Soft-sided luggage with a warranty that covers airline damage, which almost nothing else does. Expensive, unfashionable, and the case road warriors keep buying.
This entry is written from the 3 sources listed at the bottom of the page. The numbers are our editorial estimates drawn from that material, not measurements, and no statistical sample sits behind them.
On the evidence gathered here, yes. 88% of owners say they would buy it again, and satisfaction is still 8.6 out of 10 two years in. Owners testing the warranty report it honoured without argument.
Sentiment rises rather than falls, and almost always after the first warranty claim goes smoothly.
Fabric scuffs and stains with heavy use. Weight matters on tight carry-on limits. The value case depends on actually travelling a lot.
Owners testing the warranty report it honoured without argument. Sentiment across the ownership period stays close to flat, which is rare: it reads 8.5 out of 10 in the first week and 8.6 two years later.
Worth it for: Frequent business travellers; Anyone who has had luggage destroyed by an airline; People buying once for a decade. Think twice if: You travel occasionally; You want the lightest case available; Styling matters to you.
Our reading of how sentiment moves across an ownership period, drawn from the sources below. It is an editorial estimate, not tracked longitudinal data.
| At purchase | 7.4 / 10 |
|---|---|
| First week | 8.5 / 10 |
| One month | 8.6 / 10 |
| Six months | 8.6 / 10 |
| One year | 8.6 / 10 |
| Two years or more | 8.6 / 10 |
Owner reviews move this score. The researched figure stays visible next to it, so you can always see what the sources said before anyone voted.
Leave a review on the live pageEvery complaint and every piece of praise above traces back to these. The summaries are ours; nothing is quoted, and no link, quote or username anywhere on this site is invented.
First-hand test of the warranty on a damaged case.
Customer reviews covering repairs and service.
Explains what the guarantee covers in practice.