HMG Porter vs ULA Ohm volumes?

In April of 2010 I filled my 2009 ULA Ohm with packing peanuts, mushed it around until it looked typical (versus optimally barrel shaped), poured the peanuts into a tall slender box that approximated the shape of the Ohm, measured the depth, multiplied by the area and voilà – it held 2550 ci total, of which 600 were in the extension collar. That doesn’t include pockets. That thread can be found Here.

When BPL did their June 2011 Lightweight Pack article they found the ULA CDT was over rated by about 25%, using the same method. The details can be found in this Archive.

Now you need someone to do that with the Porter.

Otherwise it’s all smoke and mirrors.

Thanks for the resources Greg. Your numbers actually pretty accurately reflect the numbers listed on ULA’s website here. The additional 1400ci comes from the back mesh pocket and side pockets.

Anyone try both the Porter and Expedition? Is the Expedition too big to be the only pack someone uses, even for 10lb summer base weights?

When I last contacted HMG they confirmed, to my surprise, that the Expedition weighs less than an ounce more than the Porter. So the Expedition is definitely worth thinking about.

I just bought a Porter (size medium) and I tried out an Ohm 2.0 (size large) this summer, and I would say that they are pretty equal in size, except that the Porter has a much taller extension collar.

Keep in mind that the Porter has no external pockets to add to the volume, and the side pockets on the Ohm are quite generous.

Perfect! Thanks Clayton. Expedition it is!