View Full Version : Pack sizes not accurate?
I used an Osprey Volt 60 last summer and fall, then this winter I bought and Osprey Talon 44 2013 model as they were closing it out to bring out the 2014 model.
I am not kidding when I say the Talon holds a lot more, and is easier to pack, than the Volt...the Talon is shaped more like the inside of a paper grocery sack, and holds more than the Volt. The Volt has a weird frame bar going across it near the top, making it much harder to stuff things into it. The Talon also sits much lower and better on my back...the top of the pack is in line with the my neck instead of the top of my head. Just love the pack much more than the Volt,
Am I going crazy or are the sizes some sort of marketing gimmick, mistake, or bogus estimate?
I'm not sure about the reason behind some of the variations but I have noticed the same thing looking at packs in stores. There is no standardized industry-wide method of quantifying pack capacity. Some vendors include auxiliary areas like front mesh pockets, side pockets, hip belt pockets, etc and others do not. It is almost as frustrating as the lack of uniformity in sleeping bag temperature ratings.
Just Bill
06-18-2014, 16:32
Most vendors count it all- pockets, mesh, etc.
Some are kind enough to differentiate, some are not.
Some count the expansion collar in the base, some list it separately.
Many use some dubious math, especially so in "bean" shaped packs like many osprey's. The reality also being if you can fit your gear into those cleverly contoured shapes.
A water bottle pocket, by the numbers holds up to 2 liters on many packs- but are you actually going to put more than a liter in the pocket? Same with mesh outer- if your pack body is stuffed you're lucky if you can slip a piece of paper in them.
You'll get a better number from a simple rectangular shaped pack like a Z-packs.
The best way if there is such a thing as a standard- Use packing peanuts (or the bags of corn at REI) and fill all the usable spaces.
Dump them into a box and do the math.
Very long story short-
If you're stuff fits- it's Namtrag Liters in size. The only reliable measurement available.:)
I always compare only the main bag size.
Just Bill
06-18-2014, 16:42
I always compare only the main bag size.
solid advice
MuddyWaters
06-18-2014, 19:33
The industry basically uses the main bag volume. External compartments and pockets are excluded. Now do they measure by filling it with ping pong balls, or did they calculate it before they sewed it, who knows?
Cottage vendors often include all the pockets, etc, .
Not all volume is useable though, for everyone.
goin'4ahike
06-18-2014, 20:28
Another consideration is the pack size: Small / Med / Large.
I bought a Flash 52 from REI thinking I was getting 52L capacity.
It wasn't until about a year later that I realized MY pack is only 49L because it is a Small.
The Med Flash 52 is the only one that is (allegedly) actually 52L.
(I am new to backpacking...and maybe this is common knowledge among you veterans. I was a little surprised and a little disappointed that my pack wasn't quite as big as I thought. However, I do love the pack!)
Slo-go'en
06-18-2014, 20:45
The most accurate measurement would be to fill it with sand, then dump it out and see how much is in there. Water would work too if it were waterproof.
But it's not all about volume, it's how it's shaped and how it's divided up into pockets or sections which makes a big difference.
rocketsocks
06-19-2014, 01:34
I used an Osprey Volt 60 last summer and fall, then this winter I bought and Osprey Talon 44 2013 model as they were closing it out to bring out the 2014 model.
I am not kidding when I say the Talon holds a lot more, and is easier to pack, than the Volt...the Talon is shaped more like the inside of a paper grocery sack, and holds more than the Volt. The Volt has a weird frame bar going across it near the top, making it much harder to stuff things into it. The Talon also sits much lower and better on my back...the top of the pack is in line with the my neck instead of the top of my head. Just love the pack much more than the Volt,
Am I going crazy or are the sizes some sort of marketing gimmick, mistake, or bogus estimate?Naw, your not crazy, thought the same thing about my 65 liter Atmos. In passing a couple hikers this past winter, one guy say's "Man you got some gear" that's all he said, and I was thinkin, I got a sleepin bag, pad, tent, food bag, some other crap and some clothes, same as you prolly. Won't tell ya what I was really thinkin'...Dick :cool:. Creative Packing, will fill those oddball spaces for me, but sometimes I'm just not feelin so creative first thing in the morning....Thus the puff.
hikernutcasey
06-19-2014, 09:35
I just recently experienced this when upgrading my own pack. I had a Jansport Klamath 68L and went to an Osprey Exos 58L. I can fit more stuff into the Exos than I could the Jansport and that's just the main compartment. I can also fit more stuff on the outside of the Exos due to its super stretchy pocket whereas the Jansport's outside pocket was zippered and you couldn't get much in there.
Also, as someone said up thread, it makes a lot of difference how the pack is made. The opening in my Jansport was fairly small and the Exos is huge. Makes getting gear in there much easier.
The Dan McHale pack volume computation method...
http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/Detail%20Hi%20Rez%20Pages/Pack%20Volumes%20-%20Go%20Figure!.htm
Adding a bear canister without buying a new pack...
http://www.mchalepacks.com/ultralight/Detail%20Hi%20Rez%20Pages/Bear%20Cannister%20Page.htm
Wayne