Are YETI's balls big enough to go after Walmart/Sam's Club?

Lol out of curiosity I tried to Google "axis cups", and they already shut down there website.  

I wonder when/if Yeti goes after Orca?

I now have a completely new rotation of RTIC hard and soft coolers thanks to this. 

odie91 said:

Honestly, I think this is a totally legitimate lawsuit re: the cooler capacity.  That is very deceptive

if yeti made them to size...would they be copying rtic

Smokin_Trout said:

Does make you wonder if the RTIC is the correct size.

Most are actually slightly larger than the advertised quart size.

Smokin_Trout said:

Does make you wonder if the RTIC is the correct size.

rtic is very close to size, yeti is intentionally small


RTIC 45
Interior Dimensions: 19.375 x 10.5 x 11.875 = 2415.82 cu in
Volume: 41.8 quarts
Difference: -3.17 qts (3.17% LESS)

RTIC 65
Interior Dimensions: 24.75 x 11.75 x 13 = 3780.563 cu in
Volume: 65.46 quarts
Difference: +.46 qts (0.71% MORE)

Yeti 50
Interior Dimensions: 16.625 x 10.625 x 12.125 = 2141.768 cu in
Volume: 37 quarts
Difference: -13 qts (26% LESS)

Yeti 65
Interior Dimensions: 23.375 x 10.75 x 10.125 = 2544.223 cu in
Volume: 44 quarts
Difference: -21 qts (32.3% LESS)

Yeti 75
Interior Dimensions: 26 x 11.125 x 12 = 3471 cu in
Volume: 60 quarts
Difference: -15 qts (20% LESS)

Yeti 105
Interior Dimensions: 23 x 12.5 x 14.25 = 4096.875 cu in
Volume: 71 quarts
Difference: -34 qts (32.38% LESS)

Yeti 160
Interior Dimensions: 37.375 x 12.375 x 15.5 = 7168.992 cu in
Volume: 124 quarts
Difference: -36 qts (22.5% LESS)

fishlessman said:

Smokin_Trout said:

Does make you wonder if the RTIC is the correct size.

rtic is very close to size, yeti is intentionally small


RTIC 45
Interior Dimensions: 19.375 x 10.5 x 11.875 = 2415.82 cu in
Volume: 41.8 quarts
Difference: -3.17 qts (3.17% LESS)

RTIC 65
Interior Dimensions: 24.75 x 11.75 x 13 = 3780.563 cu in
Volume: 65.46 quarts
Difference: +.46 qts (0.71% MORE)

Yeti 50
Interior Dimensions: 16.625 x 10.625 x 12.125 = 2141.768 cu in
Volume: 37 quarts
Difference: -13 qts (26% LESS)

Yeti 65
Interior Dimensions: 23.375 x 10.75 x 10.125 = 2544.223 cu in
Volume: 44 quarts
Difference: -21 qts (32.3% LESS)

Yeti 75
Interior Dimensions: 26 x 11.125 x 12 = 3471 cu in
Volume: 60 quarts
Difference: -15 qts (20% LESS)

Yeti 105
Interior Dimensions: 23 x 12.5 x 14.25 = 4096.875 cu in
Volume: 71 quarts
Difference: -34 qts (32.38% LESS)

Yeti 160
Interior Dimensions: 37.375 x 12.375 x 15.5 = 7168.992 cu in
Volume: 124 quarts
Difference: -36 qts (22.5% LESS)

I think the measurements are of the smallest dimension on the bottom as they taper a little. Direct conversion from listed specs will be a little off.
But the Yeti coolers are very short.

Rte1985 said:

Let's just say that's a lot of beer and meat money you could have for that next camping trip

Camping this weekend- Yeti 65 for food, Yeti 75 full of Beer.  Priorities

Rte1985 said:

Lit said:

Rte1985 said:

Yeti is a nice idea but when you have a Coleman xtreme that keep ice just as long for a fraction of the price.  Let's just say that's a lot of beer and meat money you could have for that next camping trip I'm a big rtic fan also.  Yeti is just so salty!

I have 2 Coleman extremes in my attic cause I hate to throw things away. They aren't even in the same category as Yeti. 

Give them to me.  I was just stating there is not much difference in ice retention.  Bears are never interested in my coolers so I don't have to worry about that. Now the locking latches are nice but other competitive coolers have that.  I'm just saying I could sell my house to buy a Ferrari to drive back and forth to work but my 99 burb does just fine! I'm not anti Yeti. I think they are great coolers but the majority of people who use coolers don't need a Yeti for general use. But to each their own.

Now now.... "extreme coolering" where seconds count before your food goes bad, beer turns yucky, these are where it really matters that you have a super expensive chinese made well-branded cooler. 

Hell if I'm gonna add ice after three days when I could fork out a few hunnert bucks more and add ice at 4 days.  Screw that.

nolaegghead said:

I seriously hope you cut and pasted that from the internet, fishlessperson, otherwise I'll have to be concerned about the balance between your mental health and free time. 

thats a cut and paste, if you want to play fact checker, have at it

nolaegghead said:

I seriously hope you cut and pasted that from the internet, fishlessperson, otherwise I'll have to be concerned about the balance between your mental health and free time. 

I bet he went the extra step and actually bought samples of each, measured them himself, and then created the spreadsheet to do the math.

I can tell that he was serious about all that by the complete lack of emoticons in his post.

HeavyG said:

Lit said:

Rte1985 said:

Yeti is a nice idea but when you have a Coleman xtreme that keep ice just as long for a fraction of the price.  Let's just say that's a lot of beer and meat money you could have for that next camping trip I'm a big rtic fan also.  Yeti is just so salty!

I have 2 Coleman extremes in my attic cause I hate to throw things away. They aren't even in the same category as Yeti. 

When it comes to the one characteristic most people  buy coolers for - holding ice for a few days - yes they are (as actual testing has shown).

On the other hand, the YETI's are bear proof (and that may be of actual importance to 0.1% of YETI owners) whereas the Xtremes are not.

I'm after a cooler for camping, are the Coleman as good temperature wise? I just want functional (ie stays cold), ideally with latches, at a cheapskate price. Doesn't need to be bear proof.