Old Western Flyer vs. New Western Flyer
I have a really old version of the WF. It is the one with the permanent cupholder showing, as opposed to behind a semicircle zipper. It has served me well and quite frankly, it is my most used luggage. Is it time to upgrade? The bag looks as darn near new. I never use the backpack option. How much more will be gained by eliminating the backpack option and adding the two extra pockets? Will going to the more pliable Dyneema really be that tough, given how long my old bag has served me? Is it the steel Dyneema business friendly enough? Just some questions I hope somebody who has done the switch or contemplated it can answer.
Hey, Neil. Personally, I find the enclosed water bottle pocket is handy (I tend to empty my pockets into it before going through TSA security), and I like the back magazine pocket, but I'm not sure I like them enough to shell out $210 if I already had a product that worked well. You won't get a ton of additional storage space from these additional pockets, in other words. However, you will save some significant weight by moving to a rolling luggage Dyneema WF—nearly a pound. If you're carrying electronics when you travel, I'd say the weight savings could be worth the upgrade.
I have a Steel Dyneema Tri-Star and it looks fine in professional academic settings; I'm sure others who work in business settings can weigh in on that better than I can, though.
I have a Dyneema WF and I absolutely love it. I have only traveled with it a few times, but it is very robust and shows no wear. I really like the more pliable nature of the Dyneema because it seems easier to pack things into the front pockets. The Steel color is much darker in person than in pictures, so I find it to be great in professional settings. At the end of the day, it is all about weight...if you rarely use the backpack straps and you can shave a pound off your luggage, that would definitely be worth the price for me.