PDA

View Full Version : Timberline and Loco size capacity calculated differently...why?



rhunter424
12-07-2013, 06:10 PM
It occurred to me while talking to someone about the loco vs DT3 that their capacities are calculated differently. What I mean is the loco is listed at 2500 ci, and that's NOT including the slot pockets on the sides. Where the DT3 for instance is listed at 4000 ci, where roughly 1200 of that is the slot pockets, and 500 of it are the two front zippered pockets.

Why is that?

techbrute
12-07-2013, 08:17 PM
Hmmm. Timely, I just ordered a DT2 a few days ago. I wonder if I should have gotten the DT1.

widowshooter
12-07-2013, 09:18 PM
That is interesting....

HarpT
12-08-2013, 01:00 AM
It occurred to me while talking to someone about the loco vs DT3 that their capacities are calculated differently. What I mean is the loco is listed at 2500 ci, and that's NOT including the slot pockets on the sides. Where the DT3 for instance is listed at 4000 ci, where roughly 1200 of that is the slot pockets, and 500 of it are the two front zippered pockets.

Why is that?

I'm guessing it has something to with what the calculated consumer use is most likely to be for either bag. The Loco may appeal to more as an EDC type of bag and so it probably doesn't make sense to list it as having a larger volume. Whereas the exact opposite is true for the DT3. This doesn't take away from the modularity or adaptive function of either bag, but I think it lists the base capacity of both in their respective range. The only difference is one increases in volume and the other decreases.