my liquid toiletries have to go carry on, so it makes quite a difference.

suze

If you don't overstuff your ziplocks, there is no problem keeping them sealed.

janisj

I travel carry-on only and regular ziploks work just fine. I've never had one burst.

a few ¢ vs $15 (or even $5) - I know which works for me.

GiuliaPiraino

Sadly, it's form over function for me. I have switched to a lot of non-liquid products to suit the carry on restrictions and it's worked out pretty well. Like instead of liquid foundation I switched to mineral powder, instead of hair gel I switched to volumizing powder, dry cake eyeliner, etc. Can you tell I travel with a lot of products? Now you know why bags are bursting LOL. I've noticed too, at least in my experience that they don't seem to balk at security about toothpaste, lipsticks, mascaras etc to stay in the luggage, for me this has been the case both overseas and domestic, I'm not telling anyone to do it, but I've never been stopped for it. Now I only put the true liquids in the clear bag, the pastes and thicker items I leave in the main compartment. Haven't been stopped yet, knock on wood. By switching to non-liquid products, I've been able to cut back quite a bit, but still not ready to give up my pretty bag

walkdmx

What if I use a large sandwich sized ziploc for just a few bottles? I'd like to carry them in my cargo pockets and keep them standing up together. Are they seriously going to make me throw them out? I'll stick a quart size in my pocket just in case.

thursdaysd

First off, why are you reviving an ancient thread instead of starting your own?

Second, what part of max 3 oz containers in one 1 qt ziploc bag is so hard for you to understand?

In words of two (sorry, one won't work) syllables: put the 3 oz bottles in the ziploc bag. Put the bag in the box on the X-ray belt. Yes, it's a stupid rule, but the TSA WILL enforce it. Please don't hold up the line.

NewbE

I know this is an ancient thread, but I cant resist:

The TSA will not enforce it, at least not consistently. SO has been using a gallon size ziploc for a year now because he travels frequently and got sick and tired of carefully stuffing a too-small bag. He has never been challenged.

I still use a quart size, but four times in the last year have simply forgotten to take it out of my front zip pocket going through security. Not a peep was heard from the TSA.

Of course I'm not encouraging anyone to flout the rules. I'm saying there's no reason for sanctimony about those rules, because the TSA is inconsistent in their enforcement.

mlgb

In fact because it's an ancient thread it's worth reviving. In many airports, they are no longer requiring you to remove the baggie from your luggage. The scanners seem to do a good enough job of picking out oversize bottles. And they also seem to allow the odd lipstick, toothpaste tube etc to be elsewhere inside the carry-on, or even a purse or pocket.

I would however still use the quart size, even if it means repackaging into smaller bags once you get past screening.

And don't count on being able to get a free bag from TSA. I rarely see that any more, now that this is kind of routine.

DebitNM

I don't think there would be an issue if you used a sandwich bag instead of a 1 quart bag since the sandwich bag is smaller than 1 quart bag. Smaller is ok, larger is not. Gallon is taking a risk that I personally wouldn't do. I want the stuff I put in the 1 quart bag to make it through, not get taken away. And of course 100 ml or 3.2 ounces per item.

crellston

Have been in Asia fro the last 8 months and taken maybe 15 flights. Nobody seems to check or give a damn what liquids are carried on board. None of the security checks or scanner operators batted an eyelid when, just to see if we could, we took a 1.5 litre bottle through security at a Malaysian airport. It was of course water, but could just as easily have been any noxious substance. Convenient yes, concerning, even more so!

Ahh...All this talk of quarts and ounces makes me nostalgic for my my pre-metric school days ��

NewbE

<Smaller is ok, larger is not. >
You must do as you see fit, but on over a dozen domestic and international flights, this has not been the case. A large bag sailed through unquestioned. Each bottle inside it met the 100ml requirement.

suze

<Smaller is ok, larger is not. >

Agree... not according to how it is enforced (because someone's past personal TSA experiences do not mean yours will be the same) but rather according to the rules.

For BOTH bottle sizes and outer plastic bag sizes, smaller is OK. You don't have to use a 1-quart bag. You could use a (smaller) 'snack' or 'sandwich' sized bag if that gives you enough room for your liquids.

NewbE

How do you know smaller is OK? The rules don't say so.

Bucket_List

TSA is not standardized in how they do anything. I know this with my butt in many seats for many miles. If the agent looking at the contents of the bin has had a bad day a non-conforming bag could, as a minimum, result in the contents being confiscated to a delay in leaving security. Conversely, I've see agents run bins through so quickly passengers aren't through the scanners.