Exo Hunting Gear

[Justin Crossley]

I like to put my meat inside the bag so I prefer about 6-7000 c.i. packs.

I will be trying out the Nomad though this year and just put a couple tag bags full of meat in the center. We'll see how I end up liking that system.

So far the Timberline1 bag has been my all time favorite.

For just deer hunting, I could get by with a smaller bag for most hunts.

 

[mtnkid85]

Im going to be watching this one as well. Im interested to see the details of the bag.

 

[LostInSpace278]

Yeah bigger bag will come out this summer, we were planning on 4800 but after talking with 100's of guys over the last week between PM's, Emails, at the ATA show etc, we are thinking we might make it even bigger. We are definitely going to stick with the 3500 as that's the perfect size for us on anything from 1-5 days which is 95% of our trips but might make the larger bag in the 5-6000 range.

What are everyone's preferences there?

My preference is 6-7000, as my trips are 7-9 days. I hunt and camp on a budget, so one bag for all. Take into account that hunt and camp with 2 to 3 kids at a time...I need a large bag.

 

[Mike7]

Steve, thanks for the response.

I read through the rest of the info on your site and that makes sense. I like 4800 cc for by backpacking gear if carrying the meat outside of the pack, but the 6000-6500 cc would be better for me as long as the pack is compressible, because this gives me the option of putting the meat inside the pack, and the option of doing longer trips with packrafts, etc. Right now my Grab-it is my trip extender for my T2, and my bow carrier.

It looks like the titanium stays are about the width of the top of a human sacrum (the base of the spine), which I suspect is not by mistake. This should indeed increase pelvic mobility while walking, giving a more physiologic motion. I can see how this would be more comfortable when hiking/hunting with a light camp on one's back. I wonder though with really heavy loads and a greater portion of the weight being transfered through the sacrum to the pelvis, rather than directly to the pelvis, if that will lead to more fatigue or less fatigue? I am very excited to see how this works. Traditionally, I have preferred a nice lumbar/sacral pad which takes more of the weight off of my hips, but this pack takes things a little further yet it seems in that direction.

Good luck, Mike

 

[AK Shane]

Steve,

From this initial video, these packs seem pretty well thought out. The centered stays makes make sense, the 45 degree compression straps are something most companies miss, 5 water bladder options, multiple spotting scope options, and a reverse lid. Most manufacturers give you one or if you're lucky two options for the spotter & water bladder but if they aren't designed so they can offset your rifle hanging off the opposite side of the pack then you're just increasing fatique.

The 3500 or 4800 would be a good size for weekend black bear hunts and a great daypack size for hunting moose or caribou. I have some quality lightweight gear but you guys in CO must be way better packers than me, because a 3500 pack would never get me through a 4-5 day hunt. The 4800 would be the smallest I would consider for a 4-5 day hunt. For me though, my hunts seem to either be short 1-3 day or long 7-9 day. I'd be interested in seeing a compressible 6000-6800 size bag for your second option. Something large enough to get me in and out of sheep camp.

Would love to see one of these bags make it's way to Anchorage. I've been researching the heck out of new packs and would love to check out the Exo.

 

[S&S ARCHERY]

Steve, thanks for the response.

I read through the rest of the info on your site and that makes sense. I like 4800 cc for by backpacking gear if carrying the meat outside of the pack, but the 6000-6500 cc would be better for me as long as the pack is compressible, because this gives me the option of putting the meat inside the pack, and the option of doing longer trips with packrafts, etc. Right now my Grab-it is my trip extender for my T2, and my bow carrier.

It looks like the titanium stays are about the width of the top of a human sacrum (the base of the spine), which I suspect is not by mistake. This should indeed increase pelvic mobility while walking, giving a more physiologic motion. I can see how this would be more comfortable when hiking/hunting with a light camp on one's back. I wonder though with really heavy loads and a greater portion of the weight being transfered through the sacrum to the pelvis, rather than directly to the pelvis, if that will lead to more fatigue or less fatigue? I am very excited to see how this works. Traditionally, I have preferred a nice lumbar/sacral pad which takes more of the weight off of my hips, but this pack takes things a little further yet it seems in that direction.

Good luck, Mike

Mike, thanks a lot for your response. You are correct in that the stays are designed to sit inside your hip bones and are the width of the sacrum, this was very intentional in order to keep the stays from digging into the back of your hip bones. We have done a lot of hauling during this prototyping process of 100+ lbs of sand and comparing it to other packs. There is a little more weight on the sacrum/lumbar area but its not uncomfortable by any means and for us is much better than the alternative of having the frame dig into your hip bones. The foam we use and overall hipbelt design does a great job of transferring the weight all the way through the hipbelt and doesn't create any hot spots. The end result vs: a more conventional frame has been a lot less fatigue and greater comfort especially under heavy loads.

Thanks,
Steve

 

[S&S ARCHERY]

Steve,

From this initial video, these packs seem pretty well thought out. The centered stays makes make sense, the 45 degree compression straps are something most companies miss, 5 water bladder options, multiple spotting scope options, and a reverse lid. Most manufacturers give you one or if you're lucky two options for the spotter & water bladder but if they aren't designed so they can offset your rifle hanging off the opposite side of the pack then you're just increasing fatique.

The 3500 or 4800 would be a good size for weekend black bear hunts and a great daypack size for hunting moose or caribou. I have some quality lightweight gear but you guys in CO must be way better packers than me, because a 3500 pack would never get me through a 4-5 day hunt. The 4800 would be the smallest I would consider for a 4-5 day hunt. For me though, my hunts seem to either be short 1-3 day or long 7-9 day. I'd be interested in seeing a compressible 6000-6800 size bag for your second option. Something large enough to get me in and out of sheep camp.

Would love to see one of these bags make it's way to Anchorage. I've been researching the heck out of new packs and would love to check out the Exo.

Yeah we just came to the conclusion that everyone has their own preferences on where they like to put a water bladder and instead of putting just one pocket in the pack you'll have 5 different options for where it can go. 3 built in and 2 will be with a removable bladder bag that we are building right now that can hang from inside the bag or hang on the frame panel between the bag. You could definitely put your bladder or spotter on the opposite side of the pack to offset the rifle weight. There are two long vertical pockets that run up both sides and fit an 85mm Angled Razor HD with no problems.

Thanks for the feedback on the bag, I am definitely thinking 6000 is where its going to be at and we'll find a way to really compress it up.

 

[tipsntails7]

My only concern is the amount of lift that can be attained, I'm - 21 inch torso the frame is 25, I can't really tell where the load lifters attach but if they are not on the very top your probably looking at 3 inches of lift. I would also be concerned with heavy loads barreling. I look forward to more videos though, it looks really good

 

[S&S ARCHERY]

My only concern is the amount of lift that can be attained, I'm - 21 inch torso the frame is 25, I can't really tell where the load lifters attach but if they are not on the very top your probably looking at 3 inches of lift. I would also be concerned with heavy loads barreling. I look forward to more videos though, it looks really good

Yeah top to bottom the frame is 25" and we attached the load lifters at the very top to allow for the most possible lift. 25" seemed to be a good size that will not be too tall on the shorter guys and tall enough to give someone like you 4" of lift. You can also attach the load lifters down 3" lower for when you don't need the load lifters up high.

There is zero barreling of the pack under heavy loads, that was something we really paid attention too in the design. With the titanium frame and cross support stay in the middle of the pack the frame maintains its shape no matter what you do to it. That was a key point in the design as we felt that's the main reason packs start to get really uncomfortable under heavy loads; once frame starts to lose its shape its all downhill from there.

Thanks,
Steve

 

[tipsntails7]

Nice, sounds like you guys have put a ton of effort into this, I'm excited to to learn more.

 

[CentennialELK]

Interesting design. Does it get any load shift with the twisting motion or primarily stay equal on the hips? I will be watching for when you do your larger pack, I can't seem to make a 3500 ci pack load for 5 days either haha...

 

[ridgefire]

I will be waiting until they come out with a 6000 ci plus bag before I bought this pack. Keeping an eye on these though.. Probably be this or a bt1

 

[mtnkid85]

Ill add that Im one to prefer a medium sized bag. The 4800-5000cu sounds good, since the meat is not going inside the pack body itself. I just never have needed a pack that is any bigger! I consider a 5000cu (~80L) pack to be HUGE. The biggest bag Ive ever owned is a 65L, which Ive done several week long trips out of.

Also I hope that the pack body isn't overly complicated/featured. I may be in the minority here but what deters me from most packs is all the excessive pockets, zippers and buckles! Whats the old saying? "Perfection is not when there is no more to add, but when there is nothing more to remove."

Again, Im excited to see more of your guys pack!

 

[rutfest]

Hey guys Steve just posted a video on Facebook. Looks like 150lbs won't be a problem!

 

[cmeier117]

I think one of your bags should be in the 6K range. Look forward to playing around with this Steve.

 

[S&S ARCHERY]

Here is the video. We definitely had a lot of requests wondering how the frame would carry heavy weight. We realize its hard to show how comfortable something is or isn't through a video but the intent is to show how the frame is keeping its shape, the load is stable and doesn't slide down and the load lifters continue to function because the frame isn't bending and or sliding down. You can also see the hip-belt doesn't sag down and remains for the most part at a 90 degree angle from the pack, this has a lot to do with the compression strap design keeping the load up high and centered in the back.

[video=vimeo;84039246]http://vimeo.com/84039246[/video]

 

[Matt W.]

Looks good Steve. Look forward to seeing the Moffat size pack bag next. : )

 

[dotman]

What brand of buckles are you guys using? Also when the bag is so far back like in the video have you had problems with the length of the bladder hydration line? I'm in the camp of bigger bag and put your meat inside the bag so my vote is 6k+ bag. Looks great!

 

[S&S ARCHERY]

What brand of buckles are you guys using? Also when the bag is so far back like in the video have you had problems with the length of the bladder hydration line? I'm in the camp of bigger bag and put your meat inside the bag so my vote is 6k+ bag. Looks great!

ITW Nexus is what we are using for buckles. I didn't have any issues with the bladder hose being short when meat was in between the frame panel and bag. I suppose if you cut it really short that could come up, if that's the case then you can just move the bladder to the inside of the frame panel pocket. We haven't shown that yet in any videos.

 

[ridgefire]

im liking it, I typically do not buy stuff right when it comes out but I think I will with this.