• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

EXO K4 Thread (Officially unofficial)

GCTerpfan said:
Just the simplicity is what I like. Fewer straps and slimmer profile. I like most things about the MR Beartooth bag but, it is very 'strappy' and I don't like the horsehoe zipper as much as I thought I would. Those are really the only two things that have me considering changing bags.

Your right though, the slimmer profile comes with a either a higher or deeper profile to get the same volume. After looking at some of the pics in this thread, the higher profile is one of the things that has swayed me away from the K4.

Then I remember that my whitetail setup is pretty dialed in and this is for western hunting that at best I will only do every other year, so I am not sure if it's worth worrying about changing.
Click to expand...
My MR carried weight REALLY well too (for me anyway), and for a backpack hunt it's probably not being run in it's compressed state lol.
 
Homebrew454 said:
Anyone go to the Exo K4 from Stone Glacier? I have no complaints with the frame and my sky 5900 other than there is a lot of webbing to connect the bag to the frame. This does really help to compress the pack in for day hikes though.



Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yes. I did extensive research on both brands and had the SG first. It has too many straps and the set up and break down is much lite time consuming than the K4. I was testing the K4 for them all last year prior to it being released and I immediately got rid of my SG bag and accessories and went all in on the K4 due to accessories and ease of use and set up and comfort. SG clothing is still amazing and it's all I wear now really. But bag wise, the K4 is the winner to me. The lid stays better, the pockets and straps are more streamlined and easier to use which saves time each and every time you are in and out of your pack.
 
It’s a common criticism of Kifaru that it’s too strappy. Yet, a K3 bag can be set up on a Duplex Lite frame nearly identically to the Exo set. There wouldn’t even be any DIY required if the buckles were compatible between companies.

Stone Glacier is for sure strappier than Exo. But I can see how the extra attachments can lend more stability to the bag (which allows a wider bag to perform better). However, one could choose not to utilize all the straps, and in so doing the SG bag can be set up much simpler, like a K4 bag.

I actually like that Stone Glacier has a load shelf. Exo K4 does not. And that SG shelf is positioned smartly to keep weight up where you want it, without any sagging.

But where Exo offers a nice feature that Stone Glacier lacks is in it’s dedicated horizontal compression straps for securing a load. Those can be added to a Kifaru frame or Seek frame, using the tab loops (which provide tons of versatility).

I use those horizontal compression straps on the K4 frame to secure my climbing platform and it works like a charm. With the Stryker XL, I don’t need them because of how the platform sits on the shelf.

I do appreciate the simplicity of the Exo setup, but my opinion is that many of these “strappy“ packs can be simplified if one chooses to do so. And there might be benefits to having extra straps too.
 
Plebe said:
I don’t see the Vario frame on Badlands‘ website. Guidefitter lists it at $349, and 5lbs 4oz.

K4 frame is 2lbs 15oz, $384.

Between the two of them, GET THE EXO.
Click to expand...
Got an email from them and they have discontinued the Frame. I asked if a new one was coming and haven't heard back yet.
 
Has anyone tried something like a Kifaru grab it to make a load lifter in the meat shelf?
 
Camelcluch said:
Exo is dropping fusion later this year. For all you guys that hate camo.
Click to expand...

This anti-camo western pack movement stupefies me. However, the only EXO camo packs that really cut the mustard are the 1800-2200 day packs. Those solid deer colored stretch panels ruin the break up pattern on the bigger bags imo.
 
I would have bought some multi cam if they still had it. Camo bag on a tan harness would be good.
 
bowhunthard88 said:
I hunt a lot of thick stuff, so I do prefer a width of equal-or-lesser-value to my body. Remembering packing stands through that stuff gives me agita now lol. Part of the issue is that I'm not a wide nor dense person...
Click to expand...

For lateral stability, bag width is best as it approaches frame width.

So if the frame is narrow, to gain capacity the bag is usually either deep or tall.

Deep is bad because the further away from one’s back the load‘s center of mass is, the more static torque that’s applied to the user.

The K4 is a narrow frame. They’ve therefore built the larger capacity bags almost comically tall imo, for whitetail hunting.

The 2200 is fine, but it’s still quite narrow and I want for a bit more width. K3 and Kifaru frames are a bit wider than the K4 and can handle that better, but with the small capacity of a 2200 bag I think the K4 could manage a wider version just fine. A 3000cui eastern bag.

A drawback of a wider frame is it probably won’t move quite as well with the user. I am curious to hear how the ARK performs in that category.
 
This was my first year really pushing my k3. Last year I just ran with 1800 bag. Didn't hunt any extreme cold weather, never really needed the layers. This year I put the 4800 on when I went out west. Cold lots of walking and need for layers, water and game bags knives.

After that trip I see no reason to put the 1800 back on unless it is really warm. The 4800 is such a useful bag with the horseshoe zipper. These bags can be expanded and synched down to as small as you want. The weight penalty of the bigger bag isn't much. If you don't need all the volume just roll it down and it is a shorter bag. I am totally happy with my k3 setup.
 
Plebe said:
For lateral stability, bag width is best as it approaches frame width.

So if the frame is narrow, to gain capacity the bag is usually either deep or tall.

Deep is bad because the further away from one’s back the load‘s center of mass is, the more static torque that’s applied to the user.

The K4 is a narrow frame. They’ve therefore built the larger capacity bags almost comically tall imo, for whitetail hunting.

The 2200 is fine, but it’s still quite narrow and I want for a bit more width. K3 and Kifaru frames are a bit wider than the K4 and can handle that better, but with the small capacity of a 2200 bag I think the K4 could manage a wider version just fine. A 3000cui eastern bag.

A drawback of a wider frame is it probably won’t move quite as well with the user. I am curious to hear how the ARK performs in that category.
Click to expand...
The 3600 bag is able to be kept to the same height as the 2200, I just appreciate the organizational aspects of the 2200, but I'm back to the 3600 as my primary. I also don't really like running a lid for whitetail, so less overall bag height (if I did, the 2200 might be fine, but that would defeat the purpose of that bag lol). Overall, I'm satisfied, just being picky lol.
 
bowhunthard88 said:
The 3600 bag is able to be kept to the same height as the 2200, I just appreciate the organizational aspects of the 2200, but I'm back to the 3600 as my primary. I also don't really like running a lid for whitetail, so less overall bag height (if I did, the 2200 might be fine, but that would defeat the purpose of that bag lol). Overall, I'm satisfied, just being picky lol.
Click to expand...

Of course they’ve built some versatility into their bags. You can draw in the bottom using the straps with triglides and manage the side compression straps a bit. But Steve really pushes using the optimized bag size for the specific loadout and I tend to agree it’s more ideal for keeping center of mass in the right spot.

I’m sure I could fill out a 3600 with bibs and coat though, but I also prefer the zipper arrangement and organization of the 2200. 3600. I also hate the deer colored stretch panel on the camo bag.

I’m picky too, I know.
 
Plebe said:
Of course they’ve built some versatility into their bags. You can draw in the bottom using the straps with triglides and manage the side compression straps a bit. But Steve really pushes using the optimized bag size for the specific loadout and I tend to agree it’s more ideal for keeping center of mass in the right spot.

I’m sure I could fill out a 3600 with bibs and coat though, but I also prefer the zipper arrangement and organization of the 2200. 3600. I also hate the deer colored stretch panel on the camo bag.

I’m picky too, I know.
Click to expand...
I obviously prefer the organization and layout of the 2200, and it's not difficult to change out the bags lol... My ECW gear just doesn't like the 2200 tho!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top