Articles (2020)

Before The Chaos: Open Air Demo (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2006)

Before the chaos of the Outdoor Retailer Show we get ready with the Open Air Demo.

Before The Chaos: Open Air Demo (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2006) - 1
Talking with the founder of Pakboats/Scansport. There are more inflatable and foldable canoes and kayaks here this year.

The Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2006 officially begins in a few short hours. With the start of ORSM’06 the real chaos of the event will commence. From that chaos will emerge a bevy of exciting products for the ultralight backcountry traveller as well as new insights into the direction our favorite industry is going. But before we spread out to track down these precious nuggets of information some of the Backpacking Light staff attending the show were able to explore the Open Air Demo first.

The Open Air Demo is held along the shore of Willard Bay several miles north of downtown Salt Lake City. Today the waters were calm and warm, and the skies clear, with a brilliant sun beaming down upon us. The atmosphere at this demo day was relaxed with several dozen vendors showing off their pride and joy: mainly, canoes and kayaks. We let ourselves become caught up in the excitement of testing boats from the kevlar canoes made by Bell to the intriguing pedal powered, recumbent bicycle style boats by Wave Walker (we all studiously avoided the H3 Hummer…).

This is a time to get into the swing of things and in some cases make new contacts or re-acquaint yourself with people you have met before. And with any luck perhaps come across a diamond in the rough that you would otherwise miss amongst the multitude of exhibitors at the Salt Palace.

This year a second day was added to the Open Air Demo and that has enhanced the camp-like feeling of this event. Vendors, retailers, and media are all fairly relaxed – the calm before the storm. While I personally did not find any diamonds here my belief that there will be products of interest to us all was confirmed. There is product buzz already about what’s to come tomorrow.

Trail Designs Vari-Vent Windshield Spotlight Review

A neat solution to windshields getting out of control.

Overview

As Will Rietveld shows in his two articles on windshields Part 1 and Part 2, running a stove without a windshield can be, at best, a good way of using a lot of fuel, and at worst a total exercise in frustration. But finding a suitable windshield for your stove can be difficult. Most commercial butane/propane and liquid fuel stoves do come with an aluminium foil windshield, but these ones are usually fairly heavy. For instance, a couple I have here are made with 0.23 mm (0.0092″) soft aluminium foil, and a 6″ high unit weighs 76 gram (2.68 ounce). They are just a strip of foil with a large roll-over at the edges (5 – 7 mm or about 1/4″) and a couple of corners cut off to let the fuel hose pass through. One could wish for something better and lighter.

An obvious alternative is to make your own windshield, but this is not so easy. Finding suitable aluminium foil at your local hardware store seems difficult or impossible: mostly the stuff they stock is far too heavy. The aluminium dampcourse I can buy in Australia is 0.27 mm (0.0106″) thick: even heavier. You can use foil from a disposable baking dish, but usually the dish is too short. You can use cooking foil, folded several times, but this is really only suitable for small windshields under about 3″ in height. Will has suggestions for other designs, but they may not be what you want either.

The Trail Designs windshields are made from aluminium foil only 0.14 mm (0.0055″) thick. They come in three nominal heights: 4″, 6″ and 8″, although actual heights are 112 mm (4.41″), 162 mm (6.38″) and 200 mm (7.87″). The length is about 710 mm (28″). This is enough to make a complete wrap-around windshield of just over about 210 mm (8.5″) diameter, which is distinctly larger than most 2-man cooking pots. For instance, the AntiGravityGear 2 quart pot is somewhat less than 150 mm (6″) diameter, while the 1 quart GSI Bugaboo pot [link to this] is right on 150 mm (6″) diameter. This means the Trail Designs windshield in complete wrap-around mode would have a gap between the Bugaboo pot and the windshield of about 30 mm (1.2″), which is probably slightly more than you need. Yes, the edges are rolled over for strength and safety, but only by about 1 – 2 mm (about 1/16″).

Even so, this is hardly something to get very excited about. It’s just a strip of aluminium foil, after all! But Trail Designs have a patent-pending feature which convinced me that the Vari-Vent units are a step forwards. Before I explain what this is, let’s look at what normally happens when you unroll your foil windshield and try to put it around your stove and pot. You get it just right, and sproing! It rolls up or springs away or generally misbehaves. This is bad enough, but if there is some wind around the behaviour of the very light bit of foil becomes even more unpredictable. This is a pain. Various solutions involving tent pegs have been promoted, but they don’t seem to have caught on, and are hard to use when your stove is on sheet rock anyhow. I have tried other light materials, but the corners kept getting in the flame and burning … and my wife complained about the smell. The problem seems to be that the ends of the windshield are free to go anywhere they want.

Trail Designs Vari-Vent Windshield SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 1
The Trail Designs variable vent, opening outwards

There is a simple solution to this wayward behaviour which works anywhere, and weighs nothing: join the ends together firmly so the windshield sits in a stable solid ring. Anyone who has tried this will agree that it works, but with ordinary windshields it leaves the stove without an air inlet. This is not good, and can lead to poor performance and carbon monoxide production (I have been able to measure the latter). You can punch holes around the bottom edge of the windscreen (as found in some other commercial windshields), but different conditions seem to need different numbers of holes in different positions, which can be awkward in practice. You can raise the windshield up on a few stones, but this seems to be a bit unstable at times and very hard to adjust. We need a better way to control the air getting in which is stable and does not add weight.

Enter the Trail Designs solution. They have punched three-sided holes right around the bottom edge of their aluminium foil Vari-Vent windscreen. This is best explained by referring you to the picture to the left. The flap can be adjusted to do anything from completely closed to block off the wind to wide open to allow lots of air supply. This is terribly simple, and you can adjust this so easily in the field. You can close off the flaps on the windward side and leave open the ones elsewhere, and you can adjust the airflow as much as you wish. The instruction leaflet suggests you don’t do this while the stove is running, but it is easy enough if you are careful. Have the flaps poking outwards, and then a small stick can be used to adjust them. It’s best to hold the top of the windshield down while you do this, preferably with another stick as the air and the metal there may be a little hot! Just don’t get burnt. Now you have a completely adjustable but stable windshield.

Trail Designs Vari-Vent Windshield SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 2
The folded join from above

How do you join the ends together to make this into a stable ring? You can use various sorts of paper clips of course, but these are never entirely satisfactory in my experience. I find that folding the two ends back by about 1/4″, one inwards and the other outwards, gives me a join which is really secure and quite simple to connect in the field. This is illustrated to the right. I hook them together and give them a bit of a squeeze. Note that I haven’t creased the fold down hard: you shouldn’t do this as you need to leave some room inside the fold for the other end to fit. On the other hand, you do need to crease it a little to stop it from falling apart when you shuffle the pot and the stove around in the field. Fortunately, the hook joint resists a lot of my clumsiness. (You can of course do this with other brands of windshields too.)

Which height do you need? Many alcohol stoves are only about 50 mm (2″) high with whatever pot stand they are using, so the 4″ windshield is be ideal for these. Granted, cooking foil is even lighter, but I have found that cooking foil disintegrates over time, and on a long trip this can be a pain. Equally, the extremely light and flimsy cooking foil windshields are much harder to control, while the complete circle of one of these is far more stable.

The 6″ units may be useful with some remote tank liquid fuel stoves, especially the ones 4 inches high or more. The 6″ windshield should give a couple of inches cover over the side of the pot. You need to make some arrangement to pass the fuel line through the ring – it is often easy enough to to use one of the existing vent holes for this. This will depend a bit on the stove and a ‘comfortable’ height for the fuel line. In the picture below the red arrow shows the fuel line going through one of the vents. You could also use an 8″ unit with such a stove if you expect to have to handle really high winds, but I doubt this would be really needed. Since liquid fuel stoves usually have the control valve on the fuel tank, which is outside the windscreen, adjustment is easy.

I have found the 8″ unit really convenient with an upright canister stove. The pot rests on such a stove are usually about 150 mm (6 in) above the ground, so once again the windshield will cover a couple of inches of the side of the pot. A higher windshield might protect the pot even more from cooling winds, but it would weigh more and I don’t think it is necessary.

Trail Designs Vari-Vent Windshield SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 3
Field use of an 8″ Vari-Vent windscreen with a Coleman Ti Fyrestorm stove – the windscreen is higher than needed.

What length do you need? Well, Trail Designs supply the Vari-Vent windshield in a single fairly long length of 28 inches, but a couple of inches at each end is clear of holes. You can chop short bits off each end and still have room for the hook joint, to make it have exactly the clearance you want on your favorite cooking pot. If you are using a smaller one-man cooking pot you may want to chop off a bit more than the little bit at the ends. In this case you can chop a longer length off one end by including a hole (or two). Just rememebr to leave about 1/2 inch for the hook joint.

Of course, once you wrap one of these windshields right around an upright gas stove you can’t access the control handle. This also applies to the new Coleman Fyrestorm Ti remote-canister stove, where the control valve is at the stove. I solved this problem very easily by cutting a neat small hole in the windshield just where the control handle on my upright stove would be. The picture here shows this hole with a blue arrow. This was still a little awkward with my SnowPeak GST-100 stove as the handle was quite short, so I made a slightly longer handle with some Ti wire from the Backpacking Light store. Since the original handle was steel, the new and longer handle was actually lighter. The hole I made is rather small: it might be better to make a slightly larger hole to access the control – the stove will need air after all.

The windshield in this picture is actually much higher than I needed. I was using it because I was also testing out the new Coleman Fyrestorm Ti stove at the time. The control handle for it has fitted through one of the vent holes, marked by the green arrow. Of course, one or two extra small hole hardly makes any difference.

Can an ultra-lightweight walker justify carrying such a windshield? If what you have is a very small low alcohol stove, maybe not. In that case some cooking foil, renewed every few trips, may be enough. But if the stove you are using is slightly higher the cooking foil idea doesn’t work that well, and the weight of one of these windshields can be justified. How so? Well, look again at some of the results from Will’s research. When a stove has to struggle in a wind to bring water to the boil, it uses more fuel – in some cases lots more fuel. Will writes “In my alcohol stove tests, I found a 38-320 percent increase in fuel consumption to boil one pint of water in a 12 mph wind, and that was WITH a windscreen.” That fuel has weight. My own experiments over the years suggested that I had halved the weight of fuel carried by using a windshield and a lid. Over just a few days the extra fuel required to run a bare stove in the wind can easily be more than the weight of one of these windshields. A smart walker carries and uses a windshield – with any stove.

What is the best way of packing one of these away? Commercial units (Trail Designs and others) seem to come folded up, but repeated folding will damage the foil, sooner or later. I prefer to smooth the foil out carefully as soon as I get it, and then to roll it around one of my water bottles and secure it there with a rubber band. If I lose the rubber band, it doesn’t matter.

Could the windshield be improved? Of course it could: it could be made out of even thinner (lighter) aluminium foil – but then it would have to be a harder alloy and we come back to the problems of availability. Or maybe it could be made from a different metal: hard stainless steel shim, or even titanium foil. However, you can be sure that these more exotic metals would make the windshields far more expensive!

Is the windshield perfect? Nothing ever is. The one problem I haven’t solved really well so far is how to light my stove inside such a circular windshield. When the windshield only covers three sides out of four I can come in on the fourth side with my butane lighter. But when the windshield covers a full circle I have to come in from above – and that risks scorching the hairs on the back of my hand. I have found two solutions for this so far. The first involves lifting the windshield up and out of the way while I light the stove. Fine, except in serious winds. The other is to erect the windshield as a 3/4 circle, light it, then join the ends up. This latter is more fiddly, and I have to watch out for the flames while making the join, but it does work reliably.

Trail Designs display these windshields on their web site www.traildesigns.com, but marketing is currently done through the Anti Gravity Gear web site www.antigravitygear.com, where they are listed under Stoves.

Features and Specifications

Unit Height Weight MSRP
4″ 112 mm (4.41″) 32 g (1.13 oz) US$7.95
6″ 162 mm (6.38″) 44 g (1.55 oz) US$9.95
8″ 200 mm (7.87″) 54 g (1.90 oz) US$11.95

 

  • Typical length: 28″, enough for a diameter of 8.5″
  • Foil thickness: 0.14 mm (0.0055″)
  • Can be trimmed to length required
  • Can be joined into secure circles
  • Edges are rolled for strength and to avoid cuts
  • Easy to cut out holes for fuel lines and control handles
  • Can be folded up for packing, but best rolled around a smooth bottle

Mountain Laurel Designs 2006 Prophet Backpack REVIEW

Does the perfect frameless backpack exist? The Mountain Laurel Designs Prophet comes pretty darn close.

Introduction

The Mountain Laurel Designs SuperUltraLight Prophet packs have been revamped for 2006. The Prophet 20, Prophet 30, and Prophet 40 are replaced with the Prophet Pack, which now comes in sizes Small, Medium, and Large. That’s where the simplification ends, because each of the new packs has different specifications. With MLD packs, the size refers to the bag size, not the pack torso length. The torso length is custom with each order. I can unequivocally say that the Prophet is now my favorite frameless backpack, and in this review I explain why.

What’s Good

  • Right-sized for UltraLight and SuperUltraLight backpacking
  • Very well designed and constructed
  • Removable included accessories
  • Large capacity front mesh pocket
  • Very useful optional sternum pocket
  • Very comfortable to carry with up to 20 pound loads

What’s Not So Good

  • Front mesh pocket could be taller
  • Top Y-strap easily gets twists in it

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Mountain Laurel Designs (www.mountainlaureldesigns.com)

  Year/Model

 2006 Prophet, size Large

  Style

 Frameless, top loading, drawcord closure with top strap

  Sizes

 Three bag sizes available, torso length is custom to order

  Volume

 Small 1,800 ci (29.5 L), Medium 2,100 ci (34.4 L), Large (2,600 ci (42.6 L)

  Weight

 Size Large tested, 6.1 oz (173 g) measured weight without accessories, manufacturer’s specification 6 oz (170 g). Mfr. Specification for size Small is 5 oz (142 g), and for size Medium is 4 oz (113 g)

  Fabrics

 Sizes Small and Large are 1.35 oz/yd2 silnylon, size Medium is 0.97 oz/yd2 Spinntex (spinnaker cloth); backpanel is 1.9 oz/yd2 coated ripstop nylon

  Features

 Detachable waist strap with whistle, detachable sternum strap, detachable bungee system, detachable water bottle holders, wrap-around front mesh pocket with elastic binding, 2.5 inch ( cm) wide padded shoulder straps, one ice axe loop, drawcord top closure with Y-top strap

  Included Accessories

 Waist strap (1 oz), sternum strap (0.75 oz), bungee system (1 oz) , 2 elastic water bottle holders (0.5 oz)

  Options

 Sternum pocket with water-resistant zipper (0.5 oz/$20)

  Volume To Weight Ratio

 426.2 ci/oz size (based on 2,600 ci and a measured weight of 6.1 oz)

  Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

 20 lb (9.07 kg) estimated maximum comfortable load an average person can carry all day in this pack

  Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

 52.6 (based on a 20 lb load and measured weight of 0.38 lb)

  MSRP

 Small is $100, Medium is $110, Large is $125

Performance

Before I launch into its features and usability, I want to clarify the differences between the different sizes available. The current size Medium is the old Prophet 30. It is made of spinnaker fabric and comes with a full set of detachable accessories. Sizes Small and Large are made of more durable silnylon and have beefier hardware. Size Small is actually a kid’s pack, and has two torso adjustment bungees attached to the shoulder straps that provide for 2 to 3 inches of torso growth.

Mountain Laurel Designs 2006 Prophet Backpack REVIEW - 1
Views of the new MLD Prophet pack in size Large. The front (top left) has a large wrap-around mesh pocket with an elastic binding that attaches to the top Y-strap. The backpanel view (top right) shows its wide padded shoulder straps and attachments for water bottles. MLD’s “Prophet Pocket” is a silnylon sternum pouch that attaches to the sternum strap. The side view (bottom, left) shows the bungee compression that is included with the pack. The top view (bottom right) shows the drawcord closure and Y-strap.

Although this review is focused on the Prophet as a SuperUltraLight backpack, the application depends on the pack size chosen. Size Small at 1,800 cubic inches is the same size as MLD’s Revelation pack, and could be just the right size for a sub-4 pound base weight fastpacking trip. In size Medium (2,100 cubic inches) the Prophet is clearly targeted at SUL backpacking. However, in size Large (2,600 cubic inches), the Prophet is small and light enough to use for SUL trips but has enough volume to easily handle multi-day ultralight backpacking trips with a 5-8 pound base weight.

It’s also important to note that the MLD pack sizes refer to the volume of the bag, not the torso fit range. The pack torso is made to order. So, when you purchase a MLD pack you are essentially getting a custom pack. To illustrate the point, the size Large I tested was supposed to be constructed of silnylon, but it came in .97 Spinntex (spinnaker cloth). Bottom line, Ron Bell at MLD likes to deviate from the specifications, and will readily sew a pack to fit your preferences.

With SUL backpacks, the contest is to get it as light as possible, and MLD is on the cutting edge of lightness. One way to make the base pack as light as possible is to make several components detachable, so they can be excluded from the pack weight. MLD craftily did that with the Prophet, designing the waist strap, sternum strap, bottle holders, and bungee attachment system as detachable components. MLD also claimed that the drawcord closure is “detachable” (but I didn’t buy into that; it’s included in my measured pack weight). The advantage of this approach is the user can configure the pack exactly the way he or she wants it. My measured weight of all the accessories (including the optional sternum pocket) is 3.2 ounces, so the pack in size Large with all accessories and options adds up to 9.3 ounces (or 6.0 ounces when stripped of all accessories).

My preference was to use the Prophet fully accessorized. The additional components added very little weight (3.2 ounces) and added a lot of utility in terms of stability, comfort, and ease of use. I used one bottle bungee on the left shoulder strap, and found it extremely convenient to keep a 20-ounce bottle of water handy to grab without taking the pack off. I also loved the optional 8-inch x 8-inch silnylon sternum pouch which attaches to the sternum strap. It has a water-resistant zipper and kept a bunch of essentials (notebook and pencil, map, snacks, water treatment, etc.) handy, again without having to take the pack off.

Mountain Laurel Designs 2006 Prophet Backpack REVIEW - 2
Although you can strip the Prophet down to 6 ounces, I really liked the accessories included with the pack, namely the sternum and waist straps, bottle bungees on the shoulder straps, and the optional “Prophet Pocket”. The pack weight with these accessories is 8.3 ounces, 9.3 ounces if you add the bungee attachment system to the front of the pack.

I tested the Prophet on four multi-day backpacks with total pack weight ranging from 14.5 to 19.8 pounds. I found that the sternum and waist straps definitely improved the pack’s stability on off-trail explorations where I didn’t want the pack to shift when I was working my way down ledges or crossing sliderock fields. The Prophet was surprisingly comfortable to carry, in spite of the fact its torso length of 18 inches was a little short for me (see top photo, unfortunately I didn’t get to specify the torso length I wanted). Its weight carrying capacity was helped by its 2.5 inch wide padded shoulder straps. With the pack body tightly packed, I found that I could shift approximately half of the weight to my hips via the pack’s “virtual frame”.

Mountain Laurel Designs 2006 Prophet Backpack REVIEW - 3
The Prophet’s shoulder straps (left) are 2.5 inches wide and adequately padded with 0.4 inch thick foam and spacer mesh. The right photo shows details of the bottom shoulder strap attachment and detachable waist strap.

I’m a big fan of outside mesh pockets on a frameless pack, and I especially liked the wrap-around front mesh pocket on the Prophet. It holds a lot of stuff and keeps it secure with a strong elastic drawcord and cordlock at the top. My preference would be for a taller front mesh pocket so it would hold more yet.

The bungee attachment system provided with the Prophet can be attached to either the upper or lower front of the pack. I didn’t use it, but it provides some additional attachment capability for a wet tent or poncho, or carrying a sleeping pad or clothing on the outside of the pack. The top Y-strap snaps into a buckle at the top center of the mesh pocket to provide some top compression and help hold gear under the bungee system. The bungee attachment system also provides moderately effective volume compression for this smaller pack.

Mountain Laurel Designs 2006 Prophet Backpack REVIEW - 4
Included with the Prophet is a front bungee attachment system (1 ounce) that can be attached to the upper part of the pack (left) or over the front pocket (right). The upper attachment has more utility for attaching items to the outside of the pack and providing some volume compression.

I found the Prophet to be quite durable (with reasonable care) for a SUL pack. The spinnaker fabric used by MLD is very high quality and holds up well (Note: the specification for the size Large pack is silnylon, unless requested otherwise.) Also, the mesh used for the front mesh pocket is surprisingly durable for its light weight.

Mountain Laurel Designs 2006 Prophet Backpack REVIEW - 5
The mesh used for the front pocket is remarkably durable for its weight, but its not invincible.

Assessment

The MLD Prophet pack is very well designed and constructed. It’s just the right size for SUL mountain travel. The user can customize it to a large extent by ordering the pack with specific materials and sizing (fabric, pack torso length) and configuring it for each trip with detachable accessories (sternum strap, waist strap, bottle bungies, bungee attachment system). MLD’s “Prophet Pocket” (a sternum pocket) is extremely handy, and I strongly recommend getting it.

Although this review is focused on using the Prophet as a SUL backpack, in size Large it has plenty of room to serve as a multi-day ultralight backpack. The standard silnylon pack body is more durable and waterproof than spinnaker cloth (reviewed here), and weighs only 0.25 ounce more.

On the trail, the Prophet was a SUL star. It carried loads up to 20 pounds very comfortably and stably. Because of its versatility, comfort, and user-friendliness the Prophet has become my frameless pack of choice for backpacking with a base pack weight of 5-8 pounds. At $125 for size Large, it’s a good value considering the fact you’re getting a custom pack. The Prophet was also a standout in our SuperUltraLight Backpacks Review Summary.

What’s Unique

The Prophet pack comes with included detachable accessories so the user can configure the pack for each trip, or remove them to save weight.

Recommendations for Improvement

MLD has a winner with the Prophet pack. The only suggestion I have is to make the front mesh pocket a little taller.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW

Built for the gear-obsessed SUL crowd, the 3.2 ounce Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation pack is the lightest pack on the market while still offering a usable set of features. Further, it is the first commercially-available pack to be constructed of high-tech Cuben Fiber fabric. Impressive – yes, but how does it stand up to the rigors of off-trail hiking?

Introduction

The Revelation is an all-new SuperUltraLight (SUL) pack from Mountain Laurel Designs, a company known for pushing the limits of ultralight backpacking. Designed for only the most trim and focused kits, this 1,850 cubic inch (30.3 L) pack is simplistic but functional and weighs a scant 3.2 ounces. Further, it is the first pack available that is constructed of Cuben Fiber, a Spectra fiber and Mylar film laminate fabric that is used primarily for high-end sailboat sails.

What’s Good

  • The lightest 1,850 cubic inch pack on the market – only 3.2 ounces!
  • Perfectly sized for low volume sub-5 pound SUL loads
  • Functional outside front pocket and bungee system
  • Strong, waterproof, and wicked cool Cuben Fiber main bag
  • Beautiful craftsmanship and good reinforcements at critical areas
  • Optional removable accessories

What’s Not So Good

  • Quick release buckles are easily broken if cinched too hard (will be replaced with a stronger 5/8-inch buckle in production models)
  • Sewn on sternum strap is too short and too low
  • Cuben Fiber fabric, while strong, is not very puncture resistant (although according to MLD it’s more puncture resistant than normal spinnaker cloth)
  • Ice axe loop is too long
  • Ultralight materials need to be treated gently

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Mountain Laurel Designs (www.mountainlaureldesigns.com)

  Year/Model

 2006 Revelation

  Style

 Frameless, top loading, drawcord closure with top strap

  Sizes

 One size, custom torso length

  Volume

 1,850 ci (30.3 L) including outside pocket, 1,500 (24.6 L) main bag only

  Weight

 3.2 oz (91 g) measured weight as tested without bungee system; manufacturer’s specification 2.8 oz (78 g) stripped

  Fabrics

 Main pack body is Cuben Fiber (MLD calls it Spectralite .60), which is a spectra fiber and Mylar film laminate 0.60 oz/ yd2 (22 g/m2) custom made for Mountain Laurel Designs; pocket and drawstring trim are PU coated spinnaker cloth 0.85 oz/yd2 (33 g/m2), shoulder straps are PU coated spinnaker 0.85 oz/yd2 (33 g/m2) with 3D Mesh backed 3/8 in foam padding

  Features

 Top-loading main pack bag with spectra drawstring top (removable), shoulder straps padded in shoulder area only, sternum strap (can be cut off), single outside pocket, single ice axe loop, single top compression strap

  Options

 Included accessories are: bungee system [0.3 oz (8 g)], shoulder strap bungee set for water bottles [0.4 oz (11 g)]; a sternum pouch is available [0.7 oz (20 g), $15]; custom configurations also available such as extra shoulder padding, taller extension skirt, waist belt, etc.

  Volume To Weight Ratio

 578.1 ci/oz size M/L (based on 1,850 ci and a measured weight of 3.2 oz, without options)

  Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

 12 lb (5.4 kg) estimated maximum comfortable load an average person can carry all day in this pack; manufacturer claim is 15 pounds (6.8 kg)

  Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

 60.0 (based on a 12 lb load and measured weight of 0.2 lb)

  MSRP

 $95

Performance

Mountain Laurel Designs is a small company that has developed a reputation of pushing the limits of ultralight backpacking with its cutting edge designs. The all-new Revelation pack is proof of that claim. It’s the first pack constructed primarily of Cuben Fiber, a polyester film laminate sail material, which is sure to draw the attention of the most gear-obsessed ultralighter.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW - 1
The Revelation is a perfect size for SUL trips, such as this fastpack into Washington’s Alpine Lakes high country.

At just 1,850 cubic inches (30.3 liters), the Revelation is specifically focused on SUL trips where less volume is needed. Being experienced and obsessed with SUL backpacking, I found the volume to be more than adequate for my sub-5 pound loads. With my down quilt, spinnaker tarp and bivy, small stove, synthetic pullover, and minimal extra clothes and gear, I found the pack to have enough extra room inside for several day’s worth of food. The outside pocket snugly accommodates two 1 liter Platypus bottles as well as a map and small camera while the front bungee system will hold a torso pad, a rain jacket, and other items. An ice axe loop adds functionality for early season trips or off-trail adventures.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW - 2
The PU-coated spinnaker cloth outer pocket (left) is more abrasion resistant than the Cuben Fiber main pack and will hold up to two 1 liter Platypus bottles. The shoulder straps (right) are faced with the same spinnaker cloth. The backpanel is waterproof Cuben Fiber fabric, and kept my gear totally dry during sweaty summer hiking. The shoulder straps have attachment points for the optional sternum pouch.

At only 3.2 ounces the Mountain Laurel Designs pack is the lightest backpack on the market. And that is for a pack that includes an outside pocket, well-thought out reinforcements, a sternum strap, and padded shoulder straps. The included bungee system adds just 0.3 ounce to the pack’s weight and boosts carrying options.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW - 3
The two-inch wide padded shoulder straps (left) are comfortable for up to 12 pound loads. The shoulder strap adjusters (right) are quite strong and durable and are double looped so they can be tied to a fixed length in the field should buckle breakage occur.

The two-inch wide shoulder straps are comfortable when carrying loads up to 12 pounds but the lack of a waist belt makes loads beyond that range uncomfortable. The sternum strap should help with heavier loads but like the Mountain Laurel Designs Prophet 25 I reviewed last year; it is too low and too short to be usable for my tall, medium build frame. It is also non-adjustable. While I didn’t use the sternum strap, I also didn’t miss it; the shoulder straps fit quite comfortably. When stuffed, the main pack bag forms a round cylinder but it’s easily contoured using the “punching technique”. Simply fill the pack with soft items against your back, punch the back panel into a more flat shape, and you’re good to go.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW - 4
The sternum strap (left) is too low to be comfortable and too short to be very functional for my medium build. With a pair of scissors the sternum strap was easily removed, saving 0.2 ounce. The Revelation comes with removable shoulder strap bungees for attaching water bottles adventure racer style.

Cuben Fiber (which is a film, not a fabric) is very different from the silnylon and spinnaker cloth used in other SUL packs. According to Brian Hancock on www.SailNet.com: “Cuben Fiber is a much more complex means of creating fabric. For a start, it is made of many layers of untwisted filaments laid in a multitude of directions. Once the fabric has been engineered, it is loaded into an autoclave and baked under high heat and pressure until the individual filaments and film become one, making it extremely strong and stretch resistant for its weight….The process of making the ‘fabric’ is very labor intensive and therefore the cost of the raw fabric is expensive.”

Despite having a plastic shopping bag/waxed paper feel, the fabric is extremely strong and lightweight and has been used in sailboat racing since debuting (and winning) in the America’s Cup Race by America3 in 1993. While its tear resistance is many times higher than similar weight nylons, the downside to Cuben Fiber is its low abrasion resistance, making it a poor choice for ground cloths and bushwhacking packs. The material is typically bonded together with adhesive, resulting in a seam that is much stronger than sewn seams. A nice bonus with Cuben Fiber fabric is that it is much quieter and less “crinkly” than the spinnaker cloth used in other SUL packs.

The pack body of the Revelation pack is bonded in its main seam. At all locations where sewing is necessary, such as the outside pocket, it is both bonded and sewn. Special tape (technically Mylar backed tape with a PU adhesive and a polyester reinforcement grid) and backing material (heavy weave Kevlar with an adhesive) is used on both the inside and outside of the pack bag and sewn through at all stress points such as shoulder strap attachments, outside pocket corners and the bottom seam. These points are obviously bomber and proved to be robust enough to carry weights far beyond those recommended for the pack.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW - 5
The shoulder strap attachment is reinforced with a polyester grid Mylar tape and heavy weave Kevlar fabric. The photos show the attachment on the inside (left) and outside (middle) of the pack. Construction details (right) such as a blue PU-coated spinnaker drawcord sleeve, a micro cordlock, Spectra drawcord , and a perfect seam in the top closure highlight the quality construction of Mountain Laurel Design products.

PU-coated spinnaker cloth was used in areas more prone to abrasion such as the top drawstring, shoulder straps, and outside pocket. Details such as a micro cordlock and spectra cord used in the top closure, perfectly sewn seams, and doubled ½-inch webbing used on the shoulder strap cinches show thoughtfulness and care in the construction of the pack.

Despite the high level of quality construction, it is important to remember that the Revelation pack is a specialized piece of equipment and needs to be handled with care. That said, I definitely pushed the limits of the pack, hauling it above the tree line in Washington’s Alpine Lakes Wilderness. My multi-day route involved hauling an ice axe, seated glissades on rough snow, repeated slides along rough talus boulders, and even some bushwhacking. Despite the rough treatment, the Revelation showed little wear. The damage consisted of one small puncture in the Cuben Fiber fabric (easily fixed with a small piece of duct tape) and a broken buckle.

Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation Backpack REVIEW - 6
Despite some rough bushwhacking in sub-alpine forest, the Cuben Fiber pack body (left) suffered only this small puncture and was easily fixed with a small piece of duct tape. The lightweight buckles (right) used for the top and sternum straps were easily broken when cinched with moderate pressure. Fortunately, the top buckle will be replaced with a stronger 5/8-inch model in production packs.

While the fabric damage was less than expected, the top strap buckle broke very easily when cinching it down to hold my ice axe in place. With the stock buckles, extra care needs to be shown when cinching. However, I think a stouter buckle should be used, especially in the main cinch point. The adjusters used at the more critical shoulder strap adjustments were much more durable and I had no problems with them during field testing.

Even with the use of expensive Cuben Fiber fabric, extensive attention to detail, and custom sizing, the Revelation is a great value at $95. If you are pushing the limits of SUL backpacking, it is the lightest, best sized, and coolest pack in existence and if treated with care, will have the durability to last for many adventures.

What’s Unique

The use of Cuben Fiber fabric sets the Mountain Laurel Designs Revelation apart from all other packs in its class. It is sized perfectly for compact SUL loads and has the minimum feature set to make it truly usable. To some it looks like a garbage bag with straps but to those in the know, it is the most high tech and specialized pack in existence.

Recommendations for Improvement

Despite being a beautifully constructed and well though-out design, I do have a few suggestions for improving the Revelation pack:

  • The sternum strap is problematic, being both too low and too short. A removable sternum strap would be better. However, I don’t think it’s necessary at all. By cutting it off, I got my Revelation down to an even 3 ounces (or 3.3 ounces with the bungee system).
  • The top compression strap buckle is not strong enough and broke way too easily. (It will be replaced with a stronger 5/8-inch buckle in production models).
  • The ice axe attachment (aka Multi-Gear Loop) is a little long and made it difficult to keep the axe from moving (even with extra twists). While I’d like it to be smaller, it is well sized for a pair of trekking poles and should probably remain the current size for versatility.

Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit Backpack REVIEW

Looking for a weekend frameless pack that is both lightweight and durable? Check out the new ULA Conduit.

Introduction

In ULA’s new 2006 line of backpacks, the Conduit is a frameless top-loading pack with a volume of 3,200 cubic inches and weight of just 22 ounces, just right for a weekend ultralight or lightweight backpacking trip or a day hike carrying bulky gear. It’s made of Dyneema Gridstop fabric which is both lightweight and bomber. In this review I evaluate the many features and attributes of the Conduit, and discuss its sizing and fit.

What’s Good

  • Lightweight AND durable
  • Ample volume for a weekend trip
  • Good volume adjustment
  • Lots of outside storage
  • Wide, well-padded shoulder straps spread weight
  • Optional removable accessories
  • Excellent construction

What’s Not So Good

  • Pack torso length is shorter than specified
  • Shallow, tight side pockets

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA, http://www.ula-equipment.com/)

  Year/Model

 2006 Conduit

  Style

 Frameless, top loading, rolltop closure

  Sizes

 S/M fits 17-19 in (43-48 cm) torsos, M/L fits 20-22 in (51-56 cm) torsos

  Volume

 3,200 ci (50 L)

  Weight

 1 lb 6.2 oz (629 g) measured weight (size M/L); manufacturer’s specification 1 lb 4 oz (567 g)

  Fabrics

 Main pack body is 210d Dyneema Gridstop polyurethane-coated nylon, pockets are durable polyester mesh with an elastic binding, frontpanel is 1.9 oz/yd2 urethane-coated ripstop nylon

  Features

 Angled mesh side pockets with elastic binding, large bellowed front mesh pocket with elastic binding, two zippered hipbelt pockets, two equipment loops, two ice axe loops, two side and one top compression straps, two hydration tube ports, padded wings plus 1.5 inch webbing hipbelt, interior sleeping pad sleeve, sternum strap, haul loop, attachment loops for optional accessories

  Options

 Zippered internal stash pocket [1.1 oz (31 g), $5], hydration sleeve [1.4 oz (40 g), $5], water bottle holsters [0.4 oz (11 g), $2 each], handloops [0.8 oz (23 g), $2 each]

  Volume To Weight Ratio

 144.1 ci/oz size M/L (based on 3,200 ci and a measured weight of 22.2 oz, without options)

  Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

 20 lb (6.8 kg) estimated maximum comfortable load an average person can carry all day in this pack

  Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

 14.4 (based on a 20 lb load and measured weight of 1.39 lb)

  MSRP

 $125

Performance

The new Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit at 3,200 cubic inches and 22.2 ounces (measured weight) is a versatile frameless pack that can be used for weekend ultralight backpacking trips or a larger volume day pack. It’s made mostly of Dyneema Gridstop, which is a superb fabric that provides both durability and light weight. The fabric contains polyethylene fibers that are claimed to be ten times stronger than steel and two times stronger than Kevlar. The mesh used in the Conduit is also very durable.

Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit Backpack REVIEW - 1
Views of the ULA Conduit backpack. The front (top left) has a huge mesh pocket that holds a lot of gear; there are two Velcro accessory loops at the top. The backpanel view (top right) shows its wide shoulder straps and padded hipbelt with large zippered pockets. Each side (bottom left) has a half-height angled pocket and a hydration tube port. The top has a roll down closure with a tightening strap on each side, plus a top compression strap.

The Conduit is feature rich, with all the convenience features most backpackers want. The front of the pack has a huge bellowed mesh pocket that will hold a ton of gear. The side half-height mesh pockets are angled so you can easily reach a water bottle. And the hipbelt pockets are some of the nicest around – they have gusseted sides and plenty of room for a camera and more. They are mounted on padded hipbelt wings that locate the pockets at your side.

Inside, the Conduit has a half-height sleeping pad sleeve that positions and holds your folded sleeping pad against your back to create a padded backpanel. There are attachments for ULA’s optional hydration sleeve and zippered stash pocket (see specification table), that can be transferred to other ULA packs. Two hose ports are provided for the internal hydration sleeve.

In use, I loved the huge mesh front pocket for keeping on-the-trail gear handy. The large hipbelt pockets were perfect to hold my digital camera, snacks, and numerous other smaller items. I had mixed feelings about the angled side pockets. When I used water bottles, the pockets were handy for reaching them without taking the pack off. However, when I packed them with gear, they had limited capacity and were a bit tight. The optional accessories that I found most useful were the internal stash pocket and the water bottle holders that attach to the shoulder straps.

Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit Backpack REVIEW - 2
ULA’s optional accessories easily attach to the Conduit, or any other ULA pack. They include an internal stash pocket (top left), a hydration sleeve (top right), water bottle holders (bottom left), and handloops (bottom right). See specifications table for weight and cost information.

The optional internal hydration sleeve was a bit cumbersome to use with this pack (or any pack with an internal hydration sleeve) because of the difficulty to refill it when the pack was stuffed full. My personal preference was to put a Platypus hydration system in one of the side pockets, which was much more convenient. A full height side pocket on one side would be better for that purpose.

The Conduit’s suspension system consists of 3-inch padded shoulder straps (that distribute weight well), a sternum strap, and 8.5 inch padded hipbelt wings that connect via a 1.5 inch webbing belt and buckle.

Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit Backpack REVIEW - 3
The shoulder straps on the Conduit (left) are 3 inches wide and well padded, good for distributing weight. The bottom of each shoulder strap attaches to a small delta wing on the bottom of the pack (right). The hipbelt has two padded 8.5 inch wings, each with a large zippered pocket. The side pockets are half height with a fabric bottom.

For fit, the Conduit comes in two sizes: S/M fits 17-19 inch torsos, and M/L fits 20-22 inch torsos. I measured the pack torso length (bottom of shoulder straps to middle of hipbelt) of the size M/L pack I tested, and found it to be only 18 inches. This means that the M/L Conduit will best fit a person with a medium-sized torso (17-19 inches). A long-torsoed person can either tighten the shoulder straps and carry most of the load on his shoulders, with the hipbelt acting as a stabilizer, or allow the shoulder straps to wrap around the shoulders and down the back to place more weight on the hips.

Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit Backpack REVIEW - 4
In size M/L, the Conduit was a perfect fit on our 16-year old niece (left), but it fit low on me (right).

Why not make the pack torso longer? One limiting factor, as ULA explains, is that most sleeping pads are 20 inches wide, and the folded pad needs to fit vertically inside the pack from the bottom of the pack to the top of the shoulder straps, without inching up. That gives about an 18-inch pack torso length when measured to the middle of the hipbelt. The solution I found to make the Conduit fit more comfortably was to put a “hinge” in it. I folded my TorsoLite inflatable sleeping pad into a square and put it in the bottom of the pack, along with my sleeping bag. I then put my food bag above that against the backpanel, and packed the rest of the pack normally. This put a distinct bend in the backpanel, as shown in the photos, which made it conform much better to my back.

Ultralight Adventure Equipment (ULA) Conduit Backpack REVIEW - 5
Packing the Conduit to put a hinge in it (left) improved the fit of the Conduit against my back (right), but I would prefer a taller pack that matches my torso length.

That said, my personal preference is for a pack with a torso length that more closely matches my body torso length. For example, the Gossamer Gear Mariposa pack in size medium has a measured pack torso length of 21 inches, and the G5 Hyperlight in size medium measures 24 inches. Obviously Gossamer Gear doesn’t let the 20-inch width of a sleeping pad limit the torso length of their packs. So, the bottom line, for me, is I like most everything about the Conduit except its short torso. I would really like to see the Conduit (and other ULA packs) available in an extra large size, with a pack torso length of around 21 inches.

Assessment

The Conduit is just the right size for an ultralight weekend trip or day trip carrying bulky gear. This pack is both lightweight and durable, so you don’t have to baby it like many frameless backpacks made of thin fabrics. The construction is excellent, using very high quality materials and adequate reinforcements; even the internal seams are all bound. Its feature set is superb.

For weight carrying, the Conduit has wide padded shoulder straps to distribute weight and its padded hipbelt wings cushion the hips. The Conduit in size M/L best fits a person with a 17 to 19 inch torso, but can be adapted to a taller person by packing it to create a hinge. Depending on the fit and your shoulder strength, the Conduit can comfortably carry 20 to 25 pounds all day.

What’s Unique

The use of Dyneema Gridstop fabric for most of the pack makes it both lightweight AND durable. ULA’s optional accessories are removable and can be interchanged in other ULA packs.

Recommendations for Improvement

The ULA Relay is really a fine lightweight pack that incorporates a lot of refinements from previous ULA packs. However, I do have a few suggestions for improvements that are worth considering:

  • Replace the angled side pockets with full height pockets, possibly with an angled entry near the bottom to allow inserting a water bottle without taking the pack off
  • Reverse the top compression strap so the strap hangs on the front side of the pack
  • Offer the Conduit in an extra large size with a pack torso length of about 21 inches

Dunham Waffle Stomper Alcatraz Shoe SPOTLITE REVIEW

Really lightweight shoes for water sports and hiking in wet conditions, but they tortured my toes on steep downhills.

Overview

Re-designed for 2006, the Dunham Alcatraz is targeted for water sports and wet trail hiking. At 27 ounces per pair in my size, it’s the lightest shoe that Dunham makes. I tested it while canoe camping/hiking, wet canyon hiking, hiking on wet trails and vegetation, and hiking on steep/dry/rocky trails to see how comfortable and versatile it is. The results were mixed.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Alcatraz Shoe SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
The Dunham Waffle Stomper Alcatraz is a lightweight shoe designed for water sports and wet trail hiking.

First, an overview of some of its salient features. In the developing market for lightweight water sports shoes, Dunham’s entry is nicely designed and very lightweight and functional. The uppers are made of various synthetic materials and minimal padding for light weight and fast drying. They have fine mesh drain ports front and rear to allow water to be readily pumped out while walking. And they are designed with excellent durability and traction to handle abrasive and slippery surfaces. Their outsole is the familiar Waffle Stomper tread by Vibram, using a special compound formulated for enhanced slip resistance in wet conditions. Another nice feature is elastic laces with a locking adjustor.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Alcatraz Shoe SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
The Alcatraz is Dunham’s lightest shoe. It is constructed of lightweight synthetic materials and has minimal padding and water exit ports so it dries fast (left). It has an elastic lacing system (right) that is easy and fast to adjust.

I wore the Alcatraz nearly full time on a 10-day spring canoe/hiking trip on Utah’s Green River. Talk about versatility – I used the same shoes for wading while loading and unloading canoes, paddling, camping, and day hiking in side canyons. They easily handled the water and mud. For hiking side canyons, they worked beautifully for hiking wet canyons, going from water to rock to mud. However they left me wanting for better hiking shoes when we hiked steep cowboy trails leading to canyon rims. The main problems were lack of stability on sidehills, and toe jamming on steep downhills.

To test their usability for wet weather lightweight backpacking, I wore them on a multi-day mountain hike during our summer monsoon season. They got lots of exposure to wet rocky trails, mud, and wet rock and vegetation, as well as lots of steep uphills and downhills on dry rocky trails. Again the Alcatraz shoes were in their element in the wet stuff, providing excellent traction and good comfort. They were quite comfortable hiking uphill and on more gentle terrain. Their midsole with duel TPU plates and Absorb padding provided good protection from sharp rocks. The main issue again was their comfort on sidehills and downhills. On a 4,000 foot decent on a dry rocky trail, the Alcatraz tortured my toes to the point where I was hobbling at the end.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Alcatraz Shoe SPOTLITE REVIEW - 3
The Alcatraz has Dunham’s familiar Waffle Stomper tread (left) using Vibram’s TC4+ soft flexible compound formulated for enhanced slip resistance in wet conditions. The Alcatraz was most at home in the water (right) and wet trails.

Bottom line, the Alcatraz is a great lightweight shoe for water sports and wet hiking on undulating terrain, such as rafting or canoeing combined with shorter hikes or canoeing and portaging in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. However, they don’t have the support and stability needed for lightweight backpacking in rugged and steep terrain.

Specifications and Features

  • Manufacturer: Dunham Bootmakers
  • Year/Model: 2006 Alcatraz
  • Style: Low-cut watersports/wet trail hiking shoe
  • Materials: Various synthetics
  • Midsole: Absorb compression molded EVA with dual TPU plates
  • Outsole: Lower profile Waffle Stomper tread made by Vibram exclusively for Dunham, Vibram® TC4+ soft flexible compound formulated for enhanced slip resistance in wet conditions and excellent grip on dry surfaces
  • Sizes Available: 8-15, three widths, half sizes to12
  • Weight: Measured weight men’s size 11.5 4E 27.3 oz (774 g), manufacturer specification 24.6 oz (669 g) size 9.5
  • MSRP: $85

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW

Panel-loading ultralight frameless backpack with a large top pocket – a great feature set – but it also has a few limitations that affect its field performance.

Introduction

No doubt about it, the new Six Moon Designs Essence frameless backpack was designed with the intention of not following the “pack”. It’s definitely thinking “outside the box” to try and come up with a better frameless pack. The Essence, at 3,200 cubic inches and 13 ounces, is a panel-loading frameless backpack with a large top pocket, voluminous mesh side pockets, and large hipbelt pockets. The feature set is terrific, but how well does it perform for ultralight backpacking?

What’s Good

  • Panel loading provides convenient access to pack contents
  • Huge zippered top pocket
  • Three large mesh side pockets
  • Two large hipbelt pockets
  • Wide, contoured, padded shoulder straps spread weight

What’s Not So Good

  • Available in only one size (medium)
  • No effective load compression system
  • Mesh side pockets are not very durable
  • No reinforcement of the shoulder strap attachment

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Six Moon Designs (http://www.sixmoondesigns.com/)

  Year/Model

 2006 Essence

  Style

 Frameless, panel loading, front drawcord closure, top pocket

  Sizes

 One Size Fits Torsos 17 to 22 inches (43 to 56 cm)

  Volume

 3,200 ci (52 L)

  Weight

 13.05 oz (370 g) measured weight, manufacturer’s specification 13 oz (369 g)

  Fabrics

 Body is 70 d silnylon, backpanel and bottom are 420 d pack cloth, extension collar is 30 d silnylon

  Features

 Three mesh side pockets (one full height on left, two half-height on right), large zippered top pocket, two large zippered hipbelt pockets, contoured/padded shoulder straps, 1.5 in (4 cm) webbing hipbelt, front panel access with extension collar and drawcord closure, front weather flap with braided cord attachment system, one ice axe loop, haul loop

  Options

 None

  Volume To Weight Ratio

 245.2 ci/oz size (based on 3,200 ci and a measured weight of 13.05 oz)

  Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

 20 lb (9.07 kg) estimated maximum comfortable load an average person can carry all day in this pack

  Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

 24.4 (based on a 20 lb load and measured weight of 0.82 lb)

  MSRP

 $120

Performance

Six Moon Designs is noted for innovation, and their new Essence frameless backpack is no exception. The 2006 Essence is the only front-loading frameless backpack around that also has a top pocket. At 3,200 cubic inches and 13 ounces, the Essence is a perfect size for multi-day ultralight backpacking.

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW - 1
The Essence is a panel-loading frameless backpack (left) with 3,200 cubic inches of total volume and weight of only 13 ounces. The frontpanel weather flap is secured with five small side-release buckles, and holds a bungee attachment system. The backpanel view (right) shows its large zippered top pocket, wide contoured shoulder straps, and large hipbelt pockets. The sternum strap shown is a prototype that is not currently available.

To access the pack’s contents, you lay it on its back, open at least three of the side-release buckles that attach the front weather flap, open a drawcord, and the entire pack body is readily accessible. When loading the pack, the first thing that goes in is your sleeping pad, which lies on the bottom against the backpanel. It’s held in place by three thin straps with side-release buckles. The remaining gear is loaded in the usual fashion: sleeping bag on the bottom, heavier/denser items in the middle against your back, and lighter items at the top and further out. After you close up the pack, there is a drawcord system on the weather flap that snugs up the frontpanel and provides a place to tie on a jacket or wet gear.

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW - 2
Under the weather flap (left), the Essence has a drawcord closure. Looking inside (right), a sleeping pad is secured against the backpanel with three thin straps.

The zippered top pocket is huge and handy. It’s big enough to hold rain gear, snacks, maps, and anything else you want to keep handy. Then you still have a lot of storage space left in the mesh side pockets. They’re also huge. The left one is full height and has an enormous capacity. The two half height mesh pockets on the right side provide still more space for frequently used items. And then you still have two large hipbelt pockets to fill up. You get the picture, this pack has tons of convenient storage!

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW - 3
Pockets everywhere! The top pocket (left) is huge and will hold rainwear and a lot more. The left side (middle) has a full-height mesh pocket, while the right side (right) has two half-height pockets. With the pack on, I could reach and replace a water bottle in the lower right pocket.

I found that a lightweight 2-liter Platypus bladder and hose works very well in the left full-height side pocket, and it’s easy to access when you need to refill it. If you use water bottles, I found that it’s possible to reach and replace a water bottle in the right lower pocket. The hipbelt is 1.5 inch wide mesh and has two integrated pockets that locate to the side when you wear the pack.

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW - 4
The 70d silnylon hipbelt pockets are located at your sides (left). Each pocket (right) has 45 cubic inches of capacity, so they will hold a lot of stuff. The zipper is not water-resistant, but it does have a storm flap.

The Essence has ultra-contoured padded shoulder straps that curve toward the center after they pass over your shoulders. I found they worked surprisingly well to contact a larger area of the shoulders and distribute weight. The next generation of the Essence pack will include a sternum strap, which I found to be very functional with this pack.

One issue I have with this pack is the sizing. The pack is available in only one size that fits torsos 17 to 22 inches. That’s a very wide range for this pack to “fit”. I measured the pack torso length and found it to be 17.5 inches. What this amounts to is if you have a medium torso length (16 to 19 inches), this pack will fit like your palm against your head. But if you have a longer torso, the pack “fits” with the shoulder straps wrapping over your shoulders and down your back. I found that this approach works, but it’s not my preference. I would prefer a pack with a longer torso length that actually fits my back, so I recommend that the Essence be made available in a larger size for larger people.

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW - 5
Sizing is an issue with the Essence. It comes in only one size that fits well on a person with a short or medium torso (left), but it hangs lower on the back on a longer torso-ed person (middle). For the pack to “fit” a longer torso, the shoulder straps wrap around the shoulders and down the back (right).

A second issue is a lack of pack compression options to adjust pack volume and really tighten up the load to make it carry as a unit. As it is, the front loading system with its extension collar bulges out, and the bungee system on the weather flap is not adequate to constrain it. Backpacking Light’s publisher Ryan Jordan used this pack for a March backpacking trip in southern Utah, and found it difficult to stuff his bulky insulated clothing in the Essence. In his words, “It was difficult to stuff things into the panel opening without something else popping out”. The lack of effective load compression moves the pack’s center of gravity out away from the body, which is less comfortable and less efficient. Also, if the connectors on the weather flap were to give away, you could have a yard sale on the trail! The Essence really needs two to three lateral compression straps that work like a straight jacket to cinch down the load so it acts as a solid unit.

A final issue is the mesh used on the side pockets is not very durable. It extends all the way down to the bottom of the pack, and there is where it’s showing the most wear. I found that even contact with Velcro will do serious damage to the mesh. Overall the pack construction is very good, except the attachment of the shoulder straps has no reinforcement material.

Six Moon Designs Essence Backpack REVIEW - 6
The mesh used on the side pockets, although lightweight, is not very durable. It especially abraded on the bottom where it came into contact with the ground. Velcro easily snagged it.

As a load hauler, the Essence gets average marks. I carried it on a total of seven backpacking trips carrying loads ranging from 15 to 23 pounds including food and water. With the pack’s shorter torso length, I found that when I snugged up the shoulder straps to pull the pack against my back, it put too much weight on my shoulders and I had shoulder fatigue in the afternoon. If I let the shoulder straps out, the pack rode lower on my back, but was more comfortable to carry because more weight was transferred to my hips. Based on my experience, I would rate the comfortable load carrying capacity of the Essence at 15-20 pounds, depending on how well the pack fits and how strong the user is.

Assessment

The Essence is a “mixed bag”, so to speak. On the one hand I really like its innovation and feature set for convenience and ease of use. The panel access enables the pack to have a large and very useful top pocket. The large outside mesh pockets and hipbelt pockets are just what users want.

However, the shortcomings kick in with the pack’s single size and lack of an effective load compression system. If you have a small or medium length torso, this pack may really work well for you, but if you have a long torso you may not like the fit at all.

In its present design, the Essence carries like a sack of gear. It really needs some effective load control to make the pack and contents act as a solid unit. With improvements in sizing (pack torso length better matching user torso length) and pack compression, the Essence could be an outstanding frameless pack.

What’s Unique

The Essence is the only ultralight frameless backpack that is panel loading and also has a top pocket.

Recommendations for Improvement

Accolades for the innovation embodied in the Essence pack, and I really like its feature set. However, I believe it needs a few refinements to make it more comfortable and effective.

  • Offer the pack in a larger size
  • Add lateral compression straps
  • Use more durable mesh on the side pockets
  • Use a more durable fabric on the bottom of the mesh pockets
  • Add reinforcement to the seam at the top of the shoulder straps

Danner Agitator 230 XCR Trail Shoe SPOTLITE REVIEW

This low-cut trail shoe performs like a boot – really tough, supportive, and stable.

Overview

There are two approaches for water management in lightweight trail shoes: make them drain water and dry fast, or make them waterproof. The Danner Agitator 420 XCR fits in the second category, with a Gore-Tex XCR membrane as the name implies. Danner is a boot company, so their trail shoe is really a low cut boot. It has their Mountain Chassis System which makes them supportive and stable.

Danner Agitator 230 XCR Trail Shoe REVIEW - 1
The Danner Agitator 420 XCR (manufacturer photo). Although it weighs a little more than really lightweight trail shoes, it has a stiffer midsole and aggressive rubber outsole that provide excellent support and stability.

So, what’s the weight penalty to get more supportive waterproof trail shoes? Compared to the Timberland Delerion Pro or Salomon Tech Amphibian, for example, the Agitator 420 XCR weights about 8-9 ounces more per pair (all in size 9). Not bad for a really tough, supportive trail shoe, but that depends on your perspective.

A really hard-core trail runner, adventure racer, or SuperUltraLight backpacker would disagree. They want their shoes as light as possible, and want them to drain water and dry fast. But I wanted shoes that are really versatile – equally at home hiking in wet snow and slop, long trail hiking, and off-trail hiking. I did all three with the Danner Agitators, and they did quite well, for the most part.

Danner Agitator 230 XCR Trail Shoe REVIEW - 2
The Danner Agitator 420 XCR after about two months of use. I removed my gaiters for this photo. The Danner Agitator is a heavy duty trail shoe that is built like a boot.

I used the Agitator 420 in snow and slop when they first arrived. Worn with a pair of tight gaiters over the tops, they kept my feet dry while walking in the wet stuff. Their rigidity also made them a good choice for lightweight snowshoeing.

I also wore the Agitators on two sections of the Continental Divide Trail, totaling 135 miles in mostly dry (and sometimes hot) weather. In my size (11.5 wide), the Agitators had plenty room for thick socks, and provided superb comfort day after day. I never had a foot problem wearing these shoes. The only notable fit issue (for me) was the heel cups are a little loose, such that my heels rose a bit. That problem was easily overcome by simply lacing them tighter.

Off-trail, I was a bit hesitant to wear low cut shoes for crossing slide rock slopes, descending steep mountain sides, and walking steep sidehills, but the Agitators handled all with aplomb. It was simply a matter of keeping them laced tight to maintain support and stability, and wearing gaiters over them to keep snow and debris out. They have an aggressive tread that provided great traction while descending steep slopes on wet vegetation and rock hopping across streams. They also have a tough wrap-around toe bumper and protective rand to minimize abrasion to the uppers.

After several months of use, the Agitators met their match on a 5-day mountain backpacking trip in almost continuous rain. They wetted through and stayed wet inside for most of the trip. I kept the inside membrane clean, so apparently the continuously wet situation was too much for them and they wetted through. On shorter exposures to water, even quick stepping across a stream, the Agitators generally stayed dry.

One concern I had about the Agitator is the numerous side seams being vulnerable to thread wear and seams blowing out. I gave them a lot of hard use and managed to blow out one small seam. When the shoes were new I sealed the seams on one shoe with McNett Seam Grip to compare its benefits with the other shoe that was not seam sealed. The seam that came apart was on the non seam sealed shoe. It would definitely help to seal the numerous seams on these shoes to ensure their longevity. Overall, the Danner Agitator 420 XCR is well-constructed of durable materials and should last longer than most lightweight trail shoes.

Danner Agitator 230 XCR Trail Shoe REVIEW - 3
The Danner Mountain Chassis System consists of a stiffer midsole and aggressive rubber outsole, so it doesn’t bend very much in my flex test (left). When the shoes were new, I seam sealed the one on the left with McNett Seam Grip and did not seam seal the one on the right. After four months of hard use, one seam on the non seam sealed shoe was coming apart (right photo). The Agitator has a lot of side seams that are vulnerable to abrasion, so seam sealing is highly recommended.

Specifications and Features

  • Manufacturer: Danner (http://danner.com/)
  • Year/Model: 2006 Agitator 420 XCR
  • Style: Low-cut waterproof light hiking boot
  • Materials: Upper is 1.8-2.0 mm waterproof nubuc leather and AR nylon mesh, lining is nylon
  • Waterproof Membrane: Gore-Tex XCR
  • Midsole: Dual density EVA
  • Outsole: Danner Mountain Chassis
  • Sizes Available: Men’s 7-14D; 9-13EE; half sizes to 12 (size 11.5 EE tested)
  • Weight: Measured weight men’s size 11.5 EE 44.5 oz (1.26 kg), manufacturer specification 32 oz (0.91 kg) size 9
  • MSRP: $115

TechSpun Environmental Sock System SPOTLITE REVIEW

TechSpun makes some strong claims for these socks; is it hype, or do they really work? We tested them in summer and winter to find out.

Overview

TechSpun Socks are marketed as an “Environmental Sock System”, consisting of a Coolmax liner sock and a very cushy wool blend outer sock. The key word is system, the liner sock and reversed terry nap outer sock need to be worn together to obtain the warmth and comfort benefits claimed for these socks. There are two versions – the All-Weather Sock System is for general use and is claimed to be comfortable from 0 °F to +100 °F, and the heavier Extreme Weather Sock System is claimed to be comfortable from -40 °F to +120 °F.

A unique feature of the TechSpun sock systems is the outer sock is intended to be worn with the terry nap to the outside to increase moisture dispersion. It also slips on over the liner sock easier that way.

The liner sock is made with Coolmax® fabric and Lycra® to wick away moisture. It incorporates FreshFX technology, which uses silver to retard microbial activity. The outer sock is 45% wool, 45% polypropylene, 8 % nylon, and 2 % Lycra.

TechSpun Environmental Sock System SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
The TechSpun All-Weather Sock System (left and right) consists of a Coolmax liner sock plus a wool blend outer sock. The outer sock (middle) has a reversed terry nap on the inside that really cushions your feet.

The first thing we should take into account is the socks’ weight and bulk. Many ultralight and lightweight backpackers use trail runner shoes with very light socks to minimize weight. The TechSpun sock systems weigh 7.3 ounces and 8.5 ounces for the All-Weather and Extreme Weather systems in size Large, so they are not light. Also, both systems are bulkier than a single pair of socks, so shoe fit needs to be taken into account. One general recommendation is to get the socks first, then fit the shoes/boots with the TechSpun socks (especially the Extreme Weather Socks, more on that later).

Who would wear these socks? Well, if you have really toughened feet like many thru-hikers and adventure racers, you probably don’t need them. But if you are prone to sore, blistered, or cold feet, then you might want to give these sock systems some serious consideration. If you hike thru-hiker style, putting in 12 hours or more on the trail each day, you can fall in love with these socks.

Will gave the All-Weather Sock System a thorough testing in late winter, spring, and summer conditions, and it quickly became his favorite sock for sheer comfort. He wore the socks in a variety of footwear and found the socks to fit well in most of them without being too tight. However, he wears wide hiking shoes/boots, which usually have some extra volume to fill up. On trail or off-trail the TechSpun Sock System helped enable him to hike from dawn to dusk with no foot problems. The socks are a wool/synthetic blend, and he did find them to be quite dry and comfortable over a broad temperature range, as claimed. However on long days it definitely helped to take boots off at midday and dry everything out.

The outer sock is 45% polypropylene, which is legendary for its foul smell with prolonged wear. However, Will wore the socks continuously for six days/80 miles on the Continental Divide Trail with no unusual odors in the outer sock. However, the liner sock, which is claimed to contain silver to retard microbial activity, developed a rotten stench reminiscent of polypropylene underwear. This doesn’t quite make sense, but we verified it several times.

Winter Use

We both tested the TechSpun Extreme Weather Sock System in various snow activities. A key point we want to make here is that these socks are very bulky, so you really do need to purchase the socks first then fit the footwear to the socks. We found the Extreme Weather Sock System to be too tight in most of the shoes and boots we already had, so we had to size up one full size on new low-cut Gore-Tex XCR shoes and pac-type boots in order to get a loose enough fit.

TechSpun Environmental Sock System SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
The TechSpun Extreme Weather Sock System (left and right) consists of a Coolmax liner sock plus a very thick outer sock. The outer sock (center) has a thick terry nap on one side for warmth and cushioning.

As with the All-Weather Sock System, we both liked the dryness, cushioning, and comfort the Extreme Weather socks provided for our feet. As far as warmth, the socks were warmer than a single pair of Merino wool socks, and easily kept our feet warm while we were active. However, these socks are a wool/synthetic blend, and are not extremely warm in less active situations. This is verified on the TechSpun website: “These socks are not a substitute for insulation in conditions where insulated boots are required.”

While winter camping in igloos we built, we usually left the Extreme Weather socks on (if they were fairly dry, and they usually were) and wore insulated booties over them. We also slept with the socks and booties on.

Specifications and Features

  • Manufacturer: TechSpun (http://techspun.com/)
  • Products: Coolmax Liner, All-Weather Sock System, Extreme Weather Sock System
  • Fabrics: The liner sock is made of Coolmax polyester and Lycra, with embedded silver to retard microbial action. The outer socks are 45% wool, 45% polypropylene, 8% nylon, and 2% Lycra
  • Sizes Available: 7-9, 9-11, 10-13, and 13-15
  • MSRP: Liner sock $9.50, All-Weather Sock $16.95, Extreme Weather Sock $18.95

Wise Women Go Light, Part 1

The first in a series of three articles chronicling the experiences of hiking buddies Jean and Sue as they begin on the journey to lightweight backpacking.

Introduction

It was the summer of 2004 in the Sky Lakes Wilderness Area of southern Oregon, and with the continuous rain we’d had for several days, I was sure a few extra pounds were hitchhiking a ride on my pack. Still, I questioned it: physically hard working, 63 year old me having to ask my hiking buddy Jean’s assistance in heaving my 40-some pound pack onto my back. Bent over securing and adjusting the multitude of straps, I hoped I’d get it right the first time. Standing upright with a feeling of triumph, I shrugged my shoulders for a final adjustment and was ready for the day’s adventure. Then I heard a plea for help come from Jean, and with both of us lifting her pack, it too, was soon perched upon her back, waiting for adjustment.

“Watch your step!” I cautioned myself as I wobbled precariously next to a steep vertical drop. The view from 7,000 feet was spectacular, and I would have liked to have been gawking at the beauty surrounding me as I walked the zigzag section of trail. Instead, I was concerned with what was an uncomfortable load. A glimmer of thought flickered and I asked myself, “Just how much of this stuff do I really need?”

At our next rest break, the first words out of my mouth were “Jean, we need to lighten our load.” Carrying ten pounds more than I, she was very receptive to the idea.

That’s how I remember hiking buddy Jean Rogers and myself deciding it was time for us to go lightweight. How do we navigate the trail to lightweight backpacking? Where will it lead us? Well, we’re sharing our journey with Backpacking Light in a series of three articles, beginning here with our introductions to backpacking, our early backpacking experiences, and our current heavy gear lists. In the near future we’ll bring you our second article, with our many considerations in going lightweight, perhaps even ultra lightweight, and you’ll hear what we’ve learned, what skills we’ve gained, and what worked or didn’t on our gear testing trips. In our third article, we’ll share with you how our final gear choices perform for us on our 7 day, 90 mile hike of the Pacific Crest Trail from Crater Lake to Williametter Pass in September of this year. We’ll be backpacking at elevations of 5,000 to 8,000 feet, with warm to hot days, cold to freezing nights, and rain and thunderstorms very likely. It will be a great test of the gear and our skills. We hope you’ll join us as we go light!

The Wise Women

Jean’s Story

Until my 50s, I was a horseback rider, not a hiker or backpacker. By then, an active lifestyle was catching up with me and horseback riding became out of the question due to chronic inflammation of my sacroiliac joint. Straddling a horse only aggravates it, but I can walk. And, walking down a dirt road in Maine in the year 2000, I took a footpath off into the woods. I realized that even though one-third of my life had been spent in New England, there was an entirely different unexplored world here only a short distance from the road. I decided then and there that I would backpack the Appalachian Trail in New England.

After two years of planning and acquiring equipment, my cousin, niece, and I set out to backpack the AT in Vermont. We were all neophytes, and the trip was a comedy of errors. Pack weights were 60 pounds and up, all of us having been raised on sayings like “be prepared” and “better to have too much than too little”. I had one of those HUGE packs that are described as being able to carry everything including the kitchen sink. Although I didn’t have a kitchen sink, I did carry a collapsible 5 gallon jug with spigot. That trip did in my knees. My left knee has never forgiven me and reminds me what I put it through on every hike. Even so, I was hooked and returned the following year to backpack more of the AT, this time with a pack weight in the 40 pound range.

In early 2004 I attended a map and compass class where I met Sue, now my friend and hiking buddy. She had been hiking the Cascades with her friend, Mary, for two years. Since meeting, Sue and I have hiked and backpacked a good portion of the Pacific Crest Trail in Oregon and explored numerous areas of the mountains and the coast.

Each year, our backpacking trips have increased in length while our pack weights have decreased. Now 58, I am getting serious about losing more pack weight. When I look back on my first backpacking adventure, I can’t believe I was able to carry 60 pounds.

Wise Women Go Light - 1
Jean at Sky Lakes Wilderness Area in 2004

Sue’s Story

I’d found long awaited freedom to adventure in 2002 when my husband and I sold the meat packing business we’d owned for 25 years. I mentioned my desire to hike to my friend, Mary, and she was immediately ready to explore some trails with me. Soon Mary and I found ourselves on our first day hike together – the 4.5 mile round trip to Three Fingered Jack in the Oregon Cascades. Living near the Coast Range of Oregon as a child, my early memories are of looking off towards the distant country, pondering where the Cascades even were. Many years later, I was enthused to find myself there in all my day-pack glory, shoulders bearing the weight of what I thought then were essentials to survive the wilderness. Food was packed, but if I were stranded I was not prepared at all. No rain gear, no emergency supplies like first aid, and early on, no map. I was ready to hike anywhere, and I’d figured adrenaline would get me there and back.

Wise Women Go Light - 2
Sue with her heavy pack at the trailhead in Sky Lakes Wilderness Area.

Many day hike adventures followed in 2003, and in 2004 Mary and I met Jean at a map and compass class. Four months later we three ladies did our first overnight, with me confidently sporting my second hand store treasure – a wondrous six pound backpack. I was a real greenhorn then! Because I had not been able to decide on a tent, I used the bivy bag from my three spiritual vision quests of 12 years earlier.

The vision quests didn’t directly prepare me for backpacking since there was no hiking, no trails, no maps, no compass, and no backpacking gear, but they helped me become more at ease in the “uncivilized” world. The vision quest of 1992 helped me to overcome many fears that had been with me for half a century. I made it through my three solo days and nights, and shortly after I had the courage to bungee jump, and even wrapped a 15 foot python snake around my shoulders at the Oregon State Fair after years of extreme fear of snakes. Ensuing vision quests helped me overcome more fears, and by the last vision quest I was confident enough in the wilderness to choose to stay in my vision spot for five days.

My first long adventure was our Sky Lakes Wilderness Area of the PCT with Jean in the summer of 2004. Jean had a friend that wanted to try hiking with a mule and she’d invited me because she was afraid the friend and the mule would not complete the 5 day, 60-some mile hike. At the time, I was thinking I was past the greenhorn stage. The weather along that section of the trail for August is usually hot, so I had thought I might leave the rain gear at home. Jean quickly vetoed this idea, and to make a long story short, it rained for three days. Guardian angels do exist! That was the same trip that we decided to learn to go lightweight on. We learned a lot that trip. Some other lessons include: do not hike with a mule; always bring your rain gear; packs get really heavy when wet; and yes, you can pee in a zip-lock bag at night when the wind and rain are at their peak, trying to unnerve old ladies in tents.

Going Light

Jean

On every backpacking trip since my first, I have tried to lighten my pack weight, but this has been harder than I had expected. I have a BIG comfort zone that I need to break out of. When Sue and I went on our first backpacking trip together, my pack weight was down to about 45 to 50 pounds. I still had a tough time on the steeper ascents.

Each trip has instilled more confidence in my abilities and I am slowly going without items that I have considered essential in the past. Other items I have tried to find lighter alternatives for. My first sleeping bag weighed over 3 pounds and was rated to 15 degrees. My new 15 degree bag weighs 1 pound 15 ounces. Instead of carrying three nesting pots (one for every occasion, naturally), I now carry only a titanium teapot that holds enough water for dinner and my tea. Instead of a fork and a spoon, I use a Lexan spork.

I found a website with directions to make a Pepsi can alcohol stove. I discovered that I could whip out one of those in no time, and made stoves for all my friends. Sue made the windscreen/pot stands found on the same website.

That humongous pack I started with is now gone and I have a smaller, lighter pack. I did try one of the ‘frameless’ packs, but I still carry too much weight for it and so it pulls uncomfortably on my shoulders.

I still use several light weight wicking shirts from my first adventure into the wilds, but I am eyeing some made from the newer, lighter fabrics that weigh even less. I wore ‘sturdy’ leather boots on the AT. Now I use a boot with leather and mesh and knocked off about a pound or more in weight. I use Crocs as my camp-creek wading shoes. I discarded my self-inflating mattress for a solid foam pad and saved another half pound.

I sold my two person, 4+ pound tent and now use a one person 1.5 pound tent. It isn’t as roomy for sure, but I have less stuff to clutter it with.

Slowly but surely, I am emerging out of my old comfort zone and into a lighter, less encumbered zone. However, after putting only the essentials into my pack, I find that I keep adding this and that for “just in case.” Old habits are hard to break, but I am making progress. I feel good and am looking forward to hitting the trail soon with a much lighter pack!

Wise Women Go Light - 3
Jean with her heavy pack at a creek.

Sue

There were several short overnight hikes in 2005 where my 6 pound second hand store backpack stayed home and in its place was an Osprey Aether 45 weighing in at 1 pound 12 ounces. Now my “big three” items (pack, tent, and sleeping bag) weigh a total of about 6 pounds! Still, I want to replace the Osprey with another light pack.

I would like to come in at a pack weight below 20 pounds for a week long hike, and feel the Osprey Aether’s 20 to 25 pound load limit will restrain me. We did a three-day hike in 2005 where my total pack weight including food was between 22 to 25 pounds, but the Osprey Aether was not comfortable at that weight.

Other lighter gear I’ve acquired include my Vasque Gore-tex boots and an REI Sub Kilo sleeping bag. I don’t know yet if I’m comfortable with my REI Sub Kilo sleeping bag, but my new Vasque Gore-tex boots so far have not leaked.

Those Nalgene water bottles are heavy, so they became Platypus bladders. This change took some time to accept as I was concerned about the bladder being a breeding ground for germs, even with the good washing it got between each hike.

I had been so proud of my stainless steel cooking pot and then I knew it had to go. I replaced it with a titanium pot with lid at 5.7 ounces, with self-made windscreen. The windscreen also serves as the pot holder and I have a 1.5 ounce pop can stove made by Jean.

I was using REI’s Quarter Dome UL tent at 4 pounds 3.6 ounces, but intense investigation lead to the Six Moons Lunar Solo E. Complete with my piece of builder’s tyvek for a ground sheet it comes in at 2 pounds, 6 ounces. However, I’ve had difficulty putting this tent up and getting it taut – the back corners want to sag. Purchases I made for day hiking that have passed the lightweight test for backpacking turn out to be my Gore-Tex pants and my Columbia ‘titanium-alloy’ raincoat with zip pits.

I turn 65 this fall and with each passing year my slender build will demand that I pay even more attention to my load capacity. Every ligament in my being is shouting “ultralight.” I tell my three daughters that I’m going to live to be 120 so I have a way to go and many trails calling me. A lifelong tomboy for sure, but the earthly requirements of an aging body will take its toll and to spend my remaining years enjoying the outdoors will take intelligence and fortitude.

Wise Women Go Light - 4
Sue filtering water at a creek Sky Lakes Wilderness Area.

Backpacking Light

In the spring of this year, Jean mused that we should be gear testers for aging women. I did not give it much thought at the time, but several weeks later, sitting at the computer, I thought “Why not?” and wrote Carol at Backpacking Light with the idea. She thought even more valuable than gear testing would be sharing our journey from heavy to lightweight backpacking with you. Including the trials, the fears, the successes, the reluctance to change. In other words, the adventure. She mused that the journey is not gender or age specific. Most everyone goes through a gradual process as they lighten their packs, expand their comfort zones, and face some fears. What keeps the process going is the realization that it’s just so much more fun to carry a lighter pack! Wise women, and men, go light! We hope you’ll join us on the next leg of our journey, where we’ll share with you as we let go of “needed” gear, experiment with lighter equipment that we fear will be uncomfortable, and try gear that just isn’t heavy enough to possibly work. Join us as we go light!

Gear Lists

We have already lightened our pack weights considerably since our introduction to backpacking just a few years ago. What follows is our gear lists as they are now, as we begin our association with Backpacking Light and start a serious push to lighten our loads. You’ll note that Jean’s base pack weight (everything but consumables – food, water, and fuel) is now 20 pounds and Sue’s base weight is 14 pounds. Since Sue wants her total pack weight to be around 20 pounds for a week long trip, she is striving for a 10 pound or less base weight, while Jean will be happy to lose 6 or so pounds to get below Sue’s current base weight of 14 pounds.

Sue’s 7-Day Gear List: Heavy
Clothing Worn While Hiking WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
hat cap with neck flap Gore-Tex 3.2 91
neck and head cover synthetic, lightweight Buff 1.2 34
hiking shirt long sleeved, zip-off sleeves Cabela’s 8.4 238
pants convertible REI Convertible 3.9 111
underwear nylon Hanes 1.0 28
bra nylon Playtex 1.7 48
socks cool mesh, anti-blister Wright Sock 1.4 40
hiking shoes Gore-Tex Vasque 41.3 1171
gaiters lightweight Outdoor Research 3.1 88
Other Items Worn or Carried WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
walking stick wood self made 6.2 176
vest cotton and mesh fishing vest 9.0 255
Other Clothing WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
jacket fleece Great Northwest 9.8 278
pants convertible REI Convertible 11.7 332
extra socks (2 pair) cool mesh, anti-blister Wright Sock 2.8 79
underwear nylon Hanes 1.0 28
long underwear sleep in, warmth REI silk 6.3 179
gloves Gore-Tex Cabela’s 3.7 105
raincoat hood, zip-pits Columbia Titanium Alloy/pit zips 15.7 445
rain pants zip bottom legs Gore-Tex Pac Tech [rain pants listed twice. Brand name?] 12.3 349
fleece shirt warmth/wind protection Starter 11.4 323
Shelter and Sleep System WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
shelter tent, poles, cords, stuff sack Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo E 35.2 998
ground sheet under tent + wrap Platypus in while hiking Tyvek 3.0 85
sleeping bag 15 degree rating REI Sub Kilo, women’s 31.0 879
sleeping Pad cut to shoulder – hip length, also back support in pack closed cell 4.5 128
Packing WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
backpack small 2600 ci volume Osprey Aether 45 28.0 794
pack Liner garbage bag heavy duty 1.5 43
Cooking/Water WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
fuel container hold 7 days of alcohol fuel Coghlans, plastic flask 1.5 43
stove alcohol burner bottom pop can 0.4 11
windscreen/pot support lightweight metal self-made 1.1 31
pot and lid sized for solo cooking Titanium Evernew 5.7 162
utensil spoon Permaware 0.4 11
bag for pot protect pot ziplock bag 0.2 6
food storage lightweight ziplock bag 0.2 6
fire matches REI Stormproof 0.8 23
hydration bladder with hose [correct?] Platypus 2 L Hoser 3.4 96
extra bladder water storage Platypus 1 L 1.4 40
water treatment chemical potable aqua 2.1 60
Other Essentials WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
light headlamp Black Diamond 1.2 34
sunglasses prescription with water proof case 3.6 102
map trail map small section 1.5 43
sunscreen stick Banana Boat SPF 30 1.2 34
first aid mixed supply different needs 1.6 45
hygiene lotion,toothpaste handy wipes, toilet needs 3.5 99
towels shop towels blue, washable 2.3 65
compass clear base Silva 1.0 28
altimeter barometer Sun [could this be suunto brand?] 2.7 77
watch illuminated dial, alarm Timex 1.2 34
whistle small plastic 0.2 6
knife two blade Swiss Army Classic 0.7 20
camera digital Kodak 7.1 201
signaling emergency signal whistle worn on spare shoe lace 0.3 9
Consumables (7-Day Trip) WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
food 7 days 24 oz/day 168.0 4763
water average carried 32 oz 32.0 907
fuel denatured alcohol 1 oz/dinner 9.0 255
Weight Summary
Weight Summary Pounds Kilograms
(1) Total Worn or Carried While Hiking 5.0 2.3
(2) Total Base Weight in Pack 13.9 6.3
(3) Total Weight of Consumables 13.1 5.9
(4) Full Skin-Out Base Weight (1) + (2) 19.0 8.6
(5) Total Initial Pack Weight (2) + (3) 27.0 12.3
(6) Full Skin-Out Weight (1) + (2) + (3) 32.0 14.6
Jean’s 7-Day Gear List: Heavy
Clothing Worn While Hiking WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
hat full brim Columbia Hat 2.6 74
hiking shirt short sleeved Duofold 5.5 156
sports bra breathable Bestform 1.9 54
underwear synthetic briefs Duofold 1.5 43
pants hike/swim/protection Columbia GRT zip off 10.1 286
socks foot comfort Wigwam Outlast 2.5 71
hiking shoes ankle support Asolo Stynger GTX 45.5 1290
Other Items Worn or Carried WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
trekking poles assist knees Leki Makalu Poles 15.7 445
mesh fishing vest pockets for oft needed items Clearwater Utility Vest 9.0 255
Other Clothing WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
camp shoes rest feet/wading streams Crocs 8.8 249
bear spray deterrent/safety Bear Assault 12.0 340
bandana cool off/protect neck Cotton bandana 1.2 34
short sleeved shirt dry Duofold 4.0 113
long sleeved shirt dry/protect arms/sleep in Duofold 5.6 159
pants dry REI Zip Offs 12.9 366
warm hat use when cold buff 1.0 28
jacket warmth/rain protection Columbia Titanium/zip pits 15.7 445
fleece shirt warmth/wind protection Starter 11.4 323
rain pants warmth/rain protection Gore-Tex Packlite 10.2 289
long johns warmth/sleep in Silkskins 3.2 91
socks dry Wright Sock 3.2 91
sock liners emergency socks/warmth Coolmax 1.6 45
gloves warmth Leather/Gore-Tex 3.8 108
glove liners use when gloves are too hot Gordini 1.0 28
gaiters protect legs/pants REI Mid Gaiters 6.0 170
Shelter and Sleep System WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
shelter single wall tent Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo e w/stakes and cords 35.2 998
ground sheet fit under part of tent Tyvek 3.0 85
sleeping bag 15 degree rating REI Sub Kilo, women’s 31.0 879
sleeping Pad full length closed cell foam 10.0 284
packing WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
backpack internal frame Camp Trails 50.5 1432
waterproof pack liner keep pack contents dry in rain plastic garbage bag 0.7 20
stuff sack keep sleeping bag dry/separate from other items plastic garbage bag 0.7 20
Cooking/Water WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
stove light weight Pepsi can stove 0.6 17
fuel container easy to acquire, suitable for denatured alcohol Brasslight 8 ounce 2.0 57
cook pot titanium teapot Titanium Evernew 4.7 133
wind screen wind protection/support Homemade 0.9 26
drinking cup with lid keep liquid hot Plastic travel mug 4.8 136
utensil eating/light weight Lexan spork 0.4 11
plate eat off of/funnel/bowl Orikaso dish 1.5 43
bag for coot pot/stove/ matches carry cook items together small mesh bag 0.7 20
matches light fuel, wind and water proof REI matches 0.7 20
hydration 70 ounces Camelbak Bladder 8.7 247
hydration protection and carrying system protect bag in pack and out Camelbak Cover 3.2 91
water treatment kill all unfriendlies/filter out sediment Sweetwater 14.4 408
food bag carry/hang food/bear protection Ursack 8.3 235
Other Essentials WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
mosquito head net bug protection unknown brand 0.4 11
personal hygiene toilet kit Tooth paste, tooth brush, sanitizer 2.5 71
light headlamp Petzl Tikka 2.5 71
knife cutting cord Benchmade 2.1 60
altimeter watch altitude/barometer Casio Forester 1.3 37
soap wash self and clothing Camp Suds 0.8 23
medication asthma Albuterol Inhaler 1.0 28
lip gloss protect lips from sun Ice Drops 0.2 6
sunscreen protect skin from sun cactus juice in small container 2.0 57
navigation direction/map aid pin-on compass 0.8 23
first aid minor cuts/sprains Band-Aids, moleskin, scissors, blister pads, alcohol wipes in small bag 1.5 43
first aid – major bad sprains/breaks Sam Splint & vet wrap 6.1 173
survival kit emergencies firestarter kit, handwarmers, space blanket, safety pin, razor blade, trail marker, tape, paper, pencil, duct tape in small bag 6.6 187
signaling emergency signal whistle worn on spare shoe lace 0.3 9
Consumables (7-Day Trip) WEIGHT
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
fuel denatured alcohol 2 oz/evening 12.0 340
food 6.5 days 24 oz/day 84.0 2381
water average carried 70 oz 70.0 1984
toilet paper camp TP 1.2 oz/7 days 7.2 204
Weight Summary
Weight Summary Pounds Kilograms
(1) Total Worn or Carried While Hiking 5.9 2.7
(2) Total Base Weight in Pack 19.5 8.9
(3) Total Weight of Consumables 10.8 4.9
(4) Full Skin-Out Base Weight (1) + (2) 25.4 11.5
(5) Total Initial Pack Weight (2) + (3) 30.3 13.8
(6) Full Skin-Out Weight (1) + (2) + (3) 36.2 16.5

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Mid Boot REVIEW

With the new 2006 edition of the Terrastryder, Dunham has corrected the seam failure problem of its predecessor. The new boot merits high marks, except for one annoying carryover problem.

Introduction

The popular Dunham Terrastryder has been revised for 2006, with some significant improvements over the original. I liked the fit, comfort, and traction of the original Terrastryder, but its numerous seams were its nemesis. In only 6 months of (hard) use, I blew out a total of 15 seams, which increased their breathability quite a bit, but limited their longevity! Dunham corrected that problem in the new Terrastryder II, and added some other nice features.

What’s Good

  • Lightweight
  • Nicely designed, a big improvement over the original Terrastryder
  • Comfortable out of the box
  • Waffle Stomper tread provides excellent traction
  • Excellent support and stability
  • Available in extended sizes and widths

What’s Not so Good

  • Not waterproof as claimed
  • Dries slowly

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Dunham Bootmakers

  Year/Model

 2006 Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Mid

  Style

 Mid-height waterproof light hiking boot

  Weight

 Measured weight (men’s size 11.5 EEEE) 2 lb 14.7 oz/pair (1.32 kg), manufacturer specification 2 lb 10 oz/pair (1.19 kg) for men’s size 9.5

  Materials

 Upper is full grain leathers and synthetics

  Outsole

 Dunham exclusive Waffle Stomper tread, made by Vibram

  Features

 Dryworks waterproof/breathable membrane, Vibram® outsole with exclusive Waffle Stomper multi-directional lug tread, Vibram® Supertrek compound rubber outsole for enhanced grip on rocky surfaces, dual TPU plates sandwiched between the midsole and outsole for foot protection and torsional stability, compression molded EVA midsole, ABZORB® shock absorption system in the heel and forefoot, gusseted/fully padded tongue and collar, extended rubber toe bumper, extended sizes and widths

  MSRP

 $120 US

Performance

The popular Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder is redesigned for 2006, and available in low and mid heights. Although the original Terrastryder was comfortable right out of the box, fit well, and had good traction, its abundant exposed seams were its nemesis. Admittedly I was a little hard on them, but in only 6 months I wore them out, with a total of 15 seams coming apart on the two boots. The revised 2006 Terrastryder has far fewer exposed seams on the sides, which should correct the problem.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Mid Boot REVIEW - 1
The new 2006 Terrastryder Mid (bottom left) is substantially different from its predecessor (top left). The older Terrastryder had numerous exposed seams which often failed. In the new Terrastryder Mid (bottom left and right photo) Dunham has dramatically reduced the number of exposed seams. The new boot is also taller and adds some nice features.

As an aside, I strongly recommend that the first thing you do when you get a new pair of boots is coat all the outside stitching with McNett SeamGrip, which is a liquid urethane plastic. It really helps to protect the stitching and prolong the life of the boots.

The new Terrastryder mid is taller than its predecessor, nearly as tall as a full height boot, and consequently weighs a little more (5.9 ounces/pair more in my size). The materials used in the uppers are basically the same, consisting of thin leathers, synthetic fabrics, and plastics. The uppers cover my ankles and are comfortably padded throughout. An improved lacing system distributes pressure more evenly over the instep area.

The midsole consists of compression molded EVA foam and Thermo Plastic Urethane (TPU) plates in the rear and front for increased support and torsional stability. I like their balance of flexibility and support; they are plenty flexible for easy walking, yet provide good support and foot protection for rough trail and off-trail use.

The outsole is the familiar Waffle Stomper tread, made by Vibram exclusively for Dunham. It’s unchanged from the original Terrastryder. The tread is open and fairly shallow. I found that it gets good traction, cleans itself well, and wears well. The boots’ outsole will easily outlast the uppers.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Mid Boot REVIEW - 2
The new Terrastryder Mid has a proprietary Waffle Stomper outsole (top left) made by Vibram. The midsole (bottom left) provides excellent support and stability, yet is flexible for comfortable hiking. The Waffle Stomper compound and tread grips especially well (right).

The downside of these boots is they are simply not waterproof as claimed. Their proprietary Dryworks membrane is only water-resistant, meaning the boots stayed mostly dry inside when I briefly walked in water or wet vegetation. However, longer exposure resulted in water soaking through and getting my socks damp. The leakage never reached the point where my socks were sopping wet, rather it was a damp/cold feet situation.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Mid Boot REVIEW - 3
Simply put, the Dryworks waterproof/breathable membrane doesn’t work. Every time I walked in snow or water for some duration I had damp socks and cold feet.

Moreover, because of the membrane, the boots were slow to dry out, and I usually had to use a boot dryer at home to get them thoroughly dried out and ready to use again. When hiking in warmer weather, my socks tended to accumulate sweat from my feet, and it helped to pull them off and dry them out at midday, or put on dry socks.

Assessment

I used the new Terrastryder Mid for both desert and mountain hiking, on- and off-trail, and in cold and warm temperatures. Overall, I was very pleased with their design and appearance, fit and comfort, foot support and protection, and traction.

However, their Dryworks waterproof/breathable membrane is more of a detriment than an asset. The boots are simply not waterproof as claimed. Water readily soaks through the membrane, dampening socks, and the boots are slow to dry because of the membrane.

Nowadays, many hikers have a separate pair of waterproof/breathable shoes/boots for hiking in snow and wet conditions and another pair of more breathable or quick-drying shoes/boots for warm weather conditions. The prevailing opinion on Gore-Tex boots is they are waterproof as promised, as long as the membrane remains intact. And boots with an eVENT membrane are emerging that are claimed to be waterproof and more breathable.

The upshot of all this is that an ineffective membrane is worse than no membrane at all. The Dunham Dryworks membrane is inferior technology, and needs to either be improved or replaced. I personally would prefer no membrane rather than the Dryworks membrane; it would make the boots more breathable and faster drying.

What’s Unique

Dunham boots are available in extended sizes and widths to fit most feet. For wide or narrow feet, Dunham boots are a good alternative to custom-made boots.

Recommendations for Improvement

I really like the improvements in the revised 2006 Terrastryder, which overcome previous seam failure problems and provides better fit and comfort. However the Dryworks membrane is a carryover technology that has become noticeably ineffectual compared to Gore-Tex XCR and eVENT membranes in competitors’ shoes. Replacing Dryworks with an eVENT membrane would be an exciting improvement.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra Boot REVIEW

The feature set of this new boot from Dunham suggests that it might be an ideal lightweight, insulated, waterproof boot for snowshoeing and snow hiking. That would be true, if it were not for one serious problem…

Introduction

When I spied the new 2006 Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra (can you say that with your finger on the tip of your tongue?), I thought: “Aha, here’s a lightweight waterproof insulated boot that would be perfect for snowshoeing and snow hiking.” There are lots of insulated pac-type boots and rubber lower section boots around, and they are certainly warm and waterproof, but they’re heavy. The Terrastryder Extra is constructed of leathers and synthetics, insulated with 400-gram Thinsulate Ultra, has Dunham’s Dryworks waterproof/breathable liner, and weigh a lot less. Could they be the ideal boot for hiking in snow and slop?

What’s Good

  • Lightweight
  • Insulated with 400-gram Thinsulate Ultra
  • Waffle Stomper tread provides excellent traction
  • Excellent support and stability
  • Available in extended sizes and widths

What’s Not so Good

  • Not waterproof as claimed
  • Dries slowly
  • Too many side seams make them vulnerable to seam failure

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Dunham Bootmakers

  Year/Model

 2006 Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra

  Style

 Mid-height insulated waterproof light hiking boot

  Weight

 Measured weight (men’s size 11.5 EEEE) 2 lb 13.1 oz/pair (1.28 kg), manufacturer specification 2 lb 2 oz/pr (0.96 kg) for size 7

  Materials

 Upper is full grain leathers and synthetics

  Outsole

 Dunham exclusive Waffle Stomper tread, made by Vibram

  Features

 Dryworks waterproof membrane, 400 gram Thinsulate Ultra insulation, Vibram® outsole with exclusive Waffle Stomper multi-directional lug tread, Vibram® Supertrek compound rubber outsole for enhanced grip on rocky surfaces, Dual TPU plates sandwiched between the midsole and outsole for foot protection and torsional stability, compression molded EVA midsole, Absorb shock absorption system in the heel and forefoot, gusseted/fully padded tongue and collar, extended rubber toe bumper, extended sizes and widths

  MSRP

 $130 US

Performance

The construction of the new Terrastryder Extra is identical to the old Terrastryder mid-height boot, with lots of different materials and loads of seams. On the old Terrastryder I found the numerous exposed seams were their nemesis – the stitching on the side seams readily abraded from creative bushwhacking, and I blew out a number of seams after just 6 months of use. However, the exposed seams may not be a problem on boots meant for cool weather hiking and active snow sports.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra Boot REVIEW - 1
The new Dunham Terrastryder Extra (left and lower right) insulated boot has the same construction as the old Terrastryder hiking boot (upper right), i.e., many different materials and lots of seams. The numerous seams couldn’t handle the abrasion of off-trail bushwhacking, and I wore them out in 6 months. Note: the redesigned 2006 Terrastryder hiking boot (reviewed separately) overcomes the seam failure problem.

Dunham boots come in extended sizes and widths, fit well, and are very comfortable right out of the box. I found that the insulated Terrastryder Extra fits and feels basically the same as its uninsulated counterpart. The main difference is the addition of a layer of 400-gram Thinsulate Ultra insulation.

Thinsulate Ultra is a 3M product specifically developed for footwear. It is claimed to be compression-resistant, lightweight, durable, hydrophobic, and more insulative than foam or felt. It’s intended for cold weather sports at moderate activity levels.

I wore the Terrastryder Extra while snowshoeing, igloo building, and snow hiking, and found the insulation level to be about right for those types of activities in cool and cold weather. It’s a good idea to get fitted in these boots wearing heavy wool socks, or perhaps two pair of socks, for extra warmth and to absorb foot perspiration. It’s also helpful to use an insulating insole to reduce conductive heat loss. However, even with heavy socks, this is not an appropriate boot for low activity use or winter camping in really cold weather; there are better insulated boots for that purpose.

As far as weight, the Terrastryder Extra at 2 pounds 2 ounces per pair (manufacturer specification) is half the weight of a pac-boot, and a little less than comparable leather/fabric insulated boots.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra Boot REVIEW - 2
The Dunham Terrastryder Extra insulated boot has the same Waffle Stomper tread by Vibram (top left) as the Terrastryder hiking boot. The midsole (bottom left) provides stability and support yet is flexible for comfortable walking. The Waffle Stomper compound and tread provide excellent traction on a variety of surfaces, and cleans itself out well.

A critical factor with using a leather/fabric boot in snow and slop is its ability to stay dry inside. Since there is no rubber lower section, these boots are dependent on their waterproof/breathable liner to keep water out. The Terrastryder Extra has Dunham’s proprietary Dryworks® moisture management membrane system that is claimed to “provide waterproof protection and breathable comfort in the wettest conditions.” I wish I could report that the Dryworks system performs as claimed, but I can’t. Rather, I found that the boots consistently wetted through while hiking in wet snow and slop, and that’s with gaiters over the uppers to prevent any snow from entering through the top.

Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra Boot REVIEW - 3
Waterproof nada! The Terrastryder Extra’s Dryworks waterproof/breathable membrane consistently wetted through, giving me damp/cold feet.

I had little leakage in dry snow, rather the leakage issue was most prevalent in wet snow or slop, or any real wet hiking condition. It typically required an hour or so for the boots to wet through to where I could feel dampness inside, which basically meant chilly feet. The boots only leaked to the point where my socks were damp, they never reached a condition where my socks were sopping wet. In addition, the boots dried out slowly if I left them on the garage floor in 50 °F temperatures. I found it necessary to remove the insoles and put them on a boot drier overnight in order to really get them dried out.

Assessment

While the attributes of the Dunham Terrastryder Extra would seem to add up to a lightweight, insulated, waterproof boot that is well suited for snow hiking and other snow sports – there is one serious problem that torpedoes them – the boots are simply not waterproof as claimed. They consistently gave me damp and chilly feet, and were slow to dry out unless I used a boot dryer. Bummer!

What’s Unique

Dunham (and New Balance) boots are available in extended sizes and widths to fit most feet. For wide or narrow feet, Dunham boots are a good alternative to custom-made boots.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Dunham Waffle Stomper Terrastryder Extra boot is loaded with desirable features to provide cool/cold weather hiking comfort. However, there are a couple of issues that clearly need to be addressed.

  • Upgrade or replace the Dryworks waterproof moisture management system so it is an effective waterproof/breathable system. The present technology is water-resistant, but not waterproof.
  • Reduce the number of seams. Construct the lower boot of a lightweight/ waterproof Hypalon-like fabric, using welded seams.

Comparative Fuel Efficiency and Carry Weight for Six Lightweight Backpacking Cooking Systems: Part II
Calculating Fuel Usage, Carry Weight Analysis, and Cost/Efficiency Considerations

White Gas, remote canister, top mount canister, integrated canister, alcohol, and fuel tab stove systems – when factoring in fuel carried, trip length, and conditions – which system is the lightest?

You don’t have access to view this content.

Outdoor Research Flex-Tex Gaiters SPOTLITE REVIEW

Lightweight, durable, breathable, water-resistant, and stretch to fit a variety of footwear – but we had a couple of problems with the snaps and sizing.

Overview

The OR Flex-Tex Gaiters are made of a stretch Cordura nylon fabric that is abrasion-resistant, wind-resistant, breathable, and water-repellent. We especially liked their stretchiness which allowed them to cover the tops of a wide variety of shoes and boots. They are definitely one of the most versatile and durable lightweight gaiters around, but we did have a couple of issues with them, which we will cover later in the review.

The Flex-Tex Gaiters have a Velcro and snap closure on the front, plus an underfoot nylon cord and lace hook. Once you adjust the underfoot cord to length, the gaiters are basically a step-in – simply position the underfoot cord in front of the heel, attach the Velcro and snaps, and anchor the front of the gaiter on a shoelace near the front of your boot.

For warmer weather trail hiking, we wore them over trail running shoes on-trail and over mid-height boots off-trail, and found them to be lightweight, breathable, and very durable. We had no problem wearing them all day in warmer weather, and found them to be tough enough for bushwhacking.

At 3.2 ounces/pair for size S/M and 3.8 ounces for size L/XL (measured weight), the Flex-Tex gaiters are lightweight. However, they are not as light as Montbell’s stretch gaiters at 1.5 ounces/pair or Simblissity’s stretchy LevaGaiter at 1.8 ounces/pair. The primary advantages of the OR Flex-Tex gaiters are their front closure, extremely stretchy fabric, and durability.

We had two issues with the Flex-Tex gaiters:

  • The two metal snaps on the front of each gaiter were very tight and difficult to snap and unsnap. On one gaiter, both snaps broke as a result of being too tight. The snaps are overkill and we recommend eliminating them to save a little weight.
  • The Flex-Tex Gaiters fit best over taller boots and insulated boots, but fit loosely over trail runners. We found this to be true for both sizes we tested. An intermediate size is missing. We recommend adding a third size and making the fit range for each a little narrower to get a better fit, especially for trail runners.

Outdoor Research Flex-Tex Gaiters SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
The Outdoor Research Flex-Tex Gaiters have a front Velcro closure with two snaps (left). The snaps were very tight, and we ended up breaking both on the gaiter pictured. Although the Flex-Tex Gaiters fit taller boots very well, they fit loosely over trail runners (right). We found we could use the gaiter without the underfoot cord on taller boots, but it was necessary on trail runners to hold them down.

Winter Use

We used the Flex-Tex Gaiters on a variety of footwear for cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, and snow hiking, and found them to be very versatile. For active snow hiking or snowshoeing, the gaiters covered the tops of lightweight low-cut Gore-Tex XCR shoes, but fit loosely. The same size gaiters fit well over taller insulated boots and pack-type boots, stretching to fit the latter.

For hiking in slop (very wet snow and mud), the Flex-Tex gaiters in combination with a mid-height waterproof hiking boot and wool sock worked very well. We found that we could use the gaiters without the underfoot cords to avoid ice and frozen mud buildup on the cords. With low-cut waterproof shoes, the gaiters fit loosely and it was necessary to tighten the underfoot cords to hold the gaiters down.

For traveling in deep snow and snow camping, we found that the Flex-Tex gaiters adequately kept the snow out of our boots and added a degree of warmth, but they are not in the same league as taller gaiters which do the job much better and add a degree of warmth.

The stretch Cordura fabric has a DWR treatment to make them water-resistant. In all of our snow travels we did not have any problems at all with the gaiters absorbing water, or water soaking through the gaiters and dampening our socks.

Specifications and Features

  • Manufacturer: Outdoor Research (www.orgear.com)
  • Product: Flex-Tex Gaiter
  • Sizes Available: S/M fits 5-9, L/XL fits 8-12
  • Height: Size S/M is 8 in (20 cm) high, size L/XL is 9.5 in (24 cm) high
  • Fabric: Stretch Cordura nylon with DWR
  • Features: Fabric stretches to fit a variety of footwear, front Velcro and snap closure, replaceable nylon underfoot cord
  • Weight: Measured weight size S/M 3.2 oz/pair (91 g), size L/XL 3.8 oz/pair (108 g); manufacturer specification size L/XL 4.2 oz (118 g)
  • MSRP: $29

Tarptent Rainbow Tent REVIEW

This radically different Tarptent is destined for greatness, but needs a few refinements here and there.

Introduction

In a radical departure from traditional Tarptents, Henry Shires introduced the Tarptent Rainbow in early 2006. Instead of headroom only at the entry, the Rainbow is all headroom, and it has a side entry with vestibule. At 32.6 ounces with the optional extended floor, it’s luxury for one person, or one person and a pooch, and it’s do-able for two smaller people. There’s nothing “tarp” about this “tent”! It advances the single-wall tent with features and user-friendliness rivaling a double-wall tent. Is the Rainbow the lightweight backpacker’s dream come true?

Tarptent Rainbow Tent REVIEW - 1
The Rainbow is radically different from previous Tarptents and sets a new standard for single-wall tents.

What’s Good

  • Lightweight 1+ person shelter
  • Loads of headroom and usable space
  • Vestibule entry
  • Quick setup
  • Easy entry/exit
  • Good ventilation

What’s Not So Good

  • Very difficult to insert pole ends into grommets
  • Velcro attachment for trekking poles gets tangled
  • Needs mid height guylines for wind stability
  • Hood over high vent gets distorted

Specifications

   Mfr/ Year/Model Tarptent 2006 Rainbow (tested with optional extended floor)
  Style 1+ person single-wall tent (free standing with trekking poles at ends)
  Fabrics 1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2) silnylon, grosgrain tie out loops
  Pole Material Easton 7075 E9 aircraft grade aluminum
  Weight Full Package
(As supplied by manufacturer with all included items)		 Measured weight of shelter with optional floor 32.6 oz (924 g), manufacturer’s specification 30 oz (850 g); manufacturer specified weight without floor 25 oz (709 g)
  Weight Manufacturer Minimum
(Includes minimum number of items needed to erect tent)		 Measured weight of shelter with optional floor, but without stuff sacks is 31.9 oz (904 g)
  Weight Backpacking Light Minimum
(Same as Manufacturer Minimum but with 0.25 oz (7 g) titanium stakes and 0.004 oz/ft (0.37 g/m) Spectra guylines)		 Measured weight 31.1 oz (882 g) for shelter with optional floor, no stuff sacks, and with titanium stakes and Spectra guylines
  Floor Area 23 ft2 (2.14 m2); entry vestibule is 6 ft2 (0.56 m2)
  Floor Area/Backpacking Light Minimum Weight Ratio 0.74 ft2/oz
  Dimensions Length 88-96 in (223-244 cm), width is 38-44 in (96-117 cm), height is 43 in (110 cm). Length and width are with bathtub sides up or down.
  MSRP $185 without floor, $215 with sewn-in floor

Performance

The Rainbow is a 1+ person single-wall monopole tent that is free-standing if you attach a trekking pole to each end. It has 23 square feet of floor area, which is identical to the Tarptent Virga 2. The tent feels larger because of its headroom and steep walls which make all of the interior space usable. It also has a 6 square foot entry vestibule that provides additional sheltered space.

Tarptent Rainbow Tent REVIEW - 2
Several views of the Tarptent Rainbow: front with vestibule closed (top left), back showing the mesh vent and hood (top right), end (bottom left), and top (bottom right) showing the ridge pole and 18-inch aluminum strut that expands the tent.

The Rainbow’s single pole design reminds me of the MontBell Hexagon. However, the concept is executed much better in the Rainbow by adding a perpendicular 18-inch aluminum strut at the top (identical to the strut in the front of the Virga 2) to extend the sides so they don’t drape inward, and making the main pole almost vertical near the ends (see photos). The result is headroom and usable space galore.

Unlike the Hexagon’s funky end entry, the Rainbow has a convenient side entry through a split side “beak” or vestibule. Behind the vestibule is a vertical mesh entry wall with a large two-way zippered door. With the tent’s height and large door, the Rainbow is very easy to enter and exit.

I tested the Rainbow with the optional extended floor (5 ounces, $30), which is the most popular version of this tent. A floorless model is available that weighs 25 ounces (manufacturer specification), however a piece of Tyvek cut to fit the floor area weighs more than 5 ounces, so why bother? The optional sewn-in floor has 4-inch bathtub sides for splash protection; you can unclip the sides and lay them flat for more floor space in fair weather

Tarptent Rainbow Tent REVIEW - 3
The Rainbow has a vestibule entry (top left) and mesh entry wall with a large zippered door. Inside (top right) there’s loads of room for one person plus gear. Note the floor’s bathtub walls and the silicone stripes I painted on the silnylon floor to eliminate sliding. The top vent on the back wall (bottom left) has a mesh screen, and can be used to stow small items. At the head end (bottom right) there are two small mesh pockets for storage.

The Rainbow is just as quick to set up as the traditional Tarptents; simply insert the ridge pole (I usually leave the strut in its sleeve), stake the four corners, then stake the front and rear guylines. Two minutes max, just like the other Tarptents.

In my dry climate, I had a problem with the silnylon tent body shrinking, making it very difficult to attach the ridge pole to the grommets. I fixed the problem by shortening the pole by 1 inch. A better fix for this problem would be adding a second grommet to one end for use under dry conditions.

There is a tangle of Velcro on each end of the Rainbow to allow the attachment of trekking poles, giving the Rainbow a “free-standing” pitching option. That’s nice, but to ensure wind stability, I would want to stake the four corners of the tent anyway, so in my opinion the free standing option is not very functional. I opted to remove the Velcro tangle to save a little weight and simply stake the corners. It’s much easier than attaching trekking poles.

Tarptent Rainbow Tent REVIEW - 4
The Rainbow can be free standing if you attach a trekking pole to each end (top photo). The tension strap (bottom left) has a grommet on each end to insert the ends of the ridge pole. Due to fabric shrinkage when the tent is dry, I really had to struggle to get the tent pole tip into the grommet. A second grommet on one end would be really helpful. Velcro strips on the tension strap are used to attach the trekking poles. The stiffened brim on the high vent (bottom right) easily gets distorted and doesn’t straighten out. This was the best I could do.

Another change with the Rainbow is the use of 5.5-inch Easton 7075 E9 aluminum alloy stakes instead of the traditional 6-inch titanium stakes. The Easton stakes are actually lighter than the titanium stakes, 0.355 ounce each compared to 0.395 ounce for the titanium. The Easton stakes are a little harder to push into the ground, but you can pound on them with a rock.

Tarptent Rainbow Tent REVIEW - 5
Tarptent has switched to Easton aluminum alloy stakes (left) which are actually lighter and stronger than the titanium stakes previously supplied. The top of the Rainbow (right) has an 18-inch aluminum strut to widen the tent. The strut is removable to facilitate stuffing the tent, or you can leave it in and roll the tent.

In the field, the Rainbow is truly a lightweight backpacker’s dream. It requires very little space and is very fast to set up. It has luxurious room inside for one person, and is minimally large enough for two people. My wife and I slept in it on several trips, and found it quite workable, especially in fair weather.

The Rainbow sheds rain with aplomb in typical Tarptent style. The canopy extends out beyond the bathtub floor, and you want to make sure the netting around the edges is pulled inward so it doesn’t channel water inside. Condensation issues are typical for a single wall tent, especially in rainy weather or any conditions where it cools down below the dew point at night. In the Rainbow, the high vent on the back wall reduces the condensation issue somewhat when there is some air circulation, but it’s little help on a cool, calm night. There’s also more headroom, so you are less likely to brush against the wet tent walls while moving around in the tent. A pack towel works great to wipe down the inside walls, and it’s easy to do in the Rainbow.

In wind, the Rainbow is a little more of a billboard compared to a traditional Tarptent. It held up well to moderate 20-25 mph winds, with some flapping and rocking. I would like to see at least two additional half height guyline loops added to the Rainbow for extra anchoring.

Assessment

The Tarptent Rainbow is about the same weight and floor area as the Tarptent Virga 2, but there is a profound difference between the two tents. Having tested the Virga 2, I can easily say that I prefer the Rainbow. It has much more usable space and headroom, and overall is a more user-friendly Tarptent. It provides most of the ease of use features of a double wall tent at a much lighter weight, albeit without the condensation resistance. With a few tweaks to certain details, the Tarptent Rainbow is destined to become one of the best single-wall tents available.

The Rainbow is not the lightest 1+ person single-wall tent around. Compared to the 23 ounce Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo with 27.5 square feet of floor space and 10 square foot vestibule, the Rainbow has 4.5 square feet less floor space, but its space is more usable because of its steeper walls. The main reason for the weight difference is the Lunar Solo uses a trekking pole for support (which is not included in the tent weight) while the Rainbow uses a collapsible ridge pole (which is included in the tent weight).

What’s Unique

The Rainbow is a monopole design with a top strut to provide loads of interior headroom and usable floor space.

Recommendations for Improvement

While the Tarptent Rainbow introduces some major improvements in single wall tent design, and advances the user friendliness of the single wall tent, there are a few details that could be refined.

  • Because the ridge pole and sleeve are so long, a small amount of fabric shrinkage can result in the grommet connection being too tight. I recommend adding a second grommet to at least one ends of the tent’s tension strap to use when shrinkage occurs.
  • Although attaching trekking poles does gain a freestanding status for this tent, I don’t feel that the feature is really that functional compared to staking the corners. I suggest eliminating the Velcro pole attachment straps, which can easily become tangled.
  • The stiffening in the hood over the high vent easily becomes distorted and is difficult to re-shape, so some improvement is needed. A larger vent to provide better ventilation and views should also be considered.
  • To enable stability in serious winds, I suggest adding at least two more mid-height guyline loops.

Comparative Fuel Efficiency and Carry Weight for Six Lightweight Backpacking Cooking Systems: Part I
Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data

White Gas, remote canister, top mount canister, integrated canister, alcohol, and fuel tab stove systems – when factoring in fuel carried, trip length, and conditions – which system is the lightest?

Introduction

Have you ever pondered the question: If I chose the lightest stove in each category and used it as efficiently as I could, how would the cooking system carry weights compare for different usage levels and trip lengths? My inquisitive mind couldn’t resist the challenge, so I rounded up the lightest/most efficient white gas, remote canister, top mount canister, integrated canister, alcohol, and fuel tab stoves commercially available and pursued answers to the following questions:

  • What is the real carry weight of stove plus fuel for different cooking systems?
  • How do I calculate the amount of fuel I need for a trip?
  • How much does fuel efficiency make up for stove weight on a longer trip?
  • What is the comparative cost for stove plus fuel?
  • Considering the fuel cost, which cooking system is the most economical and weight efficient?

These are, of course, difficult questions. There are many variables involved, and the answers depend on the type of trip you are taking and its location. No matter. This project provides a lot of insights into the issues, and will increase your understanding of how the weight and efficiency of different cooking systems compare, how they affect the weight you carry on your back, and how they affect your wallet. In this article you will find information to help you choose the cooking system(s) that meets your needs, and dial in the amount of fuel that you actually need to take on your trips.

Cooking Systems Compared

What’s a KiteScreen?

The KiteScreen is a fabric windscreen that engineer and backpacker, Jim Wood, invented as a safe alternative to using an aluminum windscreen with a canister stove. It works! Read about it on Jim’s website (http://jwbasecamp.com/). In my companion articles on windscreen dynamics, I present some test results comparing the KiteScreen with conventional windscreens for different stoves.

In this section I describe the cooking systems I chose for comparison. Their weights are summarized in Table 1 below.

Fuel Containers

For comparison, the weight of each cooking system needs to include a fuel container. Three bottle sizes are available for a white gas stove – the “11-ounce bottle” has a fill capacity of 10 fluid ounces, the “22-ounce bottle” holds 20 fluid ounces, and the “33-ounce bottle” holds 30 fluid ounces. Fuel canisters for canister stoves generally come in 4-ounce and 8-ounce sizes, although there is some variation among different brands of fuel. For comparability, I included the empty weight of the fuel canisters as part of the cooking system. In the alcohol cooking system, I listed the 375 milliliter Platypus Little Nipper and 0.5 liter and 1 liter Platypus flasks, all with a red dispenser cap. The fuel tab stove does not have a fuel container, other than the packaging for the individual fuel tabs, which can be left at home and the fuel tabs carried in a plastic bag.

Windscreens

I experimented a lot to find the “perfect windscreen” for each stove, which of course doesn’t exist. In the process I managed to fry a top mount canister stove by using a tight windscreen with it, and I discovered the KiteScreen invented by Jim Wood (http://jwbasecamp.com/Articles/KiteScreen/index.html). Read more about what I learned about windscreens in my companion articles Stove Windscreen Dynamics and Design: Part I Wind Effects on Stove Performance and Part II Practical Applications for the Field. For this project I chose to use the manufacturers’ aluminum windscreen and heat reflector with the white gas and remote canister stoves, the KiteScreen for the top mount canister and integrated canister stoves, and a traditional tight aluminum windscreen and heat reflector for the alcohol and fuel tab stoves.

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 1
White Gas. At 8.7 ounces (burner + pump), the MSR SimmerLite is the lightest of the white gas stoves. The total weights in Table 1 include the MSR windscreen and heat reflector (2.3 ounces), and an MSR fuel bottle (three sizes available).

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 2
Remote Canister. A remote canister stove puts the fuel canister safely off to the side, so you can use any type of windscreen you want. I chose the MSR WindPro stove, which at 6.9 ounces (burner and fuel line) is the lightest available. I used the windscreen and heat reflector (2.3 ounces) that came with the stove, which are identical to the ones that come with the SimmerLite. The burner is also identical to the SimmerLite, but the fuel line has an attachment and valve for canister fuels. For comparability with other stoves, I included the weight of an empty fuel canister as part of the cooking system.

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 3
Top Mount Canister. The mini-canister stove is as simple and light as a canister stove gets. The canister itself serves as a base, and the burner attaches directly to the fitting on the canister. I chose to use the Coleman Exponent F1 Ultralight (2.7 ounces), which was the top performer in my canister stove tests (Performance Comparison Testing of Lightweight Canister Stoves: Controlled Data Evaluating Key Variables of Temperature, Wind, and Windscreen Use). For comparability with other stoves, I included the weight of an empty fuel canister as part of the cooking system. I used the KiteScreen (18 inches high x 60 inches long, 1.2 ounces) for wind protection and to avoid the problems and hazards with using a conventional aluminum windscreen.

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 4
Integrated Canister. The Jetboil Personal Cooking System is the only stove in this category right now, although the MSR integrated canister stove is on the way. The Jetboil is well-known for its superb fuel efficiency and wind resistance. The complete system weighs 14.9 ounces, which is a bit hefty. However, for comparability with the other systems (which do not include a cook pot and drinking cup), I deducted the weight of the pot and cup, which pared the weight of the Jetboil system down to 8.6 ounces. The cooking system weight does include the pot cozy and heat exchanger, which are essential parts of the Jetboil system that help account for its efficiency, and also includes the weight of an empty fuel canister. To further increase the Jetboil’s fuel efficiency I used the KiteScreen (1.2 ounces) for wind protection.

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 5
Alcohol. I chose Gossamer Gear’s Fire Fly stove (1.0 ounce for burner and pot stand) for this project because it is a good balance of stove size/weight, heating rate, and fuel efficiency. For wind protection I used a traditional close-fitting light aluminum windscreen and heat reflector (0.8 ounce) to maximize stove heating efficiency. The cooking system also includes the weight of a fuel bottle.

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 6
Fuel Tab. The lightest fuel tab stove available for purchase is the Esbit Wing Stove (1.3 ounces). I used it with the same windscreen and heat reflector used for the alcohol stove (0.8 ounce). I burned 0.5-ounce Esbit hexamine fuel tabs, which are individually packaged. A fuel tab stove has no fuel container as such, especially if you leave the packaging at home.

Table 1: Summary of Cooking System Components and Weights
Cooking System Fuel Container Capacity/Container Weight Empty (oz) Total Weight (oz) Cooking System Total Weight Includes:
White Gas 10 fl oz/ 3 14 Burner, empty fuel bottle, pump, windscreen, heat reflector
20 fl oz/ 5 16
30 fl oz/ 6.8 17.8
Remote Canister 4 oz/ 4.1 13.3 Burner, empty fuel canister, windscreen, heat reflector
8 oz / 4.6 13.8
Top mount Canister 4 oz/ 4.1 8.0 Burner, empty fuel canister, KiteScreen
8 oz/ 4.6 8.5
Integrated Canister 4 oz/ 4.1 13.9 Burner, cozy, heat exchanger, empty fuel canister, KiteScreen
8 oz/ 4.6 14.4
Alcohol 13 fl oz/ 0.6 2.4 Burner, pot stand, fuel flask, windscreen, heat reflector
17 fl oz/0 .8 2.6
34 fl oz/ 0.9 2.7
Fuel Tab 0.5 oz/ 0 2.1 Fuel holder/pot stand, windscreen, heat reflector
Note: Each total weight includes an empty fuel container. Three fuel bottle sizes are available for the white gas stove, with capacities of 10, 20, and 30 fluid ounces. Canister fuel container sizes are typically 4 and 8 ounces (113 or 225 grams), and that refers to the weight of the fuel inside. Alcohol containers included are the Platypus Little Nipper and 0.5 and 1-liter Platypus flasks.

Highlights

  • The white gas stove with fuel container was the heaviest of the lot, followed closely by the integrated canister stove and then the remote canister stove.
  • The top mount canister stove with fuel container was intermediate in weight.
  • The alcohol and fuel tab stoves were by far the lightest cooking systems.

Stove Testing Procedure and Results

I lab tested the stoves under a set of standard conditions to ensure that the data are comparable. In each test I measured the time and fuel consumption to boil 1 pint (0.47 L) of water. I subjected the stoves to the following test conditions:

Optimal Conditions – 70 °F air and water, calm

Cold – 40 °F air and water, calm

Wind – 70 °F air and water, 12 mph wind from a box fan

Part I - Assembling Comparable Cooking Systems and Test Data - 7
Stove testing setup shown with the KiteScreen protecting a top-mount canister stove (left). Measurement equipment included an analytical scale, signaling digital thermometer, stopwatch, wind meter, and box fan.

I used a 1.5 liter MSR titanium pot 6 inches in diameter for tests with the white gas, remote canister, and top mount canister stoves, the Jetboil cup for Jetboil stove tests, and a 0.85 liter MSR titanium pot for the alcohol and fuel tab stove tests.

Tests were conducted at 6,650 feet elevation, where the boiling temperature of water is 201 °F. Boiling was measured with a signaling digital thermometer at 197 °F with the temperature sensor placed in the same position each time. I used 197 °F for my boil tests so I did not have to contend with the Latent Heat of Vaporization, which takes additional time and energy to overcome, and adds complexity and potential for error. The pot and stove were cooled between test runs.

Fuel for the white gas stove was a fresh can of Coleman fuel. Canister fuel was MSR IsoPro. I used Kleen Strip S-L-X Denatured Alcohol for alcohol stove tests, and Esbit hexamine for the fuel tab stove. Boil time/fuel consumption test procedures are as follows:

  • I fueled each stove and recorded the weight of the fuel container plus fuel to the nearest 0.01 gram.
  • I started timing when the stove was lit. Priming time for the white gas stove was not included in the boil time.
  • I used a moderate flame (very subjective) for the white gas and canister stoves to conserve fuel.
  • When boiling (197 °F) was reached I immediately stopped the stove and reweighed the fuel container (or alcohol burner and remaining fuel, or remaining fuel tab). The difference between starting and ending weights was the fuel consumption.
  • I repeated each test at least two times until I obtained consistent boil times within 30 seconds under optimal conditions and within 1 minute under windy conditions.
Table 2: Cooking System Test Results
Cooking System Average Boil Time (minutes:seconds) Average Fuel Consumption (grams)
Calm Cold Wind Calm Cold Wind
White Gas 2:38 3:11 3:48 11.0 11.9 15.7
Remote Canister 3:28 6:17 4:01 7.6 7.2 11.9
Top Mount Canister 3:31 3:23 2:34 6.2 6.5 9.2
Integrated Canister 2:38 6:25 2:41 4.8 5.1 5.2
Alcohol 7:54 9:20 8:50 10.9 13.9 24.2
Fuel Tab 7:41 6:47 8:25 8.4 11.9 20.7
Note: Test results (boil time and fuel consumption) are for the stoves and windscreens pictured above. Note that there are a few inconsistencies because a moderate flame (which is subjective and hard to duplicate each time) was used for all of the white gas and canister stove tests.

Highlights

  • Under optimal conditions, boil times for the white gas and canister stoves were in the 2.5 to 3.5 minute range, while alcohol and fuel tab stoves were around 7.5 minutes.
  • Cold air and water extended boil times for most stoves, especially the remote canister stove and Jetboil stove.
  • Wind (with a windscreen) resulted in somewhat extended boil times for most stoves. For the alcohol and fuel tab stoves, the extra oxygen increased combustion, so the boil time is close to calm conditions but fuel consumption is greatly increased.
  • Fuel consumption of the white gas stove under optimal conditions was about the same as the alcohol stove. Priming of the white gas stove consumed about 0.1 ounce of fuel.
  • The integrated canister stove was the most fuel efficient of the canister stoves, followed by the top mount canister stove.
  • The alcohol and fuel tab stoves consumed much more fuel in windy conditions compared to the other stoves.
  • The white gas and fuel tab stoves had the same fuel consumption in cold conditions.
  • The integrated canister stove (Jetboil) with the KiteScreen was least affected by wind.
  • Despite the use of windscreens, turbulence within the aluminum windscreens (used on all but the integrated top-mount canister stoves) was a persistent problem, which resulted in reduced heating efficiency.

Extrapolating Cooking System Test Results to Field Conditions

Now that we have assembled cooking systems that are as comparable as possible, and lab tested them under controlled conditions to obtain comparable fuel consumption data, we are ready to tackle the challenging task of extrapolating the data to the field. In Part II of this article I will address the questions posed at the beginning of this article, and deal with some of the tricky issues of estimating fuel usage under field conditions and determining how much fuel efficiency compensates for cooking system weight. I even take a shot at estimating the stove plus fuel costs for the life span of the stoves.

Camera Selection Basics for the Lightweight Backpacker

Features for a lightweight backpacker to look for in a digital or film camera.

Introduction

Cameras For Lightweight Backpackers - 2
The author holding a Pentax WPi. The WPi is a rugged all-weather camera with a moderately fast 38-114mm (35mm equivalent) / F3.3-4.0 fully enclosed lens.

Weatherproof Grades (Japanese Industry Standard)

Grade 4 (usually called weatherproof) can handle water splashed from any direction and dust 1mm thick or greater.

Grade 8 (usually called waterproof) protects against continuous immersion, up to 30 minutes, in water up to 3 feet (1m), no ingress of dust.

Amazing! Having turned the last corner out of a dense forest, you are facing a magnificent little lake that is reflecting some glorious peaks on top of it. You are overwhelmed by the incredible beauty. Now it is time to relax, set up the tent and prepare dinner; it just does not get better than this!

As you smile to yourself, the desire to freeze the moment in time comes to mind. Pity, you do not have a camera. You have pondered getting one but they are either too heavy and too big or they don’t shoot quality pictures. Well, fortunately you are wrong. Maybe that was the case, but now there are several choices for the lightweight backpacker and even some for the ultralightweight backpacker.

When looking for a good camera, what items should you consider? To start with, the camera should be able to take pictures that will not only be of good quality in the standard size print of 4×6 inch, but also up to at least an 8×10 and worthy of a frame and wall space in your favorite location.

Another desirable requirement is some “weatherproofness,” better still, waterproofness. Battery types and their expected life should also be examined. I do not believe in absolute “best” in a camera; in the end, you will have to decide according to your particular preference.

I will divide the different options available into three categories:

  1. One-use (disposable) film cameras
  2. Compact film cameras
  3. Compact digital cameras

(Note: camera model names and numbers can vary wildly across the globe for identical models. Wherever possible we’ve included both US and overseas nomenclature.)

One-Use Cameras

Cameras For Lightweight Backpackers - 3
Disposable cameras are available from many camera manufacturers. FujiFilm’s QuickFlash is shown here.

Tip: There are also some “panorama” types available. Check the focal length in millimeters, the lower the number the better. Standard on a compact is 35mm, 28mm is wider, and 17mm is the widest of this type. (Note that the panorama effect is created by masking off parts of the top and bottom of a standard 35mm negative.)

One-use cameras are available from most film suppliers, Fuji/Kodak/Agfa, and generic brands. Look at the weatherproof type for an extended trip, or simple non-flash standard type for a day trip.

There are also “digital” one-use cameras that provide prints and a photo CD as part of the processing.

Pros: Inexpensive to buy and you are not out much money if you damage or break them. Also, very important to the lightweight backpacker, they are very light. 4.5 to 5.3 ounces (130 to 150g).

Cons: Image quality is only good enough for a standard size print; they have a fixed lens and no exposure or focus settings, so are generally restricted to fair weather use. If you think you’ll want more pictures than the camera holds, you’ll have to bring a second camera, limiting the weight and bulk advantages.

Compact Film Cameras

With the advent of digital cameras the range of available film cameras has been reduced dramatically. But the good news is that they have also gone down in price and there are some real winners left. Star performers are the Olympus Stylus/MjuII, the Kyocera (Yashica) T4 and the Canon A1. Some of these cameras will be hard to find.

Pros: Very affordable, choice of high performance, low light lens (Olympus Stylus Epic) or mini zoom, auto focus and auto exposure for sharp and well-exposed negatives or slides. Generally they have good battery life.

Cons: You do not know what the results will be until the film has been developed and printed. Because of this, some shots will translate into wasted money and time and others will never be captured.

 

MODEL WEIGHT
oz (g)		 SIZE
mm		 BATTERY TYPE NUMBER OF SHOTS** LENS*** OTHER
Canon A1 11.29 (320) 133x88x53 CR123 240 32mm / F3.5 Waterproof/Grade 7*. Great for tough environment
Minolta Explorer EX / Riva 75 8.9 (255) 121x66x44 CR123 300 28-75mm Good wide to tele zoom
Nikon 100w 7.76 (220) 115x65x41 CR123 350 28-100mm Very light for a 3.5x zoom film camera
Olympus Mju II/Stylus in U.S. 5.29 (150) 108x59x37 CR123 280 35mm / F2.8 Weatherproof/Grade 4*, bright sharp lens
Pentax Espio 24EW 7.3 (215) 113x62x45 CR2 350 24-105 Widest wide angle available. Expect darker and softer edges
  *Refers to the Japanese Industry Standard (see the sidebar on Weatherproof Grades for more details).
 **A very approximate number for the number of shots the camera can take before its batteries are exhausted.
***The first value describes the lens focal length or range of focal lengths if it is a zoom lens. The second value is the lens’ maximum aperture represented by the F-Number.

Compact Digital Cameras

Here we have a huge range of choices, but the standards we are using of size, weight and weatherproofness reduce the choice to a much smaller number. A digital camera is a rather fragile piece of equipment. Water, condensation, dust, and sand are the enemies, so some sort of weather protection is very important for the typical outdoor user.

Tip: To save battery life on multi day hikes, avoid chimping. Chimping: The act of reviewing one’s pictures and emitting oh, oooh sounds.

Use power save mode.

Avoid consecutive flash shots, give the battery time to recover.

Turn off the sound effect mode. On my Pentax WPi I get at least another 50 shots by foregoing the shutter noise and various other amusing but power hungry sounds.

Cameras For Lightweight Backpackers - 4
The Ricoh GR-1 is a tough, fixed focal length – 28mm (35mm format equivalent), fast, weather resistant camera.

Another major consideration is the type and the capacity of the battery used. Digital cameras either use standard AA or AAA batteries or proprietary Lithium-Ion batteries. The former are easy to acquire anywhere and come in non-rechargeable (alkaline or lithium) and rechargeable (Nickel Metal Hydrate, NiMH). The latter are typically camera specific, rechargeable, higher capacity, and only available through specialty stores. The single greatest advantage cameras that use standard batteries have is that you can purchase replacements quite easily. However alkaline batteries – which are what you will most readily find – are fairly low capacity and will not yield as many photos. Recharging standard size batteries in the field may be easier too with the use of a solar charger, but this of course adds significant weight. Proprietary batteries are harder to recharge, cost more, but are typically considerably more powerful.

Many digital cameras will tout their water and weatherproofness. There are relatively few waterproof cameras that can actually tolerate immersion. For example, the Olympus Mju/Stylus is weatherproof (JIS Grade 4) which means it can tolerate splashed water and dust particles 1mm and larger. While the Pentax Optio Wpi, possessing a JIS grade 8 rating, can be submerged for up to 30 minutes in water up to a depth of 4.9 feet (1.5m). Another practical choice to improve the weatherproofness of your digital camera is a compact digital camera with a waterproof housing. There are two types of waterproof covers. A thin and relatively light (about 5.3 ounces/150 grams) waterproof case to about 9 feet (3m) or a heavier (around 9 ounces/250 grams) and larger housing waterproof to 100-130 feet(30-40m). The former is available for the Sony L1, T7, S60 and 90, also for the Olympus Verve/Mju Mini. The latter can be had for most of the models by the top brands.

Pros: Instant gratification, point/shoot and review, don’t like it? Delete and shoot again. Choice of functions and zoom range.

Cons: Startup cost (camera, spare battery, memory card).

Models

The following is a list of some of the latest digital still models. There are several hundred on the market. This list focuses on what I consider backpacker friendly cameras.

MODEL WEIGHT
oz (g)1		 SIZE
mm		 BATTERY TYPE NUMBER OF SHOTS2 LENS3 PIXELS
megapixels		 OTHER
Canon Powershot A520 8.5 (240) 91x64x38 AAx2 … 35-140mm 4 Great value for money
Casio EX-Z55 6.7 (190) 87x57x23 NP40 Li … 35-105mm 5 Great battery life, winner of the Camping Camera 2005 award
Fujifilm F10 6.7 (190) 92x58x27 Li-Ion 500 36-108mm 6 Long battery life. Best in low light. Largest CCD
Nikon Coolpix 5600 6.7 (190) 85x60x35 AAx2 … 34-102mm 5 Another one for the long trail
Olympus Stylus 720 SW 5.3 (150) 95x56x20 Li-Ion 37-114mm 7 Waterproof to 3m (9ft); Shock proof
Olympus Stylus Verve/Mju Mini 4.5 (130) 95x55x27mm li 30b … 35mm-70mm 4 Weatherproof /Grade 4*
Panasonic DMC FX01 5.5 (155) 94x51x24 Li-Ion 270 28-102mm 6 Widest angle+16:9 capture and playback. Great for that HD TV screen
Panasonic DMC FZ5 12.0 (340) 108x68x85 CGA S002E … 36-432mm 5 Very small for a 12xzoom. Close to SLR performance. Includes optical stabilizer
Panasonic DMC LZ2 8.11 (230) 101x64x33 AAx2 200 37-222mm 5 Compact for a 6x zoom with optical stabilizer (anti-shake)
Pentax Optio WPi 4.8 (135) 102x51x22 DL18 … 38-114mm 6 Waterproof/Grade 8*, Silicon skin now available for a better grip
Ricoh GR Digital 7.1 (205) 107x25x58 Li-Ion … 28mm fixed 8 Solid construction, high quality wide lens, low noise
Ricoh R2/Rollei Dr5 7.1 (200) 100x55x25 Li10 / AA 400 with Li10 28mm-135mm 5 Wide angle lens/ can use 2x AA Batteries
Sony DSC L1 4.94 (140) 95x44x25 Li NPFT1 240 32-96mm 4 Small and light, with an extra battery you could do a multi week walk
Sony S90 9.2 (260) 108x52x26mm AAx2 400 39-117mm 5 Heavy, but great colors and long battery life with 4x spare AA Li you can do all of the AT
*Refers to the Japanese Industry Standard (see the sidebar on weatherproof grades for more details).
1Weight does not include battery and memory card. Save weight with AA batteries by using the lithium type.
2Number of shots is according to CIPA standards.
3Lens size is presented as its 35mm equivalent, e.g., a 50mm focal length is standard, a 25mm would be twice as wide and a 100mm twice as long (the subject would appear twice as far or twice as close).

Cameras For Lightweight Backpackers - 5
Olympus continues to improve the Stylus camera line with the waterproof (to 9 feet / 3 meters) 720SW.

Most of the above models are available as 3 or 4 megapixel (mp) or 4 and 5mp versions. With some, the higher mp version has a larger screen or better battery performance.

Digital cameras have a very short product lifecycle and are replaced quickly. The above list is only a guide highlighting some of the best of each type, see the “other” column for the reason.

The Pentax WP has been replaced by the WPi, same camera but with a 6MP sensor from the current 5mp,

The Olympus Verve is now the Verve S, from 4 to 5MP, also see the Stylus 800, which is a bit bigger and heavier but 8MP.

Battery Performance

Digital Cameras – what is mAh? mAh stands for MilliAmp hour. This is a capacity rating telling you how much power a particular battery has. A higher mAh means the battery should hold a charge longer, which means that you can take more photos before recharging. When using multiple batteries in a camera, make sure that their mAh values match.

Tips: Different camera brands and models have different power drain, so do not assume that the 800 mAh battery inside model X will last longer than the 600 mAh powering model Y. As an example, the same battery will deliver about twice the number of pictures when used with the Olympus Verve S compared to the Verve.

Sony, Casio and Ricoh have put a lot of effort into delivering more shots per charge. There is a standard established by the Japanese Industry Standard Association to guide us with the expected performance with each model. The test sequence is as follows: power up the camera, zoom out, take a shot with flash, zoom back, take another shot without flash, and switch off. Because of different habits and temperatures, in practice what you get will vary from this, or any other standard.

Generally speaking, for better performance avoid powering up the camera too often; better to keep it on for a couple of minutes than to switch it on and off. If you can, use the viewfinder and not the LCD screen and use the “power save” mode. Limit unnecessary zooming and flash use.

Battery Types Compared

Disposable Pros Cons
AA and AAA
Cheap, easily available The disposable types are not exactly a “green” solution”, bulky compared to many proprietary rechargeable batteries.
Alkaline Cheap One use and low power
Lithium Very light (about 2 ounces / 60 grams for four) About three times the power of the alkaline battery and has a very long shelf life, up to 10 years. More expensive, harder to find.
Lithium cells such as CR123, CRV3, 2CR5 and CR2 power many film and some digital cameras.
Long life, light weight. Can be difficult to find, expensive.
Rechargeable Pros Cons
Rechargeable batteries offer the obvious benefits of many reuses and always being able to leave home with a fully charged battery. Few film cameras and most digital cameras use rechargeable cells. On longer trips, backpackers face carrying expensive extra cells or some way to recharge them in the field.
Ni-Cad (Nickel-Cadmium) – Not usable with most compact digital cameras, avoid them.
Ni-MH (Nickel Metal Hydride) Reusable (up to 500 charges), available in capacities from 1200 mAh to 2500 mAh (the higher, the better) High self-discharge rate, about 10% after the first 24 hours and 25% per month after that, so not recommended for long trips. No “memory.”
Li-Ion (Lithium Ion) Small and light (some will give up to 500 shots per charge), have a relatively long life, have a self-discharge range of only about 5% overnight and 8% per month after that. No memory. Now available in AA and AAA size. Expensive and too many types (proprietary) makes them hard to find. Available from tiny 500 mAh to 1800 mAh – most cameras can only take one size.

Discontinued Cameras

There are a lot of very good but discontinued models out there. The shelf life of a digital still camera is now less than 1 year, keep in mind that newer is not always better. Here are some suggestions for some of the better discontinued models.

Film Camera
Contax T series
Minolta Riva
Olympus XA/XA2
Rollei 35T/S
Stylus/Mju
Yashica T
Digital Camera
Canon Ixus /Powershot S-SD (various models)
Olympus Mju/Stylus (various models)
Sony U30/40/60 (Only 2mp but tiny. The 60 is waterproof. Great for 6 by 4 prints.)

For more details check these two excellent sites http://www.dpreview.com and http://www.steves-digicams.com.

Tip: the lens size and coating is always a good indication of the quality of the results. A small mono-coated (bluish tinge) lens spells cheap.

As stated at the beginning of this article, there is no single best camera; you have to choose according to your own preferences. The brand is only important for after sales service, no single brand makes only good cameras, however there are a lot of No Brands that are sold on the Internet and in some shops that are best avoided. Do not buy by comparing numbers, I can show you better pictures from a 2MP than from some so called 10MP. The price is an indication, the look and feel of the item is another way to tell the quality. I very rarely see a cheap looking camera that takes sharp pictures.

None of the cameras that I have highlighted should disappoint; however, I suggest you handle and compare them before you buy. I started selling cameras when the Kodak 110 was the people’s choice and as bad as they were, they did give a lot of joy and preserved memories for most.

Now, go and buy a camera, return to that fantasy lake and freeze that magic moment. Happy shooting!

About the Author

Cameras For Lightweight Backpackers - 1
The author at Waterfall Valley in Tasmania. The Bennett’s wallaby (Macropus Rufogriseus) is wild and common at this campsite.

Franco Darioli was born in 1955 in the Italian Alps. He did some hiking up to the age of 18 in elevations from 2500 to 7000 feet. He has worked in London, then New Zealand and Sydney, Australia. Since 1980, he has been living in Melbourne. He is the still digital and video buyer for a busy photographic shop and a regular contributor to the photographic section of the largest Melbourne newspaper. He has recently started hiking again and is gradually changing to lightweight gear, (e.g., from a Bibler Pinon to a Black Diamond Lighthouse to the TarpTent Rainbow and soon the TarpTent Squall Classic).

Headsweats Race Hat SPOTLITE REVIEW

Way cool hiking hat that really manages the moisture and stays put, but snags fairly easily.

Overview

The Headsweats Race Hat is a baseball cap style lid constructed of Coolmax fabric for rapid moisture dispersion. It features Coolmax wicking fabric in the main cap, Coolmax terrycloth sweatband, large stiff bill with black underside for face protection and glare reduction, an easy to adjust cinch strap on the back, and Invista sun protection.

Headsweats hats are marketed to adventure racers and runners, who really need high performance clothing to stay dry and comfortable. That’s especially true for the head area, which puts out a lot of heat and moisture during an endurance race.

I used the Race Hat for backpacking, which doesn’t come close to adventure racing, but it does get pretty darn hot and sweaty on a 3,000 foot climb carrying a pack in the hot sun. Over a two-month period, I wore it on weekly backpacks in a wide variety of conditions.

The outcome – the Headsweats Race Hat really works! In normal trail hiking, the Race Hat soaked up sweat and dispersed it without having to wear a bandana under it. However, I did wear a bandana under it on some really hot bushwhacks up steep slopes, so there are limits to its wicking ability. With its cinch strap adjustment on the back it was very easy to put on a bandana then slip the Race Hat over it and snug it.

Headsweats Race Hat SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
The Coolmax fabric is textured on the outside (left) to increase its surface area for moisture dispersion. The Race Hat (right), has a 1.5-inch wide Coolmax terrycloth sweatband, a cinch strap on the back, and black underbrim to reduce glare.

Everyone has a different hiking hat preference, and I personally prefer a baseball cap style because it’s cooler. I have tried hats with an integrated sun cape, and they’re simply too hot unless there is a good breeze. That said, the downside of wearing a baseball cap is I get a lot of sun exposure and have to really slather up with sunscreen. One combination I often use is laying my bandana over my head and then putting the Race Hat over it, which provided good sun and wind protection when I really need it.

Headsweats Race Hat SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
Ok, this is a bit dorky, but wearing a bandana under the Race Hat works well for extra sun protection when you really need it. A lighter color would be cooler than the dark blue bandana I used here.

The cinch strap on the back of the Race Hat adjusts easily and really holds the hat on. When a wind came up, all I had to do was reach back and snug the hat to make it stay on. The hat even stayed on when I hitch-hiked a ride in the back of a pickup truck to get back to my car after six days on the Continental Divide Trail.

In a rain shower I could feel every drop wet the top of my head, so the Race Hat is not showerproof by any means. However, it works great under the hood of a rain jacket or poncho to ventilate my head and keep the hood from restricting my vision.

The Coolmax fabric is somewhat durable, but I still managed to get a few snags in it from bushwhacking through brush. So expect some damage if you wear it off-trail.

Specifications and Features

  • Manufacturer: Headsweats (http://www.headsweats.com/)
  • Product: Coolmax Race Hat
  • Fabric: Coolmax polyester body, Coolmax terrycloth sweatband
  • Sizes: One size fits most with rear cinch strap
  • Features: Coolmax fabric, 1.5-inch Coolmax sweatband, black underbrim
  • MSRP: $20