Ultralighters and thru-hikers love cheap gear, and nothing represents that ethos better than the Smartwater bottle. Its appeal is trifold: First of all, it is very cheap. Depending where you buy it, the one-liter version costs between $3 and $5. It’s very light at just over one ounce. And most importantly, it works flawlessly with water filters like the Sawyer Squeeze and Platypus Quickdraw—no adapters needed. It’s flexible enough to squeeze, but robust enough to last hundreds of miles on trail.
CNOC, well known for its ultralight water bladders and soft-sided bottles, is the first brand to really take on the challenge of de-throning Smartwater as king of water carry for weight-conscious ultralighters and thru-hikers. The long-awaited ThruBottle shares the basic design that makes the Smartwater bottle so popular: Slim, tall, with a 1-liter capacity, and with a 28-millimeter thread compatibility for squeeze filters. It costs $13, or about the equivalent of four disposable bottles. So is it just a Smartwater clone, or a worthy upgrade? Let’s dig into the details.
For ultralight hikers, this is the first concern. Carrying a ThruBottle instead of a Smartwater bottle will come with a two-ounce weight penalty: A one-liter Smartwater is about 1.2 ounces and our sample of the ThruBottle weighs 3 ounces. For some hikers, that weight difference is likely enough to write-off the ThruBottle.
That weight difference comes entirely down to the type and thickness of plastic used in each bottle. The ThruBottle, made with thicker HDPE plastic, is certainly more durable than the PET plastic in the Smartwater bottle, and doesn’t bend and crinkle over time the way a Smartwater bottle does after repeated squeezing during a long hike. After a month of use, the ThruBottle essentially looks brand new, while the Smartwater bottle is covered in creases and dents.
After enough abuse, a Smartwater bottle can become so misshapen it breaks, leaks water, and no longer stands up on end.
The ThruBottle’s thicker plastic also means that squeezing the bottle to filter water requires a bit more strength. We had no problem filtering water with the ThruBottle using one hand, but it is noticeably stiffer than a Smartwater bottle. Using a brand new filter, it took us about one minute to filter a liter of water in a Smartwater bottle, and about 20 seconds longer using a ThruBottle. Since the ThruBottle doesn’t deform quite as readily, you do need to unscrew the filter more often to “reset” the bottle by letting air back inside. Long term, these are minor quibbles. After repeated uses, filters tend to slow down anyway, and the flow rate is usually dictated by the filter, not the vessel. In day-to-day use, the ThruBottle is just fine.
Otherwise, there’s not much to discuss—it’s a basic water bottle. It has a nearly identical shape to a Smartwater bottle, with a slim profile and straight sides that make it easy to pull out of a side pocket and stow it away again. Like a Nalgene, it has markers that show the volume of water inside. The cap has a tether, which can be removed if you want to replace the cap with a filter. There’s also a small loop of cord to hang the bottle or help you pull it from a pocket.
Longevity is a big part of CNOC’s sales pitch: Unlike a Smartwater bottle, this is a vessel that’s meant to be reused. Hikers do reuse Smartwater bottles, sometimes for months, but ultimately they end up in the recycling bin or landfill. Given the durability of the ThruBottle, there’s no reason why it couldn’t last you for years.
Aside from longevity, there is some evidence that the plastic used in the ThruBottle is safer for long-term use than the plastic used in Smartwater bottles. Coca-Cola, which owns the Smartwater brand, says the bottles are made with food-grade PET plastic and are BPA-free. In contrast, the ThruBottle is made with HDPE plastic, which CNOC says is BPA-, BPS-, and BPF-free.
Research has shown that there are other plasticizers and compounds, like phthalates, used to make plastic bottles that can leach into water and have health impacts on humans. Some studies suggest that these compounds are more likely to leach into water when exposed to high temperatures, and that PET is more susceptible to this than HDPE. In other words, there are fewer health concerns with washing a ThruBottle in hot water, or drinking water from it after it’s been baking in the sun compared to a Smartwater bottle. Other studies found that in normal temperatures, both PET and HDPE are chemically stable. And at least one suggests that HDPE leaches more chemicals than PET.
Both plastics are recyclable, though most plastics—even those that end up in recycling bins—don’t get recycled. In terms of microplastics, studies have shown that both HDPE and PET can shed microplastics. There is some evidence that damaged bottles shed more microplastics than new ones—a point against re-using Smartwater bottles.
Without better research to turn to, our conclusions here are pretty simple. One, using a more durable ThruBottle will have less impact on the planet than replacing Smartwater bottles regularly. Two, using the ThruBottle might be slightly better for your personal health, but the research is far from conclusive. If microplastics and chemical migration are a real concern for you, don’t use a plastic bottle.
The ThruBottle is a product designed expressly for backpackers looking for a lightweight bottle that attaches to squeeze water filters. If you use a different type of filter, like a pump, the ThruBottle will still work fine, but there’s no inherent reason to use it. Thru-hikers and ultralighters are the target audience, because combining a Sawyer Squeeze and a lightweight bottle with 28mm threads creates one of the lightest and most reliable ways to filter water. The ThruBottle isn’t quite as light as a Smartwater bottle, but if you want to reduce waste, buy less, or simply like the idea of a bottle that will last years rather than weeks, the two-ounce weight penalty shouldn’t keep you away.