Kifaru bag sizing compared to traditional backpacking pack

[pancakesadinfinitum]

I'm getting ready to purchase a Kifaru pack, and am deciding between the Reckoning and Fulcrum. I'm having some trouble visualizing just how big each pack is. Can anyone compare the sizing of these bags (or any of Kifaru's advertised bag sizes) to a traditional lightweight backpacking pack?

I currently run an Osprey Atmos 65. While mainly concerned with being able to carry heavier loads, I definitely want something bigger. Since every company seems to measure their capacities differently, its hard to tell just how much bigger the Reckoning might be compared to my Osprey.

I know people have said 'just get the bigger bag' in reference to the Fulcrum, but some have said it's too big, and it's also another $100 I don't necessarily want to spend.

Thanks all for your help!

 

[PNWTO]

Liters to Cubic Inches conversion

Looks like the Atmos 65 goes from 3783 CI to 4150 CI depending on size. Both Kifaru bags are definitely bigger and will more than likely carry weight much better.

 

[carter33]

I recently purchased the fulcrum and it is absolutely massive. For its size it does do well compressing down for a day pack mode but is so large that it does seem a bit awkward/too much in day pack mode. It could absolutely carry a weeks worth of gear/food and still have room for carrying meat in the bag itself. If you intend to keep backpacking gear with you as you hunt I think it is awesome. If you plan on hiking in, dropping camp and hunting from a basecamp then it seems like a little overkill to me. The reckoning was also the second bag I had considered. I don't mind carrying meat on a meat shelf, which the reckoning has. However I have never used the reckoning just have experience with the fulcrum.

 

[mmccolloch]

I'm getting ready to purchase a Kifaru pack, and am deciding between the Reckoning and Fulcrum. I'm having some trouble visualizing just how big each pack is. Can anyone compare the sizing of these bags (or any of Kifaru's advertised bag sizes) to a traditional lightweight backpacking pack?

I currently run an Osprey Atmos 65. While mainly concerned with being able to carry heavier loads, I definitely want something bigger. Since every company seems to measure their capacities differently, its hard to tell just how much bigger the Reckoning might be compared to my Osprey.

I know people have said 'just get the bigger bag' in reference to the Fulcrum, but some have said it's too big, and it's also another $100 I don't necessarily want to spend.

Thanks all for your help!

I have the Reckoning and the Osprey bags and the Reckoning is substantially bigger. After you include the side pockets, meat shelf, and potentially a guide lid, there is no question that there is a TON of space available in the Reckoning. I don't own the Fulcrum, and I'm sure it is a great bag, but my opinion is that I personally don't want or need a pack that i fill half full all of the time. The Reckoning fits the bill for me. As you can see in the photo below, the Reckoning is huge in comparison to the Osprey. For reference the Osprey has one queen comforter in it in the photo and has about 6" of space left in the snow collar. The Reckoning has a queen comforter, a standard pillow, and a throw pillow. The snow collar still has about 12" of space left.

 

[Kotaman]

Both of these bags will haul more than you can carry. I LOVE the Fulcrum. It is a beast of a pack, but is also nice/usable in daypack mode. They are both substantially larger than what you have now.