Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

EXO 2000 anyone?

Wild Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2015
Messages
1,092
Location
SD
Just wondering if anyone has had any experience with the EXO 2000 pack? Looks to me like a quality pack to me but I haven't gotten my hands on one. I'm also wondering if anyone has any 1st hand experience with the 3500 or comparing the 2? I like the idea of the 2000 since I don't do more than a night or two away from basecamp, but the extra 1500 cubic inches for only a couple ounces and about $50 is enticing.
Thanks in advance for any input!
 
I've not used the 200 personally but i have the 5500. I can compress the 5500 down to basically the size of the frame if need be but yet have over 7000ci of space when needed.

I'd personally just get the 5500 as the weight difference is negligible.
 
I used one this season, and was able to pack meat in it and use it in a pretty broad spread of conditions.

I can’t say enough good things about the frame. It is ridiculous how well a frame that small can stabilize and handle a heavy load. I’m a small guy, and have had problems shooting a bow with other frames like the NICE from MR due to its width. No problems with the EXO at all.

I like some things about the 2000 bag, other things not so much. The horse shoe zipper is great. I love being able to open the whole bag like that, it makes everything very accessible. The spotting scope sleeve on the outside is awesome. It fits my Leupold 12-40x60 perfectly.

The roll top flap is pretty worthless. The top access pocket completely fills the slot between the roll top and main compartment, so there’s a pinch-point there that keeps the bag from acting like one major pocket. I guess you could put a jacket up there or something, but I never tried it. The roll top does help for securing a load if you use it to connect over the top to the frame, but I think a couple straps would accomplish the same with much less material. With the roll top being worthless, that leaves the main compartment as the only usable space, and it’s tight. For early season when you don’t have a bunch of layers it works well, but when you’ve got multiple jackets you’re packing the bag fills up quickly. There’s no way I could do an overnighter in it.

Ideally, the roll top would go away and the main compartment would be 10-20% larger. As is, I’m still very happy with the bag and am planning on keeping it for the foreseeable future.

Here’s a picture of me carrying half my wife’s deer out with it-

20161113_121021_zpslc30iwpb.jpg
 
I used one this season, and was able to pack meat in it and use it in a pretty broad spread of conditions.

I can’t say enough good things about the frame. It is ridiculous how well a frame that small can stabilize and handle a heavy load. I’m a small guy, and have had problems shooting a bow with other frames like the NICE from MR due to its width. No problems with the EXO at all.

I like some things about the 2000 bag, other things not so much. The horse shoe zipper is great. I love being able to open the whole bag like that, it makes everything very accessible. The spotting scope sleeve on the outside is awesome. It fits my Leupold 12-40x60 perfectly.

The roll top flap is pretty worthless. The top access pocket completely fills the slot between the roll top and main compartment, so there’s a pinch-point there that keeps the bag from acting like one major pocket. I guess you could put a jacket up there or something, but I never tried it. The roll top does help for securing a load if you use it to connect over the top to the frame, but I think a couple straps would accomplish the same with much less material. With the roll top being worthless, that leaves the main compartment as the only usable space, and it’s tight. For early season when you don’t have a bunch of layers it works well, but when you’ve got multiple jackets you’re packing the bag fills up quickly. There’s no way I could do an overnighter in it.

Ideally, the roll top would go away and the main compartment would be 10-20% larger. As is, I’m still very happy with the bag and am planning on keeping it for the foreseeable future.

Here’s a picture of me carrying half my wife’s deer out with it-

20161113_121021_zpslc30iwpb.jpg

You're a sexy bitch!! :cool:
 
I have the 3500 and like Randy am amazed by the stuff I can carry with the frame...several quartered deer, antelope, moose, and elk. The 3500 is big enough for overnights but longer trips I wish I had more room. The lid is one big bag and I often find myself wishing it was 2 or 3 smaller compartments because stuff gets lost in there. Side pouches are great for trekking get poles or spotters.
 
Randy11;2570431. The roll top flap is pretty worthless. The top access pocket completely fills the slot between the roll top and main compartment said:
Hmm..Maybe my reading comprehension stinks, but are you saying the roll top does not access the main body of the pack and is just sort of an upper section with a divider?
 
Hmm..Maybe my reading comprehension stinks, but are you saying the roll top does not access the main body of the pack and is just sort of an upper section with a divider?

I described that poorly.

The roll top is connected to the main pouch. When you load the top easy-access pocket (the one between the roll top and the frame), it fills the area between the roll top and the main compartment, which essentially makes them two separate compartments. They didn't leave a big enough opening there.
 
I'd go with the 3500 only from the standpoint that it compresses to essentially nothing and with negligible weight difference and no cost difference why not play it safe. I have a first gen 3500 and like it but I have not tried the newer frame or bag. I have heard great things though!
 
I described that poorly.

The roll top is connected to the main pouch. When you load the top easy-access pocket (the one between the roll top and the frame), it fills the area between the roll top and the main compartment, which essentially makes them two separate compartments. They didn't leave a big enough opening there.

So if you just had some small stuff in the easy access pocket would this still be the case or does any weight in the small pocket cause it to get in the way? I've got a Mountain Hardware bag that does the same thing you're describing and it does it no matter how little you put in the easy access pocket.
 
I don't own one of the Exo packs but have spent lots of time with friends who do. They are top-notch packs/frames and you will likely be really happy with any choice you make. That said, for the very small weight difference I would suggest you really consider the larger sizes (3500 or 5500). The larger packs are able to compress down very easily if you have a small load. You may not use the "extra" room all that often, but the few times you do need it you will likely be extremely happy to have a larger pack. That has been my experience when it comes to a good high-end, large volume pack that can compress.
 
My 5500 does everything from a day pack to hauling out 1/2 an elk at a time.
 
So if you just had some small stuff in the easy access pocket would this still be the case or does any weight in the small pocket cause it to get in the way? I've got a Mountain Hardware bag that does the same thing you're describing and it does it no matter how little you put in the easy access pocket.

It really doesn't take much, lunch would be enough to fill it up.

I guess as is it isn't much different than a lid on other packs, just harder to access. I haven't read the complaint much elsewhere, so it might just be my pet peeve.
 
Back
Top