Hi Mike,

 The Osprey Exos does have a fully-suspended mesh 'trampoline' backsystem, however thanks to our new frame system, this gap is significantly less than other ventilated packs currently on the market. This is one of the reasons the Exos 46 won the Outdoor Industry Award at the show.

I hope this info helps....

Thanks again for the interest in the packs.

Martin

Osprey Packs

<<< The Exos series is for the superlight single-day up to expedition trekker who wants a fully featured, fully ventilated pack where every ounce counts.>>>

Thanks Martin, looking forward to trying one out.

Judy

Martin Osprey wrote (see)

In terms of colour questions, the Exos will only be available in the Ember Orange / Silver colour for its release in January. Continuing with the theme of colour, I can confirm that the Talon series will be available in Magnesium (very very deep grey / almost black. Looks better than straight black we think!) for our up coming Spring/Summer '09 season. They will be available in stores from Jan '09.

Heresy! Grey, in any shade, better than black?  Sounds like you were involved in picking the vomit green for the 08 Talon series.   I once saw a picture with four people on the hill with their green Talons.  Two things struck me - that was probably all the green ones ever sold and I understood why the people concerned chose to hide their faces. 

This is a smiley:   This is one in green:   And this one has added black:

Which one looks worst and which looks coolest!!!

Still, I think that there is something like a 80% chance of me buying a "magnesium" Talon (and pretending that it is really black).  It probably hinges on which is the most comfortable/functional from it and the new Exos, and whether I can live with the orange/silver colour.  I came very close to buying a blue 33 talon this year, but could not quite face the loss of reputation - in comfort and fuctionality it is the best sack I have seen, but colour wise... (and blue was the best of the three colours).

Maybe I'll get a magnesium 33 talon for a day sack and wait for good (colour) sense to prevail for a 58 Exos for a wild camping sack.  After all, my birthday is in January...

The Mountain Ninja

Not sure I get the point of these "suspended" backs on big packs (not that it's any worse than the "air channel" designs that seem to be the alternative, mind...)

Since a big pack with a frame and hipbelt suspension is effectively anchored by the hip-belt at the lumbar pad, and since the pack will tend to rotate back/down away from the shoulders with the lumbar pad as a pivot (because the centre of mass will be behind the lumbar pad), as long as the frame is stiff enough there is nothing in the system requiring any contact with the back at all.

By stripping off all the padding above the hip-belt, and a mesh suspension net is still padding, you'll save weight and  all you need to ensure ventilation is to make sure the frame staves are curved to bend away from contacting your back.

This is not theory, as I know from my 20 year old Lowe Kantega with an old Parallux harness with no padding on the back at all and enough airgap above the hip-belt to let me scratch an itch  or to let air cicrulate.  I was without this pack for 18 months when it was stolen and replaced it with a more recent update of the same model (an Alpamayo).  When I sent in the registration card I asked why it needed the extra back padding, I had back a letter from the designer of my original Kantega agreeing with me but regretting marketing these days required padding on backs becuse it makes a sack more attractive to prosepcetive buyers...

If you want to save weight and have an even more comfortable sack you should be able to do it by the complete removal or any mesh or padding over the back as long as the pack has a moderately stiff frame and a hipbelt taking the weight.  The back will not take any significant part of the load so there is no reason to touch it.  The hip-belt will take the load through the frame and the shoulder straps will keep the thing in place.  But I guess it won't look so cool and sexy...

Pete. 

Paul – the Stranglers success was partly down to their music and parly down to their 'Meninblack', menacing cool. And if Jean-Jacques Burnel had been photographed on the Old Man of Coniston sporting a day glow Talon in 1979, I am sure he would have been taken to task in the NME.

Similarly, If the Jesus and Mary Chain had climbed 'the Ben' sporting burnt orange Ospreys at the height of the 1986 Psychocandy hype, I’m sure it would have diminished the black-clad Reid brothers’ status as the coolest guys on the planet.

...but I'm not quite getting the same vibe from your avatar photo!  

Lol DavidG

Peter, that's a fair point - a strong supporting frame means that contact at hips and shoulders should be all that's required. My earliest POD sac (circa 1991) had a parallux harness with a fantastic (if bulky) hipbelt, dirty great lumbar pad, and then a plain back up to the point that the shoulder straps took off - the back of the sac never contacted my back, especially if I bent the central alloy strut a little, and yet that sack would carry more weight than anyone would sensibly ever lift! Doesn't look pretty though .

Even now, the current non-adjustable PODs rely on a strong but malleable alloy strip to give them shape and if necessary be curved away from the back. And some of the larger OMM packs use similar systems (back to the old Karrimor fformat days ) - none of these are over-blown with mesh or padding.

One other thought - I'd happily throw, kick, sit on, or submit to baggage handlers, any of these 'simple' back systems. I'd be far less keen with any of the pre-shaped trampolene-sprung systems.

Aside from anything else, if he was really a mountain ninja we wouldn't be able to see him! there's more to "stealth" than black...

Pete. 

Any idea on how much this is going to retail for? I've never been a fan of Osprey as I think they set there rrp's way too high. But like the standard of there kit. However I'm after something new now as an all rounder as I'm sick of my Golite sack without air gap making my whole back a quagmire of sweat in the summer!

Mike(no to the fence) wrote (see)

The only 'problem' with 2 points of contact sacks, is that they must fit perfectly, as all the force is directed into a small area. It's for this reason that i prefer frameless rucksacks, as they mould to your back. I rarely carry enough weight to worry about a frame.

For some values of "perfectly".  I think "adequately" is a better word as there's not really too much problem getting a foam pad to distort to fit you quite acceptably well.

if you're not carting chunky weights then fair point though. 

Pete. 

Some framed packs have a rigid base that can't be 'persuaded' to fit. A heavy pack pressing into the small of the back is guaranteed to kill me after a few hours.

I would like to find one for winter though. I'm 'making do' with a pack that isn't perfect.

The frame staves on most packs are malleable, and can/should be bent so that the load rests below the small of your back, on the back/top of the pelvis.  There shouldn't really be any pressure to speak of on the back.

As with all things, some things will fit individuals better than others, and the best way to find out what is try alternatives with weight. 

Pete. 

Our Osprey airspeed backpanel design doesn't have a lumbar pad as such, it also doesn't have any malleable stays (very few lightweight packs do). The frame is T6 aluminum and the 'lumbar' area is created by the suspended mesh panel stretched under tension (vertically and horizontally) between the frame. The best way to distribute any load is over a bigger - not a smaller area. It is possible to design a pack in such a way that your lower back takes a reasonable percentage of the load (especially in the lumbar area) the remaining load can be on the hips (through the hipbelt) and roughly 20% (or less) on the shoulder harness. The Airspeed backpanel works very well as it is a lightweight system that distributes load evenly over a large back area and provides the user with ventilation at the same time. The peripheral frame doesn't simply create the structure for the mesh panel, it also creates a lightweight frame structure which supports the load providing a lightweight suspension, a little like the principle behind the old external frame packs. Someone mentions earlier about having simply a flexible foam pad, and that would conform to your back - it would, but it has very little structure or ability to support heavier loads. Like our Talon series, the Talon 33 has no frame, the Talon 44 has a frame for this reason (heavier loads and more support).

"The best way to distribute any load is over a bigger - not a smaller area."

 Rob, at first sight that looks like a common-sense statement. But surely the best way to distribute any load is onto a strong, load bearing structure? Now I have no specialist knowledge of either pack design or human anatomy, but the 'received wisdom' that's been put about for years (by pack manufacturers mostly!) is that that means taking the load on your hips? Although I'd also suggest that for practical carrying comfort you need to be able to vary to a degree just where the load gets taken in response to changing conditions (terrain and yourself) through the day. Has that advice about taking a load on the hips now changed?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for a minute suggesting that Osprey don't make good, supportive packs, but it it actually a case of horses for courses and different compromises being made according to the target use/market? Packs like the Exos (and Atmos and Talon) are aiming at light weight but 'only' coping with a light to medium load (10kg, 12kg, 15kg max?) so perhaps spreading the load as you describe, aided by a lightweight frame, is an efficient / effective way to do it. Is it also the case though, that those materials and construction techniques used to achieve the light pack weight couldn't actually put the vast majority of the load onto the hips so you've found a different way of distributing it?  Mike mentioned a flexible foam padded back and I know he's typically aiming at carrying only 5/6/7kg, so maybe that's suitably effective? But I know that if I still ever needed to carry 25 or 30kg or more I wouldn't be trying to do it with any of those packs, whereas something like my old POD with it's sturdy hipbelt, lumbar pad and malleable stays will comfortably support whatever load I can lift onto my back and walk with (not that I'd choose to now if I could help it!)

Martin Osprey wrote (see)

Those of you with eagle-eyes have noticed, and I can confirm, that the side compression straps on the Exos series do in fact compress either under or over the the mesh side pocket at the user's discretion.

Hi Martin

What's the possibility of having my 2 Talons modified to allow for "compression of sack" OR "use of pocket", as above? (The strap covers the top of the pocket too on the Talon ) This is my only gripe about an otherwise outstanding product!

I do not want to try this myself - i just know it would all end in 

OR, has anyone else had this done anywhere.....?

Regards

Jason