REASONS TO BUY
Inexpensive
Bottom access
Included pack cover
REASONS TO AVOID
Difficult top lid access
Minimal features
Heavier than expected
Osprey Rook 65 Review
An entry-level pack at an entry-level price, but without any standout features
Credit: Ben Applebaum-Bauch
RELATED: Best Backpacking Backpacks of 2024
Our Verdict
The Osprey Rook 65 is a basic pack that carries smaller loads well. We think this pack could be right for those who don't need to carry heavy loads or don't need to take their packs very far. It has many of the basic features we look for in a backpack: top lid pocket, water bottle pockets, and bottom compartment access. It can be adjusted quickly and has Osprey's airspeed ventilation system to keep you fresh. However, it's not the most comfortable, and many components feel stiff. There are other inexpensive starter options that are more comfortable and have better features.
Compare to Similar Products
 This Product
Osprey Rook 65 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Awards |  |  | |||
| Price | $189.80 at Amazon Compare at 3 sellers | $199 List $199.00 at REI | Check Price at Backcountry Compare at 3 sellers | $249.95 at REI Compare at 3 sellers | $259 List $259.00 at REI |
Overall Score  |
|||||
| Star Rating | |||||
| Bottom Line | A decent-enough, inexpensive pack for smaller loads | The Flash 55 is a great value, with excellent features and a great weight to volume ratio at an affordable price | An affordable pack with lots of organizational features and three access points to the main compartment | This is an excellent lightweight backpack that has solid suspension and a comfortable mesh back panel | This pack is inexpensive and comfortable, but it's heavier than most packs |
| Rating Categories | Osprey Rook 65 | REI Co-op Flash 55 | Deuter Aircontact C... | Gregory Focal 58 | REI Co-op Traverse 60 |
| Comfort (40%) | |||||
| Ease of Use (25%) | |||||
| Weight (20%) | |||||
| Adjustability (15%) | |||||
| Specs | Osprey Rook 65 | REI Co-op Flash 55 | Deuter Aircontact C... | Gregory Focal 58 | REI Co-op Traverse 60 |
| Measured Weight | 3.6 lbs | 2.8 lbs | 5.2 lbs | 2.7 lbs | 4.3 lbs |
| Weight per Liter (oz/L) | 0.89 oz/L | 0.81 oz/L | 1.11 oz/L | 0.74 oz/L | 1.15 oz/L |
| Advertised Volume | 65 L | 55 L | 65L + 10L | 58 L | 60 L |
| Organization Compartments | Lid, front mesh pocket, side water bottle pockets, hip belt pockets | Lid, front mesh pockets, 2 side pockets per side, hip belt pockets, shoulder strap pocket | Lid with two zippered pockets, front mesh pocket, side water bottle pockets, hip belt pockets, sleeping bag compartment | Lid, front mesh pocket, side water bottle pockets, hip belt pockets | Lid, front pocket, side water bottle pockets, hip belt pockets |
| Access | Top | Top | Top, front, bottom | Top | Top, bottom |
| Hydration Compatible | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Sleeping Bag Compartment | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| Materials | 600D nylon ripstop | Main Body: 100D ripstop nylon Bottom: 420D nylon |
Main: 235-denier polyamide Bottom/high-wear areas: 500-denier textured polyamide |
100% Nylon | 300D recycled ripstop nylon |
| Measured Volume (main compartment) | (not measured) | 45L | 52L | (not measured) | (not measured) |
Show full specification details ▼Hide full specification details ▲
Our Analysis and Test Results
The Osprey Rook 65 lands in the lower tier of overall scores because of its only mediocre performance across the board. This pack offers a simple set of features at a good price point. Its suspension system across the back is robust but lacks a lot of the comfort of cushier models in the shoulders and waist belt. We generally found the features of this pack felt a little stiff and its form a little bloated. Its lower weight is a plus, but we think there are better backpacking packs in our best backpacking backpack review for the average loads this pack is designed to carry. It didn't fail in any specific regard, but it also didn't overly impress us.
Performance Comparison
This inexpensive pack can go the distance with smaller loads.
Credit: Ben Applebaum-Bauch
Comfort
This model is in the middle of the pack for comfort. The shoulder straps are ergonomically shaped, but they don't offer quite enough padding, and the fabric on the underside of the waist and shoulder straps is abrasive after a few miles.
It carries 30-40 pounds by design. It takes small loads well, so if overnights are in your future, this could be one to consider. In practice, however, we found that carrying comfort began to diminish after about 35 pounds.
The trampoline suspension evenly distributes weight across your back and keeps the pack away from your body for good ventilation on hot summer days.
Credit: Ben Applebaum-Bauch
We appreciate the effort put into the suspension on this budget pack, but there are better options out there. The airspeed back panel provides superior ventilation, and the wireframe does do an excellent job of transferring the load to the waist belt, so it's a practical design, we just didn't find the waist belt to be particularly comfortable.
Ease of Use
In the spirit of its minimalist muses, this pack comes with a basic feature set. It has two mesh water bottle pockets with 'on the move' side access. The sleeping bag compartment zipper makes it easy to grab something from the bottom of the pack mid-hike. There is a flap on the inside of the main compartment which can separate the bottom from the top which is helpful if you have a wet bag or a tent that you need to keep separate from the rest of your gear. The side compression straps on the top and bottom are handy for trekking or tent poles, and there is also a separate set of straps that could be nice for a foam sleeping pad.
This pack has pockets that enable you to grab your bottle while on the move.
Credit: Ben Applebaum-Bauch
We found that the lid was a toss-up. On the one hand, its narrow opening means that gear isn't spilling out all over the trail. On the other hand, it's just difficult to see into the pocket to get what you are after. Because the lid integrates into the main body of the pack, the opening is rather tight as well making for much more of a fishing expedition than we would want from a lid.
The lid is unfortunately difficult to get into and search in.
Credit: Ben Applebaum-Bauch
Weight
While this model is among the lightest packs reviewed, we felt it could offer more features or functionality for its weight.
Adjustability
The adjustability of this pack is adequate for most people but also limited in some ways. It comes in one fixed size with a 4-inch range on the torso, which is pleasantly simple to adjust. There is no 'like super glue' velcro to separate, just a peg on each side that pops out of a webbing loop, enabling the shoulder straps to slide up or down. The sternum strap similarly has discrete cord loops that secure it at different heights on the shoulder straps.
On each side of the back of the pack, you can see green loops that allow the wearer to adjust the height of the shoulder straps.
Credit: Ben Applebaum-Bauch
On the flip side, our testing revealed that our particularly skinny reviewers had trouble cinching down the waist belt. They just about ran out of strap before they could get it properly secure.
Value
The biggest selling point of this pack is its price. It lacks some of the features and performance that we have come to be spoiled by with some other models. However, if you aren't thrilled with the idea of dropping more money than you have to, this model could be worth a look.
Conclusion
This budget pack will get you from start to finish, but you won't necessarily get there in style. Its basic feature set feels minimalist, but it doesn't come at a minimalist weight. If your bottom line is your top priority, this is the least expensive pack in our review; however, for a few more dollars you can get a significantly more comfortable, more capable pack.
—
Ben Applebaum-Bauch
You Might Also Like
