November 20, 2015 8:16 PM MST - Subscription purchasing, account maintenance, forum profile maintenance, new account registration, and forum posting have been disabled
as we prepare our databases for the final migration to our new server next week. Stay tuned here for more details.
Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Exos Cubic Inches
Display Avatars Sort By:
Ray Dunham
(Raymond) - F

Locale: SE US
Exos Cubic Inches on 06/12/2009 18:52:05 MDT Print View

I was checking out the Exos 46 and 58 today and noticed that they seemed have more cubic inches then advertised. I called Osprey and they said the cubic inches were only the inside of the main bag and did not include pockets, lid or back strech pocket.

My question to those who have purchased an Exos - what whould you estimate total cubic inches to be if those items were included and have you noticed the larger volume of the packs? What other packs are comparable in size from your experience?

David Poston
(dgposton) - F

Locale: Texas / Colorado
Exos 46 vs. 58 on 06/12/2009 20:30:47 MDT Print View

I am also interested in whether people have chosen the 46 over the 58 due to this. Is the 46 adequate for a 10-15 pound baseload kit?

Jim MacDiarmid
(jrmacd) - MLife
Re: Exos 46 vs. 58 on 06/12/2009 20:42:33 MDT Print View

I tested out the Exos 46, and it had plenty of room for my 12 lb basweight, and that included a bear cannister. I found the side bottle pockets to be not very useful though - too tight. There's a good amount of room in the back drop pocket, and then their is the zipper pocket too. The fabric has some stretch, and can hold a decent amount. The 58 seemed more appropriate to snow camping, when you'd have a lot of high-loft, low weight gear.

Jim MacDiarmid
(jrmacd) - MLife
Re: Exos Cubic Inches on 06/12/2009 20:49:59 MDT Print View

Edited to correct my math.

Ray, I compared the Exos 46 to the ULA Ohm. The Exos in medium has a body size of 2800ci, the Ohm 2600ci with the extension collar. The Ohm also holds a total of 900 additional ci in it's pockets. It'd say that the Ohm and the Exos 46 held about the same amount of gear. So I'd say the Exos has somewhere between 900-1000 additional cubic inches, but that's just a guess. And actually, that's not counting the top lid, which I wasn't using. That probably adds another couple hundred ci. I liked the Ohm a lot better.

Edited by jrmacd on 06/12/2009 20:51:38 MDT.

Chris Benson
(roguenode) - F

Locale: Boulder
I went with 46... on 06/12/2009 20:50:39 MDT Print View

...and have a base of 11/12 lbs. I test carried 25 lbs for two hours on local trails the other night and am pleased so far. I had to reposition/tighten the belt once, but it stayed fine after that.

Making my decision easier is that the large is actually 49 liters and the pack has numerous storage extras not included in the base 49 (belt pockets, side pockets, main outside storage pocket, and removable lid (that has pockets).

I picked this up as a summer pack after trying the Ohm, which is a great pack. However, for hot hikes I wanted the dry/cool back like I get from my Deuter Futura Pro. The Exos seems to have advantages over the Deuter with the load closer to back for better balance and uniform internal storage dimensions making loading easier.

edit: I'd agree about the side pockets, not so good for water bottles. They hold my 1 liter platy's just fine, but getting them back in while wearing the pack is going to take some practice.

Edited by roguenode on 06/12/2009 21:08:22 MDT.

Thomas Tait
(Islandlite) - F

Locale: Colorado
Osprey 46 on 06/12/2009 21:57:38 MDT Print View

I have a 46 and it is down right cavernous. Here is my gear list for a recent weekend trip.

REI Shuksan jacket
Montbell UL Parka
MontBell #3 UL hugger sleeping bag
Terra Nova laser comp tent
Neoair sleeping pad
Cooking kit (fits into a Snowpeak 700 mug)
Hygiene kit (XS silnylon stuff sack)
Water bottle (nalgene cantene)

I didn't even pack the sleeping bag in a stuff sack, just crammed it in the bottom. It still had room and I didn't even use the pockets yet. I put snacks and camera in the little belt pockets and hung an ice axe and crampons on the outside. BTW it is a size large and weighs 2lb 9oz.

The Osprey main bag is about the same as my GG Virga but the Virga has the extension collar from hell so it can be seriously overstuffed the Osprey can't.

I would say for me the Osprey is overkill for a weekend but perfect for probably up to a week in the summer (I use lighter clothing and a tarptent) with no resupply. Nice versatile bag. I really like it so far.

Franco Darioli
(Franco) - M

Locale: @Tarptent
Exos Cubic Inches on 06/12/2009 22:20:43 MDT Print View

The Exos seem to be larger than stated but it is the other way around, most packs are really much smaller than the given figure.
Of course manufacturers make the most of the supposed storage capacity of the pockets, but that seldom translates in real world use.
To see this, just get hold of a 60 L dry sack and put it next to an average 60 L pack.

Ray Dunham
(Raymond) - F

Locale: SE US
Exos on 06/13/2009 06:05:05 MDT Print View

Thanks for the feedback. Has anyone else compared to an Ohm? What are your thoughts?

Jim MacDiarmid
(jrmacd) - MLife
Re: Exos on 06/14/2009 10:48:33 MDT Print View

I personally liked the more simplified set-up of the Ohm over all the straps of the Exos 46. It was comparing the Exos 46 to the Ohm and the GG Gorilla that made me realize that I didn't need all those straps and pockets and holsters, but if I had them, I would use them, to the detriment of my basweight (and shoulders/back).

I really did like the airmesh back panel on the Exos It felt a bit more comfortable against my back in that it conformed to the shape. The Ohm ends up being a bit convex. The Ohm is available with a removable internal backpad which I did not get. That might improve the comfort a bit. It wasn't uncomfortable. That was the only area I preferred the Exos to the Ohm.

Eric Blumensaadt
(Danepacker) - MLife

Locale: Mojave Desert
EXOS suspension/frame on 06/14/2009 11:09:21 MDT Print View

Personally I prefer the comfort of the EXOS frame and suspension system. I own an '08 REI Cruise UL 60 but wish I had the EXOS after walking with my buddy's large EXOS pack for a few miles.


Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: EXOS cubic inches on 06/14/2009 13:46:15 MDT Print View

Also note that the frame size affects the total volume, for instance the Exos 58 in a size large, has an actual main pack volume of 61 litres rather than 58.

(mountainwalker) - MLife

Locale: SF Bay Area & New England
bearikade weekender? on 06/14/2009 18:08:48 MDT Print View

James, which bear canister do you carry in the 46? Could you fit a Bearikade Weekender? I think I recall someone responding to my question on the forums that a Weekender wouldn't fit - that would be the only potential downside to me. Otherwise very supportive and feature-rich for the weight, and carries very cool with the mesh.

Ashley Brown
(ashleyb) - F
replace the hipbelt? on 06/14/2009 19:02:02 MDT Print View

Is there any way that the exos hipbelt could be replaced with a beefier model? I like most things about the exos but the hipbelt kinda sucks... doesn't extend far enough around the front, and I would prefer more padding. So I'm wondering whether there might be a way of removing the hipbelt and attaching an alternative (eg. granite gear or ULA).

Mark Verber
(verber) - MLife

Locale: San Francisco Bay Area
Re: replace the hipbelt? on 06/14/2009 22:33:50 MDT Print View

It would be somewhere between impossible and extremely tricky to replace the hipbelt on the exos. It's directly attached to the back mesh. I think any attempt to remove the original hipstrap would likely damage the mesh.


Jim MacDiarmid
(jrmacd) - MLife
Re: bearikade weekender? on 06/14/2009 22:48:09 MDT Print View

Nope, I have a BearVault 350/400 solo. Dimension are 8.25"x8.5".

Ashley Brown
(ashleyb) - F
Re: Re: replace the hipbelt? on 06/14/2009 22:58:31 MDT Print View

Ha, ok, thanks Mark. Pity it is not interchangeable!

Joe Clement
(skinewmexico) - MLife

Locale: Southwest
Exos Cubic Inches on 06/15/2009 08:55:22 MDT Print View

What Verber said. I called Osprey to complain about the entire hip belt, they said they'd pass it along to research. Yeah right. I sold my 58 to a buddy who is tall and skinny, and the large belt seems to work well for him. Don't know what I'm going to do with my 46. I really, really wanted those packs to work for me.

Edited by skinewmexico on 06/16/2009 13:50:23 MDT.

Mike Klinefelter
(mjkline) - F

Locale: Southern California
Exos 58 on 06/15/2009 09:37:17 MDT Print View

Anyone else have an Exos 58 (size L) that isn't working out for them let me know, I'm interested. That's always a problem with non-removable hipbelts, they only really fit a certain segment of the height/weight ratio.

Raymond Estrella
(rayestrella) - MLife

Locale: Northern Minnesota
Re: Exos on 06/16/2009 12:36:43 MDT Print View

Here is a review I just posted for my Exos 58 in detail.

I am using the 34 right now and am going to get a 46 too. I am in MN right now but will try to give you some answers about the bear can fit next week, EJ.

Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: Re: Exos on 06/16/2009 13:52:27 MDT Print View

Nice review Raymond, and I agree on almost all points. I find the hipbelt to be more than adequate both in size and padding, but I DO NOT like the mesh at all. Too easy to catch on bush. I also find there are just too many straps and dangly bits for my liking, but those can easily be removed. Otherwise, it's a very spacious, comfortable and light pack for carrying heavier loads. We loaded it up to it's max recommended carry weight of 16kg and found it was still very comfortable.