Dear Pack Manufacturers,

When listing the details of your packs online, please include liters. If you are already listing the cubic inches, why can't you just include liters? When I see cubic inches, I have no freaking clue what you are talking about. I have to constantly have a google tab open that serves the sole purpose of converting cubic inches to liters.
I'm talking to you ULA, with your rocket science approach to listing the pack volume.
It's a little bit annoying.

Thank you.

Justin, it isn't that difficult.

One liter = about 60 cubic inches (actually about 61.02 if you are counting)

Make yourself a little table with liters on one side and cubic inches on the other side.

Personally, I go the other way. I grew up with a pack having so many cubic inches of volume, and it has been only recently that liters have entered the description. For me, cubic inches of volume was easy to think about since I figure my pack will weigh about ten pounds for each 1000 cubic inches.

So, if you prefer to think in liters, you should think of weights (mass) in kilograms.

--B.G.--

I prefer inches, feet, miles.... and ounces, quarts, gallons. I'm OK with liter only because it's practically the same as quart, so no big deal. I can tolerate meters and kilometers...

But for some reason, when it comes to temperatures, I much prefer Celsius. I hate Fahrenheit intensely.

>But for some reason, when it comes to temperatures, I much prefer Celsius. I hate Fahrenheit intensely.

Might have something to do with the whole German/Swede thing...

Kelvin is what I use on a daily basis. ;)

Hey... at least it's easier converting C to K... then F to K. :)

Ben, which would you prefer, -40 C or -40 F ?

--B.G.--

Both great starting point. I prefer the relationship between the two remain similarly consistent. :)

These are extraordinarily useful in these parts, and what I mostly rely upon I've got the Wisconsin model (not pictured here):

Justin, it isn't that difficult.

No, it isn't, but it's very frustrating when you just want to browse a site and easily compare volumes and dimensions without having to sit and calculate everything. I can understand not thinking about customers for those sites which don't ship overseas, but a manufacturer like ULA, which ships all around the world and is aware of this, really ought to be making the shopping experience less cumbersome for its international customers. It isn't that difficult for manufacturers to list the weights and dimensions and temperature ratings in the world's most commonly used measurements. Currency is another matter, since there are so many currencies and the manufacturer typically sells in their own currency.

Not to throw off the subject too much... but I think a far, far bigger issue than the failure to list weights in both English and Metric -- is the issue of specs not reflecting reality! Not specific to ULA or any single manufacturer... but weight, volume, size, warmth specs vary enormously even when using identical numbers within a single measurement system!

Ben, yes, there is that, too. But until manufacturer's worldwide come to consensus on how to measure that, I don't see this happening anytime soon. There are, however, already standardized measuring systems in place... Metric and English... and for someone who's ordered a lot of products from the States it can be quite time consuming and irritating to go back and forth getting the measurements so I can understand them. It's particularly irritating when you are looking at products made by American and non-American manufacturers and you're trying to compare the products.

Most of the American backpackers I know here rarely seem to order anything from overseas, so they rarely have to deal with this problem, but I bet every non-American member here has gone through the frustration quite often.

Edited by butuki on 03/24/2012 22:34:36 MDT.

It is decided!

We will measure the volume of all backpacks in units of furlongs per fortnight.

--B.G.--

"I prefer inches, feet, miles.... and ounces, quarts, gallons. I'm OK with liter only because it's practically the same as quart, so no big deal. I can tolerate meters and kilometers..."

Well, a lot of us do live in Amurica.

Werd.

Justin. Start a facebook campaign on their page. Just nag them till they do it.

Naah, I am already going to try and get them to put out the ohm in woodland camo instead of just the circuit and catalyst. Wouldn't want to anger them.

"Not to throw off the subject too much... but I think a far, far bigger issue than the failure to list weights in both English and Metric -- is the issue of specs not reflecting reality! Not specific to ULA or any single manufacturer... but weight, volume, size, warmth specs vary enormously even when using identical numbers within a single measurement system!"

It really irks me to have to give up a great deal of interior space to put large bottles in the exterior pockets, but getting manufacturers to honestly list this will almost certainly put them at a big disadvantage to those that continue listing in the current manner. That's a while different fight that'll be harder to win. For now I'd be happy if manufacturers listed in metric and imperial units. It benefits them more than me. It means that for someone that's quickly or casually comparing packs, that their product won't get dismissed because they didn't list the volume in both units.

Bikers seem to deal with engine displacement in liters and have for years.
Bicycles are all metric.
Liquor went metric at least 30 years ago.
Who wants to be an ounce weenie?
If you still tip 15% and can do it in your head, you can flip CI to liters too.

I don't know about measuring in cubic cubits. How about pecks?

I think an ounce weenie is much better than a gram weenie