Storage value index

The method, in full

Every figure below comes from the modular box specification database and three lines of arithmetic:

exterior volume (L) = (length x width x height in inches) / 61.0237
usable volume  (L) = exterior volume x 0.70
cost per liter     = midpoint of the street price band / usable volume

The flat 0.70 usable factor is a deliberate simplification. It is wrong for every individual product, because wall thickness, rib geometry, gasket flange and lid dome all differ. It is right for comparison, because it is wrong in the same direction for all of them, and because the alternative (unpublished, inconsistently measured interior volumes) is not comparable at all.

By system

Median across every priced component in each system, so a system is not flattered by having one cheap crate or penalized by having one expensive rolling base.

Read the ordering carefully. A system near the bottom of this table is not being criticized: coupling hardware, gasket sealing and lid load rating all cost money and add no volume, and that is exactly what a modular system is for. What the table shows is the size of the premium, which is the number that never appears on a shelf tag.

By component type

The stronger signal, and the one that survives across every brand.

Organizers and cases sit far above plain boxes in every system, because you are buying compartments and dividers rather than space. That is a legitimate purchase when the compartments are what you need. It stops being legitimate when an organizer is bought as general storage because it was on the same shelf.

The finding the brand argument hides

Set the brands aside for a moment and ask a different question: how much does cost per usable liter move inside one system, against how much it moves between systems?

That reframes the usual argument. Whether Packout or ToughSystem or Systainer is better value per liter is a real question with a modest answer. Whether you bought the large box or the shallow organizer is a question with a much larger answer, and it is entirely within your control after you have already committed to an ecosystem.

The practical rule that falls out of it: pick the ecosystem on coupling, accessories, availability and how long you expect it to be sold, because those are the things you cannot change later. Then buy the volume efficiently inside it, because that is the decision that actually moves the money.

The metric nobody publishes

Empty weight per usable liter is what your arms experience. A system that is cheap per liter and heavy per liter is buying its price with material, and you pay that back on every stair. It also rarely correlates with cost per liter, which means it is genuinely independent information rather than a restatement of price.

What this index cannot see

• Sealing performance. A stated IP rating is in the database, but a rating is an empty-box laboratory result, not a promise about a stacked, loaded box in the rain. See IP ratings on tool boxes.
• Latch and hinge life. The most common real failure on a modular box, and nobody publishes a cycle count.
• Ecosystem longevity. A discontinued system leaves you unable to buy the matching box in three years, which is a larger cost than any price difference here.
• Accessory breadth. Mounting plates, dollies, racking and inserts are most of what makes a system useful and none of what makes it cheap per liter.

Which is why the index is published as a screening tool rather than a ranking. Use it to notice that a product costs three times what its volume is worth, then go and decide whether the reason is a good one. The system-by-system decision framework is in Packout vs ToughSystem vs Systainer, and the value tier is examined in Ridgid, Bosch and the value tier.