Osprey Exos weight insanity

7oz off is a real bummer. That's nearly half a pound and certainly significant when you are comparing which packs to purchase.

You might want to consider returning it for a lighter framed pack like the BPL Absorka (sp?), ULA Ohm or Gossamer Gear Gorilla. You'll likely find these comfortable too, and you'd save a pound or so.

I agree with Dan – especially from the perspective of feature set and comparing the pack to other like packs. It the 7oz got you something in return then it may be worth it but it appears that it doesn't (except for the bowed suspension which I dislike).

Bummer.

Just noticed that Will Rietveld's review of the Exos on BPL (premium content) lists the correct weights and notes the (differing) manufacturer's weight as well..

Thanks for the tips, Dan. The GG Gorilla was always very appealing to me but the volume is too small for me. I'm reducing my total pack weight to less than 25 lbs hopefully for 4 – 5 day trips — but our food is large in volume because of certain allergies that cause us to carry special airy fresh bread and things. I'm going lightweight partly to afford such luxuries..

I'll check out the Ohm.. strange that there is no detaild BPL review article of the Ohm. (the BPL backpack is perhaps too close to the Exos in weight.)

Yeah, the final weight ended up being much heavier (to us UL'ers) than originally planned. Somewhere along the line it seems as if the tags for these packs never got reprinted. I'm not sure why they did this.

This happened with the SteriPen Fits All Filter. They were claiming a 4 micron pore size on their packaging, but with a little investigation, I found that it is a 4 x 4 pore size, or 16 microns! I contacted Steripen about it, to which they quickly replied, apologized, and said they'd be fixing the packaging claim.

Sometimes you just have to REALLY make sure of what a company is claiming their product is, or what it can do.

When I ordered an Exos, I knew beforehand the correct weight from Osprey's website. I got it from REI which listed the weights incorrectly (lower). I asked REI about it and they said that Osprey provided everyone with incorrect weights early on and that was why so much literature was produced with the incorrect lighter weights listed.

I tried several different packs in the 35L range, no frame, internal frame and external. After six packs the Exos 34 was the right size for my 25-30 pounds and the fit was the most comfortable. I knew going in that it was about 2 pounds. Still it is the best fit so far for me. I just ordered a Aarn Natural expression 2008 model to check out though I really don't need a different pack anymore.

I went in knowing the correct weights, but agree that Osprey owes a better effort. They should chase down the incorrect weights listed at their retailers.

FWIW, I have modified the Exos 34 size L, removing some straps, shortening others, removing the chest compression strap and most notably cutting out the internal bladder pouch and it's still:

Modified weight 945 grams (33.4 oz).

In my experience this is an insanely comfortable pack for 7 days / 3 seasons / 25 lbs (incl food & water). Personally I would probably have little interest in a similar-use pack unless it weighed under ~17 oz. Can I get a witness?

Woz,

What internal bladder pouch did you remove? The models I've seen (they were the 46 or 58 though) just have a zipper through which you insert the platypus bladder behind the taut mesh. So the bladder sits in the air gap between the mesh and the pack (with the O ring)..

Not sure what could possibly be removed from this.. but would love to know!

Both my 46 and 34 have an internal bladder pocket as in other packs. Look harder.

the water bladder is supposed to go in the Silnylon bladder pouch below the clip. My son and I have the Exos 46 and have thought about removing the pouch, but it doesn't look like it will save much weight.

i have removed the "stow on the go" trekking pole straps and the top tool storage strap (all which can still be added back later). I have considered removing the lower tool strap, the sleeping pad straps and excess compression straps length. All my stuff fits in the pack without the lid so i don't take it along. With the straps I have removed and without the floating lid my 46 is 33.7 ounces.

This pack is insanely comfortable.

I knew going into REI that the weighths were off. I have owned a GoLite Jam2, LiteSpeed and GG Virga, and none of them even came close to being as comfortable or having nearly as many features.

I wish osprey made more of the "features" removable.

@ Longhiker,

"Woz, What internal bladder pouch did you remove?"

LH,

"Woz" takes it back to the good old days.

It's in there. Unless someone got to it first. It's an elastized fabric covering the back panel. Careful cutting it out. The backing nylon is stretched very tight over the frame. I was in fear of a little nick just laying it open.

@ Frank

"have removed the "stow on the go" trekking pole straps"

Yep, I almost cut those out to. I am still undecided. Right now I am playing with using just one pole instead of always walking with two. Using one pole for assists up hill, and balance on steep downs, uneven terrain and river crossings and front of tarp. Stow and go makes sense for one pole walking, probably not much sense for two pole.

Paul

Paul,
I've used the Stow and Go straps for my Leki trekking poles. Works well for two poles.

It's not insanity at all — but dishonesty. For years now, Osprey has earned this reputation consistently. Yeah, the quality is good — but the marketing is underhanded.

Paul, you don't have to "cut" the stow-n-go straps out. you can pop off the little piece of plastic on the "cinch" cord device, pull all the strings through and then put the cinch device back together (tweezers helped) and store them for a rainy day (to sell when the 1 lb 14 oz really comes out?)Same goes for the upper tool holder.

Unfortunately to remove the bottom tool holder and sleeping pad straps would require cutting :( .

Look at the website, they have the current weights listed. The paper inserts were all wrong with mine. I think they printed them up before the final production run or something.

http://www.ospreypacks.com/Packs/ExosSeriesSuperlight

Here are my actual weights, all for the Large packs.

Exos 58: 2 lb 9.8 oz (1180 g)

Exos 46: 2 lb 6.7 oz (1100 g)

Exos 34: 2 lb 3 oz (995 g)

No, Ray. They're just dishonest.

How so? The weights are on the site.

They can't put new pamphlets in the packs that are all gone already.

>They can't put new pamphlets in the packs that are all gone already.

Which begs the question: Why were they sending out packs without the updated pamphlets in the first place?

Actually, I could see some packs getting into the market with some outdated tags on them, but to have major distributors and retailers selling the wrong information to customers? I was a bit bummed by the weight increase in my Exos 58.

Because the market demanded to have the pack…NOW. You know how the market is….

Yep, the market can be pretty demanding. Which is why I respect the little guy much more. Folks such as TT, SMD, MLD, GG, etc usually refrain from putting out a product until they are satisfied with it instead of rushing out a product to satisfy the immediate needs of the consumer.

Ray:

Osprey's dishonest weight specs have been going on for years now. It's as consistent as Slumberjack bags warmth ratings — though not quite as egregious.

Not just picking on Osprey. Many popular brand name makers are just as guilty. Not on every item or every count — but enough of a pattern. Sierra Designs and Marmot are just two that come to mind. And among the cheaper brands, Kelty and Eureka are consistent offenders as well.

Who's honest? Some that come to mind:

Large brands — Western Mountaineering, MontBell.
Cottage brands — pretty much everyone. Kudos to them!!

Given manufacturing variations, 5% plus or minus is "accurate" in my book.

Ben, out of curiosity, what offenses have you found with Marmot? I've got many of their jackets, their Pinnacle 15 F bag, and some powerstretch. Happy with it all.

I gotta agree with Ben on this, it's not like the Exos packs at REI are 3-4 years old. Everytime I'm there i see someone buy one.

I also was highly enamored with the "on paper" version of the 46(48? I never remember) version of this pack until I realized the discrepancies.

I actually feel kind of bad for the "big brands". They are stuck between the focus group rock-and-the-hard-place B.S. of trying to be a) bomber (bwaha), and b) light-weight.

Here's my favorite useless(misleading) term: "Fast Fly Weight", as if anybody ever takes their 10lb "bomber" tent out, minus tent…

=D