Articles (2020)

Nunatak Arc Alpinist

Nunatak Arc Alpinist


Ryan’s Nunatak Arc Alpinist, Grand Teton National Park, WY

Introduction

Nunatak Gear of Seattle, WA makes an innovative down sleeping bag called the Arc Alpinist. The “stock” model (6’0″ length, 10″ baffle spacing with 10 oz of 800+ fill down, 0.85 oz/yd2 shell and lining fabric) weighs a paltry 18 oz and has a manufacturer-claimed temperature rating of 20 deg F.

The Arc Alpinist is unconventional in design. While the bag has a mummy shape, it is manufactured more like a quilt. The bag has buckles and straps at the outer edges that transform it from a quilt into a nearly closed sleeping bag. Designed to be strapped underneath a sleeping pad, the Arc Alpinist’s straps and buckles when tightened seal the sleep system against any drafts when the bag is closed.

The Arc Alpinist fills a unique niche: to provide maximum comfort in a very wide temperature range for minimum weight. Do you know of any other 18 oz bag with its temperature rating or flexibility over a wide range of conditions?

Ryan likes to refer to the Arc Alpinist as a “variable-girth” sleeping bag. Unbuckled and draped over him like a quilt, his custom Arc Alpinist (with 6″ of loft, weight 21 oz) remains comfortable even on very warm nights (near 60 degrees). With its straps buckled and cinched tight (resulting in very little wiggle room), his Arc Alpinist is warm enough for a 15 degree night. By adjusting the straps and increasing the girth, Ryan can make himself comfortable in virtually any temperature between 15 deg F and 60. He can also increase the girth to accommodate extra layers, such as a down jacket and pants. In this configuration the Arc Alpinist is an ultralight winter sleeping system. Ryan has successfully used this approach to temperatures near zero degrees.

The Arc Alpinist has no hood, zippers, draft tubes, watch pockets, or other extraneous features that can add weight without significantly increasing performance for the summertime backpacker.

At $260 to $340+ (depending on size, fabric choices, and degree of customization), the Arc Alpinist is not cheap. But with well-selected custom options including both shell and lining fabrics (from among Pertex Microlight, EPIC, and 0.85 oz/yd2 nylon); specified loft or fill weight; and custom dimensions, it may be the ideal core to any ultralight backpacker’s sleep system.

The centerpiece of this review is an analytical discussion between Don Johnston and Ryan Jordan about the design and performance of the Arc Alpinist – in particular their experience with the custom bags they ordered in 2001. Collectively they have used these bags on more than 100 backcountry nights.

Product Design

Don: I wanted a sleeping system for summer use wherever I might go, including mountainous areas of the US, where temperatures can drop to freezing. I wanted the bag to weigh as little as possible for that level of warmth, something like a Rab Carrington Elite Top Bag, only better.

Ryan: I was looking for simplicity — a bag with an extremely wide comfort range that could, when combined with down or synthetic fill clothing as necessary, be used for both the zero-degree nights of a Montana winter and 50-degree nights on the Appalachian Trail.

Don: Like the Rab Elite, the Arc Alpinist is a “top bag” design. That is, there is no down on the bottom of the bag. Your sleeping pad serves as the bottom insulation. A closed foot box and a set of buckles and straps close the bag into a typical mummy configuration. When the straps are left unbuckled, you can drape the Arc Alpinist over you as a quilt. This bag/quilt feature is the core of the unique design that provides such a wide temperature range. In addition, with this bag/quilt, I have the freedom to sleep in any position I want (just like in a regular bed) within the limitation of the width of the sleeping pad and the foot pocket girth. For active sleepers like me, the straps can be secured underneath a sleeping pad, providing draft-free warmth with enough room to roll around, sleep in a fetal position, or just bring one knee up.

Ryan: I am convinced that remaining somewhat mobile through the night leads to a better nights’ sleep. Moving around promotes blood circulation that heals tired legs and prevents the cramping that is common after extremely long and exhausting days on the trail or on moutain climbs. The variable-girth system of the Arc Alpinist is the key for remaining mobile during the night.

Don: In warm weather I don’t use the straps. In colder weather I will strap the waist strap under the pad and use the neck adjustment as needed. For maximum warmth I will strap both straps, waist and upper back, under the pad, and I’ll cinch the neck. This configuration lets me roll around inside without being exposed to drafts.

Ryan: I had a third strap added to my bag. The third strap that I added near the neck keeps the bag in a more closed configuration and retains more warmth. The reason was simple: I don’t like to strap the sleeping bag under my foam pad, but I do like it strapped together. Because I tend to wear a lot of clothing to bed, I prefer to be able to control the degree of drafting that comes into the bag. Cinching the straps under my pad prevents this.

Don: I like the fact that that the Arc Alpinist is a hoodless bag. In warmer temperatures a hood is unnecessary, so why bring it? As temperatures fall, you can wear your balaclava or warm hat, something you already have as clothing anyway. If you want to push the bag to lower temperatures, you can switch to a down hood. This down hood would replace other warm headgear in waking hours and would serve as the hood for the sleeping bag. Excellent down hoods are available from Nunatak.

Ryan: I too had Nunatak make me a down hood. It’s made with an EPIC shell and Pertex Microlight lining, has a loft of 3″ and weighs 3.5 oz. I use the hood whenever I’m expecting average temperatures below freezing. The down hood seals drafts at the neck and is vital to pushing the Arc Alpinist comfortably down to temperatures less than 20 deg F. For most summer backpacking, where I don’t expect temperatures below 40 degrees, I find that my wool watch cap provides plenty of warmth.

Specifications:

  Don Ryan
Size I am 5’7″ 145 lb and I wear small or medium size men’s clothes. This bag is sized to fit me but other sizes are available and it can be ordered custom-sized to your needs. I too am 5’7″ but pushing 155 lbs. My typical clothing size is medium. My bag is custom sized (both length and girth). From my measurements, I suspect that it is about three inches shorter than the stock medium model.
Baffles My bag has a baffle height of 2.5 inches and a baffle width (spacing) of 5 inches. Nunatak’s standard version has a baffle spacing of 10 inches, but I suspect that a 5-inch spacing increases down control and prevents shifting. I also specified a 5″ baffle spacing. I suspect that this adds an ounce or so of weight. I specified a higher baffle height of 3.0 inches to accommodate the greater amount of down in my bag.
Fabric Since I was looking for minimum weight, I specified that 0.85 oz/yd2 fabric be used for both the shell and lining fabric. I prefer the shell fabric to be as breathable as possible to prevent condensation. Since I spend a lot of time in sub-freezing conditions, my shell fabric choice was Pertex Microlight (1.3 oz/yd2). My lining fabric is 0.85 oz/yd2.
Loft & Fill I specified the amount of down fill to be as much 800+ fill down as possible to bring the bag to a total of 18 oz. This end result was about 2.5 inches of loft. I specified my loft (3.0 inches) rather than fill weight. My bag ended up at 21 oz, 3 oz heavier than Don’s, due to more down, an extra cinch strap, and slightly heavier shell fabric. I also specified that Nunatak use a differential cut between the shell and lining fabrics. This maintains full loft at the sides when the bag was cinched. This was a custom request.

Use

Don: Operating the buckles and straps required a mental adjustment and a little practice. If I expect cold conditions, I will strap the waist strap under the sleeping pad before I get in and pass the other strap under the pad at the same time. If I need the upper strap I buckle it next and then clip a final buckle at the neck. When fully strapped to the pad I find it easiest to snap the buckle at the neck of the bag when on my stomach or by scrunching down in the bag and fastening the buckle with it held over my face then ducking under to get my head through. Once in and fastened down, I cinch the draw cord as needed. Alternatively, I can buckle everything and wiggle into the bag from the top and then cinch the neck.

Ryan: I don’t like wiggling around, so I prefer to buckle the straps after I get into the bag. Sometimes this requires a bit of convoluted movement, which was frustrating at first, but when I realized that it demanded enough effort to generate some heat, I actually began to look forward to the ordeal. Seriously though, you get used to it, and it becomes second nature. I can clip/unclip buckles and adjust straps without thinking whether I am on my back or stomach.

Three Season Performance:

Don: On a five-day trip in the Tetons in September, I was comfortable in a thin nylon shirt and silk weight boxers, even on the coldest night, when my thermometer read 36 deg F. Humidity in the Tetons is low. (At home in my back yard I felt much colder in the bag at the same temperature but at 100% humidity.) I slept comfortably in my Arc Alpinist on a winter weekend in Pine Grove Furnace State Park. Both nights had temperatures in the low 20s. Conditions were dry with no wind. I slept in my Nomad 2-4-2.

Ryan: My Arc Alpinist has about half an inch more loft than yours, Don. I would also agree that it’s comfortable (not just survivable!) in the mid-30s in only long underwear. With my normal 3-season clothing (which includes a light down or synthetic-fill jacket, thin wool top and bottom long underwear, a wind shirt, and rain shell jacket and pants), I am comfortable well into the 20s. However, to remain comfortable consistently after a difficult day of hiking on a 20 degree night (the claimed temperature rating of the stock bag, which has less loft), I would add a bit more insulation, such as a layer of Powerstretch fleece top and bottoms, or maybe just a pair of lightweight down or synthetic-fill pants. I have also experimented with down half bags (like Nunatak’s Akula) and ultralight liner bags (including the 14 oz Western Mountaineering LineLite) and have found that this combination can easily push the comfort rating of the Arc Alpinist to zero degrees or less.

Don: When temperatures are expected to be below 30 deg F, I carry more layers of clothing. With my other conventional sleeping bags, I could not gain much more warmth wearing additional clothing in my sleeping bag. The bags’ narrow girth compressed both the clothing’s loft and the bag’s. The only way around this was to use the bag as a quilt, which created a lot of drafts and defeated the attempt to get warmer.

The Arc Alpinist avoids these problems. The Arc Alpinist is spacious and as comfortable as a quilt in warmer weather. However, when the temperature drops, I can strap it to my sleeping pad. In this configuration it still has enough room to accommodate a lot of extra clothing. I’ve had the opportunity to use the Arc Alpinist in combination with my normal hiking clothing in temperatures near its claimed temperature rating of 20 deg F. In short, I’m comfortable with the Arc Alpinist without making changes to my normal clothing system.

Ryan: The beauty of the Arc Alpinist’s design is its flexibility. It can accommodate virtually any combination of clothing between utter nakedness and winter down clothing. Barring an expedition to Denali or Borneo, I cannot imagine a bag that can cover such a wide range of conditions in comfort.

Cold Weather Performance

Don: Last summer I used this bag for a number of warm nights around home, on some local weekend trips, and for five days on California’s Lost Coast trail. My bag arrived in the summer; so, lacking cold weather for testing, I did some testing in a walk-in freezer at work. This 20-degree-rated bag/quilt was never intended for the 0 deg F temperatures in this freezer, but finding temperatures cooler than the upper 50s around here (Maryland) in the summer was not an option. The freezer tested the bag well below its rating.

For this extreme cold I collected the clothes I would have along if backpacking in winter where temperatures might go this low. The Arc Alpinist has enough space inside to wear these extra layers of clothing without compressing the bag’s or the clothing’s loft. On my upper torso I wore my PHD Minimus down jacket and vest, a Patagonia Zephur jacket (which serves as a long underwear layer) and a button-down cotton shirt that I happened to be wearing to work. I wore my hiking shorts, Patagonia Zephur pants (long underwear layer), and my regular backpacking socks on my lower body. On my head I wore a pile balaclava pulled up to cover my lower face and nose to keep my nose from freezing, a Patagonia Pile Balaclava as well, and the hood from an old Patagonia Down jacket. I also wore Manzella thermostat dot gloves. I was comfortably warm at -4 to +4 during this test and dozed off but was watchful about my feet. They did not have enough insulation for the cold temperatures. My toes got cold after 2 hours. By then, I felt I had enough information to know I could sleep at 0 deg F if I had enough insulation for my feet.

Ryan: My coldest-weather experience differed a bit from yours, Don. I spent the night in a poorly-designed snow cave on a late January night in Montana’s Bridger Mountains. I slept on a full length Cascade Designs Deluxe Ridgerest pad, which was inside an Integral Designs Endurance Bivy Sack. The Arc Alpinist was not strapped to the pad, but its straps were cinched tight enough to provide little wiggle room but not so tight as to compress my clothing. I wore my Nunatak down hood over a Powerstretch balaclava as headgear, a GoLite Coal Parka over Smartwool long underwear on my torso, lightweight merino wool tights and Schoeller Dynamic pants on my legs, and down booties over wool socks on my feet. At the near-zero temperatures inside the snow cave, and with very wet clothing and inadequate insulation for my legs, I pretty much enjoyed the night on the fringe of hypothermia. My saving grace was a 3L Platypus Big Zip water bottle that I filled up with hot water at 3 am to get me through the rest of the night.

Had I brought with me my normal suite of winter clothing, which would have included a down jacket and pants, I would have been fine with such a light sleeping bag. In another cold- weather test a few weeks later, I was able to confirm that the Arc Alpinist was indeed comfortable with just such a clothing ensemble.

Summary

Don: Based on my experience so far this bag is extremely versatile. For three-season use it will be my only bag. At 18.4 oz that is amazing.

Ryan: Ditto. Other than my McHale Sub-POP pack, the Arc Alpinist is the only piece of gear that I cannot imagine parting with in the near future.

Recommendations for Improvement

Any changes to the design (e.g. smaller baffles, a differential cut, more down, etc.) can be specified (for a fee) by the customer. So if you want to make your own design changes, go ahead and let Nunatak know. This is the kind of service that you simply cannot get from a major manufacturer. The downside to this: there will be a waiting period. Nunatak is a busy company with a small workforce; so do not expect to receive your custom bag for several weeks (possibly months?) after placing your order.

Final Grade A

We do not think we could give “A” grades to the stock Arc Alpinist as specified on Nunatak’s web site, or we would not have had a need to order custom bags. However, the custom bags that Nunatak delivered to Don and Ryan certainly do rate an “A.” The product is a winner.

Nunatak Gear (Seattle, WA)
2716 39th Avenue SW
Seattle, WA 98116
1-866-NUNATAK (686-2825)
Manufacturer’s Website: www.nunatakusa.com

Ortovox BivvyPoncho Lite

Ortovox BivvyPoncho Lite


Manufacturer’s Website: www.ortovox.com/

Specifications

One Size

  • Powernet-Thermolight rip-stop fabric with silver PU-coating
  • Orange / Lilac / Aluminum
  • Total Bag Weight: 10.6 oz.
  • Shoulder Girth: 78″
  • Length: 75″
  • MSRP: $78

General Description

The German company Ortovox, well known for its search-and-rescue and avalanche safety equipment, has a product that just might raise eyebrows among lightweight US hikers: an 11-oz nylon poncho and bivy sack designed for emergency weather protection in exposed conditions. The BivvyPoncho is priced at around US $80.

The unique feature of the BivvyPoncho is that it is both raingear (in poncho mode) and an emergency shelter (in bivy mode). The BivvyPoncho has an excellent performance-to-weight ratio that provides nearly bombproof emergency raingear and shelter protection in the worst of conditions.

Construction

The BivvyPoncho is made from a lightweight synthetic ripstop material, trade name “Powernet-Thermolight.” This material has an aluminized inner surface for counteracting radiant heat loss. The construction is simple: two rectangular pieces of fabric approximately 40″ x 80″, sewn on the two sides and top, with openings for arms (to which are attached short “sleeves”) and neck (to which is attached a roomy hood). All openings, including the foot end, can be controlled with ultralight draw cords and toggles.

Function

To use the BivvyPoncho in poncho mode, slip it over you and stick your arms and head out the appropriate openings. You control the ventilation using the neck, arm, and foot drawcords. Ventilation control is important since the garment is made from a non-breathable, coated material. The poncho easily fits over a large backpack. Depending on your height, it may extend down below the knees. To shorten the poncho and keep it out of the mud, you can cinch the foot drawcord around your waist.

We found that using the BivvyPoncho as a poncho provided excellent weather protection, at the cost of some ventilation. Due to its more “closed” construction, the BivvyPoncho is not as well ventilated as a traditional poncho like the Integral Designs SilPoncho. It would be more than adequate for a short escape from a rainy deluge during a hike.

To use the BivvyPoncho in bivy mode, climb in, stick your head (and arms if desired) out the appropriate openings and control ventilation with the foot, neck, and arm drawcords. Small loops are sewn at all openings so that the openings can be tied to trees, bushes, rocks, a backpack, etc. for added ventilation. Because of the non-breathable fabric, we don’t advise you use the BivvyPoncho with a sleeping bag (especially a down one!) for several nights in a row. Condensation could quickly degrade the performance of your sleeping bag.

However, the BivvyPoncho is ideally suited for dry areas where it could be used as a ground cloth on most nights but as a temporary escape from the occasional midnight thunderstorm. The BivvyPoncho is long enough to accommodate comfortably someone up to about 5’10” tall.

We found that the real strength of the BivvyPoncho is in the day hiker’s equipment kit. Adventurous day hikers and climbers in mountainous areas often keep moving in wet conditions, and they prefer more breathable wind shells over waterproof raingear while moving fast. However, if conditions worsened and the hiker or climber needed a temporary refuge from a driving rain (either as a sit-and-wait shelter or as stay-moving-raingear), the BivvyPoncho fits the bill as well as any product on the market.

Finally, as emergency gear, it is well designed, using bright red fabric with “HELP” imprinted in large letters on one side of the poncho.

Overall Impression

The BivvyPoncho fills a unique niche — there is nothing like it on the market. For the day hiker wanting to carry emergency raingear and shelter into the mountains, the BivvyPoncho is hard to beat. The BivvyPoncho is extremely light and provides excellent protection from rain for both hiking and as a shelter.

For overnight backpacking, however, we still prefer the more versatile and better-ventilated poncho-tarp designs available from several manufacturers. Also, the bright colors and non-breathable fabric of the BivvyPoncho may prevent its widespread acceptance as either raingear and/or shelter for the typical lightweight backpacker.

GoLite Flash Sleeping Bag REVIEW

The Polarguard 3D-filled GoLite Flash Sleeping Bag takes a modular approach to sleep systems, with a removable top that can be used to adjust the temperature range of the bag: when it’s warm, simply zip it off and leave it home.


Manufacturer’s Website: www.golite.com

Specifications

Medium Size

  • Temperature Rating: +60 deg F Top / +40 deg F Bag / +20 deg F Combined
  • Recommended User Height: 5’6″ to 6′
  • Fill Material: Polarguard 3D
  • Component Weights: Top 14 oz / Bag 40 oz (15/43 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • Total Sleep System Weight: 54 oz (58 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • Shoulder Girth: 62″
  • Hip Girth: 58″
  • Foot Girth: 44″
  • Stuffed: 1200 cubic inches
  • MSRP: $236

General Description

The GoLite Flash is a synthetic-fill sleeping bag with an additional zip-on insulated top for colder weather. It has a full-length zipper and can be used in three modes:

  • With The top alone as a quilt;
  • As an ordinary sleeping bag;
  • With the sleeping bag and top zipped together to add extra warmth.

The GoLite Flash appears to be designed for those who are not zealous enough to use the company’s hoodless, bottomless, sleeping systems but who still want a lightweight synthetic sleeping bag.

Construction

Three shell materials are used:

  • Black Pertex for the inside of the main bag and the underside of the zip-on top quilt
  • Mini-double ripstop on the outer shell of the main bag
  • GoDri waterproof-breathable fabric on the outside of the zip-on top

The sewn-through seam-sealed top of the main bag is probably suitable only for protection from splashes or condensation, not a serious watering, although with synthetic insulation this is not as much of a problem as it is with down sleeping bags.

The insulation is Polarguard 3D which has the best reputation for durability amongst synthetic sleeping bag insulations. The bottom of the bag has a single layer of Polarguard 3D. The thin insulation on the bottom means that little loft is wasted by being crushed beneath the sleeper. This allows GoLite to put the rest of the insulation where it counts most, over the sleeper. The sleeping bag upper has two offset quilted layers. The zip-on top has a single layer of sewn-through Polarguard 3D. The seams on the top are quilted to coincide with those on the upper of the bag rather than in the preferable offset location.

The Flash appears to be well made with neat seams and tidy finishing.

Function

The bag is mummy-shaped with a fairly narrow foot and leg section but plenty of room around the chest area so that the user can wear extra clothes and still be quite mobile in the torso and arms. The floor is narrow so that the sides of the sleeper have thick insulation all the way to the ground. One nice feature of the zip-on top is that in really cold weather you can slide more clothing between the main sleeping bag and top quilt — something that you usually need a bivy sack to do.

The top could conceivably be used by itself as a quilt, but the piece is narrow — 36″ at the widest point. Unless the sleeper is very still, ties may be necessary to hold it to the sleeping mat. The sewn-through quilting means that there is no insulation at each seam in this configuration.

The hood has good loft and is generously sized. With the use of its single one-handed drawcord, it shapes nicely around the head, without compressing the insulation. There is a cozy neck muff and a “beak” flap over the forehead.

One reviewer questioned whether the zip-on top’s extra half inch of loft (as measured by the reviewer) justified an additional 14 oz of weight. This person spoke in favor of just adding an extra layer of insulation to the main bag and skipping the zip-on top layer, pointing out that this saves the weight of two fabric layers and two full-length zippers.

Overall Impression

The Flash is a flexible sleeping system that saves the hiker from buying both a +40 and +20 sleeping bag. Most manufacturers use a full-circumference liner or overbag in their dual- temperature sleep systems. GoLite puts all the additional loft over the sleeper, where it counts most. This saves both weight and bulk. The zip-on top layer also performs some of the functions of a bivy sack. This is nice for colder and windier weather. Some hikers not so enthusiastic about dual-temperature sleep systems may feel that 54 ounces is not particularly light for a +20°F synthetic bag. (By comparison, for the same temperature rating, the single person GoLite Fur 1 is only 29 oz although it lacks a hood. This may be a moot point. If you are considering a Fur 1 then you are probably not a candidate for the Flash. Note: GoLite is redesigning the Fur 1 for this year.) However, the Flash appears well-constructed with a nicely shaped hood, clever distribution of insulation, a nice set of features, and good detailing.

Oware EPIC / Silnylon Bivy Sack

Oware EPIC / Silnylon Bivy Sack


Manufacturer’s Website: www.owareusa.com

Specifications

Regular Size

  • Materials: Top Fabric – 1.8 oz./sq. yard EPIC by Nextec
  • Materials: Bottom Fabric – 1.3 oz./sq. yard Silicone Impregnated Nylon
  • Total Bag Weight no Bug Netting: 10.5 oz. (9.9 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • Total Bag Weight with Bug Netting: 12.0 oz. (12.3 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • Length: Up to 6′ user height
  • Width: 35″
  • Optional Bug Netting Available
  • MSRP: $110

General Description

Oware’s EPIC-and-silnylon bivy sack may be the only bivy sack on the market to use a waterproof silicone impregnated nylon (silnylon) fabric for the floor and a highly water resistant, very breathable silicone encapsulated EPIC fabric for the top cover. It is also a very light bivy weighing in at less than 10 oz for the model without bug netting. As such, it is one of the lightest bivy sacks on the market. For both price and performance this bivy is targeted at the serious ultralight backpacker and/or climber.

Oware’s EPIC/silnylon bivy is a basic but functional design. Its only “value added” functional feature is a zippered hood. The bivy comes in two hood closure options: one with a lighter No. 5 dual slider zipper (the user supplies a separate mosquito head net); and one that comes with a heavier single slider #9 zipper and zip-in mosquito netting. There is a tie-out at the hood for the model with bug netting to keep it off your face. One could easily read a book or comfortably sleep in this configuration even under heavy mosquito pressure (see picture).

Construction

The Oware bivies have a bathtub floor of silnylon and a top cover of ripstop 1.9 oz/sq yd EPIC by Nextec. The EPIC top is offered in a nice, earthy “Stealth Green” while the floor can be specified as either green or gray. There are tie-out loops on the four corners so the bivy can be staked to the ground for windy conditions. The bottom of the bivy has a separate foot-box panel to prevent loft compression at the foot end of a sleeping bag. Construction quality is good with taped seams and sound stitching. Seam sealing is left to the user, although with the EPIC one may not want to bother. While a great idea, the zip-in mosquito netting could be improved by using a much lighter zipper.

Function

Our reviewers are generally keen on EPIC fabric for some applications. EPIC is more water- resistant than DWR-treated microfiber fabrics. It depends on silicone encapsulation of individual fibers to repel water and to close spaces between fibers. Contrary to popular belief, EPIC is somewhat less breathable than standard microfiber fabrics, but it still remains more breathable than PTFE and PU laminates and coatings, including Gore-Tex, ConduitSL, and Pertex Endurance. According to the manufacturer, EPIC is water- and wind-resistant to 4 psi, thus significantly more so than uncoated microfiber fabrics, which rely solely on an external DWR finish for water resistance. The water resistance is a permanent feature of the EPIC fabric and cannot be washed out like a durable water-resistant finish (DWR). EPIC is good for intermittent light drizzle and for use in shelters with heavy condensation, but it may not be appropriate for protecting the user from sustained rain or wet, heavy snow. Think of EPIC as a little less water resistant but more breathable than a standard waterproof breathable fabric, and a little more water resistant but less breathable than a standard uncoated microfiber fabric.

The Oware bivy is cut just right. There is plenty of room for some extra gear and for layering a large, warm down jacket over your sleeping bag. However, the cut is not so roomy that the bivy billows around in the wind or adds unnecessary weight from surplus fabric. The bivy hood is large enough for a generous pillow and plenty of gear (e.g. flashlight, pocket knife, hat, water bottle etc.), making it nice not to have to grope around for these essentials in the dirt when you need something at night.

Our staff has 12 field nights in the Oware bivy in temperatures from 5 to 50 deg F. In the cold and humid conditions of winter and early spring in the Northeast, the bivy added some warmth and plenty of protection from blowing wind. With the breathable EPIC fabric we had no problems with condensation. The hood zipper works well for adjusting bivy ventilation to improve breathing comfort and condensation resistance, and the dual sliders allow you to locate a ventilation hole exactly where you want it. It was also a pleasure to zip the hood completely shut (which is not recommended with waterproof-breathable bivy sacks due to the buildup of carbon dioxide in the shelter) in the wee hours of the morning and get warm and comfortable for an extra hour of sleep.

In the Southwest, we found the bivy useful to stake to the ground and prevent sleeping bags from blowing off across the mesa. The bivy also kept volumes of blowing, dust, sand, and other debris out of our reviewers’ sleeping bags. Exposed all night to desert winds, the bivy gave excellent protection from penetrating winds. They used the bivy and a silnylon poncho as our only shelter. (No surprise, we never took the poncho out of our packs).

Our Northern Rockies review team used the bivy primarily in spring conditions in river valley bottoms where the dew point and humidity were high enough, and the temperatures cold enough (due to temperature inversions), to promote dewfall at night. The Oware bivy easily shed falling dew, which soaked everything in sight by morning. However, the presence of moisture on the bivy sack surface seemed to inhibit breathability, as some condensation was observed under these conditions. More testing will need to be performed to validate this hypothesis.

The only restriction for the Oware bivy is that it is not intended for use as your sole shelter, if you think you may be camping in steady rain or wet snow. EPIC is not fully waterproof, and while it sheds a lot of precipitation and reduces condensation, it will not keep you dry in a night of significant amounts of precipitation. You will risk having a very wet down sleeping bag in the morning (but the bivy is worth exploring as a cover for a synthetic-fill bag).

Overall Impression

Oware’s EPIC/silnylon bivy may be the best all-around ultralight bivy sack on the market. It is perfect for additional protection in windy and colder temperatures. It is waterproof enough to protect your sleeping bag from a condensing single-wall tent, or a minimal tarp that may have some rain spray underneath, or even a snow cave. Yet the EPIC cover suffers from less condensation than fully waterproof breathable bivies. Best of all, at only 10 oz, it weighs less than many hikers’ ground sheets and just about every other bivy sack on the market.

Big Agnes Horse Thief

Big Agnes Horse Thief



Manufacturer’s Website: www.bigagnes.com

Specifications

Regular Size

  • Temperature Rating: +35 deg F
  • Gray Shell / Black Lining
  • Fill Weight: 11 oz. 775 down
  • Total Bag Weight: 26 oz. (28.2 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • Shoulder Girth: 67.5”
  • Hip Girth: 64”
  • Stuffed: 7.5” x 14.5”
  • Compressed: 7.75” x 4.5”
  • MSRP: $199

Recommended 20″ x 72″ x 2.5″  Air Core Pad

  • Weight 20 oz (20.6 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • MSRP: $54

General Description

The Big Agnes Horsethief is a mummy-shaped down sleeping bag with three distinctive features: no down under the sleeper, a sleeve on the bottom to hold a ground pad, and a built-in stow sack to create a fixed pillow by inserting clothing. Unlike its warmer brother, the +20 deg F Zirkel (also reviewed this issue), the Horsethief has no hood. Big Agnes rates this bag to +35 deg F for a moderate sleeper when paired with one of their ground pads. The bag’s pad sleeve will appeal to anyone who has ever awakened cold because they rolled off their pad during the night. The Horsethief has a feature usually only found in more expensive and warmer bags – a “no-draft” yoke. This is a down-filled collar that drapes down from the top of the bag and seals around your neck to prevent warm air from escaping and cold air from sneaking in.

Big Agnes’ 2.5-inch thick Air Core mummy pad is innovative for its lack of foam – at least in backpacking circles. Hey, people have been car camping and floating around the pool on these for years. But jesting aside, the Air Core mummy pad weighs about one-half to one-third the weight of a similar thickness foam-filled, self-inflating mattress. The pad is contoured to fit exactly into the pad pocket on the Horsethief. It took our staff 80-90 seconds to fully inflate the pad, and yes, we were a bit dizzy at the end.

Construction

The exterior shell is 30-denier Pertex nylon microfiber ripstop with a fluorocarbon DWR treatment for a windproof and water resistant shell. The interior lining is a soft and breathable 30-denier Pertex nylon microfiber. The bag bottom is a durable 210T DWR- treated ripstop nylon. The insulation is 775 down fill – the highest available quality. The bag is well sewn and the workmanship is fine with no obvious gaps.  Given the high quality of materials and construction, we expect that the Horsethief will give years of service if cared for properly.

Function

Our review staff made preliminary loft measurements of the Horsethief and compared them with bags of known field performance. Based on this comparison, we anticipate that, paired with a warm hood or balaclava, the Horsethief should work down to freezing, if not better, for many hikers (more in future issues on the field performance of this sleeping bag).

The attached pillow stuff sack is a nice idea. It solves the problem of chasing your slippery nylon “pillow” that has a life of its own as it pops out from underneath your head and scoots away during the night.

The Horsethief’s cut is roomy for a light mummy: a 67.5-inch girth compared to a Western Mountain Apache at 61 inches, and a Western Mountaineering UltraLite at 59 inches. Our larger and more restless sleepers liked the roomy cut — our medium build and quiet sleepers felt that it might be a bit drafty and a smidge more bag than they needed. The larger girth offers the option of wearing a jacket inside the bag to extend its range in cold weather.

Note: When you place the Air Core mummy pad in the pad pocket, the Horsethief loses some of its roominess. The rigid pad flattens out the bottom of the bag, reducing volume and making it feel tighter than its 67.5 inch girth. For this reason, some of our reviewers preferred sleeping with the pad outside of the pad pocket. The 20-inch wide Air Core pad is a bit narrow. The rounded edges of the pad make it seem closer to 18 inches wide. One of our mid-sized reviewers had problems keeping their arms from sliding off the pad. Still, the Air Core pad is the epitome cushy trail comfort.

The Horsethief and Air Core pad combination weighs about a half pound less than many light +30 deg F down bags paired with light, full-length, self-inflating pads (e.g. Marmot Arroyo and Thermarest Ultralight).  However, the Horsethief alone weighs about half a pound more than minimalist sleeping bags like Nunatak Arc Alpinist or Rab Top Bag that have similar loft over the sleeper. The combination of the Horsethief and Air Core mummy pad weighs about pound more than a minimalist bag paired with a closed cell foam pad (e.g. Mt Washington), albeit the Big Agnes combo has more features and comfort.

Overall Impression

The Big Agnes Horsethief is a high-quality bag with a lot of design innovations and creature comforts. It manages these while weighing less than many light down bags with similar temperature ratings. If you want to cut some weight but aren’t ready for the Spartan sleeping accommodations of minimalist bags, the Horsethief and an Air Core pad may be the right choice for you.

Lightweight Snowshoes: Two Models from MSR and Northern Lights are Cream of the Crop

Overview

Snowshoes are essential for traveling in the mountains in most of the winter and spring months. In some places of the western U.S. (e.g., the Cascade volcanoes and Northern Rockies), snowshoes may even be necessary for high-country travel well into May and June.

We reviewed and tested nearly 20 models of 25-33″ long backcountry snowshoes from Atlas, Red Feather, MSR, Northern Lites, Little Bear, Grivel, Tubbs, and Crescent Moon. We put these snowshoes to the test for an entire winter season, and used them ALL on the following types of terrain:

  • Deep backcountry powder in the foothills of Wyoming’s Teton Range
  • Powder and windblown hardpack in Montana’s Bridger Range (famous for its steep backcountry skiing and snowboarding chutes)
  • Hard ice on the glaciers of Washington State’s Mount Rainier

Review criteria included an assessment of the decking design (flotation), binding (ease of use and durability), crampon (effectiveness in hard conditions and durability), and of course, carry weight.

It’s a safe bet that if you’re simply in the market for a day-hiking snowshoe suitable for packed trails and shallow powder, you won’t go wrong by purchasing a foot sled from any of these manufacturers. However, there were only two models in particular that really captured the hearts of our equipment review team, and we are pleased to award them with Trail’s Best Awards and highlight them in this review:

  • Best Snowshoe for Steep and Icy Terrain: MSR Denali Ascent
  • Best All-Around Backcountry Snowshoe: Northern Lites Quicksilver 30’s

MSR Denali Ascent

Trail’s Best Award Winner

Mountaineers and other visitors to the steeps take note: there is probably no finer snowshoe than the MSR Denali Ascent for climbing steep and hardpacked or icy terrain.

DECK

The Denali Ascent is made with a one-piece injection-molded deck (8″ x 22″ with optional modular extension tails), resulting in excellent durability on rocky and icy terrain and relatively light weight. The deck’s bottom is made with a variety of fins and edges that are designed primarily to resist backsliding on steep terrain. Although not the only, or the lightest, injection-molded deck of the snowshoes we reviewed, it proved to be the most durable (in its resistance to cracking and nicking) and certainly one of the most well-designed. Of all the snowshoes tested, the MSR resisted backsliding the best (although this has a great deal to do with the crampon design as well).

CRAMPON

The Denali Ascents feature aggressive crampons, a pair of 1.25″ steel spikes, and a pair of long traction bars (11.5″) that minimize the backsliding so common in climbs of steep and icy slopes. We were able to climb alpine glacier ice slopes up to 30 degrees without backsliding, and were able to traverse ice slopes to 40 degrees without side slipping. We are pleased that MSR chose to use steel for the crampon material and traction bars, rather than titanium, as some manufacturers did. We found the titanium crampons to be “soft” and not particularly durable after hard use on black ice and other rocky terrain.

BINDINGS

The Denali Ascent employs a binding with Voile-style straps that can be operated with a single mittened hand. Three straps over the instep and a single strap behind the heel locks the foot securely into the snowshoe. The binding sole is reinforced with a thin steel shank that effectively prevents your foot from “rolling” over while traversing a steep slope. This was a feature that was greatly appreciated in a traverse of a windblown 30-degree ice slope on Mount Rainier’s Ingraham glacier last spring.

Incidentally, of all the snowshoe bindings we tried, we unanimously chose Voile-style straps as the best strap style for snowshoes, not only for their mitten-friendliness, but also for their ability to remain secure at light tension settings (to prevent cutting off blood circulation in your feet), their excellent flexibility at low temperatures, and their resistance to snow buildup. Of our panel of eight reviewers, we found no one that would purchase snowshoes that did not have this type of binding.

OTHER FEATURES

In addition to its characteristic injection-molded design and aggressive crampon, the MSR Denali Ascent stands out from other snowshoes with its heel lifters. These bars flip up when needed while climbing steep slopes and greatly reduce calf fatigue. They are a blessing and we wished that they were standard on every snowshoe model on the market! This feature alone was capable of tipping our reviewers’ pocketbooks into purchases of their own Denali Ascents.

SUMMARY

The Denali Ascents are not the lightest snowshoes around (3 lb 15.0 oz actual measured weight), but they’re not the heaviest either. When you consider their performance on steep and hard or icy terrain, there may not be a better snowshoe on the market.

However, if you’re looking for an all-purpose powder shoe for off-track backpacking, the Denali Ascents do not provide the flotation necessary for deep powder. MSR recommends adding their extension tails, but this adds weight to the snowshoe and makes it somewhat cumbersome — there are lighter, better snowshoes for deep powder.

Final Grade: A

CONTACT INFO:

Mountain Safety Research
PO Box 24547
Seattle, WA 98124
800.531.9531
http://www.msrcorp.com/

Northern Lites Quicksilver 30s

Trail’s Best Award Winner

The Northern Lites series of snowshoes stand out for one simple reason: they are light. Really light. The full-length 9″ x 30″ Quicksilver 30’s weigh only 49.0 oz (actual measured weight) – or 3 lb 1 oz. The shorter 25’s (25″ deck length) and their higher end (and more expensive) Extreme models weigh even less. So when you consider that the Quicksilver 30 is their heaviest model, and it is still the lightest snowshoe on the market for its deck size, you begin to appreciate its design. When you strap Northern Lites to your feet then that appreciation turns quickly to outright giddiness. Similar shoes from Atlas or Tubbs are 1.5 — or more — POUNDS heavier than the Quicksilver 30’s.

DECK

Northern Lites are so light due in part to their very simple design and in part to lightweight materials. The aluminum tubing used for the frame is thinner in diameter that the industry standard, but even so, in normal winter backpacking, when you aren’t abusing the frame on rocky terrain, both the snowshoe frame and lightweight PVC-based decking material held up through an entire season of hard use.

CRAMPON

Northern Lites shave weight by employing a very simple aluminum crampon. They are not appropriate for either icy or rocky terrain, or the crampon will wear quickly. However, the crampon is certainly aggressive enough for the occasional icy slope and can easily climb hardpack snow up to 30 degrees without backsliding.

BINDINGS

Like the MSR snowshoes, the Northern Lites employ a binding secured by Voile-style straps. The only fault of the Northern Lites binding was the use of a traditional nylon strap with a ladderloc buckle for the heel strap – a design that occasionally “locked up” as the nylon absorbed water and froze. The binding sole on the Northern Lites snowshoes is “soft” in contrast to the plate sole of the MSR Denali Ascents: they are not as appropriate for traversing steep slopes as snowshoes with more rigid bindings and sole plates.

SUMMARY

Northern Lites are easily the lightest snowshoe on the market for their flotation range. In exchange for the weight, they do sacrifice some features that are needed for steep and/or icy/rocky terrain, including crampon aggressiveness and durability, lateral binding stability, and frame durability. However, for most recreational snowshoe backpackers, these features are seldom, if ever needed, so why carry the weight?

Final Grade: A

CONTACT INFO:

Northern Lites
1300 Cleveland
Wausau, WI 54401
800.360.LITE
http://www.northernlites.com/

Backcountry Travel on Snowshoes for Lightweight Backpackers

Backcountry Travel on Snowshoes for Lightweight Backpackers

Introduction

Originally snowshoes consisted of large wooden frames strung with rawhide lacing which allowed the wearer to walk on snow without sinking into it. Snowshoes still operate on this principle, and they are still available in that form, but snowshoes made with high-tech materials are also available and weigh considerably less than snowshoes made with the more primitive natural materials.

There are plenty of good reasons to snowshoe. Snowshoeing has a faster learning curve than cross-country skiing, the other option for winter travel. Snowshoes are less expensive and easier to transport than skis. Here is some information on snowshoes that will be useful in deciding which snowshoes will work best for your needs.

Types of Snowshoes

There are three general classes of snowshoes. They are:

  • Traditional wooden snowshoes. They have rawhide lacing and are large and relatively heavy. They are not as maneuverable as more modern snowshoes, and they require some maintenance each season. Some snowshoers prefer them because they are attractive and nostalgic, but most outdoor enthusiasts use modern high-tech snowshoes.
  • Injection-molded snowshoes. These are unlovely, inexpensive and utilitarian. They are strong and dependable but tend to be heavy.
  • High-tech snowshoes. Usually snowshoes of this sort have tubing frames made of the type of aluminum used in aircraft, and they have synthetic decking material across the broad surface instead of lacing. These are lighter in weight than the other kinds, and they are the type of snowshoe that I will be discussing.

Selecting Snowshoes

Having settled on high-tech snowshoes, you will still face a series of decisions, for the ones best for your lightweight winter outing will depend on your activity:

  • Racing snowshoes are light and small and are designed for running over groomed trails as a competitive sport. They are not large enough to use on unpacked snow, nor are they sturdy enough for backcountry use. Some high-tech racing snowshoes have titanium or carbon-fiber frames which are strong but light. They are great for getting into shape, but they are not designed or recommended for hiking.
  • Recreational snowshoes are designed for casual walking over trails or gently rolling terrain for a few miles or a few hours.
  • Backcountry snowshoes are sturdy, dependable snowshoes designed for steep slopes, deep snow, off-trail travel, mountaineering, and mountain rescue.

In selecting a pair of snowshoes, you will need to consider three variables: the size of the snowshoe, its bindings, and its crampons. You will want snowshoes that are appropriate to the conditions in which you will be using them.

To begin with, you will be selecting snowshoes of a certain length and width. Heavier loads require larger snowshoes to keep the wearer aloft on top of the snow. To figure your snowshoe size, add your body weight to the weight of your loaded pack. If you have a lightweight pack, you will be spending less energy snowshoeing and you will balance better than a snowshoer carrying a heavy one.

The standard adult high-tech snowshoe sizes are:

Width x Length Total Body Plus
Pack Weight
8″ x 25″ 90 to 140 lb
9″ x 30″ 140 to 200 lb
10″ x 36″ over 200 lb

Larger snowshoes give better float in soft new snow, but in consolidated snow you may be able to use a smaller snowshoe.

Bindings are needed to hold your snowshoes firmly to your footgear, and they should be easy to operate even when you are wearing mittens. The type of bindings a snowshoe has affects the way it works. Many snowshoers pay more attention to larger, more obvious parts of the snowshoe and give little consideration to the two main binding types, pivoting and fixed.

  • Pivoting-hinge bindings, also called freely-rotating bindings, allow the boot to rotate freely around a pivot, and they allow the tail of the snowshoe to drop to the ground when the snowshoe is raised to take a step. This sheds snow that has accumulated on the decking. This type of binding does not allow you to back up, because the snowshoe’s tails will dig into the snow. It is the strongest type of binding, and it is best when you are going to be doing a lot of climbing.
  • Fixed bindings, also called spring-loaded bindings, have a spring that lifts the snowshoe’s tail up away from the snow with every step. This makes backing up possible, but it also throws snow from the decking against the back of your legs, so be sure to wear high gaiters with fixed bindings. Fixed bindings are best on packed trails and in brushy areas where their good maneuverability is an asset.

Snowshoers need to be able to walk up, down, and across hills. High-tech snowshoes provide traction with toothed cleats called crampons. These are usually found on the toe or under the ball of the foot and also near the heel, and they grip the ground on ascents and descents. Additional crampons which run parallel to the snowshoe’s sides are found on heavy-duty climbing snowshoes and provide additional lateral stability for traversing slopes.

The Rest of the Snowshoeing Outfit

Preparation for snowshoeing will involve decisions not only about snowshoes but about other items of gear as well. Most fundamentally, you will need suitable footwear to coordinate with them into a comfortable, stable, maneuverable unit. Snowshoe racers wear lightweight sports shoes for racing and training, but if you are venturing into the backcountry, you will want to use sturdy, waterproofed boots with your snowshoes. Mountaineers and snowboarders can wear their specialized boots with their snowshoes, as long as the bindings fit. Many styles of hiking boots also adapt well to this purpose.

It’s a good idea to take the boots you plan to wear while snowshoeing with you when you go to rent or buy snowshoes. Most modern bindings are quite adaptable, but not all bindings may adjust easily and well to your footwear.

Snowshoeing racers don’t use poles, but most backcountry snowshoers use at least one and more often two. Poles can push interfering branches out of the path and can improve balance on uncertain terrain. Either collapsible trekking poles with snow baskets or one-piece ski poles work well. Some snowshoers prefer poles that come up to the elbow, while others prefer poles that come up about to the armpit the way they would for cross-country skiing.

Not all snowshoers use gaiters, but they are useful for keeping your lower legs dry and comfortable. They are particularly welcome if your bindings are the fixed type, which otherwise throw snow onto the backs of your legs and into your boots.

Some Tips for Beginning Snowshoers

  • Rent your equipment the first few times you snowshoe. This will familiarize you with snowshoeing and will allow you to use several different brands to see which you prefer.
  • Use poles for stability.
  • Go on daytrips with a group.
  • Snowshoe on well-packed trails over gently rolling terrain.
  • Don’t get too far away from your starting point.
  • Familiarize yourself with safety aspects of winter recreation, such as minimizing avalanche danger and avoiding or if necessary treating hypothermia or frostbite.

What the Author Uses

I especially like my Northern Lites snowshoes for recreational snowshoeing and I even use them for multi-day snowshoeing over relatively gentle terrain. They have proved themselves to be tough enough for long backpacking trips, and they are so light that I can carry them even when I’m uncertain that the trails will be snow-covered. These snowshoes come with fixed bindings that are very easy to use.

For mountaineering I take Mountain Safety Research Denali Ascent snowshoes. These extremely durable snowshoes are designed for steep ascents and have a televator heel-lifting device that reduces fatigue. They also have excellent traction for traversing steep hills, and they come with pivoting bindings.

Northern Lites and the MSR Denali Ascent snowshoes are both lightweight snowshoes of their type. The Northern Lites are exceptionally light for recreational snowshoes, and the Denalis are low in weight for a technical backcountry snowshoe. Both were reasonably priced, but the main reason I chose them was their suitability for my needs and their light weight.

For poles, I usually choose from among several pairs of Black Diamonds because I am particularly fond of their “flick-lock” adjusters.

Final Thoughts

Snowshoeing is an easy and efficient way to backpack in winter, and it’s fun and great exercise too. The silence and peace of the white winter landscape convey a special serenity, and I especially enjoy seeing how many different animal tracks I can identify in the snow on these outings.

GoLite, Integral Designs, and Wild Things High Loft Synthetic Insulating Jackets (Comparison Review)

Overview

High-loft insulating garments have a higher warmth-to-weight ratio than any other type of clothing. So, they are perfect complements to a lightweight backpacking clothing system when temperatures plummet.

This review compares and contrasts three very different synthetic high-loft insulating jackets from Wild Things, GoLite, and Integral Designs. For a more thorough discussion of high-loft garments, be sure to read Jordan et al.’s Clothing and Sleep Systems for Mountain Hiking.

Wild Things Primaloft Sweater

Looking for a synthetic-fill jacket that’s trim enough for layering under a shell but loftier than most Microloft garments on the market? If so, then the Wild Things Primaloft Sweater may be the answer.

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

The Primaloft Sweater is a full-zip jacket with a 1.1-oz ripstop nylon shell and Primaloft PL1 insulation. We measured the weight of a size M at 17.0 oz. A high collar, straight hem, and elastic cuffs keep warmth in in a trim-fitting design designed for layering.

Two layers of 1.8-oz Primaloft Sport are quilted to the shell for (thoeretically) about 1.5″ of single-layer loft, offering warmth that easily exceeds that of a 300-weight fleece jacket. After quilting and construction, the actual loft of the new jacket is about 1.0″.

Two zippered handwarmer pockets round out a simple but very functional design.

Interestingly, the design is reversible, allowing for two different colors to be displayed. The jacket’s color combinations include chili red/navy, gold/gray, and cobalt blue/black.

FIT

Testers generally found that the Primaloft Sweater offered a trim fit that made it an ideal piece to layer under a rain shell. A hem that extends just beyond the waist retained torso warmth without impairing mobility, and this jacket was both comfortable and unobtrusive.

However, lack of sufficient articulation resulted in the wrist cuffs riding a little higher than some would have liked, although this was an issue only for our longer-armed men. Women and short-guys wouldn’t have had much of a problem with sleeve length.

PERFORMANCE REVIEW

We used the Primaloft Sweater in a variety of conditions:

  • spring backpacking in the southern Appalachians
  • winter snowshoeing in the northern Rockies
  • alpine climbing in the North Cascades and Northern Rockies

We used the jacket as a warm-up layer for chilly mornings, a belay jacket for summer alpine climbing, and a warm active layer while winter snowshoeing at 10 degrees below zero with 40 mph winds.

The jacket performed adequately in all conditions, and it excelled in the wet spring climate of North Carolina and the high mountains of the Cascades

One of us even submerged the jacket in a lake and wrung it out, then wore it to bed (in a 45*F-rated Primaloft sleeping bag) on a 45*F night, with little discomfort. Best of all, the jacket (and the sleeping bag) were nearly dry in the morning, a testament to the low water absorption of Primaloft that was unmatched in a similar test with a Polarguard 3D garment and bag combo. Indeed separate tests conducted at our labs have shown that Polarguard 3D absorbs about three to four times more water per fill weight than the 1.8-oz Primaloft.

So, in addition to serving well for mountaineering and backpacking in sloppy climes, the Primaloft Sweater might make the ideal garment for three-season canoe camping trips.

Perhaps one of the more remarkable practical field tests of this series was an alpine climb in the Northern Rockies of Montana. Our tester packed only a windshell and the Primaloft Sweater before embarking on a half-day alpine climb to a 12,000 foot summit, for which his partner packed a wind shell and an 18-oz down jacket. On the descent, the skies unleashed their fury in a typical afternoon thunderstorm (that lasted well into the night!), dumping buckets of rain on the climbers and soaking them to the bone. With wind-chill temperatures in the 20s, both climbers were forced to wear their insulating jackets (over their wind shells in each case) simply to remain warm while moving. During the course of the 3-hour descent, the down jacket (which was shelled with a similar lightweight ripstop nylon) lost well over half its loft and resulted in near-hypothermic chilling of the climber, while the Primaloft-clad alpinist felt warm in his jacket, which had lost little if any of its loft. Both climbers wore their jackets to bed (both using 30*F down sleeping bags). The Primaloft Jacket was completely dry in the morning, while the down jacket regained very little of its lost loft.

We’ve been testing this jacket for more than a year, with approximately 60 nights of use in all seasons in the mountains of the Cascades, Rockies, and Appalachians. With repeated stuffing, wetting, and laundering, the jacket has still retained 90% of its original loft in all cases, in surprising contradiction of Primaloft’s reputed lack of durability (as claimed primarily by Polarguard activists). Testers did use care in handling the jacket, storing it at full loft when it was not in use and not ever packing it in a compression stuff sack.

WEAKNESSES

The Primaloft Sweater suffered only a few minor weaknesses:

  • The quilt stitching (the stitching that secures the insulation to the shell fabric to prevent it from shifting) proved prone to abrasion and showed significant signs of wear; this was primarily cosmetic and did not result in shifting of the Primaloft in the garment.
  • The lycra hems were prone to abrasion; both wrist cuffs on our test specimen suffered fraying that eventually caused them to fail.
  • Excessive quilting may have resulted in undue compression of the insulation, given the discrepancy between the actual and theoretical loft measurements.

Special care and attention by the user could probably prevent or at least minimize the wear to stitching and hems. That the jacket might have been warmer quilted another way is a moot matter for now: it’s however warm it is. Still, future models might use the fill more efficiently.

SUMMARY

In conclusion, Wild Things owns a niche with the Primaloft Sweater: trim-fitting synthetic-fill insulating garments with approximately 1.0″ of loft. In fact, after reviewing the market extensively, we found no product comparable to the Primaloft Sweater, and its ability to layer under slim shell jackets was our testers’ favorite feature.

FINAL GRADE: B+

CONTACT INFO

Wild Things Gear
64 Hobbs St
Conway, NH 03818
603.447.6908
http://www.wildthingsgear.com/

GOLITE COAL PARKA
(TRAIL’S BEST AWARD)

The GoLite Coal Parka may provide the best warmth-to-weight ratio of any synthetic jacket we’ve seen. Uncrushed Polarguard 3D, a long cut that covers your rear end, an ultralight nylon shell material, and a hood, make this 19-oz wonder an easy selection for a Trail’s Best Award for backpacking warmwear.

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

The GoLite Coal is a full-zip jacket with a 1.1 oz ripstop nylon shell and Polarguard 3D insulation. With the removable 2.5-oz hood, we measured the weight of a size M at 19.2 oz. The hood, a high, insulated collar, twin drawcords (waist and hem), and elastic cuffs contribute to make this the warmest garment in its weight range we’ve seen yet. Polarguard 3D is quilted sparingly to a 1.1 oz nylon shell and results in about 0.75″ of single-layer loft. GoLite uses “uncrushed” Polarguard, which is shipped from the supplier without vacuum sealing. GoLite says that this increases their shipping costs, but that it results in the insulation having higher loft. Two zippered handwarmer pockets round out a simple, but very functional design.

FIT

The jacket is cut full for layering over your clothing and shell, but is trim enough to fit under a loose-fitting parka and works in perfect concert with a poncho, where it’s lofting can’t be inhibited. The hem extends well below the waist to keep the netherlands warm but can be cinched at the waistline for better mobility. Good sleeve and shoulder articulation, combined with the long hem, made the jacket comfortable when reaching overhead while scrambling, hanging a bear bag, or casting a fishing rod.

PERFORMANCE REVIEW

We used the Coal Jacket in a variety of conditions:

  • 3-season backpacking in the Tetons
  • winter snowshoeing in the Montana Rockies
  • 3-season alpine climbing in the North Cascades and Northern Rockies

The jacket performed adequate in all conditions, and excelled in the drier climates, where the jacket’s shell breathability allowed it to have a wide comfort range. In wet conditions, even when the fill material was nearly soaked (which occured only on exposing it to sustained hard rain or submerging it in a lake), the jacket retained a surprising amount of loft (about 0.5″) after wringing it out. The DWR finish of the shell fabric did wear out after a few washings, but it was easily restored with an aftermarket product (we used Gore Revivex). We would love to see an EPIC shell version for alpine climbing purposes (when the jacket would be used as outerwear) but appreciated the lighter weight of the 1.1 oz nylon shell for traditional backpacking pursuits.

In our “submerge and sleep test”, where we submerged the jacket in a lake and wrung it out, then wore it to bed (in a 45*F-rated Primaloft synthetic sleeping bag) on a 45*F night, we found that the jacket was not completely dry by morning, but did manage to gain about 0.13″ of loft (from 0.5″ saturated to 0.63″ by morning). We did not find it to be particularly uncomfortable in this sleep system, despite the moisture that had been absorbed by the Polarguard 3D in the Coal. These findings agree with ongoing laboratory testing at BackpackingLight.COM that has revealed that Polarguard maintains good insulating properties when wet, despite the fact that 3D absorbs about 3-4x as much water per fill weight than Primaloft PL1.

On a fall alpine ice climb in the Tetons, where wet snow and hail fell nonstop during the climb (for a duration of 14 hours), the Coal was used as a belay jacket, layered over the tester’s climbing clothing (which included a thin fleece top and a windproof shell jacket). By the end of the climb (12 belayed pitches), repeated exposure to wet conditions and stuffing resulted in the Coal’s weight increasing by nearly 12 oz (from its original weight of 19 oz to 31 oz by the end of the climb). Remarkably, however, the jacket retained most of its loft. A custom-made Primaloft jacket of similar thickness, shell material, and construction used on the same climb, absorbed only 8 oz of moisture but its loft was reduced by more than 30%. Also, unlike the Primaloft garment, the Coal was quicker to dry, which is contrary to our findings when fill materials were completely saturated (where Primaloft dried more quickly). Our hypothesis is that the 12 oz of water absorbed by the Coal was distributed in smaller ‘droplets’ or ‘pockets’ of water that provided a greater surface area for drying. Thus, when partially saturated, we hypothesize that water has less of an impact on the integrity of Polarguard 3D than on Primaloft PL1. More testing is certainly needed to validate or invalidate this claim, of course, and the lack of a more extensive collection of data taken under more controlled conditions prevents us from making a statement one way or the other about Polarguard 3D vs. Primaloft PL1 in scenarios where the insulation becomes wet.

We’ve tested the Coal for more than 30 nights of mountain use, and stored the jacket stuffed (but dry) in a 500 ci stuff sack. It was subjected to repeated stuffing (perhaps 100 times) that included about 25 stuffings in a 1000 ci compression stuff sack with other clothing. With repeated stuffing, wetting, and laundering, the jacket has retained about 85% of its original loft, an impressive result considering that we probably abused the jacket beyond the manufacturer’s recommendations.

Possible Improvements

Since the coal’s hood is detachable, it would be nice if GoLite had designed it to be used without the jacket. To do this, the Coal’s hood needs a Velcro or snap neck closure similar to their Snow Cap. Right now, your only way to use the Coal’s hood without the jacket is to tie the drawstrings together. This not comfortable nor does it make a warm seal around your neck. This is a pity, since the Coal’s hood is warmer than the GoLite’s Snow Cap and there are many situations where a hiker would prefer it to the Snow Cap. For instance:

  • To use with a synthetic vest like their Chill or any other insulating top layer, or
  • To use with a hoodless sleeping bag, or
  • To use by itself when you need to throw something warm on quickly in cold conditions.

SUMMARY

The GoLite Coal Jacket suffered few weaknesses, even when taken out of its range of intended use (i.e., we tested it for alpine climbing conditions). Our only irritation — and this reared its ugly head only in very cold, wet conditions — was that the main coil zipper was prone to icing up, making it difficult to operate. For most weather conditions typical of three-season backpacking, however, this was never an issue.

All of our testers agreed that a version with a double layer of torso insulation, a hood large enough to fit over a climbing helmet, a larger-toothed zipper that resists icing, and an EPIC shell would be an ideal alpine climbing jacket for three-season and mild winter weather conditions.

With a price tag of $159 ($36 less than last year), it meets the price point for synthetic insulated jackets in this weight range. For occasional-to-moderate use by backpackers or climbers who take appropriate care of their gear, the Coal should last several seasons. Thus it can be thought of as a good value and an investment, and, cost aside, it’s our top pick.

For backpacking and general backcountry use, including summer alpine climbing, the Coal may have no match. It offers an outstanding performance-to-weight ratio and is the best in its class of hooded synthetic jackets in the 18-22 oz range.

FINAL GRADE: A

CONTACT INFO

GoLite
5785 Arapahoe
Boulder, CO 80303
888.546.5483
http://www.golite.com/

INTEGRAL DESIGNS DOLOMITTI PARKA

The Integral Designs Dolomitti Parka offers a lot of loft that provides serious warmth suitable for three- and four-season use in mountain climes. Primaloft insulation and a Pertex shell are an outstanding combination that allows this jacket to thrive in wet, sloppy conditions. With a full-conditions hood that fits like the hood of a sleeping bag, the Dolomitti is suitable protection that could even get you through an unplanned bivouac.

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

The Integral Designs Dolomitti jacket is a full-zip jacket with a 1.3-oz Pertex nylon shell and a single layer of Primaloft Sport (5 oz) insulation, with a theoretical loft of about 1.5″. Including the removable hood, a Dolomitti in size L weighed in at 23.8 oz. A drawcorded-hood, a high, insulated collar, hem drawcords, and stretchy Spandura cuffs effectively seal the torso from the penetration of high winds and precipitation. In fact in eight months of testing in awful conditions, we found the Dolomitti to be one of the most weather-resistant synthetic-fill parkas in its class.

Primaloft Sport (5 oz/yd2) is quilted sparingly to a 1.3 oz Pertex shell and results in about 1.25″ (measured) of single-layer loft, which is close to the 1.5″ theoretical maximum for this insulation.

Two zippered handwarmer pockets, a removable, zip-off hood, and a nylon-toothed main zipper round out a simple and functional design.

FIT

The jacket is cut full for layering over your clothing and shell. Make no mistake: this parka was not designed for layering under a rain shell and is meant to be the primary means of protection between you and the elements. The hem extends well below the waist for trunk warmth but can be cinched at the waistline for better mobility.

Good sleeve and shoulder articulation, combined with the long hem, made the jacket comfortable in overhead reaching, and our reviewers found it to be an excellent parka for any four-season backcountry activity.

Our testers’ favorite feature was the Dolomitti’s hood, which was full of loft and cut large enough to layer over any amount of headwear worn by a backcountry traveler (including a climbing helmet). It could even cinch tight enough to leave nothing exposed but a breathing hole, like a sleeping bag hood, making this jacket an easy choice if there’s a chance of an unplanned bivouac, or for that matter if you are making it part of a sleep system which includes a hoodless bag.

PERFORMANCE REVIEW

We used the Dolomitti Jacket in a variety of three- and four-season conditions, but primarily we exposed it to the wet, sloppy conditions of winter alpine climbing in the Cascades and the drier but colder winter conditions affording snowshoeing and ice climbing in the Northern Rockies of Montana and Wyoming.

The jacket was a solid performer in all conditions, and it was surprisingly comfortable in wet ones. When the fill material was (seemingly) nearly soaked on long backcountry tours in Cascade sleet and snow, the jacket retained about 75% of its loft. The DWR finish of the shell fabric did wear out after a few washings, but it was easily restored with an aftermarket product (we used Gore Revivex).

In our “submerge and sleep test”, where we submerged the jacket in a lake and wrung it out, then wore it to bed (in a 20*F-rated Polarguard 3D synthetic sleeping bag) on a 35*F night, we found that the jacket had lost much of its loft after soaking, about 75% of it in fact, but it was nearly dry after a 10-hour night’s sleep in a tent, recovering most (90%) of its pre-soaking loft.

We subjected the Dolomitti to a significant amount of abuse (repeated wetting, drying, and laundering cycles, in addition to serious stuffing for about 40 nights in the backcountry) and found that by the end, its loft had decreased to about 75% of its original thickness.

WEAKNESSES

The Dolomitti provides solid features for a 1.5-lb synthetic parka. However, our testers were dismayed that the garment had lost 25% of its loft after only one season of use. Admittedly, the garment was probably abused beyond manufacturer recommendations (frequency of laundering, stuffing). Other weaknesses were only minor:

  • the fit is slightly roomy for an athletic build; a trimmer cut might be more efficient at retaining heat;
  • the elastic shockcord used for the drawstring hem is very stretchy; when the drawcord is cinched tight, an excessive amount (about a 12″ loop) remains flapping around, free to snag itself occasionally on gear, brush, or the like.

SUMMARY

The Dolomitti is one of the few jackets on the market that bridge the gap between the one-pound summer parka and the two-pound parkas suitable for Himalayan winter conditions. For most winter conditions in North America, the Dolomitti gives all necessary protection from the elements. At 24 oz, it is light, compressible, and highly functional. Its hood and good performance-to-weight ratio make it a feasible option for unplanned bivies and a variety of other two-and three-season in the mountain areas of the U.S.

FINAL GRADE: B+

CONTACT INFO

Integral Designs
5516 3rd St SE
Calgary, AB, Canada T2H1J9
403.640.1445
http://www.integraldesigns.com/

A Homemade Gear Sled (Pulk) for Backcountry Winter Travel

Introduction

Winter backpacking is an entirely different experience from backpacking at any other time of the year. In the winter our needs for food, water, and warmth require significant changes in our hiking style. If you go winter backpacking you are entering a world that can present you with exquisite sights, sounds, and silences. That same world also provides short days and long nights. The cold opens options for food that you would never consider in the summer. The long nights tempt people to sit around a fire and chat with one another, stare into the sky hoping to see Northern Lights, and listen for the distant howl of a coyote or wolf.

FIGURE 1. The author hauling his sled. At this point in the trip the sled’s payload is less than 30 pounds.

When backpacking in the winter, you will have to take considerably more gear than you normally do. You carry warmer clothing; a much warmer sleeping bag; a more weatherproof tent; a more robust sleeping pad; more high-energy food; snowshoes or perhaps skis; a larger pot to melt snow for water; an efficient cold-weather stove with ample fuel; plus whatever else you normally carry to make your trip enjoyable. Even for an ultralight backpacker, the weight quickly mounts.

But is there a way to make carrying the heavier load more comfortable? Since this is the winter and the ground is covered with snow there is such a way: pulling a sled.

Not all winter backpacking trips are conducive to using a sled. I doubt that pulling a sled over steep, often rocky mountains would work. However, if your trip takes you over more rolling terrain, then using a sled has many advantages. You can put considerably more gear on a sled than you can comfortably put into your backpack and carry. A sled will help you distribute weight and so will make snowshoeing or skiing across the snow much more pleasant, since you won’t sink in as often. A sled also gives you the option of carrying in things you would never consider putting in a backpack, such as fire logs.

While you can purchase a sled and harness for hauling gear, the only model I am aware of is quite expensive. It turns out that building your own sled, also called a pulk, is fairly easy and inexpensive. All you need is a sled and a means to haul that sled comfortably with a modicum of control. The design I will describe meets these criteria very well: credit for the design goes to Joe “Jundog” Juno.

Parts You Need

  • Children’s long plastic flat-bottom sled. The sled must have a lip with a horizontal edge.
  • Two 7’ pieces of 0.5” PVC pipe. The length of the pipe can be shortened if you never plan to wear skis while hauling the sled.
  • 2” web belt with a quick-release buckle
  • Two D rings
  • About 4” of webbing material for the attachment points. Extra material from your hip belt will work well.
  • Two 2.5” eye bolts
  • two 2.125” lag bolts
  • Four nuts
  • Two wing nuts
  • Four washers for the lag bolts
  • Two mini-carabiners
  • One tarp that is large enough to wrap your gear in (e.g., 6’ x 8’)
  • Three or four bungee cords of various lengths

FIGURE 2. Top view of the front of the sled. Notice where the bolts are placed. Holes were drilled for the placement of each bolt.

The Hauling System

The PVC pipe creates a rigid hauling system that will prevent the sled from chasing you down hills. While you can haul a sled with just a tow rope attached to a harness, it is likely that a sled drawn this way will get out of control from time to time. The sled I am describing is designed to work well for snowshoeing or cross-country skiing. The length of the PVC pipe listed above is more than enough for someone who is six feet tall and uses skis 210 centimeters long. Longer lengths of PVC tubing will make the sled a little harder to manage on turns and on steep declines. If you will never be skiing with the sled, then you can shorten the pipe considerably. It may take some study and experimentation, and even then you should plan for a little more wiggle room than the bare minimum, but I suspect shorter adults can manage with lengths of pipe as short as four and a half to five feet. You want to make the pipe long enough so that there is no chance of your sled becoming entangled with your skis or snowshoes. If the sled runs up your skis or snowshoes, the result can be disastrous. If the pipes are too short, the sled will tend to dig into the snow and pull your harness down. When I first used the sled I was on a snowshoe trip, and pipes six feet long worked well even though they were longer than necessary.

The PVC tubes are attached to the sled with the lag bolts. First drill holes through the sled, ones of an appropriate size for the bolts. The sled must have a lip with a horizontal edge. The holes should be placed on the left and right front edge of the sled. Drill the holes through the horizontal edge of the lip (see Figure 2).

FIGURE 3. The lag bolt and PVC pipe assembly at the sled end of the pipe.

Push bolts through the sled from the bottom, sitting them on washers. The washers will help distribute any tension that is placed on the plastic of the sled. Drill an aligned hole through each tube, two inches from the end, for the bolts to slide through. To attach the PVC pipe to the sled, simply slide the tubes onto the bolts you have attached to the sled. If you want to reduce tension further, you could place an additional pair of washers against the tubing before spinning the wing nuts on. See Figure 3.

At the other end of the PVC tubing, repeat the procedure. Drill aligned holes two inches from the end and thread eye bolts through these holes with the eyes on top, securing them with the two remaining nuts. Again you can reduce tension by placing washers on the bolts before screwing the nuts into place. See Figure 4.

FIGURE 4. The “eye” bolt and PVC pipe assembly at the far end.

The Harness

FIGURE 5. The designer of the sled. Notice how his PVC tubes are crossed to increase control of the sled on descents. At this point in the trip he is hauling about 70 pounds of gear and wood.

To make the harness, simply attach a D ring on each side of the hip belt with web material looped over the ring’s straight edge. There will almost certainly be extra material on your 2” web belt that you can cut off and use to make your attachment points. By stitching each loop closed next to the D ring and then sewing it into place on the belt, you create an attachment point. Two inches of material per attachment point should be more than enough to create an appropriately sized loop. Sew the D ring in a vertical orientation against the belt. The D ring should be positioned on the belt as you would position a regular belt loop. The loops you sew on the belt should be just large enough to allow the D rings to rotate easily. Since you will be using the extra belt material to sew your loops just align the loop material to the belt and stitch them together. If you are attaching the loops to a belt that is wider than the width of the material you should center your loops with respect to the belt itself. The easiest way to complete this process is to slide the D ring onto the piece of material you are going to sew onto the belt then sew one end of the material on the leading edge of the belt and then sew the other end onto the trailing edge of the belt.

It is best to sew the D rings on the sides near the front of the belt. You want to transfer the weight of the sled onto your hips, and the best way to do this is by putting the attachment points on the sides and slightly in front of your hips. This also places the PVC tubes in a position where you can easily grab them if you need to guide the sled with more care. The mini-carabiners will connect the harness to the eye bolts.

If you do not feel comfortable sewing you can still make the harness. You can use a light hip belt, like a belt from a fanny pack, and simply slide the D rings on to the belt. Once you snap the belt closed position the D rings slightly in front of your left and right hips and then cinch the belt tight. The pressure from the belt will hold the D rings in place.

The mini-carabiners are used to connect the hip belt harness to the PVC tubes. Open a carabiner and slide it onto the harness and then slide it onto the eye bolt of whichever PVC tube you wish to connect to.

Final Thoughts

You have completed the sled. This basic design should be quite comfortable under most conditions. However, there are a few things you should keep in mind when hauling your gear. First, it is much easier to maneuver the sled if you position heavier items in the rear of the sled. This will help keep the sled from nosing down into the snow. Second, if you are going to navigate many hills, you may want to cross the tubes before attaching them to your harness. Attaching the right tube to the left side of your harness and the left tube to the right side of the harness will greatly reduce the chances that the sled will run away and outflank you on a descent. The penalty for crossing the tubes is reduced maneuverability.

Make sure your tarp is large enough to cover all your gear. The tarp, secured with bungee cords, will not only help keep your gear dry but also prevent the gear from spilling out of the sled should it tip over. When packing your gear you may choose to pack it simply in stuff sacks inside the tarp, but I still prefer to place the stuff sacks in some additional protection. Since you are not actually carrying the gear, there is no need to use a backpack. A large duffel bag works quite well.

There are things that can be done to improve this design. For example, next year I plan to drill a few small holes around the edge of the sled. These holes will be just large enough to allow me to string strong string around the edge of the sled. Such a cord, working much like deck lashing on a boat, should provide me with more ways to secure gear on the sled effectively.

It is important to remember that this design is not the only one out there. Some people haul sleds simply by attaching heavy rope to their hip belts and to attachment points near the front of the sled. Others use considerably shorter pieces of PVC tubing in their hauling system but thread rope through the PVC tubing to increase the overall length of the haul line. In this design a person might run 6 or 7 feet of rope through each piece of tubing. However, the tubes themselves might only be 3 feet long. The PVC tubes would then “float” along the haul ropes and add some rigidity to the design. Other designs build extra stability into the hauling system by adding cross-bracing, made by threading strong string between the main tubing near the sled.

Conclusion

I, like others who use sleds, have found that the use of a sled to haul gear has enhanced my winter backpacking trips. The ability to move lots of gear efficiently is a tremendous asset in the winter. On a recent trip to Hoist Lakes in Michigan, three companions and I hauled in on sleds all sorts of special items, including nearly 75 pounds of wood, fresh food, some very fine schnapps, and gear we wanted to try out under real-world conditions. We could have enjoyed the trip without the extra items – just not as much. A sled gives you options that may expand the range of types of trips you may be willing to take. For example, with a sled I could return to Hoist Lakes next winter for a multi-day base camp trip involving both snowshoeing and cross-country skiing. It would take several long round trips with backpack alone to haul in the supplies for such a trip: what a pleasure it would be to do it one single time with a sled.

Not Your Ordinary Lightweight Backpacker: An Interview with Bill Merchant

Not Your Ordinary Lightweight Backpacker: An Interview with Bill Merchant

Introduction

The following conversation is a continuation of one begun face to face in Bill Merchant’s dining room this past July. My husband and I were embarking on an outdoor adventure in Alaska, and we’d landed at Earth Bed and Breakfast late in the day, after the long flights that had taken us to Anchorage. In this tidy split-level house reminiscent of a chalet, a gracious, multilingual woman named Margriet van Laake accommodates paying guests and organizes tours. I did not yet know early the next day, when a wiry, sandy-haired man of about fifty scurried around laying out breakfast, that this was Margriet’s husband Bill, and that he was a master of the Alaskan wilderness in ways that an ordinary backpacker from the lower forty-eight can barely grasp. Of course we did get talking, and as croissant followed croissant, so did one tale follow another, of Bill’s exploits and of his equipment. I was spellbound. Later, when my husband and I were taking off, our host eyed our backpacks, outfitted for summer mountain weather in regulation Backpacking-Light style, with what I would call mild approval. Certainly he had seen far worse. But you see, Bill himself carries little more than half as much – in the frigid winter weather he finds so bracing. Now with winter upon us, it has been a pleasure to renew my acquaintance with him and to picture him, as the days have shortened and the temperatures have plunged, coming into his full glory.

Interview

Ellen Zaslaw: Bill, mountains come right up to the edge of Anchorage, and mountains seem to be your natural habitat. Have they always been?

Bill Merchant: Really they have. I spent four years hiking in the White Mountains of New Hampshire with my father when I was young, and I lived in Pinedale, Wyoming – that’s in the Wind River Range – all my adult life until I moved to Alaska in December of 1989.

EZ: It’s a lucky man who so enjoys his work it’s also his hobby. You teach wilderness skills, guiding your students as they face the challenges of the backcountry. And then with your free time, off you go again to the outback. What do you do out there on your own, when you’re suiting only yourself?

BM: Every trip I make is a training run of sorts. That’s a major part of my lifestyle, taking these trips out, always building, always growing. I constantly try different techniques of traveling more efficiently uphill, downhill, on rock, on snow. I may work on going quickly but quietly, or on reading tracks in the trail. I play with my layers, my diet. But most of all I’m there for the simplicity of life the wilderness allows me. When my only responsibility is to provide for my basic needs (now there’s a relative term!), I have an enormous amount of time just to appreciate my natural surroundings and enjoy being alive. The only time I experience fully each fraction of a second is when yesterday doesn’t matter and tomorrow won’t come if I don’t pay attention NOW! Those moments in most adrenaline sports are short-lived. But when you travel as a minimalist at 50 and 60 below those moments are continuous.

EZ: What about racing? What sorts do you do?

BM: I’ve run hill climbs in Wyoming, and I’ve done long distance skijoring races in Alaska. I’ve done the Coldfoot Classic over the Brooks Range on foot, and last year I did it on bike. I’ve raced in the Iditasport Extreme the last four years, twice skijoring, once biking (over snow), and last year biking and running. It wasn’t supposed to be a combination of biking and running, but I broke my bike 100 miles in; then I carried it for five or six miles over the mountains, and after that I left the bike and did the last 250 miles on foot.

EZ: Trails must look different to you than to the rest of us. The Lonely Planet Guide describes the Resurrection Pass Trail on the Kenai Peninsula as a full four days’ hike. You do it as a training run, and how long does it take you?

BM: Twelve hours, including an hour’s rest at the top. That’s a superb trail, one of my favorites.

EZ: Do you have a particular style as a racer, in terms of your attitude, your gear, or your preparation?

BM: I have a very distinctive style in terms of attitude. The more adverse the conditions, the bigger my smile is. As far as gear goes, mine differs very little from that of other race-lite veterans.

EZ: I’ll bet you used to carry heavier packs than you carry now, since just about every ultralighter did. Am I right? I know you’re very parsimonious with weight: what sorts of weights do you carry?

BM: I did carry heavier packs in the past and the ultralight method has just been a natural progression as my experience has allowed me to be comfortable with less. For racing I carry 15 lbs (that includes one liter of water) and I am self-sufficient for three days. On a three-day climbing trip at the end of summer I also carried 15 lbs (I was free-climbing with no ropes or hardware), including food. Food and fuel are what change the weight of my pack most from trip to trip. I use only two sleeping bags. One is a 3 lb 9 oz down bag with a DryLoft shell and the other is a Feathered Friends 1 3/4 lb down bag liner. If I want to be really cozy at 50 below for several hours I use them together. I carry a pair of 400-weight polar fleece pants and a down parka when I’m on a pleasure trip in the winter, but these and the amount of fuel are the only things in my pack that change from summer to winter. The pants and parka make sitting out at 40 below a bit more pleasant.

EZ: Um, “cozy” isn’t a word that comes to mind at the thought of spending several hours motionless at 50 below, but I’ll take your word for it. What prompted you to cut your weights down? How did you develop your ideas about how to do it, and how did you locate suitable gear?

BM: I developed my ideas mostly by trial and error, and suitable gear became that which passed the tests. I’m lucky enough to travel in circles now where I hear stories from people who are testing products for manufacturers, and I can avoid costly mistakes.

EZ: You’re telling me that you carry a 15-lb pack into the Alaska backcountry in winter. And you’re telling me temps might be 40 below, right? Maybe even 50 below.

BM: I’ve spent days traveling in temps of 50, 60 below and I love it. Just existing is an adrenaline sport. Very often I select a location for training just because it’s notoriously cold.

EZ: Now there’s a concept. Can all people, properly equipped and trained, tolerate those conditions?

BM: NO! Not at all! Nor do they want to.

EZ: So you’re setting out, thinking it might go down to 40, 50, 60 below. What do you carry in that pack?

BM: Well, besides the sleeping bags, pants and parka, there’s a spare wool hat (actually summer and winter), spare wool gloves, sunglasses, MSR stove and fuel, a titanium 1.3 liter pot, titanium cup, and of course food and one liter of water. The 15 lbs includes the pack. I do NOT wear or recommend any waterproof parka shell for arctic winter travel, especially for those going light with no spare dry clothing. Garments dry on the body, and they can’t when they’re covered with frozen Gore-Tex. I have a very nice Gore-Tex shell I use for rafting and I love it. But I leave it home in favor of a windproof shell in winter. I could carry a light plastic raincoat in addition if I thought I needed it.

EZ: Perhaps I should ask what you don’t carry, that most other backpackers would carry under those conditions? And how do you manage without it? For instance, I didn’t hear you say you carry a sleeping pad to use out on the snow. Do you really do without?

BM: I don’t use a pad on snow when I’m racing or doing a fast-and-light trip. My pack and outer layers can double as a pad, and I can add natural materials too. Even a few dead sticks help under the bag: if I’m really sleepy I don’t mind the bumps. Now I don’t always need to be so spartan. I do trips at varying levels of luxury. A sleeping pad is the first item I add to my fast-and-light kit as I “upgrade”. There’s a big difference between catching a little shuteye for two or three hours in a race and sleeping well on the ground all night.

EZ: You also didn’t mention carrying a shelter, or an emergency kit.

BM: I use a tent only if someone else is with me. I take a bivy sack if I expect much rain. I mean a huge amount, because most of the time my body heat burns the water off my clothes and sleeping bag. If it does rain while I’m in the bivy, I cover my face. I don’t need a whole tarp or tent for that. I’ve used a tarp but not since I bought my first bivy sack. As for emergency supplies, I carry one #4 suture and lots of Ibuprofen.

EZ: I see. This is humbling. Still, would you be taking less risk if you were carrying more?

BM: I never feel as if I’m taking a risk. If I did I’d carry more. I profess to be a risk manager, not a risk taker. Stay within your own comfort zone in the wilderness and not that of your neighbor or your ego, and you’ll stay out of trouble. I stay warm by knowing my body and how to use what I do take. The one thing I have noticed through the years is that many people don’t know how to use their clothing or their sleeping bag efficiently. What works for me may or may not work for others, depending on their metabolism, their travel strategies, and what they require for comfort.

EZ: Have you ever been out in unusual conditions, where you wondered whether your gear was going to be adequate?

BM: Twice I wondered if I was going to freeze to death. Both times it was a series of small mistakes that caused the problem. It wasn’t a matter of lower temperatures than I’ve managed on other occasions.

EZ: Did you ever feel you lacked something important that you needed?

BM: Not recently, unless you count the giant chocolate milkshake I was dreaming of during the Iditasport Extreme this year.

EZ: Is any of your gear homemade, or did you design or custom-order any of it? Or do you use as gear any items that aren’t sold as gear?

BM: While my clothing is all purpose-made as gear, still it’s a combination of biking, skiing, boating and mushing items, no matter which discipline I’m involved in at the time. And then I do redesign some gear items, and I even build some.

EZ: What are some of the things you’ve improvised?

BM: My latest modification is one of my most successful, and I’m not afraid to recommend it. Last fall I modified the Vibram soles of my NEOS overshoes to accept SPD cleats. I inserted a pair of summer-weight mountain-biking shoes inside, and then I mounted the cleats with long screws, which I ran through the soles of the overshoes (trimmed to receive them) and screwed into the bike shoes. The thick sole and the dead air space (and some thick wool socks) in these light, waterproof boots kept my feet toasty.

In quite a different vein, I had incredible fun creating a pulka from scratch, for my long-distance skijoring team.

EZ: Skijoring? Pulka? I don’t think we in New York know about such things. What are they?

BM: Sorry! The pulka is a sled pulled behind a skier with dogs pulling in front, or sometimes the sled is rigged between the skier and the dogs, though I prefer the former. Skijoring is touring in this configuration or any other, even one using a vehicle, that pulls the skier along.

So, these pulkas I designed are built with the same materials as toboggan-type dog sleds, but without the driving bow (handlebars) mushers need, and much lighter. The runners are half as thick as a traditional dog sled’s and so is the bottom. The sled weighs 12 lbs, which is very light for what it was designed to do, yet it’s bombproof, much tougher than the light plastic children’s sleds many mountaineers drag along. It’s a good compromise between weight minimization and toughness, since for a week-long trip I have loads up to 60 lbs, including frozen meat for us all, fuel, cooker, etc., and of course the pulka itself. There was no such equipment available on the racing circuit before, so this greatly expanded the range of possibilities, both for equipment and technique.

One other thing I made falls somewhere between modification and invention. It’s a stove just right for me and three dogs, a small version of the stove a musher with a full team would use. I made it from two pots, one fitting inside the other with just a bit of clearance on the sides so it can heat on the sides as well as the bottom. The inner pot sits on rods inserted through the outer pot. The burner is a coffee can cut down and placed under the inner pot. An old dog bootie serves as a wick (one per cooking) and alcohol is the fuel.

EZ: Many of our readers have made stoves with cans: Pepsi cans, catfood cans, you name it. But I don’t know how many have used dog booties in the setup. Let’s go back for a moment to those plastic sleds you mentioned. Do you take one of those with you when you go mountaineering?

BM: I’ve tried it in the past but no, I prefer just to carry my load. It’s not worth the trouble of trying to maneuver it on the steep parts. And I’d be even less interested in dragging something as heavy as my pulka. But one man took my pulka on Denali and loved the way it gripped on the slopes. That wouldn’t be my style at all.

EZ: Tell us about your diet, on and off the trail, and some trail foods that work well for you. Are there any special challenges keeping hydrated and fed at those way-below-zero temps?

BM: The colder it is the more you have to eat. They should put workout rooms in freezers for people who need to lose weight. Also, the colder the air is, the drier, so the need for water goes up sharply as well. I drink six to eight liters of water a day when I’m racing; I have to work up to that gradually as part of my training. I consume around 5500-6500 calories a day when I’m traveling on my own, and it’s more like 9000-9500 when I’m racing. About 60% of my diet comes from animal fat, even in town: at the kinds of temps I deal with in winter, neither a lower-fat diet nor a vegetarian one would cut it. Some of my students who start out vegetarian become what I call “urban vegetarian.” They’re vegetarian back in the city, but not out on the trail.

You know what’s a great trail food for me? A stick of butter rolled in brown sugar. An essential trail food for multi-day racing, by the way – I travel 18-22 hours and often sleep only an hour and a half out of each 24 – is chocolate-covered espresso beans. I eat enough of them that I count them as part of my daily caloric intake. Also I really enjoy smoked salmon in the backcountry. Of course in winter the bears are asleep, but I pack it in summer, too, though some people wouldn’t.

EZ: Are you troubled by the diuretic and potentially dehydrating effects of all that coffee? Does the salty smoked fish make you thirsty, or bloated? Are you concerned about the effects of animal fats on your cholesterol level?

BM: No, no, and no. If certain foods make me thirsty, that’s fine: I need to drink. And since I do drink a lot, I don’t suffer any special discomforts. My cholesterol level gets checked regularly and it’s normal.

EZ: You push your body pretty hard. Do you do anything special, besides keeping well hydrated, to keep aches and pains at bay?

BM: On the trail I take three Ibuprofen, four times a day. The one time I neglected to do so, I wound up in bad shape. Some athletes alternate Tylenol and Ibuprofen so they can take a larger total. Of course keeping in condition is more than half the battle. I ravaged one of my knees years ago, tearing the meniscus and blowing out the anterior cruciate ligament, but it turns out not to matter at all; really it’s a question of keeping up the muscle tone.

EZ: I understand you teach people of every experience level, from beginners to experts. I can imagine it’s quite a stimulating exchange between you and, say, a wilderness pro from the tropics. Have you encountered any experts lately who have yet to lighten up?

BM: Sure.

EZ: Are there any who know about ultralight methods but stick with heavier loads because they trust them more?

BM: Yes, a large number travel heavy by ultralight standards. Philosophies of wilderness travel are as varied among the experts as they are in the general population. How much protection a given person needs between the body and the elements is a crucial factor, though, and sometimes it’s overlooked. Many who travel ultralight shouldn’t. The evidence is in the news around here quite often. I think if rescue weren’t an option, a large percentage of hikers would carry more gear.

EZ: People who venture into the outdoors meet new challenges regularly. In the beginning practically everything is a new challenge. You’ve said you yourself are still learning, sometimes even from the fresh perspective of a newcomer to the wilderness experience, or for that matter a child. But you’ve been honing these skills for many years, and you spend huge amounts of time out there, compared to the typical backpacker reading this magazine. So tell us, at least until something new catches your eye, have you got it all worked out? Do you feel the gear you’ve developed is ideal for your purposes, or are you still actively tinkering with any of it?

BM: My gear is always a work in progress. I can’t imagine a life without tinkering with it. In particular, at the moment I’m rethinking my backpack. Backpacks have come a long way recently (in terms of weight) and I’m actively looking for something better.

EZ: Backpackers who’ve been indoors too long daydream about their last time or maybe their next time on the trail: sweet air, an uplifting view, and the rewards of physical exertion. We’re animals, after all. We sense that we belong in the landscape. Or is it just that we dream of what we’ve left behind? Do you when you’re in the wilderness ever long for a chance to be inactive and breathe stale air, surrounded by four walls?

BM: I have the feeling this is a rhetorical question! Truly, the only thing I’ve ever missed in the wilderness is the company of my loved ones.

EZ: Where will you venture next?

BM: I have a training partner who has a new-found interest in mountaineering, and I’ve been doing peaks in the Chugach with him in preparation for a January ascent of Gannett Peak in Wyoming. I attempted Gannett solo in 1989 but wound up marooned in a snow cave for two and a half days during a windstorm, and I ran out of time. I look forward to skiing the 25 miles in to the mountain, through some of the most beautiful country in the lower states (I’m from Wyoming so I may be biased) – really just as much as I look forward to the climb to the summit. The ascent to the summit is only an excuse to train more in these beautiful mountains here at home.

EZ: And then the training you’ve invested at home becomes an excuse to summit, and the summiting an excuse to ski in . . . . I think you’ve invented a form of perpetual motion, Bill! And that’s wonderfully fitting.

For more information about Bill Merchant’s signature winter races:

http://www.alaskaultrasport.com/

Western Mountaineering, Feathered Friends, Nunatak, and PhD Lightweight Down Jackets (Comparison Review)

Introduction

A lightweight down jacket is a wonderful thing. A down jacket can have up to three to five times more loft than its synthetic counterpart (e.g. a Patagonia Puffball, Moonstone Cirrus, or MEC Northern Lite). The additional loft of down keeps you a lot warmer and makes the jacket ideal for an integrated jacket/bag/bivy system that can save you a bunch of weight. Finally, with the newer water-resistant and breathable outer-shell technologies, the risk of getting the down wet is much lower.

There are more than a few lightweight down jackets on the market. The problem is that the really light down jackets are not stocked in major retail stores. It’s hard to get a close look at just one of them, let alone a number side by side. A few people have taken the plunge and mail-ordered one of these jackets. But given these jackets’ high prices, it’s unlikely that anyone has acquired a number of them side by side for comparison. I decided to take the problem on and by various means managed to get four of the better lightweight jackets together for comparison.

Index:

  • Nunatak Kobuk
  • Western Mountaineering Down Jacket
  • PHD Minimus Jacket
  • Feathered Friends Helios
  • Comparison Chart and Measuring Loft
  • Microfiber fabrics

Nunatak Kobuk

Nunatak Kobuk 19.3 oz – 4.26 in loft – 0.22 in loft/oz
More Info: http://www.nunatak.com/

The Kobuk is the jacket I would want if the weather were cold and I had to spend a lot of time in a down jacket. It’s a superb lightweight choice for adventurous winter outings or to supplement a lower-rated sleeping bag as part of an integrated bag/jacket/bivy sleep system. Excellent loft, a durable and highly water-resistant Epic shell, cavernous pockets, solid zippers, and generous fit are a few of the plusses of this jacket. This was the heaviest jacket tested but also the most generous in fit, the richest in features, and the best thought out in design. (With the extended rear hem removed, the Kobuk would be in the weight range of the Western Mountaineering and Helios jackets.) The Kobuk jacket feels wonderful when you put it on. Both as measured and subjectively, the medium Kobuk is a bit larger in the torso than the medium Minimus and medium Western Mountaineering down jackets and a lot roomier than the large Helios. The Kobuk was one of the jackets with the highest loft. Chamber fill seemed just right — not too stingy on the down but not so overfilled as to waste down loft by compression.

With the Epic outer shell and 1.3 oz taffeta liner, the Kobuk can probably handle just about anything you can throw at it. Nextec’s Epic is a silicone-encapsulated microfiber fabric that gives the shell enhanced moisture protection and greater durability. (Please see the discussion of shell fabrics at the end of this article LINK.) The Kobuk was the only jacket with a down-filled extended rear hem, which probably added around an ounce of weight. Nunatak will add a down hood to the jacket for an additional $45.

Improvements: Moving a bit of down from the arms to the torso would make the Nunatak a bit warmer without increasing weight. A Velcro flap wrist closure would be nice and is available at no extra charge. I like the Epic fabric, but if light weight were your ultimate goal, you could substitute a Pertex Microlight outer shell (with its DWR). Likewise, if, like me, you aren’t sure you see the need for the extended rear hem, you could remove it; and you could use .85 oz nylon for the liner fabric. With these changes, you could get the jacket down to approximately 16 oz. Since Nunatak is a custom shop, you can get just about any variation you want.

Western Mountaineering Down Jacket

Western Mountaineering Down Jacket 17.8 oz – 4.14 in loft – 0.23 in loft/oz
More Info: http://www.westernmountaineering.com/latestnews.htm/
Note: Backcountry Gear has the best description of the jacket at: http://www.backcountrygear.com/catalog/appareldetail.cfm/WE4000

The Western Mountaineering (WM) down jacket is another solid high-loft jacket with lots of features. The WM jacket uses 1.3 oz nylon for the liner fabric and a new 1.7 oz polyester, Teijin 30/36™ Micro Fiber, for the outer shell. The WM website says the following about this fabric (Please see the discussion of shell fabrics at the end of this article LINK.):

“This proprietary MicroFiber fabric has threads and their filaments so tightly packed that air spaces are few and too small for wind and rain to breach. Since the fabric construction itself is responsible for weatherproofness, it’s not something that can wear off, wash out or delaminate. It is built in! This is the most technologically advanced non-laminated weather resistant fabric.”

The WM jacket was the second heaviest of the jackets tested, but it competed with the Kobuk in design and features. Down fill of the chambers seems about right. Front zippered pockets are smaller than the Kobuk’s but are insulated on both sides. The fit is a just a bit snugger than the Kobuk’s. Freedom of arm movement is excellent. The jacket has an ingenious interior cargo pocket with a fold-out extension collar that doubles as an excellent stuff sack with drawcord and toggle. This was the only jacket with Velcro flap wrist closures.

Improvements: It’s close to perfection. Skip the insulated hand warmer pockets and use light fabric for pocket liners. A bit of the down in the arms could be moved to the torso. With these changes, warmth would be increased and weight should be right around 17 oz.

PHD Minimus Jacket

PHD Minimus Jacket 12.0 oz – 2.97 in loft – 0.25 in loft/oz
More Info: http://www.phdesigns.co.uk/minimus.html/

At 12.0 ounces, the PHD Minimus is the lightest jacket tested. It also is one of the ones with the highest loft per ounce of jacket weight. It has a generous fit and the best arm movement. The Minimus is an excellent choice for summer insulation. It is 2 to 4 ounces lighter than a synthetic fiber jacket (e.g. Puffball Pullover or Moonstone Cirrus) but at 3 inches of loft it has 3 to 3.5 times the loft of the synthetics. The Minimus uses PHD’s proprietary M1 microfiber for both shell and liner. My best guess is that this fabric is similar to WM’s Teijin 30/36 shell but lighter — at a guess, somewhere around .85 to 1.4 oz. (Please see the discussion of shell fabrics at the end of this article LINK.) This is not a jacket you want to go bashing around in. There is a Drishell option for the outer fabric, which increases water resistance and adds 1 oz.

To be fair, the PHD is a bit stingy on down. This gives the garment a bit of a saggy dishrag look. This is not necessarily bad, but it can cause a negative reaction in uninformed consumers. Be assured that the down in the PHD is unrestricted and lofting the maximum amount. The jacket could easily take a few more ounces of down before reaching its maximum chamber capacity.

Note: 0.25 inches of loft per ounce of jacket weight for the Minimus is a considerable achievement. Since shell weight is constant, the less down you use the lower your loft per ounce is. As you add down, your loft-per-ounce ratio goes up significantly with just the addition of a few ounces. This works until you reach the capacity of the shell’s down chambers.

Improvements: Add one or two more ounces of down to the jacket and it could boost its loft to 3.5 or 4.0 inches. This might increase the loft of the jacket to .29 inches per ounce.

Feathered Friends Helios

Feathered Friends Helios 17.3 oz – 4.24 in loft – 0.25 in loft/oz
More Info: http://www.featheredfriends.com/outerwear/ultra.htm#helios/

This jacket vied for the honor of having both the greatest loft and highest ratio of loft per ounce. The jacket looks like a million bucks with its puffy Michelin Man chambers. It’s sure to be a winner with consumers. The Helios uses a snug fit and lots of down to achieve high loft and low weight. If you want the basic minimum of features and a body-hugging fit, and you groove on very plump down chambers, this may be the high-performance jacket for you. Meanwhile, this jacket was the most difficult to review. I had some confusion with the size, weight and loft of the jacket.

Size: The Helios, the only size large tested, was smaller than any medium jacket under review, both by measurement and by subjective fit. Everything about the Helios is scaled down. The large Helios had the tightest torso, the shortest arms, the shortest hem, and the smallest pockets of the jackets I examined. The interior pocket opening was so narrow I couldn’t fit my hand inside.

I’m 5’9”, 155 lbs, with a 39 inch chest. I swim in many medium garments, but I found the fit of the large Helios very snug. FF states that “The lighter pieces are cut to be worn in place of sweaters, not over them. If you want a more relaxed fit, choose the next larger size.” Considering this and noting the sizing charts, I conclude I should choose a large for the Helios. Yet in this size, the jacket was far from a relaxed fit. True to its billing, this jacket is not one I would want to put on over anything besides a shirt or base layer. The sleeves were tight and arm movement was a bit restricted by the snug fit, short length, and stiffness from the expanded chambers. The sleeves just covered my wrists. Pulling my hands back into the sleeves wasn’t an option. (The jacket does have insulated hand-warmer pockets.) Fortunately the sleeves have good articulation and raising my arms overhead didn’t lift the hem that much.

Weight: The jacket was also about 1 oz over FF’s specification weight, perhaps a bit more. (Medium is quoted at 15 ounces, so I figure large should be around 16 ounces.) My guess is that most of the extra weight is down fill. I would love to have the person who filled this jacket pouring drinks for me at the bar. This baby is just stuffed with down. The small Helios I examined was overweight as well. Even with custom-made shorter arms, the small weighed more than FF’s stated weight for a medium.

Loft: Given the small shell size and amount of down, it isn’t surprising that the Helios achieves over 4 inches of loft with 750+ fill power down. The two Helios jackets I tested, a large and a small, differed significantly in loft. The large measured 4.24 inches and the small 3.49 inches. I have reported 4.24 inches of loft on the accompanying table but be aware that if you have a less generous stuffer at FF, your jacket may be closer to spec. weight and around 3.5 inches in loft. This would equate to around .22 inches of loft per ounce.

My Helios used 1.9 oz Epic for its outer shell and 1.1 oz nylon for an internal lining. FF has since changed to using 1.3 oz taffeta as the standard lining. Except for insulated hand-warmer pockets, the jacket has the basic minimum of features — a non-insulated draft flap for the single- slider front zipper, elastic hem and wrist closures, and a small zippered napoleon pocket on the inside. FF will make you a matching hood if you request and like Nunatak they are a custom shop, so you can get just about any variation you want.

In summary, the Helios is high on performance. It is a very light, high- loft jacket with a minimal set of features. If you like the fit and are fond of very stuffed chambers, this may be just the jacket for you. It will certainly keep you warm.

Improvements: The down chambers on the Helios I tested were very plumply filled. Some of the down’s loft may be wasted by compression in the chambers. Skip the insulated hand warmer pockets and use light fabric for pocket liners. Enlarge the opening on the interior pocket. Change jacket sizing to be more in keeping with that of the rest of the industry, or at least state that your ideal fit for the Helios may be a bit tighter than what many consumers expect, even when purchased a size larger.

Down Jacket Comparison (Table)

  • Download the Down Jacket Comparison Table: Adobe PDF

About Measuring Down Loft

Measuring the loft of a down garment is a difficult thing. Each of the many chambers has a slightly different loft. Measure a jacket once, pick it up and shake it, put it down and measure it again, and you won’t get the same number. Measure it a day later and you’ll get yet another number. All of the jackets increased 10% to 20% in loft over the week of observation. As such, my loft figures are probably as good as you can expect. Under trail conditions where it has been stuffed in your pack all day, you’ll likely have less loft.

I measured each jacket four times over the course of the week. Each time I made ten measurements on a jacket, four on the torso and six on the arms.

A level was used to make loft measurement more accurate.

I took the best two (namely, loftiest) of the measurement sessions for each jacket and averaged them for the loft measurements reported in the comparison table.

The weighted loft figure I report in the comparison table takes into account that torso loft covers more of your body and is more important to overall warmth than sleeve loft. Weighted loft is calculated as follows:

Weighted Loft = [(2 x Torso Loft) + Sleeve Loft] / 3

Thus torso loft gets twice the weight of arm loft in the final loft figure.

Note: Just for amusement, I made the same measurements on my early 90’s Gore-Tex down sweater. It had 3.75 inches of loft, weighed 20.8 ounces and only had .18 inches of loft per ounce. Clearly we’ve come a long way.

About the Microfiber Fabrics

Epic is more water resistant but less breathable than Teijin 30/36. It has a somewhat looser weave and depends on silicone encapsulation to repel water and to close spaces between fibers. After encapsulation, the Epic fabric is very water resistant but not as breathable as untreated microfibers like Teijin 30/36. According to Feathered Friends, Epic is water and wind resistant to 4 lbs/sq. inch. The water resistance is a permanent feature of the Epic fabric and can’t be washed out like a durable water-resistant finish (DWR). Epic is good for light rain, heavily condensing shelters and wet snow. Think of it as a little less waterproof but more breathable than a standard waterproof breathable fabric.

Teijin 30/36 has a very tight weave in both directions and depends on leaving almost no space between the fibers for wind and water resistance. It is more breathable than Epic. A Teijin 30/36 shelled jacket will have less condensation from internal moisture and will dry out faster if damp. According to WM, Teijin 30/36 resists the moisture of mist, fog, dry snow or an inadvertent splash of water — but any greater exposure to moisture and you’ll need a rain shell to protect the jacket. You’d better make sure that your regular rain shell has enough room to fit over a lofty down jacket.

PHD’s M1 is a proprietary fabric. In the absence of any other information, I would guess that the properties of the M1 microfiber fabric are similar to those of Teijin’s 30/36. M1 is probably a lighter fabric than the 1.7 oz 30/36.

The BPL.com lab will likely do some testing on the water resistance and breathability of these emerging microfiber fabrics in the future.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Nunatak Gear for providing the Kobuk Jacket

Thanks to Ellen and Neal Zaslaw for lending me their Helios Jackets.

2001 Raingear Roundup Review Summary

Introduction

Long awaited, read the results of a months-long review of raingear that includes extensive laboratory and field testing of fabrics and garments by the BackpackingLight.COM Product Review Staff.

Introduction

In the Spring of 2001, BackpackingLight.COM embarked on a full-scale program of rainwear testing that included seventeen individual garments from seven different manufacturers. These garments included:

  • 1 poncho
  • 9 hooded jackets
  • 1 non-hooded jacket
  • 2 hooded pullovers
  • 3 non-hooded pullovers
  • 1 non-hooded crew

The criterion for inclusion in this review was a simple one: each garment had to weigh less than 13 ounces. Certainly we did not include every garment on the market that met this criterion. Some manufacturers simply declined to participate in the review. Others submitted one or two but perhaps not all of the garments in their product line that met this criterion. Finally, there came a time when we had to close the invitation in order to give each garment a fair field trial.

We feel that this is one of the most comprehensive comparison reviews of raingear ever performed, because we looked at virtually every detail, including breathability, ventilation, waterproofness, fit, mobility, and other features. It includes more different types of raingear than can be found in other reviews.

In addition, we offer the first results to appear out of the Beartooth Mountain Product Research and Testing Laboratory – our own independent laboratory for testing the performance of products side by side, under the same test conditions. The fabric breathability measurements presented in this review came from this laboratory effort.

Finally, we sent a selection of garments to Associate Editor Alan Dixon, who tested thoroughly their ability to ventilate moisture. His results appear both in this review and in his companion article, High-Exertion Moisture Accumulation in Rain and Wind Shells.

We hope that this review provides you with a fair assessment of raingear currently available. More importantly, we hope that it helps you look at these – and other garments – with a sense of objectivity that will allow you to choose the garment best suited to your needs.

Contents:

  • Frogg Toggs
  • GoLite
  • Integral Designs
  • Montane
  • Rainshield
  • Red Ledge
  • Sierra Designs
  • Trail’s Best Award
  • Raingear Comparison Table
  • Review Criteria Discussion

Enjoy!
Ryan Jordan, Editor-in-Chief, and
the BackpackingLight.COM Product Testing Team

Frogg Toggs Original Pullover

There are few differences between the Frogg Toggs Pro Action Jacket and the Original Pullover, but the differences are significant.

The Pullover sports a short neck zipper (vs. a full-length zipper), and a shorter hem (by several inches) that rides above the waistline when the wearer reaches overhead.

On the upside, the pullover offers a kangaroo pocket that is accessible even under a pack, so you can stash those few necessities needed while hiking. The pocket is large enough for a map, a few energy bars, or a pair of gloves.

Finally, it is 2.4 ounces lighter than the Pro Action Jacket, so if you want the torso volume characteristic of Frogg Toggs and are looking to minimize weight (with some loss of storm protection for the trunk, and ventilation), then the Pullover may be appropriate.

At 7.1 oz, only three garments in this review came in lighter (and only one of those – the less durable and far trimmer Rainshield Multi-Use Jacket – has a hood).

Final Grade: B-

More Info: http://www.froggtoggs.com/

Frogg Toggs Pro-Action Jacket

Like most polypropylene rainwear in this review, the Pro Action Jacket is a simple garment that took a surprising amount of abuse. Still, it was not appropriate for bushwhacking through brambles, due to the relatively fragile nature of the polypropylene fabric.

On first inspection, the Pro Action Jacket appeared to be far too baggy for our tastes, but after being constricted by the trim cuts, low sleeve volumes, creeping hems and cuffs, and cramped hoods of the other garments in this review, testers learned not only to appreciate the freedom of movement but to relish it.

The Pro Action Jacket is roomy enough to layer over the loftiest down sweater, and it offers unparalleled mobility and freedom of movement, at a cost of bagginess. One other benefit of the bagginess (combined with the excellent resilience, which is to say resistance to draping) of the three-layer polypropylene fabric: it promotes air movement through the jacket for good ventilation. Another advantage of the Pro Action Jacket is a fine storm flap with snaps over the front zipper; this gives excellent storm resistance (with a touch of added warmth, perhaps). One the downside, this voluminous jacket’s extra fabric adds weight and, more importantly, it can get in the way, snagging on trail brush.

Torso volume could certainly be reduced without decreasing the jacket’s functionality. In addition, the hood was uncomfortable when cinched, due to a certain “stickiness” of the fabric and its inability to slide easily over hair or a fleece hat); and it had no brim to offer eye protection in driving rain.

The Pro Action Jacket is a head-to-head competitor with Rainshield’s 3-layer polypropylene Sporting Jacket (see review below) and was an easy favorite between the two among our testers.

Final Grade: A-

More Info: http://www.froggtoggs.com/

Frogg Toggs Raincoat

Remember cagoules? Those ultra-long anoraks that provided full trunk protection so you could safely leave the rain pants at home? That even provide shelter as an emergency bivy? The Frogg Toggs Raincoat is probably closer to a cagoule than any other type of garment, but it is better: it sports a full-length zipper and a breathable fabric, while cagoules were typically made from nonbreathable coated fabrics.

Marketed primarily as a long street coat (e.g., for traffic officers), the Raincoat just might be a concept worth pursuing in backpacking rainwear. Our testers balked at the design when they first received it, but when the heavens poured out, this was the jacket they wanted for standing around in the rain.

To our surprise, the Raincoat received high marks for comfort on the trail, but testers found that it was not as versatile as Frogg Toggs’ Pro Action Jacket for highly active use (it has a lower volume torso and a less articulated cut), and they did not appreciate the jacket’s hem dragging around on the muddy ground when it came time to cook meals and pitch the tents. The extra hem length tends to get in the way on brushy trails, and our test samples suffered the consequences with tears.

However, if you’re looking for something different and want to turn heads on the trail with some style and a look that says “I’m with the CIA, can you guess what’s under my trenchcoat?” then the Frogg Toggs Raincoat is just for you.

Final Grade: B

More Info: http://www.froggtoggs.com/

Frogg Toggs Wind Shirt

The Frogg Toggs Wind Shirt is the simplest garment in this review. There are no zippers, hood, or adjustable cuffs or hem. It is essentially a waterproof-breathable sweatshirt with synthetic knit cuffs and waist hem.

Our reviewers struggled to find a niche for this garment in a backpacker’s arsenal of raingear, and in the end they recommended that it would be appropriate for rain protection for hikers only when they are relatively inactive around camp.

Alternatively, it might serve as an emergency piece. However, even for such limited applications, there are lighter, more functional alternatives. Zero options for ventilation and knit cuffs and a hem that absorbed a good bit of water motivated testers to give this jacket low marks as backpacking raingear (or as wind shirt for that matter).

Our testers are sure that this garment has an application, but they’re still searching for it (one suggested that the torso be emblazoned with a college mascot logo and sold by vendors at outdoor football stadiums).

Final Grade: D+

More Info: http://www.froggtoggs.com/

GoLite Squall and Newt Jackets

[Editor’s Note: The only difference between the new Squall and Newt is a minor one: the Squall has a mesh-backed ventilation flap on the upper back of the jacket.]

The Squall’s unique features include its voluminous torso (suitable even for layering over a down jacket), sleeves that are long enough to withdraw hands into, and a very long hem that kept wearers’ trunks completely dry in the rain.

Also readily apparent is its very light weight – 9.6 oz (men’s size M) for a full-featured, roomy jacket that is completely waterproof and breathable; this made it the lightest of its kind in this review.

The Squall is simplicity itself – if you like a minimum of drawcords, seams, and frills, then the Squall might be just your ticket.

However, testers did discover a few limitations. First, the simple brimless hood did not provide adequate face protection from driving rain; (on the other hand, its volume was ample for layering over warm hats). And although the sleeves crept up the wrists slightly when testers reached overhead, the jacket provided very good torso, hood, and arm mobility.

In the field, the testers felt that the fabric seemed to be breathable enough for comfort while they moved at a moderate pace, but the jacket’s lack of ventilation features (e.g., pit zips, mesh-backed pockets) kept testers too warm when they moved fast in rain that was hard enough for them to keep the front zipper fully zipped.

In addition, the position of the pockets low on the torso prevented them from being accessed under a pack’s hip belt.

All in all, testers appreciated the Squall’s simple design, long cut, and minimal weight. It does its primary job – protecting from rain – very well. However, its lack of supplemental ventilation features (e.g. mesh-lined pockets placed high on the torso, adjustable wrist cuffs for forearm ventilation) made it just a shy too steamy under some conditions and prevented it from earning an “A” grade.

Final Grade: B+ (Squall), B (Newt)

More Info: http://www.golite.com/

Integral Designs Sil Poncho

The Sil Poncho (which doubles as a very functional 5′ x 8′ tarp for shelter – and a pack cover) is one of two nonbreathable products in this review. However, unlike a jacket, it offers ample ventilation with its open hem and sleeves, allowing the hiker to remain quite comfortable on the trail. We found that when the poncho was worn over a pack and the hood left open, there was no overheating, even during uphill hiking (assuming the wearer was dressed appropriately underneath the poncho).

For added storm resistance, you can fasten the two snaps down each side and tie a cord around your waist from the rear of the poncho (using the poncho’s guy loops) to control flapping. This worked surprisingly well, though it hindered ventilation significantly.

The large-volume hood makes head-turning difficult when it is cinched tight, because the ultra-slippery fabric doesn’t move with head. However it does provide excellent ventilation and face coverage when not cinched.

Lacking sleeves, the poncho exposes the forearms and hands if the hiker is using trekking poles, but otherwise arms can be drawn completely inside for full body protection as needed.

Although we recognize the primary limitations of the poncho due to the excess of fabric, we like ponchos for their light weight, multi-use functionality (i.e., pack cover, rainwear, and shelter), and wonderful ventilation.

Integral Designs’ incarnation of the poncho is excellent for its very good hood and its design as a quality tarp. A stiffened hood brim and a volume-adjustment drawstring would make it virtually perfect.

Final Grade: A-

More Info: http://www.integraldesigns.com/

Montane Hyper-Activ Smock

The Hyper-Activ Smock was the only garment in this review with a wicking mesh lining, which improved perceived comfort (by minimizing clamminess through moisture dispersion) and increased warmth. Thus, this was our testers’ choice for a serious cold-weather rain and wind shell.

A excellent (but trim) fit, in addition to its warmth and breathablility, made the Hyper-Activ one of the most comfortable garments in this review.

Since the smock is intended for use in cold and cold/windy conditions, an integrated hood would increase both the warmth and water resistance of this garment, and factory taped seams would be appropriate considering the waterproofness of the face fabric (Pertex Tri-Activ).

For a garment that is only slightly heavier than similar ones (e.g. Marmot’s DriClime Windshirt or Patagonia’s Zephur Jacket), the Hyper-Activ offers increased water resistance and warmth which make it more appropriate for sustained cold and wet conditions.

Final Grade: B+

More Info: http://www.montane.co.uk/

Montane Sirocco Bike Smock

At 5.9 oz, the Sirocco Bike Smock is the lightest nylon rainwear in this review (third lightest overall). However, it achieves this weight at a price – no hood, trim cut, and a partial front zipper.

Montane takes a unique approach to rainwear with its Sirocco series, choosing to develop garments that are “showerproof” (as opposed to completely waterproof) but highly breathable.

Our tests confirmed these claims, as our testers did notice water leakage through the fabric in all-day sustained rains, but also, but on the other hand, they raved about its significantly better breathability relative to the other nylon-based waterproof-breathable jackets (from Red Ledge and GoLite) in this review. Our lab tests confirmed this as well, with the Montane fabrics testing four to five times more breathable than either Red Ledge or GoLite.

The Sirocco Bike Smock is probably the least storm-resistant garment in this review, lacking a hood, outside storm flaps, and taped seams (although the seams can be sealed with a polyurethane-based sealant).

It has a trim cut that is not appropriate for layering over bulky fleece or high-loft synthetic garments, but our testers found that it worked well when layered over long underwear and a lightweight synthetic vest like a Patagonia Puffball or Moonstone Cirrus.

A single kangaroo pocket that is backed with the garment fabric (rather than mesh) and a too-short front zipper would hinder ventilation if not for the huge (12”) twin core vents on the front of the torso. These are effective enough that this garment might be considered as a serious alternative to a wind shirt.

If you’re looking for a bare-bones rain shell that provides decent shower protection and durability for high levels of activity, the Sirocco Smock warrants serious attention.

Our testers’ only recommended changes to this garment were factory-taped seams and slightly more torso volume, and well, that’s about it. This one is a winner in the “hoodless” category.

Final Grade: B+

More Info: http://www.montane.co.uk/

Montane Sirocco Jacket

If the hoodless Smock and Bike Smock from Montane do not give you enough features, yet you want to enjoy the benefits of a highly breathable fabric in an abrasion-resistant nylon construction, then the Sirocco Jacket might be your best choice.

It offers slightly more room in the torso than the other two, and its double-layer hood failed to leak in the field, even in an all-day rain.

The articulation of the jacket is superb: the cuffs and hem remain where they are supposed to when the wearer reaches overhead, and the jacket is particularly comfortable under a pack, featuring high pockets and good head-turning mobility under the hood. In terms of fit and mobility, the Sirocco Jacket takes top honors in this review.

The Pertex Tri-Activ fabric (and untaped seams that can, incidentally, be sealed for added protection) will not prevent water entry in an all-day rain, yet the very high breathability of this jacket results in surprising comfort during periods of high exertion.

Despite the lack of supplemental ventilation features, the Sirocco Jacket’s full front zipper and wide wrist cuffs with a straight hem combine to vent the forearms much more effectively than the elastic construction that has become the industry standard.

Testers’ key complaints concerned the lack of factory seam taping (since most water entry did occur at the seams); the use of Pertex Tri-Activ (instead of mesh) as pocket backing, preventing the dual use of pockets as torso vents; and the lack of a brim to protect the eyes in wind-driven rain when the hood is cinched tight.

At 8.8 oz, this jacket offered the best fit in the review, and it was a favorite among the reviewers.

Final Grade: A-

More Info: http://www.montane.co.uk/

Montane Sirocco Smock

The Sirocco Smock is a well-designed anorak with highly breathable material and an excellent but trim fit.

This smock could be improved with better ventilation options and sealed seams.

A single zipper along the sides (extended 11” upward from the hem) fail to provide adequate ventilation of the upper torso due to the relatively short neck zipper (10”). An improvement would be to replace the side zips with lighter front core vents similar to those on the Montane Sirocco Bike Smock, Sierra Designs Backpacker’s Rainwear Jacket, and the Montane Hyper-Activ Smock.

Improved ventilation, factory-taped seams, and a simple hood might earn this garment an “A” grade for a general-use backpacking anorak.

Final Grade: B

More Info: http://www.montane.co.uk/

Rainshield Cross Training Jacket

Raingear doesn’t get much simpler than this. This jacket has a full front zipper and that’s about it. No hood, adjustable cuffs or hem, pockets, storm flaps, etc.

Raingear also doesn’t get any lighter than this. At 4.3 oz, the Rainshield Cross Training Jacket may very well be the lightest waterproof-breathable (or for that matter, waterproof) rain jacket on the market.

The torso cut is trim and thus inappropriate for layering over even a midweight fleece jacket. The pattern is very simple and not articulated, so the jacket binds slightly across the shoulders and the cuffs and hem ride up while arms are reaching overhead.

Though ventilation was limited, this was not too much of a problem, as the jacket’s fabric breathed well. However, despite the fact that this fabric scored similarly to the Pertex Tri-Activ fabrics (used in Montane garments) in our laboratory breathability tests, our testers agreed unanimously that it was not as breathable as Pertex Tri-Activ in the field. Admittedly, this perception may have had as much to do with jacket design as with fabric performance.

All in all, there is not much to discuss about this jacket because frankly there are not many features to discuss. And therein lies its beauty – if you absolutely have to carry a rain jacket but do not intend to pull it out of the bottom of your pack unless it’s a dire emergency, then at 4.3 oz, this one is an ideal choice.

On this basis, this jacket fills a unique niche in the lightweight backpacking rainwear market, competing only with a (far less durable and breathable) plastic trash bag. Our only complaints were the short sleeves and too-trim torso fit.

Final Grade: B+

More Info: http://www.rainshield.com/

Rainshield Multi-Use Jacket

This is a great garment for its intended purpose – very light, basic rainwear.

Excellent fabric breathability makes up for a lack of ventilation options.

The biggest complaint with this jacket was its storm flap. All testers found it to be completely non-functional because, lacking snaps or hook-and-loop patches, it would not remain in place over the zipper (especially after long-term use and repeated stuffing and laundering).

Other problems such as the absence of drawstring toggles on the hood drawcords and sleeves with no extra allowance in length were minor design annoyances but forgivable given the $27 price tag on this jacket.

The use of ultralight but not-so-durable fabric makes this jacket a solid choice for occasional-use rain protection for trail hiking.

Final Grade: B

More Info: http://www.rainshield.com/

Rainshield Sporting Jacket

Rainshield makes two types of polypropylene garments: two-layer, offered in their Multi Use and Cross Training jackets, and a more durable three-layer, offered in their Sporting Jacket.

The Sporting Jacket competes directly with the Frogg Toggs Pro Action Jacket, and while the features are similar – they lack pockets but have a hood and a storm flap with snaps over the front zipper – there are significant differences in performance and construction.

First, the Sporting Jacket offers a longer hem and a trimmer cut. Although the torso provided plenty of volume for layering over high-loft synthetic fill garments (e.g., a Moonstone Cirrus Jacket), the non-articulated cut and short sleeves caused testers to give the jacket lower grades for mobility. A smaller hood made the jacket less storm resistant than the Frogg Toggs Pro Action Jacket and less comfortable when worn over a warm hat.

In general, testers found themselves equally comfortable (with respect to staying warm and dry) in both Rainshield and Frogg Toggs garments, despite the fact that the Rainshield fabric appears to be more breathable (as evidenced by our own laboratory testing). Perhaps the trimmer cut of the Rainshield garment does not promote venting as well as the baggier fit of the Frogg Toggs garment.

The Sporting Jacket’s strong suit is its long hem, which may even motivate you to leave rain pants at home, thus saving weight in the long run.

All in all, the Sporting Jacket is a fair purchase (and still far from a disastrous product) at $35, but all of our testers felt that the $10 premium for the Frogg Toggs Pro Action Jacket was well worth it.

Final Grade: C+

More Info: http://www.rainshield.com/

Red Ledge Thunderlight Parka (TRAIL’S BEST Award Winner)


This jacket was the testers’ unanimous top pick for best all-around rain gear and a true performance bargain for the $65 MSRP.

The heaviest jacket in the review, the Thunderlight still tips the scales at less than 13 ounces and uses its weight efficiently in a nearly perfect design.

The Thunderlight offered the best ventilation of any jacket in the test, despite being the least breathable of the “waterproof-breathables” (according to our laboratory testing of fabric breathability).

The testers’ only complaints concerned the hood, which, though otherwise well-designed, lacks a brim. Also, with the heaviest fabric of any garment in this review (3.2 oz/sq.yd.), the Thunderlight would have benefited from the use of a lighter fabric to shed a few ounces.

Final Grade: A

More Info: http://www.redledge.com/

Sierra Designs Backpacker’s Rainwear Jacket

The Backpacker’s Rainwear Jacket was rated both the most durable and the warmest of the jackets tested, due to its waterproof, non-breathable fabric. Durability was rated subjectively for abrasion resistance during both lab and field tests.

When the jacket was worn without a pack (at a mild level of exertion), the twin “core” vents on its upper torso were surprisingly effective ventilation channels; however, their effectiveness was limited under a pack’s shoulder straps, which inhibited air channeling between the torso and upper arms, as would happen with any rain jacket.

A wonderfully wide (3″) hood brim coupled with a well-designed hood gave the jacket top honors for hood mobility and eye protection in driving rain, but the hood was a little too short (causing a tight fit) when the testers wore packs or when they layered it over warm headwear.

The biggest complaint with the jacket was the lack of sleeve articulation: overhead reaching caused the wrist cuffs to ride halfway up testers’ forearms, and sleeves were not quite long enough for testers to withdraw their hands fully for added warmth and rain protection.

In addition, the handwarmer pockets were not accessible under a pack’s hip belt (they were too low), but at least wearers could warm their hands in the torso vents.

The testers’ favorite feature of the jacket was its durability: it stood up to severe abuse as the wearers bushwhacked in thick undergrowth and scrambled and scraped on rock. Testers also appreciated being able to button the jacket up to retain heat, so much so that they would seriously consider this jacket as a replacement for waterproof-breathable raingear for this feature alone.

With additional volume (height) in the hood and length in the sleeves, the jacket might be something of an industry model of excellence for a flattering and comfortable fit; as it is, though, it falls short. In addition, despite the presence of core vents, testers felt that ventilation was inadequate and that pit or forearm zippers would be well worth their added weight.

Final Grade: B

More Info: http://www.sierradesigns.com/

Sierra Designs Microlight Anorak

The Microlight’s first serious strike against it was the choice of using a nonbreathable fabric in a poorly-ventilated anorak design. Changing the backing of the front pocket to mesh to create a core vent and/or adding pit zips would improve its performance for high-exertion activity.

The Microlight fabric is waterproof, yet in lacking seam taping the jacket is somewhat at cross-purposes with itself (although the consumer can certainly seal the seams with a polyurethane-based sealant). Leakage occurred significantly in seams across the upper torso and middle of the back, a lapse in pattern design apparent in no other garment in this review.

The positive features of this garment are its durability-to-weight ratio: at 8.3 oz, this would be a great jacket for weathering a hail storm, but we can’t recommend it for much else.

Final Grade: C-

More Info: http://www.sierradesigns.com/

Trail’s Best Awards: Raingear

You’d think our testers could reach a consensus about a Trail’s Best Award with 17 garments from which to choose, but the decision was a difficult one. They found at least minor faults with all of the garments, but still a few products stood out as having excellent performance-to-weight ratios.

All of the following garments fill unique product niches with little overlap (which means you really need to own several!), and they offer tremendous performance-to-weight ratios. Thus, we highly recommend each of the following garments with a Trail’s Best Honorable Mention:

  • The Integral Designs Sil Poncho offers multi-use functionality, terrific ventilation, and unparalleled construction quality;
  • The GoLite Squall Jacket offers room for layering, long sleeves and hem, light weight, and a supple and quiet ultralight fabric in a full-featured nylon jacket;
  • The Frogg Toggs Pro Action Jacket offers plenty of room for layering with excellent storm resistance, warmth, and breathabilty for a great price;
  • The Montane Sirocco Jacket blends fit with functionality in a terrific all-around package that takes top honors for breathability;
  • The Rainshield Cross-Training Jacket provides absolute simplicity and a ridiculously light weight for a waterproof-breathable garment;

Minor upgrades to each of these garments could elevate their status from “very good” to “best in class.”

However, one garment stands out above the rest, due in large part to its high price-performance ratio. Ironically, it is the heaviest garment in the review, but at 12.8 ounces, it’s hardly a back breaker. With taped seams, waterproof-breathable fabric, a mid-length cut, enough torso room for layering (and a terrific fit to boot), a functional hood, and usable pockets, this jacket is a steal at $65. But it was the addition of terrific ventilation features (pit zips and torso vents) without inflating the weight that sold us on this jacket.

So, we are pleased to award the Red Ledge Thunderlight Parka with a 2001 BackpackingLight.COM Trail’s Best Award.

Raingear Comparison Table

This table provides a comparison overview of all garments in this review.

Click for Table 1. Raingear Comparison Table Adobe PDF

For a detailed description of the review criteria, see the following pages.

Review Criteria: Weight and MSRP

Weight & Statistics

All gear was weighed on a digital scale with an accuracy of +/- 0.05 oz. Weights were rounded to the nearest 0.1 oz. The average weight of the 17 garments in this review was 8.4 oz. All garments weighed were a Men’s or Unisex size M except the GoLite Newt (Women’s size L). The lightest jacket in the review was the Rainshield Cross-Training Jacket (4.3 oz) and the heaviest garment was the Red Ledge Thunderlight Parka (12.8 oz).

MSRP

Manufacturer suggested retail prices were rounded to the nearest $5. The average MSRP for the jackets in this review was $56. The most expensive jacket in the review was the GoLite Squall ($125) and the least expensive garment was the Rainshield Multi-Use Jacket ($25).

Review Criteria: Fabric Specifications

Specifications are those reported by the manufacturer.

FACE FABRIC

The material exposed to the outside environment. Face fabrics in this review included nylons (most durable) and polypropylenes (lightest).

LINING FABRIC

The material (if any) that is exposed on the inside of the garment. Only the polypropylene garments in this review had a lining fabric. In addition, GoLite’s Newt and Squall are described as having a lining (see the comparison table), but the lining is actually a polyurethane matrix bonded directly to the inner membrane.

WATERPROOF TECHNOLOGY TYPE

A brief description of the barrier technology used in the garment. Barrier types in this review include nonbreathable coatings to nylon (silicone, polyurethane), breathable coatings to nylon (microporous polyurethane), and breathable membranes laminated to nylon (microporous membrane) or fused to polypropylene (polypropylene microporous membrane).

WATERPROOF TECHNOLOGY BONDING

Indicates whether the barrier is coated, laminated (glued), or fused (via thermal and/or ultrasonic means) to the inner and/or outer fabrics.

WATERPROOFNESS SPECIFICATION

Indicates the water pressure that the fabric is capable of withstanding before leaking. In some cases, manufacturers reported the height of a column of water (in mm), while in other cases, they reported this value as pounds per square inch (psi). To facilitate comparison, all results have been converted to psi.

WATERPROOFNESS TEST METHOD

Identifies the standard test method used to determine the waterproofness specification. It should be emphasized that results are not necessarily comparable between different test methods.

FIELD OBSERVATIONS OF WATERPROOFNESS

Indicated as “good” if no apparent leakage was observed in an all-day downpour, and “fair” if some leakage occurred. The only garments to receive a “fair” rating were unlined shells from Montane. Laboratory testing confirmed that these garments were the least waterproof of all fabrics tested (according to hydrostatic head testing in our own laboratory) but they were still waterproof enough to be classified appropriately as rainwear, based on our subjective experience with them in the field.

FINISHED FABRIC WEIGHT

Indicates the weight (in ounces per true square yard) of the fabric used in the garment construction, and it includes the combined weight of the face fabric, waterproof barrier, and inner lining fabric.

Review Criteria: Breathability Specifications

Reported by the Beartooth Mountain Product Research & Testing Laboratory
in Collaboration with BackpackingLight.COM

By Ryan N. Jordan, Ph.D., Laboratory Director

BREATHABILITY & MANUFACTURER CLAIMS

Whether or not a fabric is “breathable” is indicated by the manufacturer’s claim only. For breathable fabrics, breathability is most commonly reported as a moisture vapor transmission rate (MVTR), i.e., the quantity of moisture vapor passing through a given area of fabric in a specified period of time. We have normalized these values (see the “breathability specification” criterion) according to the industry standard of g/m2/24hr.

MVTR data was not reported by Montane, who chose instead to report breathability as a percentage (according to the test method outlined in British Standard 3424) of the MVTR through a monofilament polyester mesh fabric with 12.5% open surface area.

It should be noted that breathability results from different tests MUST NOT be compared. In many cases, breathability results from the SAME test method (performed by different laboratories) may not be comparable and can vary by up to 50% depending on the test conditions.

The “Breathability test method” criterion indicates the standard test method that the manufacturer used in reporting breathability data. Because of the variability and controversy involved in breathability testing and reporting, we do not intend to compare and discuss manufacturer-reported breathability claims, and we report them only for informative purposes.

BREATHABILITY TESTS FROM THE BEARTOOTH MOUNTAIN OUTDOOR RESEARCH & TESTING LABORATORY

[Editor’s Note]: We realize that inclusion of the following technical information will not be of great benefit to most people; however, we include it here in order to offer the more advanced consumer insight into breathability testing and to highlight the importance of performing comparison testing in the same laboratory with the same methods.

We evaluated the breathability performance of each garment in our own testing laboratory according to a modification of ASTM E 96-00 (dessicant method) with a vapor pressure gradient of approximately 5 hPa over a 27 hour period. Data was normalized and reported according to BS 3424. The data is presented as a percentage in Table 1 under the heading “BackpackingLight.COM Breathability Index” (“BI”). We do not support the reporting of actual MVTR values because of the warranted debate over their validity and ability to predict actual MVTR values under field conditions.

Test control fabrics included 1 mil polyethylene (BI = 0%) and a polyester monofilament mesh (noseeum mesh) (BI = 100%). The reported BI for each fabric is the average of triplicate tests with an average standard error of the replicates of 4.9%.

The average BI for the six “breathable” (BI > 5) fabrics in this test was 58%. Fabrics with the highest breathability indices included Pertex Tri-Activ (used on Montane garments) and 2- and 3-layer polypropylene constructions from Rainshield, with BI’s of 90%-91%, with no statistical difference between them. Frogg Toggs polypropylene constructions were next in line at 45%. Red Ledge TH4 coated nylon and GoLite’s GoDri laminated nylon were not statistically different, at 14%-17%.

It is important to realize that laboratory breathability testing according to our chosen test method (ASTM E 96) is probably not indicative of actual field performance. However, our field testing confirmed the relative differences in breathability between the garments, indicating that such (laboratory) testing may be valuable for comparison purposes.

Review Criteria: Durability

Fabric durability was evaluated in both the laboratory and the field.

Abrasion resistance was tested with a low-grit sandpaper in the lab and by extensive bushwhacking through thick forest undergrowth.

Tear resistance was evaluated by measuring the (approximate) force required to rip the fabric. Puncture resistance was evaluated by repeated cycles of “swatting” the fabric with a freshly-cut limb from a spruce tree. A grade of “good” was awarded to a fabric if no leakage was observed after the test. A grade of “fair” was awarded if minor leakage occurred, and a grade of “poor” was awarded where major leakage occurred after the test.

Review Criteria: Pockets, Hem, Cuffs, Front Zipper, Hood, Torso Volume

POCKETS

Table 1 reports pocket types, whether or not the pockets are accessible while wearing a pack, what type of material the pockets are backed with (note that mesh-backed pockets can also serve as vents), and the presence and type of storm flaps on the pockets. Our testers’ favorite pockets were found on the Montane Sirocco Jacket and Red Ledge Thunderlight Parka.

WAIST HEM

The waist hem can be elastic (nonadjustable), shockcorded (adjustable), or straight (nonadjustable). The hem type is an important consideration because it provides a key source of cool, dry air that contributes to ventilation via the chimney effect (primarily while not cinched by a pack’s waist belt).

Hem length is also reported as being short (waist-length); medium (covers the buttocks in back but no extensive coverage over the front of the trunk); or long (covers entire lower trunk, front and back).

WRIST CUFFS

Wrist cuff type is reported because the cuffs provide the only source of ventilation to the arms, a particularly important feature when hiking strenuously while wearing a pack. The industry-standard wrist cuff is a half-elastic cuff with a hook-and-loop (e.g., Velcro) flap closure. However, nonelastic straight cuffs and non-adjustable full-elastic cuffs also appear on some garments. Our testers’ favorite wrist cuffs (wide, straight hems with hook-and-loop closures) were found on the three Montane Sirocco garments.

FRONT ZIPPER

The length of the front zipper is reported, as well as the presence and type of storm flap. Storm flaps in back of the zipper are not as water-resistant as storm flaps in front of the zipper, but they allow for easier zipper operation by staying out of the way. Our testers’ favorite front zipper was found on the GoLite Squall and Newt Jackets and the Frogg Toggs Pro Action Jacket, because their storm flaps closed with snaps, providing ample ventilation when the zipper was left open while preventing water entry with the snaps secured.

HOOD

The presence of a hood is indicated in the comparison table, as well as the presence of a hood brim (which serves to keep rain out of the eyes). Adjustability and hood volume (an important consideration for layering over warm headwear) are also reported. Our testers’ favorite hood was found on the Sierra Designs’ Backpackers Rainwear Jacket.

TORSO VOLUME

Torso volume is rated as “trim” (incapable of fitting over a midweight fleece without severe binding); “medium” (suitable for layering over a midweight fleece or light synthetic loft layer); or “large” (suitable for layering over a down jacket with 1.5” of loft). The Integral Designs Sil Poncho, Frogg Toggs Pro-Action Jacket and Raincoat, and GoLite Squall/Newt provided the most room for layering, while the Red Ledge Thunderlight, Sierra Designs Backpacker’s Rainwear, and the Montane Sirocco Jacket provided the best balance, with “comfortable volume without excess.”

A NOTE ON FIT

Garment fit will depend in large part on the individual. The fit and mobility grades assigned in this review were based on fitting by a single model. The model was a typical size “medium” male, 5’7″ in height, 150 lbs, with a waist size of 33, chest size of 37, and torso length of 18.5 inches.

Review Criteria: Ventilation

VENTILATION FEATURES

Ventilation features, such as vented pockets, torso vents, or rear flap vents, are reported in the comparison table; in addition, the table reports whether or not the ventilation is adjustable, for instance by zippers, and whether or not the vents are protected by storm flaps so that they can remain open for some air exchange while minimizing water entry.

MOISTURE ACCUMULATION INDEX

The “Moisture Accumulation Index” (MAI) is a number presented on a scale of 0-100% that evaluates how well a garment’s ventilation features perform during periods of high exertion, the number indicating the mass of moisture accumulation from sweat in a base layer worn under the shell during a period of intensive exercise, relative to the case where a shell is not worn (see companion article by Alan Dixon for a detailed description of the MAI and how it was determined for these garments).

VENTILATION SUMMARY

The Integral Designs Sil Poncho, Montane Sirocco Jacket, and the Red Ledge Thunderlight Parka, with its pit zips and torso vents, provided the best overall ventilation, but special mention goes to the Montane Sirocco garments for their well-designed wrist cuffs that effectively provided forearm ventilation.

Review Criteria: Field Performance

Field performance was evaluated by testers on overnight backpacking trips during the summer and fall of 2001. Garments were worn in temperatures ranging from the mid-teens (degrees Fahrenheit) to the low 60s, winds to 40 mph, and precipitation that included rain, sleet, and snow.

Four key field performance categories were addressed: mobility, storm resistance, breathability, and ventilation.

Testers rated several performance criteria as “poor”, “fair”, or “good”. A “fair” rating indicates that the garment served the intended function satisfactorily, while a “poor” rating indicates that the expected standard of performance was not met. A “good” rating indicated that the garment exceeded the standard of performance. All testers had the opportunity to review at least six garments. However, the reader should be made aware that the level of perceived performance may vary between individuals; thus, these criteria may not be indicative of garment field performance in all conditions.

Our testers’ favorite garment with respect to mobility and fit was the Montane Sirocco Jacket. Top honors for storm resistance goes to the Sierra Designs Backpacker’s Rainwear Jacket. The most breathable garment in the field was Montane’s Sirocco Bike Smock, while the best-ventilated garments were the Integral Designs Sil Poncho, the Red Ledge Thunderlight Parka, and the Montane Sirocco Bike Smock.

Review Criteria: Final Grade

The final grade was assigned based on a traditional letter scale (A-B-C-D-F) by evaluating weight, price, fabric performance, fit, mobility, features, storm resistance, breathability, and ventilation.

Garments were NOT graded on a curve. They were graded on their own merits according to their intended use. Grades also took into account the garment’s utility as all-purpose backpacking rainwear.

Thus, for a garment to receive an “A” grade, it must serve well in both its intended niche market and as general-purpose backpacking rainwear.

Lightweight Backpacking 101: An Introductory Manual for Lightening Your Load Today (1st Edition – August 2001)

Lightweight Backpacking 101: An Introductory Manual for Lightening Your Load Today (1st Edition – August 2001)

Lightweight Backpacking 101

A 9-Part Series Outlining the Basic Concepts of Lightweight Backpacking

Ryan Jordan
Series Editor

Alan Dixon
Series Managing Editor

Series Contributors
George Cole, Alan Dixon, Rick Dreher, Ryan Jordan David Schultz, M. Lee Van Horn

First Edition: August 2001

Length (Approximate): 20,000+ Words

Copright (C) 2001 Beartooth Mountain Press, LLC


Preface

by Ryan Jordan

Backpacking Light (www.BackpackingLight.COM) is pleased to introduce the first edition of “Lightweight Backpacking 101.”

Consider this nine-part series to be your rite of passage as a new lightweight backpacker, as we introduce you to the fundamental concepts that provide the foundation of a lightweight philosophy. For the more advanced lightweight hiker, “LB101” provides a great refresher course that will continue to solidify core concepts and remind you of some forgotten tidbits.

The series will be released in parts throughout the month of August, 2001. While each article stands on its own and can be read independent of the others in the series, the series order has been designed to serve as a logical outline for learning the basic techniques of lightweight backpacking.

We hope that you enjoy the series and find it to be informative, challenging, and insightful.


Table of Contents
  1. Basic Concepts, by Alan Dixon

  2. Equipment Primer, by Alan Dixon

  3. Clothing, by Ryan Jordan

  4. Cooking Equipment, by M. Lee Van Horn

  5. Trail Food, by Dave Schultz

  6. Water Treatment, by George Cole

  7. Miscellaneous Essentials, by Rick Dreher

  8. Nonessentials, by Rick Dreher

  9. Ultra-Light, Ultra-Cheap, by Dave Schultz


Part 1: Basic Concepts

An Introduction to the Philosophy and Practice of Lightweight Backpacking

By Alan Dixon

Introduction

You’re grinding your way up a pass. It’s near 10,000 feet. The air is thin, and you have to stop every few hundred feet to catch your breath. You put your thumbs under your straps to keep them from digging into your sore shoulders. You hitch up the hip belt that keeps sliding down. Painful bruises are forming on your hip bones. You can feel a blister starting on your right heel. Your legs are like rubber. The summit seems hours away. If it weren’t for this damn heavy pack life would be a lot easier right now.

Then along comes another backpacker. He has a tiny pack on his back and a smile on his face. He’s in running shoes and must be moving at four times your speed. If it weren’t for the ground pad rolled up on the top of his pack you’d think he was a day hiker. He remarks that it’s a beautiful day and what nice views there are up this high and then he’s off. A few minutes later he’s out of sight.

You just saw a lightweight backpacker.

You think two things. First-that the guy is in great shape. And second, that he must be crazy to be hiking with that tiny pack. There is no way he can be safe or comfortable with such a small amount of equipment. You checked your list and you know that you couldn’t go safely without any less equipment or food.

Or could you?

Maybe that lightweight backpacker wasn’t in better shape than you. Maybe his pack just weighed half of yours. Maybe he had enough stuff to be nearly as safe–and as comfortable–as you. And maybe…you could be the one with a spring in your step and a smile on your face.

Lightweight Backpacking Defined

In essence, lightweight backpacking involves using the lightest gear to meet the needs of an overnight (or longer) wilderness walk. Many “ultralight” backpackers have a base pack weight (weight of gear not including clothing worn, items carried, food, fuel, and water) of less than 12 pounds. For others that are transitioning to this ultralight range, a base pack weight of 12-20 pounds is considered lightweight.

This is in stark contrast to most U.S. backpackers, which have base pack weights as high as 30, 40, or even 50 pounds. In a recent poll of the BackpackingLight E-Group (an online discussion group devoted to lightweight backpacking), the majority of poll respondents had packs in the transition weight range of 12-20 pounds. Realize that these numbers are arbitrary–each person eventually finds a balance between comfort and minimalism, and while a 12 pound pack might be considered “ultralight” for one person, it may be considered “heavy” by another. Hopefully, after reading Lightweight Backpacking 101, you’ll have enough information to find your ideal setup.

The amount and type of gear you pack will change with each trip. The 12 pound ultralight base pack weight is possible if nighttime temperatures are not too much below freezing, trail and cross country routes do not exceed class III, and you are camping below tree line. Trips with technical climbs, very cold weather, deep snow, and strong winds require more gear for both comfort and safety. A pack for a winter climbing trip may have a base weight of 25 pounds, but the principal of using the lightest gear to meet the needs of the trip remains. That pack would be much lighter than most winter climbing packs, and, depending upon the scope of the trip, might be considered “ultralight.”

Why Hike Light?

Or, why suffer if you don’t have to?

The average backpacker carries 40 to 50 pounds for a week-long backpacking trip (e.g., 30 pounds of pack and equipment, plus two pounds of food a day).

My son, Colin, may be laughing in the photo above, but his 55-pound pack was no joking matter after 8 days on the trail.

A pack this heavy causes plenty of problems:

  • Slow, tedious hiking;
  • Exhaustion, irritability, and low esprit de corps on the trail;
  • Increased chance of injury–sore back, sprained ankles, blown knees, sore muscles, bruised and blistered feet, sore hips and shoulders, etc.;
  • Increased risk of poor foot placement and falls;
  • The need for heavy boots (since weak ankles cannot effectively provide the necessary lateral support for heavy loads);
  • Tired, cross people who make bad decisions, sometimes with serious consequences;
  • Long hiking times that mean less time for the fun stuff–relaxing in camp, fishing, staring at clouds, skinny dipping, side trips…;
  • Exhaustion upon arrival at camp for the night.

How about an 18-pound pack for a weekend trip? A 25-pound pack for a one week trip? At these pack weights, backpacking feels more like day hiking. It’s a freeing experience–trail miles melt away, and you can better appreciate the beauty of the hike. You can cover more miles and see more places or get into camp early, with plenty of time and energy to do almost anything.

Lightweight backpackers can easily achieve a base pack weight of around 12 pounds (see Part 2: Equipment Primer for more details.) Adding around 1.75 pounds of food per day and some fuel, you will be carrying 25 pounds for a seven-day trip and 18 for a weekend. (Refer to Part 5: Trail Food, for more information about food for lightweight hiking.)

Who Can Practice Lightweight Backpacking?

Lightweight backpacking is for everyone.

If you have ever creaked and groaned up a mountain, you know the misery of hiking with an overloaded pack. Heavy packs turn many people away from backpacking. For some, going lightweight may make the difference between backpacking or not, especially people hiking with children, older people, those with joint or other physical problems, and people not as fit and/or trim as they wish.

An example: last year I guided a friend on a trip to the Sierras, who was neither in great shape nor svelte. But with a 13-pound pack, she was able to make it off-trail over a 12,000 foot pass to a beautiful and remote alpine lake. She would never have been able to do this with a conventional pack and we would not have had the pleasure of sharing each other’s company in such a beautiful and remote location.

What are the Tradeoffs?

A lightweight backpacker should carry the same safety gear and essentials that any hiker would take–clothing, sleeping bag, shelter, first aid kit, water treatment supplies, etc. Inexperience and poor judgment cause the most problems when backpacking–it’s simply unfair to blame your equipment in most cases. Solid backpacking technique, familiarity with your equipment, sound safety practices, and, above all, good judgment, count more for your well being on the trail than the weight of equipment you bring.

While wise lightweight backpackers do not forgo safety, there are trade-offs. Some light equipment has performance limitations or is less durable than heavier equipment. However, most light equipment is every bit as comfortable and durable as heavier equipment. Materials such as carbon fiber, titanium, Spectra® fabric and light emitting diodes (LEDs) can even provide added durability at less weight than conventional materials. With proper care and use, lightweight equipment can perform well while surviving thousands of trail miles.

Many backpackers blindly trust advertisements in mainstream media and advice given by young salesmen in retail outdoor stores. For financial reasons, most outfitters sell equipment that emphasizes durability at any price (in order to avoid product returns) while claiming to supply “all the comforts of home on the trail” to lure unsuspecting hikers into a false sense of comfort and security.

Lightweight backpackers include weight as a fundamental factor in their equipment decisions. Some luxuries, such as baking ovens and double-walled tents, may be abandoned while others, such as an inflatable mattress that doubles as pack support in lieu of a frame, may be used. These decisions are personal. As with all choices, being informed and experimenting with different alternatives leads to better equipment decisions. I challenge you to put away your old preconceptions (misconceptions?) about backpacking and experiment with the alternatives.

How Much Does it Cost?

The short answer is somewhere between $300 and $1,000. The equipment included in my own sub-9-pound summer ultralight kit would cost around $700. In Part 9: Ultra Light-Ultra Cheap, we close Lightweight Backpacking 101 with a discussion on outfitting yourself for as little as $300. Some of your current clothes and/or backpacking equipment may do just fine for lightweight backpacking (e.g., your present pair of trail running shoes). Also, many discount stores like K-Mart and Target have a surprising amount of inexpensive equipment that is suitable for the beginning lightweight backpacker. If you watch for closeouts from conventional outdoor retailers (e.g. REI, Campmor, EMS, etc.) and/or super deals from discount retailers like Sierra Trading Post or REI-Outlet.COM, you can save 60 to 70% on some of your equipment purchases.

Another recent poll of BackpackingLight E-Group members revealed that the average lightweight backpacker has spent somewhere between $1,000 to $2,000 dollars on equipment. However, I’m not sure that the members of this list are a representative cross-section of Lightweight Backpacking America, simply because these people tend to be “gear heads,” taking this activity seriously enough to warrant a fascinating psychological study into the power of choice and the human soul. In other words, this is a serious activity for them, and this total reveals expenditures for equipment purchased over a long period of time. It is highly likely that these dollar figures represent include replicate items as “old” light gear was replaced with “newer” light gear.

In summary: If you are just starting out and own little equipment, for $500 to $1,000 you can put together a very high quality kit of lightweight equipment. But be forewarned–this is an addictive pursuit! Many who begin spending a little find themselves spending a lot, so keep an eye on credit card balances and don’t lose those $3 titanium tent pegs!

How do I Start?

First and foremost, consider your pack, shelter, sleep system (e.g., sleeping bag, sleeping pad, and ground cloth), and clothing. You might be able to lose as much as 15 or 20 pounds by replacing these items alone.

Here a few other things you might try:

  • Find out the horrible truth! How much does your pack–and it’s individual items–really weight? Gather every piece of gear you own and weigh it on a scale with an accuracy of at least one ounce. If you don’t have a scale, you can purchase a decent digital scale at office supply houses for less than $30, or you can just pack up and go to the post office for an afternoon that will surely attract some attention from the USPS’ “other” customers.
  • Go to a reliable search engine like Google and type “lightweight backpacking” in the search box. Review the first 50 or 100 sites in the results, many of which are personal sites with equipment lists posted online. Reviewing these lists will give you ideas for reducing pack weight and a representative overview of equipment available on the market.
  • Use your computer to your advantage. Create a spreadsheet listing your equipment items in one column and their weights in another. This can be an indispensable analysis tool for planning a trip or even developing an overall “buying” strategy when you’ve decided to make the move from heavy to light.
  • Consider items that you can leave at home. Anything you don’t bring with you is free weight reduction! Think hard about this one and ask yourself honestly, “Do I really need this item?”
  • Post your current or proposed equipment list, with weights, on the Backpacking Light E-mail Group. You’ll get great advice from experienced lightweight backpackers that are just as addicted to staring at their others’ gear lists as they are to staring at their own. Remember, many of these folks have been right where you are now and are eager to help.
  • Try to analyze how to spend your money to get the most “bang for the buck” (e.g., find an item’s price and divide that by the weight it will save you over your old equipment to get a “cost per oz in weight reduction” as a measure of buying power). Then replace the items that give you the most weight loss for the fewest dollars.
  • Finally, don’t try to do this all at once! Many items regularly go on sale or are closed out, and you’ll certainly want to consider a manufacturer’s new offerings, usually introduced in the winter and spring. Patience–particularly in the buying department–can be a real virtue.

My Personal Thoughts on Lightweight Backpacking

I go to the mountains to enjoy natural beauty and solitude. I want to get away from houses, roads, and city life. I find that material “stuff” gets in the way of my mountain experience. For obvious reasons, a lightweight philosophy is a perfect fit for me.

  • When I’m in the mountains, I like to cover a lot of ground. I want to see as much as I can in the limited time I have.
  • I hate being a pack mule. I like the freedom of a light pack. It allows me to go farther and through more rugged terrain–without suffering!
  • I sometimes hike with people that are not fit or fast hikers. A light kit allows me to carry a little extra weight for them, substantially reducing their pack weight and increasing the enjoyment of our group.

In addition:

  • I don’t need fancy food or hot meals when I hike solo. (I do carry a stove and cook meals when I hike with others.)
  • I don’t mind if the ground is bit hard.
  • I don’t want a big fancy tent that reminds me of the rooms I left behind.
  • Books? I never get bored. There’s always too much to see and something interesting to check out in the next canyon, Or a nice lake or stream from which to angle some trout. And I need time to think in the quiet and solitude of the mountains, which is something I get precious little of in my hectic, daily life.

That’s my personal take. Many lightweight backpackers cook fine cuisine, sleep on soft ground pads in the shelter of a tent, and even bring a book or two. Some even bring a candle lantern and a Bible along. Lightweight backpacking techniques offer you the flexibility to make these choices.

Again, there are no hard and fast rules that dictate right and wrong in a lightweight philosophy.

Each person finds their ideal pack weight and comfort level.

Finding yours will be half the fun.

Happy trails to you and your lighter pack.


Part 2: Equipment Primer

An Overview of Lightweight Backpacking Gear

by Alan Dixon

Introduction

In Part 1: Basic Concepts, you learned a general overview of lightweight hiking. Hopefully, you have decided to begin transitioning to a lightweight approach. Part 2 will focus on how to put together a kit of lightweight backpacking equipment. At the end of Part 2, you should have enough information to begin selecting lightweight backpacking equipment that will complement your hiking style.

For now, we’ll focus on equipment selections for a kit that will require a total investment of $600 to $1,000. If this is too much money, there’s no need to worry. Part 9: Ultra Light – Ultra Cheap will provide insight into choosing equipment that won’t require a second job, let alone a second mortgage.

By following the guidelines outlined herein, you can easily achieve a base pack weight of less than 12 pounds.

To simplify this discussion, the information presented in this article is focused on a lightweight backpacking gear kit suitable for:

  • Three-season (April to October) backpacking across most of the lower 48 states (i.e., two-season (June to August) backpacking in the western U.S. mountains like the Cascades, Sierras, or Rockies);
  • Nighttime temperatures that only infrequently fall to below freezing;
  • Trail hiking and cross country routes not to exceed class II scrambling.

Comparing Ultralight, Light, and Traditional Backpacking Equipment

To start off, review three arbitrary equipment kits: ultralight, light, and traditional (Table 1), primarily to understand how individual equipment weights add up to the total kit weight.

TABLE 1. Equipment list comparison (click for Adobe PDF format table)

The first thing you should notice is that a lot of seemingly small weight reductions can add up to a whopping amount. For a 7-day trip this can be the difference between a pack that weighs 22 pounds and a pack that weighs 55 pounds (as suggested in Table 1).

Building a Lightweight Kit of Backpacking Equipment

Select the Lightest Equipment. The lightweight backpacker typically takes a similar number of items as the traditional backpacker, just lighter versions of those items. For example, you won’t find things like a 7-pound tent, a 2-pound Goretex jacket, or a 3½ -pound sleeping bag in the pack of a lightweight backpacker venturing out for a summer walk in the mountains. Much of the time, this lighter equipment is every bit as functional–if not more so–than heavier equipment. Sometimes the lighter equipment has some performance limitations or may be less durable than heavier equipment. In this case, the reduction in weight may very well exceed these limitations, although perception of such limitations tends to be highly subjective and depends on the individual. With care and proper use, durability is not often a problem under most trail conditions, and lightweight equipment can perform to a high performance standard for years.

An example: A tarp made with 1.4 oz/yd2 silicone-coated nylon (“silnylon”) does not provide the ease of setup and “bombproof” rain and wind protection of a free standing tent. But in summertime in the Sierras where the normal weather pattern calls for little more than afternoon thunderstorms (if any at all), do you really need the 5 or 6 or 7 pound tent? With proper care and pitching, a 16 oz silnylon tarp will keep you dry and sufficiently sheltered from the wind. Further, the increased airflow through a tarp results in less claustrophobia and condensation than is found in most tents. Finally, with a light pack you can hike at a more consistent rate that could put you in camp with the tarp set up before the arrival of both the afternoon thunderstorms and the traditional backpackers toting their heavy loads. Even if tarp camping isn’t your cup of tea, there are even some two person ultralight tents manufactured with silnylon for around two pounds.

Select Your Pack, Shelter, Sleeping Bag, and Clothing Appropriate to the Season. You stand to lose the most weight on these items (e.g., as much as 17 pounds in the comparison lists shown in Table 1). The traditional backpacker carries three-season equipment for summer backpacking, i.e., a heavy internal frame pack designed to carry 50+ pound loads, a double-walled three-season tent, a +15 synthetic bag, and clothing more appropriate for suffering through a Green Bay Packers home game than for walking the woods in the heat of summer.

A lightweight backpacker will carry equipment appropriate to the season. For example, for summer backpacking, a frameless backpack designed for a 25 pound load, a one-pound tarp or two-pound tent, a high-fill down bag with a 30°F temperature rating, and clothing suitable for temperatures down to freezing or so. The lightweight backpacker also selects the lightest equipment suitable for the conditions to round out the rest of his kit. The difference in base pack weights between these two approaches, as shown in Table 1, is typically in the range of 15 to 20 pounds.

Take Only What You Need. A lightweight backpacker takes little or no duplicate or “backup” equipment. As an example, your clothing, sleep system, and shelter, when used together, should keep you just warm and safe enough during the lowest anticipated temperatures and worst anticipated weather.

A lightweight backpacker does not take more of anything than needed for a single trip. For example, do you really need an 8 ounce tube of sunscreen or toothpaste for a weekend of wilderness travel? This axiom holds true for bug repellent, soap, toilet paper, fuel, and even food. All these items can add up to a lot of extra weight without careful planning and forethought.

Deliberate food planning can reduce the total weight of food you carry. One guideline followed by many lightweight backpackers when designing a backcountry diet is 2,000 calories per pound of food, resulting in about 1.5 pounds of food per day to meet the caloric requirements of the average backpacker (who consumes about 3,000 calories per day). Adhering to this guideline, a traditional backpacker can reduce food weight by five or more pounds.

If maximizing calories per pound is your overall goal, then seek out a balanced diet with a significant quantity of foods that are high in fat–fat contains an astonishing 9 calories per gram, in contrast to carbohydrates or protein, which contain only 4 calories per gram. In addition, if you are using a bear canister for food storage, high calorie food is more compact and you’ll be able to pack the canister with greater ease.

Considerations for Equipment Selection

The Big Three – Pack, Shelter, and Sleep System – Save 10 to 12 Pounds

Packs. With a light load, you won’t need a heavy pack with a stout internal (or external) frame. Most light frameless packs (or internal frame packs with the frame structure removed) will easily carry up to 25 pounds in comfort. For a frameless pack, your ground pad and the contents of the pack will provide the “structure” to help transfer the load to your hip belt. Some backpackers find comfort even in packs without a hip belt–I have no problem with a frameless, hip belt-less rucksack for most of my backpacking. With few exceptions, such “light” packs are not as durable as their heavier Cordura or ballistic nylon counterparts, and shouldn’t be indiscriminately dragged across a granite talus slope. With proper care and a little common sense, this is not likely to be a problem.

Here are a few lightweight pack options. All are frameless rucksacks. The Breeze does not have a hipbelt. The G4 is made from a very light nylon that requires some care in handling. The One Pound Pack is made from a durable mesh, resulting in quick drying of wet contents and more air flow to your back. The AT pack is made with a very durable material and is the largest of the four listed.

  • GoLite Breeze (12 oz)
  • GVPGear G4 (12 oz)
  • LWGear One Pound Pack (13 oz)
  • Wild Things AT (41 oz)

Sleeping Bags. Not surprisingly, sleeping bags are the cash cow of lightweight backpacking. No piece of equipment is capable of instilling more feeling of contentment after a hard day on the trail than a quality, high-lofting (and expensive) down bag. Even lightweight backpackers on a budget eventually break down and succumb to the luxury of a 750+ fill power down bag with an ultralight shell fabric. Down is unmatched by any synthetic for its warmth to weight ratio and compressibility. Synthetic bags, although they do insulate better when wet, tend to be significantly heavier than down (despite manufacturer claims) while consuming additional volume inside the pack. The new microfiber shell fabrics and more resilient durable water-resistant (DWR) finishes used in down bags protect down insulation from external moisture much better than the traditional nylon taffetas of long ago. With a reasonable amount of care, most backpackers can keep a down bag dry, primarily by (1) storing it in a waterproof stuff sack while hiking, and (2) selecting campsites that won’t turn into rivers or lakes in a downpour.

Most backpackers use sleeping bags that are grossly overrated for the anticipated temperatures. However, sleeping bag temperature ratings are only an estimate of a bag’s performance and should not be taken as consumer gospel. Temperature ratings between manufacturers WILL vary for bags that have equal performance characteristics. Your metabolism, state of exhaustion, diet, hydration, and weather can all affect how warm you will sleep. For the same bag and climatic conditions, one person may sleep toasty warm while another may lie awake and chilled all night. Testing out a bag in your backyard or on an overnight trip before taking it out on longer trips into more remote areas is a great way to realize that you can probably get by with a bag that is lighter than you think.

Here are a few sleeping bag options. The UltraLite is considered by many to be the creme de la creme of traditional mummy-style sleeping bags and is probably rated conservatively by 5°F. The UltraLite has a contoured hood, full-length zipper, 0.85 oz/yd2 fabric shell, and a trim cut. The Hydrogen has a half-length zipper, hood, a slightly wider cut than the UltraLite, and is probably liberally rated by +5°F. The Alpinist is a no-frills bag featuring 800-fill down, no zipper, a mummy cut, and a hood. The Elite Top Bag, as the name implies, includes insulation only on the top (quirky but innovative), hence its light weight. The Minimus has the narrowest cut of the bunch in a zipperless mummy bag with 800-fill down.

  • Western Mountaineering UltraLite (28 oz) +25°F
  • Marmot Hydrogen (23 oz) +30°F
  • Nunatak Alpinist (23 oz) +20°F
  • RAB Carrington Elite Top Bag (17 oz) +32°F
  • PHD Minimus (17 oz) +41°F

For synthetic bags, check out the Polarguard 3D-insulated Fur and Fuzz sleep systems from GoLite and PrimaLoft-insulated bags from Integral Designs and Nunatak.

For the do-it-yourself crowd, you can make a light quilt with 1.1 oz/yd2 nylon as the shell and lining material and PrimaLoft for less than $75 of material investment. Instructions are available in Ray Jardine’s Beyond Backpacking or by searching Google for “homemade sleeping quilt.”

Sleeping Pads. Even the lightest hybrid air-open cell foam inflatable mattresses, such as Cascade Design’s ThermaRest® UltraLite, weigh about a pound; others tend to fall in the 1-2 pound range (some weigh even more) . On the other hand, a closed cell foam pad can weigh as little as four ounces, and will seldom exceed 12 ounces for a typical ¾-length (54″) pad. The biggest advantages to closed cell foam over inflatables are (1) they do not fail you in the case of puncture, and (2) they offer a greater warmth-to-weight ratio. Their primary disadvantage is their lack of comfort on hard ground. However, the lightweight backpacker that can effectively seek out campsites on forest duff and other soft substrates can save a significant amount of weight-without sacrificing comfort-in the sleeping pad department.

The cheapest closed cell foam sleeping pad on the market is probably the old standard 3/8″ “Blue” foam pad, available for about ten bucks from Wal-Mart. Cut to a size of 20″ x 48″, you can get the weight down to an amazing 5 oz. For more comfort and durability, consider Cascade Designs’ Ridge Rest, weighing about 9 oz in its standard size (20″ x 54″). Finally, for a lightweight backpacking “cult” favorite, try High Country Outdoor Products’ Mount Washington Pad. At 7 oz, the MW’s eggshell pattern provides surprising comfort, albeit in a bulky configuration.

Ground Sheets. One of the most popular-and heaviest-ground sheets carried by traditional backpackers is the 12 oz Space® “All-Weather Blanket.” While this product provides great durability for several seasons, in addition to possible dual use in an emergency, all that a ground sheet really needs to do is keep dirt and moisture off of your sleeping bag and pad. Some lightweight backpackers even use their poncho for a groundsheet.

Some other ground sheet options include the 6.5 oz Campmor Thermolite Emergency Survival Blanket (item no. 89034), or the fragile but very light mylar Space® Emergency Blanket (3.0 oz). In addition, scrap pieces of Tyvek® Housewrap (available as a scrap piece from a building contractor) , 1.4 oz/yd2 silicone-coated nylon (available from outdoor fabric suppliers), or 1-2 mil “painter’s plastic” drop cloth material (available from hardware stores), cut to size, can provide a great alternative to commercially-available ground sheets at weights between 3 and 6 oz. Tyvek® will be the most durable, “silnylon” will be the lightest and most waterproof, and painter’s plastic will be the most widely available.

Tarps, Tents, and other Shelters. In general, tarps are the lightest and least expensive type of shelter. They provide sufficient wind and rain protection in most summer conditions. For additional protection, you might consider a floorless tent. They are heavier and more expensive than tarps but provide more protection from wind and hard, driving rain. Neither type of shelter provides bug protection, although the addition of a simple noseeum mesh headnet or free standing “bug shelter” can make tarp life tolerable in the peak of biting insect seasons.

A special category of shelters are backpacking hammocks, which usually provide a full mesh enclosure and an overhead, integrated tarp for rain protection. Finally, there are light, single walled tents, usually made out of silicone-coated nylon, and range in price from moderately expensive ($300+) to very expensive ($500-800+). They provide the most protection from wind, rain and bugs, but sacrifice air flow and may cause problems with condensation. Two person single-walled tents usually range from 3 to 5 pounds, while solo single-walled tents typically weigh 2-4 pounds.

Suppliers of Silicone-Coated Nylon Tarps

  • Campmor
  • Oware
  • Integral Designs
  • GoLite

Other Lightweight Backpacking Shelters (Silicone-Coated Nylon)

  • Integral Designs Silshelter (12 oz). Floorless “tent” can also be pitched as a tarp. Requires a single (trekking) pole for setup.
  • Henry Shire’s Tarptent (18 oz). Solo tarp with mosquito netting walls and doors for added bug protection. Available from Moonbow Gear.
  • LW Gear One Pound Tent – (14 oz). Tarp with end doors for a full enclosure if needed.
  • Hennessy Hammocks (20 oz and up). Backpacking hammocks with full mesh enclosures and rain flys.
  • Wanderlust Outdoor Gear Nomad Tents (28 oz and up). Single wall tents using trekking poles for support and structure.
  • Stephenson’s Warmlite Tents (36 oz and up). Everest-worthy 2-, 3-, and 5-man tents in both single and double-wall configurations.

Footwear. Many lightweight hikers prefer hiking in trail running shoes. A cult favorite is New Balance’s 800 series trail runners (with the 804 representing the new model for 2001). Also consider the Montrail Vitesse or Salomon Raid series, designed primarily for mountain running and adventure racing. As with any footwear, make sure that fit remains your first priority in selecting a shoe. Secondary but very important considerations include breathability (don’t select a waterproof-breathable model for summer hiking), shoe weight, cushioning, and stability on uneven surfaces.

Other Equipment. This article cannot hope to provide an overview of all lightweight backpacking equipment (e.g., clothing, water treatment, cooking gear, food, other essentials, and “nonessentials”). Be sure to read Lightweight Backpacking 101 to help you put together the rest of your lightweight kit.

A Final Word: Be Smart, Stay Safe

Please be very careful when you start lightweight backpacking.

The lightweight approach to equipment selection described herein is intended for a limited scope of environmental conditions and should not necessarily be relied upon in extremes of temperature or weather. Even during the heat of summer, the U.S. western mountain ranges can offer snow and sub-freezing temperatures. You should be confident that you can use your equipment to deal with these conditions.

Therefore:

You should not take a lightweight kit into high-mountain areas like the Rockies, Cascades, or Sierras without the knowledge and experience to use it. Not having the appropriate equipment, or unfamiliarity with lightweight backpacking techniques, could result in serious discomfort, injury, or death.

As with any serious study, take your time learning and gaining experience: lighten your kit a bit at a time with judicious testing on short outings and in your backyard. Take backup equipment until you have confidence that your ultralight equipment will keep you warm and safe.


Part 3: Clothing

by Ryan Jordan

Introduction

On one September day in the Teton Range, I woke up at dawn and began hiking on a calm but bitter cold 25-degree morning. By 11:00 AM, the temperature had risen to the high 70s on the 10,000-foot ridges. At 2:30 PM, we were experiencing 40 MPH winds that signaled an impending storm. Within a period of two hours, temperatures dropped 35 degrees and freezing rain and hail were coming down by 5:00 PM. We awoke the next morning to a 6-inch blanket of fresh snow, clear skies, and temperatures in the teens. We would see weather in the 80s before the week was over.

Coping with extremes in weather is one of the most challenging applications of lightweight backpacking. Here is a list of environmental circumstances that your clothing must be able to handle:

  • Sun. Sunscreen is out, clothing is in. Select clothing that can protect you from the harmful UV light in the sun’s rays. Your body will thank you later and you’ll avoid the mess and odor associated with sunscreen.
  • Heat. Your clothing system, and especially, your hiking clothing, must be able to keep you cool during the heat of the day. Clothing made with thin, highly breathable, loose-fitting fabrics are ideal.
  • Precipitation. Why stay home because of a little (or a lot, for that matter) rain? Being in the wilderness in the peak of a wicked storm can be a memorable experience. Make the memories satisfying ones by being prepared with waterproof raingear.
  • Cold. Whether your choice is fleece, down, Primaloft, or some other insulating material, include some cold weather protection in your ensemble. Cold weather, in combination with being wet, is a sure recipe for hypothermia.
  • Insects. You can certainly bathe in DEET while you’re in the backcountry, but I’d recommend that if you’re visiting an area where the mosquitoes and blackflies rule the roost, consider long pants and long sleeved shirts for your primary bug protection. You can always fill in the gaps with a dab of insect repellent here and there.

OK, so where do we start? With a gear list of course!

We pulled a recommended three-season clothing list from Backpacker.COM to represent what mainstream backpackers are carrying into the hills. Then, we selected specific products, including a number of “lightweight” alternatives, and determined their weights. Here’s what we came up with:

So, that means that on a typical mild day, you’ll be carrying close to seven pounds of clothing in your pack. That’s no so bad. If your in the Rockies…in WINTER! Let’s take a closer look at this list…

Let’s Lighten Up!

Recall from Part 2, Equipment Primer, some very important guidelines for reducing pack weight that we can apply to our clothing selection, the most important of which are (1) select the lightest possible item, and (2) select equipment appropriate for the season. These guidelines are the foundation of the three “axioms” for clothing selection defined herein.

Axiom #1. Don’t pack any more clothing than you can wear at one time.

In reviewing the list above (i.e., for torso clothing), you could remain warm wearing all of the following layers simultaneously:

  • short sleeve t-shirt
  • long sleeve t-shirt
  • midweight long underwear top
  • midweight fleece jacket
  • waterproof-breathable rain shell jacket

This is really not a bad torso ensemble, although personally, I would argue that one of the t-shirts could be left behind.

How about the legs?

  • underwear
  • hiking shorts
  • hiking pants
  • midweight long underwear bottoms
  • waterproof-breathable pants

Again, this is a reasonable selection for the legs. Hat and gloves are necessary items, so you shouldn’t plan on removing them from your gear list. As for socks, extra pairs of clean and dry socks are key on a multi-day backpacking trip. A sun hat and bandanna are nearly mandatory above the tree line for sun protection. Gaiters and hiking boots really don’t contribute to “pack” weight, and a pair of camp sandals are sure a nice break from those heavy hiking boots at the end of the day, right?

However, let’s make some fundamental changes to the gear list, based on the following precept:

Axiom #2. Don’t carry more than one item that serves the same function.

With that in mind:

We’ve eliminated the short sleeve t-shirt and will wear the long-sleeve t-shirt, which will provide better sun and insect protection while hiking.

The hiking shorts we selected have a mesh liner–so we’re going sans underwear.

Do you really need hiking shorts AND hiking pants? How about a pair of convertibles with zip-off legs?

Assuming the rest of your load is light enough AND you are comfortable hiking in low-cut shoes, replace the boots with some very breathable trail running shoes; this will allow you to eliminate “camp shoes” because your trail shoes serve the same relaxing function with their laces loosened; in addition, you can get away with lighter socks that wick moisture better, and thus, you may not need a sock liner. Finally, shortie gaiters made for trail runners tend to be lighter than those made for boots.

Now let’s look at our revised list:

Note that just by altering our gear selection a bit, we are able to drop more than two pounds from our pack weight. Did we really sacrifice that much comfort? I will argue for a resounding, “No!”

LIGHTER STILL?!

But we can do better, especially if we are hiking at lower elevations, southern U.S. latitudes, or in the heat of mid-summer.

Axiom 3. Choose garments with the highest possible performance-to-weight ratio.

We replaced the Marmot Precip Jacket and Pants with a lighter combination (GoLite’s Squall and Reed). We cut the weight of our insulating layer in half by replacing the fleece with a high-loft synthetic vest. The silkweight and midweight wicking shirts seemed redundant, so we’ll just wear the silkweight shirt and leave the extra at home. We reduced the weight of our hat and gloves slightly by selecting 100 weight fleece in lieu of 200 weight fleece. The result is shedding more than a pound and a half from the second list, and about four pounds from the original list, albeit at the expense of some cold weather comfort and safety margin:

SUMMARY

Recall our three rules for lightening up in the clothing department:

  1. Don’t pack any more clothing than you can wear at one time.

  2. Don’t carry more than one item that serves the same function.

  3. Choose garments with the highest possible performance-to-weight ratio.

The beginning lightweight backpacker would not venture into the high mountains with the third type of clothing list. Learning to manage moisture effectively (by controlling your level of physical exertion), maximize your garments’ performance potential (by understanding its limitations), and digging deep into your reserves when things get tough (e.g., by bumping up your physical exertion a notch (i.e., go faster) when the temperatures drop), are key requirements in being able to successfully apply an “ultralight” (i.e., as opposed to a “light”) approach to clothing. These and other factors are discussed in detail in Jordan et al.’s Clothing and Sleep Systems for Mountain Hiking.

Gambling with your clothing selection has greater consequences than gambling with your other gear: hypothermia is the number one cause of death of backcountry travelers.

But if you do choose to roll the dice, keep that sleeping bag dry…


Part 4: Cooking Equipment

by M. Lee Van Horn

Introduction

There are several different approaches to food preparation. The lightest option (the personal choice of this series’ Managing Editor, Alan Dixon) is to take food that requires no cooking. This eliminates the need for a pot, plasticware, stove and fuel – a savings of 1 to 2 lbs. A second option, exercised by Nimblewill Nomad, is to cook over open fires. This is prohibited in many wilderness areas (especially in alpine regions), and also requires that you have food that can be eaten without cooking, in case no dry wood is available to build a fire or there is a high risk of forest fire. “Leave no trace guidelines” should be followed. Most backpackers choose some type of stove to cook their food on.

Making Heat

So, you’ve decided that cold water and trail mix on a snowy morning isn’t your idea of a delicious breakfast? You have also realized that your 13-oz. Whisperlite, even without fuel and canister, is anything but “lite.” After a shelter, sleeping system, and backpack, new cooking gear may offer you the biggest weight savings for your dollar. There are three types of ultralight stoves: fuel tablet stoves that burn solid fuel and usually include some sort of pot holder; alcohol stoves, which are often homemade and burn denatured alcohol; and very small—albeit expensive—stoves that screw into fuel canisters. All of these weigh between 3 and 4 ounces, although the amount of fuel used for each will vary, thus affecting the total weight.

A major advantage of a homemade alcohol-burning stove is that it is very cheap. These stoves are efficient—in fact, close to the efficiency of commercially-available canister stoves. Denatured alcohol is also cheap and can be carried on airplanes, although it may be difficult to find in trail head towns and may have you looking for it in the local hardware store. Keep in mind that air travel with other kinds of fuel may be a problem – or prohibited. Fuel tabs are somewhat more expensive and not as easy to come by. Search Google for “Wings homemade stove archives” for directions for many homemade alcohol and fuel tab stoves. A comparison of the most popular alcohol stoves and Esbit tabs (a well-known brand) by Don “Photon” Johnston can be found in the BackpackingLight E-Group archives (or, find instructions on making the “Photon” stove by searching Google for “Photon stove instructions”). If you use alcohol, you will need a container to store it in. Just about any leak-proof plastic container will do. I use empty rubbing alcohol bottles.

Recent demand has led to the development of light commercial stoves using non-refillable gas canisters. MSR makes the Pocket Rocket; Primus, the Alpine Micro Stove; and Snow Peak makes the Giga Power Stove. These stoves use a propane/butane mix in canisters that weigh about 8 oz. each and last for about 10 days on the trail. They don’t always work in very cold weather; and if you get one with a built-in ignition, it may not work in high altitudes. Four and 16 oz. fuel canisters are also available.

A windscreen makes any stove more efficient. These keep heat under the pot, saving you fuel (and thus weight). Make one! The cat food can stove in the Wings archive has easy directions for this. Last month’s issue has an article on a Homemade Canister Stove Windscreen.

A Container for Heating

Go to your attic and find the cooking kit you had in the Boy Scouts. The aluminum pot probably weighs about 7 ounces, and should be adequate to cook food for one. Or you can spend $35 on a titanium pot. A .9-liter pot is just big enough to cook for two hungry people. You will save 2 ounces or so for your $35. Some inexpensive aluminum pots at stores like K-Mart are very light and work fine for backpacking. Don’t forget, you can paint the bottom of the pot black with fireproof paint for somewhat greater efficiency. If you aren’t comfortable eating out of the same container as your companion, the lid can be used for a plate.

A Container for Drinking

Do you really need a mug? Why not share your coffee from the pot? If you want to drink coffee with your oatmeal, the cheapest and lightest option is the green plastic mug that came with the Boy Scout cooking kit (a 1-cup plastic mug weighs about 1 ounce). A titanium mug weighs about 2 oz. and will set you back about $20.

Eating Utensils

Since you’re not hauling your grandmother’s silver into the wilderness you probably won’t save much weight here. But you don’t need a spoon, fork and a knife for each person. A spoon is usually enough.

Man Cannot Live on Bread Alone

Water containers are essential. Save over a pound by discarding your old Nalgene bottles and using the flimsiest 20-oz to 1-liter plastic water bottles you can find in the grocery store. These are lighter than soda bottles and I’ve never had one break (although the caps start to leak after a year or so). If you know you’ll be camping dry or won’t find a water source for a long time, the large water bladders, like the Platypus, are your best bet. They are light and fold up when not in use, and are convenient for in-camp use in the evening.

Surviving the Food Chain

While few hikers become sustenance for larger carnivores, bears do get hungry. Take measures to protect the food you bring. Traditional methods include hanging one’s food (bears can have hours of fun with this kind of piñata) and stashing it in bearproof canisters. Among these are large plastic, graphite fiber or aluminum storage cans. Most of these are around 2 to 3 pounds and likely weigh more than your tent. A welcome innovation: bear bags made from bulletproof fabric (guarding against bears with guns?). The Ursack weighs 5 ounces and provides reliable bear protection for your food in most wilderness areas. In Yosemite and some other national parks with bears habituated to stealing food from humans, even the double-walled 11-oz Ursack Ultra is prohibited and will result in a heavy fine.

The Good News

If you are trying to reduce your pack weight, or are just venturing into backpacking, you don’t have to spend a fortune. If you don’t need a bear bag, you can follow these recommendations for just a few dollars. You can always upgrade to the more expensive items, but the cheap ones are just as functional with little difference in weight.


Part 5: Trail Food

by David J. Schultz

Introduction

The author Henry Fielding wrote, “We must eat to live and live to eat.”

Nowhere is this more true than on the trail. After a long day on the trail, your body needs fuel. Furthermore, if you are like me, you will find that few things can make you forget the weariness in your limbs like a good meal. The challenge comes in trying to keep weight and bulk to a minimum while keeping nutrition and good taste to a maximum. As if this were not a hard enough balancing act I also place a high premium on ease of preparation and clean up. When cooking on the trail the hardest thing that I want to do is boil water and pour it in a bag.

Now I know what you are thinking, “Great! Another article on which brand of freeze dried meal tastes the least like sawdust.” Oh contraire, dear reader. Those freeze dried meals are about $7 each. On principal, I just can not bring myself to buy those things (see my other article in this issue, “Ultra Cheap, Ultra Light”). Price, however, is not the only problem that I have with using commercially prepared freeze dried backpacking meals. They tend to be bulky, the portions are sometimes on the smallish side, their quality is inconsistent, and they are often lacking in nutrition. There is one more reason I tend to avoid buying prepackaged trail meals… I love to cook. It is an ego thing and I don’t mind saying so. I find few things as satisfying as hearing comments on how small and light my pack looks as I walk into camp, how good my food smells and looks as I eat, and how nice it must be to only have to boil water and not even have to clean a pot when I’m done.

Nutrition

Unless you are a thru hiker who will be eating on the trail for many weeks in a row, nutrition while hiking means calories. A few days without the proper ratios of vitamins and minerals in our diet will not harm most of us. This doesn’t mean that you should ignore vitamins and minerals in your meal planning. It simply means that calories are king. A few days of hiking at a big caloric deficit can make you miserable and put a damper on an otherwise wonderful trip.

Going ultra light means that you can go farther and faster than you were able with your old heavy pack. Twenty-plus-mile days are common in ultralight circles. While this new found freedom is made possible by shedding pounds, you do pay a penalty in increased energy usage. In his book, “Factors and Formulas for Computing Respiratory Exchange and Biological Transformations of Energy”, T. M. Carpenter lists the caloric expenditure of almost every activity imaginable, including sleeping and hiking. Search Google for the “House of Nutrition” site, which has this type of information. I found that my 225 lb. body will burn well over 6500 Calories during an 18 mile day of hiking that includes 3000 feet of elevation gain.

This is probably a good time to include a note of caution. There are many methods and variables involved in the calculation of caloric expenditure. Your best calculation is only an estimate to use as a starting point. The key is to test your estimate in the field on shorter trips. It would be foolish to pack food for a 2 week trip based solely on an untested calculation of caloric expenditure. After some field testing on shorter trips you will soon get an instinctive feel for how much food you need for hiking in various conditions.

To put this caloric expenditure in perspective, 11 Big Macs contain something in the neighborhood of 6300 Calories and weigh about 5 lbs. Think of it, a five day trip would require that I carry 55 Big Macs. These would certainly fill up a big pack and would weigh more than all of my gear combined. You can see that we have to find trail food that is more calorie dense than Big Macs. With any luck our trail food will also taste better too.

Butter has roughly 200 Calories per ounce. A big Mac has 80 Calories per ounce. I have read that some ultra lighters try to average 150 Calories per ounce of food. However, a diet that averaged 150 Calories per ounce would, of necessity, be very high in fats and not terribly interesting. A generally accepted target is an average of 125+ Calories per ounce of food. At an average of 125 Calories per ounce my 18 mile days would only require 3.25 lbs of food per day. The USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory (hey, you should be a Google expert by now) website has a searchable database of just about every food imaginable and lists, among other things, the calories per 100 grams of a given food.

Note: Technically, the energy value of food is measured in Calories, not calories. Each food Calorie is actually a kilocalorie or 1000 calories. This may be confusing when consulting scientific web sites.

How This Really Works

After looking at the Calories per ounce in a variety of foods you will probably notice that it is not easy to make an interesting diet from only foods that pack 125 Calories or more per ounce. The secret here is to remember that we are talking about an average of 125 Calories (kcal) per ounce in your diet. For example, 1 oz of raisins has only 82 kcal. But, when that one ounce of raisins is combined with 1 oz of gold fish crackers (141 kcal) and 1 ounce of cashews (160 kcal), the resulting “trail mix” contains an average of 127 kcal per ounce. For dinner, 190 grams of dry instant rice (enough to make 2 cups of cooked rice), contains only 107 kcal per dry ounce, but when some tomato powder, dried vegetables, spice and 1 oz of butter flavored or pepper flavored oil is added, the resulting Spanish Rice contains about 125 kcal per ounce of dry weight. The key to making a tasty diet that is also calorie dense is stacking the deck with ultra high calorie foods. Such foods include: nuts, peanut butter, chocolate, butter, oils, snack chips and crackers, pepperoni, and pre-packaged cooked bacon.

My standard operating procedure when I plan meals is to work around the number of calories that I think I will need in a day. First I create dinner, being careful to note its caloric content. Next I create lunch, again noting the calories. Lastly, I fill in the remaining calories for the day in the form of snacks to be eaten through out the day. I do not typically eat “breakfast”; I just start snacking as soon as I wake up. I have a tendency to not eat enough during the day which can result in a horrible “crash” in the mid afternoon when my body runs out of energy. To combat this I eat a snack at least once an hour whether hungry or not.

Dinner is the BIG meal of the day for me. It is more than just a meal; it is a ritual of relaxation. I don’t eat dinner while I walk. Even if I am in bear country, I eat a few miles before I stop to set up my camp for the night and take my time. I don’t rush dinner, but neither do I want to be bothered much with its preparation. Dinner is when I sit down and relax. My body unwinds a bit from the work of the day as I boil water and then savor my repast. I have found a technique which allows easy preparation and clean up as well as providing tasty and nutritious food.

I make my dinners in single serving bags which require only that I add boiling water and wait for several minutes while the food “cooks”. I then eat my meal straight from the bag. When I’m through eating I zip the bag back up and pack it out. There is no pot cleaning for me on the trail. My current packaging bags of choice are the one quart size Glad “Stand and Zip” bags. These bags are much stronger than regular freezer zip locks and easily stand up to boiling water. After the meal is bagged, I simply roll the bag up and place a rubber band around it. A dinner packaged like this will withstand a tremendous amount of abuse. When packaging these meals at home I start with the dinner foundation first. This is typically a starch such as pasta, rice or potato flakes. Often a prepackaged rice or noodle side dish is the foundation. Next in the bag goes whatever suits my fancy: dehydrated veggies, meat, tofu crumbles, and spices. I write down the caloric content and the amount of water and oil (or ghee) needed on the outside of the bag. Occasionally, I will forget to record the amounts of the different ingredients and have to guess at the amount of water to use. A good rule of thumb is one cup of water for every one cup of dry ingredients. If you put in too much water, just gradually add a bit of couscous, instant rice or potato flakes to absorb the excess. Finally the bag is zipped shut and all excess air is forced out. To prepare the meal simply boil the appropriate amount of water, add the boiling water and oil to the bag, seal it, mash the contents around through the closed bag to mix, wrap the bag in some unused clothing to insulate it (often unnecessary), and wait 5 to 15 minutes (depending upon what you are cooking).

Your local supermarket can provide most of the foods for your hiking pantry. Health food, ethnic food, and online specialty food stores will provide variety and some harder to find items. Here is a list of some things that typically go into my “easy cook” hiking meals:

  • Prepackaged rice or noodle based side dishes (I only get those that cook in less than 8 minutes.)
  • Instant potatoes (I especially like the flavored varieties. Try several as the taste varies greatly among brands.)
  • Ramen noodles
  • Angel hair pasta (This will cook by being submerged in boiling water with no simmering needed.)
  • Couscous
  • Instant rice
  • Dried refried bean flakes
  • Dehydrated or freeze dried vegetables ( I dehydrate most of my own – it is really easy and cheap. These can also be purchased online from Enertia Trail Foods or Just Tomatoes, Etc.)
  • Spices
  • Powdered gravy or sauce mix
  • Oil (I typically use olive oil or flavored oils. The popcorn section of most supermarkets has butter flavored oils.)
  • Clarified butter or ghee (If you want to make this at home a quick web search on “clarified butter” or “ghee” will yield dozens of hits. One of my favorites is at Ayurvedic Foundations web site. Ghee can also be purchased in stores that sell food from India. As long as no moisture is introduced to the ghee it does not require refrigeration.)
  • Grated Parmesan Cheese
  • Sour Cream powder
  • Dehydrated cooked ground beef, chicken, or tuna ( Some freeze dried meats are available commercially, but they cost an arm and a leg, so I dehydrate my own.)
  • Dehydrated tofu crumbles (Tofu crumbles – a ground beef substitute – are available in many grocery stores. I then dehydrate them for trail use. Their taste and texture are very much like ground beef.)
  • Textured vegetable protein (TVP is available in many health food stores.)

Lunch, to a lesser extent than dinner, is also a time of relaxation for me. On most days by the time I stop for lunch, I have already been walking for 4 or 5 hours. I typically will make lunch a one hour rest stop that allows me to catch my breath, wiggle my toes, and let my socks and shoes air out. Again, ease of preparation is key to me so I rarely heat lunch. Current lunch favorites include peanut butter, honey, crackers, pound cake, flat bread, pepperoni, cheese, dried fruit, and nuts.

Trail snacks usually consist of anything that I can eat while walking. Lately I find myself munching various brands and types of high nutrition food bars (the excellent Luna brand of bars are my current favorite), the old standby – gorp, home made trail bars, various flavors of sweet cakes that come from military MREs, and goodies from the Little Debbie family of snacks.

After dinner snacks are always a part of my hiking cuisine. Typically, I will bag a half box of “no bake” cheese cake or perhaps some instant rice or bread pudding. If stealth camping (no cooking where I sleep), desert can be my first meal the next morning.

Condiments and extras play an important part in the overall enjoyment of a trip. There is always a ¼ ounce of Tabasco brand pepper sauce and ¼ ounce of spicy seasoned salt in the food bag. The added weight is negligible, the enjoyment is not. I usually take a small amount of spirits. Depending upon the trip and mood my preference in choice of spirits will fall toward one of two extremes. I may bring a wee dram ‘o the peaty dew, i.e. a small quantity of a fine single malt scotch (usually Lagavulin from the Isle of Islay). At the other end of the spectrum are the makings for a true ultra light cocktail – a few ounces of 190 proof grain spirits and vitamin fortified Crystal Light drink mix powder. The high proof spirits give twice as much bang for the weight and serves double duty as both stove fuel and an effective disinfectant. Sometimes the liquor goes home unopened and sometimes it disappears during the first night.


Part 6: Water Treatment

by George Cole

Introduction

Unless you’ve never been backpacking, I’ll assume you’re using a combination of a pump filter and some sort of water storage container. This means you’re probably carrying at least a pound of water treatment and storage gear. I hope no one is still carrying all the water they’ll need, even for a short trip, unless they’re going where there are no natural water sources. Water weighs more for it’s volume – about 35 ounces per liter – than almost any other thing you need to survive.

Therefore, I believe that there are two elements to a “water treatment” weight reduction strategy: the equipment you use and how much water you carry.

Equipment

You have a range of choices when choosing gear. There’s the extreme minimalist approach – take your chances and drink right from the source. You may get away with this for years but some nasty bug will eventually catch you and you won’t like the result. It’s messy in a particularly unpleasant way, can be life threatening, most medical treatments are hard on the liver and kidneys, and some people never completely recover.

Then there’s the minimalist approach – treat the water with chemicals. You can use an iodine compound such as Polar Pur or a chlorine dioxide compound such as Aqua Mira or Pristine (chlorine dioxide – appears to be more effective). The good news is that your treatment system will weigh only ounces. The downside is murky water and the time it takes for the chemical to work. Effectiveness can be improved and some treatment time saved by filtering out the suspended particles on which bacteria reside in relatively high numbers. You can do this using a paper coffee filter, a bandana, or a scrap of fine cloth.

The mainstream lightweight approach is to make your water storage container part of your treatment system. Usually this means a hydration bag (e.g., Platypus, Camelback, etc.) with a small filter (e.g., Safe Water Anywhere or Seychelle) spliced into the drinking tube although some backpackers prefer to use a dual bag gravity feed system. An advantage to this type of system is that you can drink more water more often because you can drink while walking. It is generally safe for healthy folks for any North American water source.

However, your immune-compromised water treatment editor, yours truly, takes the hydration bag system farther – a homemade silk muck filter, an in-line Sweetwater Siltstopper II pre-filter, and an in-line Safe Water Anywhere filter. I also treat the unfiltered water with Aqua Mira. It’s safer, cleaner, better tasting water than I can get at home, and the whole kit weighs only 11 ounces (wet).

Water Consumption

Your water consumption strategy is a more important step in reducing the weight you’re carrying. Essentially, water is easier to carry and does you more good when it’s inside you instead of on your back. Here’s my approach.

Where water is relatively abundant (at least one source every five miles or so, requiring that I know where reliable sources are beforehand), I drink as much as possible first thing in the morning and before starting to hike. Then I carry no more than one liter of water to the next water stop. At each stop I drink any clean water I have left then drink at least a liter of newly filtered water (my system lets me do this safely right away). Then I carry no more than one liter to the next stop. An added benefit to this pre-hydration strategy is how much better I feel and how much more energy I have throughout the day. The downside – I have to stop to pee more often. Some ultralight backpackers take this strategy to the extreme, drinking only at sources and carrying none. This approach is all right if you’re absolutely sure where the next reliable source is and you can make it there comfortably but doesn’t leave you with any margin for error.


Part 7: Miscellaneous Essentials

by Rick Dreher

Introduction

Each time we head out into the woods (or mountains, or desert, or jungle, or…), whether it’s for a couple of hours or a couple of months, there are some basic items everybody should carry – the “essentials.”

For years, the Mountaineers have been teaching the “Ten Essentials” concept of backcountry preparedness, providing a foundation of small items that every hiker should carry that could prove to be life-saving.

Having “cut my Vibrams” learning to backpack in the suffocating woods of western Washington, I’m acutely aware of how easy it is to become completely disoriented wandering just a few dozen feet off the trail. A tangled second-growth forest blocks the view skyward and the dense brush underneath makes bushwacking a straight line a trying exercise. The normal Washington State cloud stretching from horizon to horizon eliminates any sense of where the sun may be, and before you know it, you’re lost. But if you’ve got some simple tools in your pack, you stand a better chance of “unlosing” yourself or, if worse comes to worse, keeping yourself well until you’re found.

This article is not about dealing with backcountry emergencies. Its humble goal is to start you thinking about standard items for your essentials kit. Who you are, where you live and hike, and who you travel with, all influence what you should carry – there’s no one-size-fits-all formula. My emphasis here is two-fold: first, make some well-reasoned decisions about what items should comprise your kit; and second, take this kit every time you go for a hike. The good news for lightweight backpackers is that this list need not add up to much weight or much money spent. Careful choices will keep both to a minimum while, at the same time, keep you prepared on the trail.

The Essentials

Here is a typical list of essentials:

  • Bug repellent
  • * Firestarting supplies
  • * First aid kit
  • * Flashlight
  • * Food
  • * Knife
  • * Map & compass
  • Sunblock
  • Sunglasses
  • * Water / water treatment
  • * Whistle

In assembling your kit, you’ll want to always include certain items – they are marked with an asterisk. The others listed will either go or stay at home depending on where you’re headed and what time of year you’re traveling.

Bug Repellent

I once joined another party hiking out of the Sierra. One fellow was a sculptor who specialized in creating animal forms. During the conversation I more than once referred to “bugs” and was each time corrected, “that’s insects.” I decided not to ask “what about arachnids?” and instead vowed to use bugs as my preferred term from then on. (I like very much that Aussies include lobsters as members of the bug family). Bugs of however many legs can be both an annoyance and a health threat. Mosquito- and tick-borne diseases are no joke – as disease vectors, mosquitoes kill more people worldwide than any other animal. In North America the situation isn’t nearly as dire, but ticks and mosquitoes here can and do transmit fatal diseases. Carrying protection is a good idea.

The only reliable and proven repellent against serious mosquito populations is DEET, and a small bottle or tube of DEET-containing repellent should be included in the seasonal pack. I prefer the time-release formulas. In my (thankfully) limited experience with black flies and “noseeums,” DEET also provides some benefit. Standing near a smoky fire and flailing the air wildly with your arms is useful for bugs that can’t be repelled by DEET. Before leaving home, consider spraying your clothing with a permethrin treatment if you’re anticipating especially buggy conditions (in addition to carrying repellant). The combination of permithrin-treated clothing and a DEET-based repellent provides solid bug protection with very little weight.

The good news is that in winter you can leave it all at home, saving at least an ounce!

* Firestarting Supplies

In the Scouting program, we spent considerable energy learning the manly art of fire building. In the soggy Northwest, that can be a tall order. In today’s canister stove/leave-no-trace world, fires aren’t used as much and are often discouraged (even banned in some sensitive places). In addition, if you’re venturing into an alpine zone or the desert, fire fuel of any kind may be unavailable. Still, the ability to build a fire is an important skill to have and your kit should have the things you need to do so in lousy (wet) conditions.

Regardless of the type of trip you take, a fire source – matches and/or a lighter – is a necessary item to pack, if only to light a candle or a stove. Strike anywhere matches tend to work poorly in wet conditions, but a handful of “storm” matches (which have extra-long burning tips) like those distributed by REI can be invaluable.

In addition, depending on your destination, some sort of fire starter (i.e., something to maintain heat for several minutes) is useful in order to light damp tinder. There are many options available, both commercial and homemade. There’s no point of going overboard here – in fact, a simple 0.5 oz tea light candle can serve both as a fire starter and, well, a candle. An even lighter option is a 0.1 oz birthday cake candle.

Above all, keep your firestarting supplies dry. The ultralight backpacker usually chooses a double-Ziploc bag.

* First Aid Kit

We’ve all seen the kits available commercially, ranging from a few bandages in a baggie to a four-pound surgical kit. Because we’re concerned with options for lightweight hiking, we’ll suppress our grievous-injury paranoia and assemble a reasonable kit to cover the basics. For additional perspectives on first aid supplies and kit weight, be sure to read Face-Off: First and Emergency Equipment, by Bill Thorneloe, Dave Schultz, and Ryan Jordan, an article found at BackpackingLight.com.

Doing it yourself saves money and weight and yields a better kit than one purchased commercially.

The common treatable outdoor injuries tend to be cuts, scrapes, blisters and burns. You’ll want to include:

  • An assortment of bandages, tape, and pads for both small “boo-boos” and larger wounds
  • Wound cleansing supplies (alcohol swabs, triple-antibiotic ointment, and maybe even an irrigation syringe)
  • Moleskin for foot blisters
  • Antibacterial ointment
  • Cortisone cream of some kind
  • Tweezers (if not available as part of your knife)

Small quantities of painkillers, antihistamines, and decongestants add little bulk and weight. Date these so you know when to replace them. I usually include a needle and thread – intended primarily for gear repair but also useful for sliver removal and – Heaven help me – closing wounds (consider butterfly bandages as an option here, or even a Super Glue type adhesive). Some folks include latex gloves and CPR masks. Finally, a bit of baking soda can help in treating stings and bites.

Possessing, as I do, a brain packed full of commercial jingles and old telephone numbers means I can’t remember unimportant information like first aid techniques. I have a tiny sub-one-ounce guide to help me out. A complete first aid kit in a baggie weighs a scant few ounces and costs little to assemble. Make two—one for your backpack and the other for your daypack. Leave them in at all times.

* Flashlight

There’s no excuse for a lightweight backpacker to leave a flashlight home, especially given that the little LED button-cell lights weigh less than half an ounce. Some of these are bright enough to guide you down a clear trail after dark. Any will help you rig an emergency shelter, read, or examine your pack contents. Flashlights and their headlamp cousins warrant an entire article unto themselves – which variety you choose to carry is entirely up to you. Routinely check them at home before you head out to ensure that the batteries are fresh and that the bulb is intact. A spare bulb is a good idea for incandescent flashlights due to their inherent fragility, but one of the big advantages of LED technology is the tremendous durability and longevity of the bulbs.

* Food

Some sort of storable food ration can be included as part of an emergency kit. The so-called “sports bars” are a good option – they have a long shelf life and provide a more enduring energy boost than a candy bar (due to their higher percentage of fats, proteins and complex carbohydrates). Food can benefit you in at least three ways: it can provide sugars to overcome the dreaded “bonk” (the depletion of your glycogen reserves), it can help ward off the cold, and it can simply improve your mood – and a good mental state of being enhances your judgment, meaning you’re likely to make better decisions during trying circumstances.

In the pre-lightweight days it was considered important to always return home with some amount of food left in the pack – a sign that you had an emergency ration. I still believe and follow this maxim.

* Knife

Knives and multitools span the gamut, from the tiny and simple to the wondrously complex. Some folks will model themselves after MacGuyver and select that perfect Swiss Army Knife featuring enough blades to build a woodland city and, should the script call for it, overhaul a 737 engine. I even went through a Jim Bowie phase around the time I was a Boy Scout, finding the biggest sheath knife my allowance would accommodate. What a disappointment: not only would the thing never stick in the tree, it had no other apparent uses. I’ve since acquired a series of progressively shrinking Swiss Army knives, among other options.

Over many years of hiking, I’ve narrowed down my actual knife uses to some basics:

  • cutting thread, cord, twigs, tape, fabric, fishing line, food, dead skin, etc.
  • screwing/unscrewing screws
  • poking holes
  • filing metal, wood, nails (of the finger and toe variety)
  • prying
  • tweezing

For all of these functions I’ve found that either a tiny Swiss Army Classic pocketknife or a nearly-as-small multitool – the Leatherman Micra – will fit the bill. Their tiny blades will not spread peanut butter but they can certainly handle most cutting jobs encountered by a backpacker. Since cutting is oftentimes better done with scissors, I always make sure my choice of tool includes them. Because these knives are small, I recommend that you keep it on a lanyard (a.k.a., “dummy cord”), perhaps along with your tiny LED flashlight, and attach it to either a belt loop or your pack. If you do this, I can’t promise that you won’t lose it, but if you don’t, I can promise that you will.

* Map and Compass

Few things more wasteful than a map and compass in the hands of someone who doesn’t know how to use them. Before you hit the trail, ask yourself an honest question: do you or anybody else in your party know how to use a map and compass?

Let’s assume that answer is yes. Further, let’s assume that the map is accurate, up-to-date and covers the entire area you’re visiting. So-called 15-minute maps are generally detailed enough, but sometimes the more detailed 7.5-minute maps (i.e., based on USGS quadrangles) are required for technical cross-country jaunts and in more “tortured” terrain. Keep paper maps in a Ziploc bag for protection. Maps printed on plastic are tougher and demand less care. Waterproof topographic maps are increasingly available from public land management agencies, including the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service.

All good compasses are liquid filled (the converse is not true: all liquid-filled compasses are not necessarily good ones). Your compass should feature declination adjustment to discern between magnetic and true north. If you’re planning on taking bearings using map and compass, your compass will need a side long enough to allow you to draw your triangulation lines. (Bring a pencil and straightedge too.) A hinged compass with a mirror gives you a way to apply your sunblock and check your contacts. It has advanced navigation uses too, but that’s a topic for a different article.

Some compass features appearing on “multi-use” compasses include a built-in whistle, a map-distance measuring device, and an inclinometer. Some have glow-in-the-dark needles and bearing rings. Any compass you carry should be fitted with a lanyard and kept handy for frequent use.

The caveat about ascertaining your location using map and compass is that there may be situations in which you’ll have no view of physical landmarks required for taking bearings. One piece of advice I heard recently from an orienteer is to actively use your map and compass the entire time you’re hiking in order to continually establish where you are and are headed, based on the terrain. This makes good sense, and works against the typical leave-them-in-the-pack-until-needed approach. The flip side of this hyper-aware method is to note that some PCT thru-hikers never once touch their map and compass during the entire 2,600-mile journey. Not all trails, however, are marked as a National Scenic Trail, and even the PCT has to pass though clearcuts and confusing road crossings.

[Editor’s Note: More and more lightweight backpackers are entering the wilderness with wrist watches having altimeter and compass capability. Particularly in mountainous areas and steep terrain, it can be much faster to navigate with an altimeter than with a compass. Several manufacturers make such devices, with Suunto generally being regarded as offering the highest quality and most accurate devices.]

Sunblock

If you’re headed for the deep woods of Maine or a triple-canopy rainforest, or taking a soggy wintertime oceanside hike, you can leave the sunblock at home. Otherwise, keep a small tube in your pack. There are seemingly, a million formulas available, with the A and B UV types getting the most attention lately. Some of these are throwbacks to the old days, containing either zinc oxide or titanium dioxide in a colloidal suspension. Whatever your preference, just remember to bring it and use it. Especially remember to apply it on overcast days when you’re on snow or water (e.g., canoeing). In these situations, some of the most serious burns seem to happen on days when the sun never officially pops into view. If you have a bigger bottle than you want to carry, transfer some into something small, like a film canister.

Sunglasses

You can protect your eyes from wind, bright sun and dust by wearing a decent pair of glasses. Match the glasses to the need – summertime travel on alpine snowfields requires very dark lenses with side protection (snow-blindness can immobilize you for several days). Cold, windy, and snowy conditions might even call for goggles, while a rainforest hike might require nothing at all. Choices in glasses are endless, just make sure that they fit well – ill-fitting glasses are a unique form of torture.

* Water / Water Treatment

Always carry either water or some means of gathering and treating water. Let your destination be your guide as to which type and how much. If you have to carry all your water, test yourself: do you still have some left when you return to the trailhead? That’s a good indication you’ve taken enough.

For more information on water treatment options, check out Part 6, Water Treatment.

* Whistle

“You do know how to whistle, don’t you?”

A simple item often overlooked, a whistle is a good way to get in contact with wayward members of your party or with potential rescuers. Voices typically don’t carry well in the wilderness, particularly in wooded areas. The sound from a whistle carries well. Three short whistle blasts (or three shouts) is a universally recognized distress signal.

Note to parents: Equip your kids with whistles, always worn on a neck lanyard, and emphasize that they are not to be used as toys.

Conclusion

Excluding water (slightly more than one pound per pint), a typical “essentials” kit for lightweight hiking might weigh one or two pounds. The cost is difficult to pin down, but the largest expense items will usually be knife/multitool ($10-50), the compass ($5-50) and the sunglasses ($10-200). Everything else is certainly a minor expense, and many of these items are probably laying around your home. I hope you’ll agree that the minor weight and expense of assembling and carrying your kit are a small price to pay for your safety.

Other essential kit contents might include an emergency shelter/Mylar blanket, extra clothing, utility cord, snakebite kit, signaling device, etc. – use your experience and imagination in making your kit unique but useful. The most important thing to remember is that you should pack your essential kit every time you hike, be it for one day or one week.


Part 8: Nonessentials

by Rick Dreher

Introduction

Preparing for every trip brings a host of packing dilemmas: do I take this (fill in the blank) or leave it behind? While dyed-in-the-wool (polypropylene?) ultralighters will never be found with extraneous items in their kit, the rest of us take some extras along. What makes decision time so tough for the lightweight backpacker is the following dilemma: If I take it all, my light pack isn’t light any longer.

Our challenge as fun-loving lightweight types is to match our gadgets to both the trip and our own interests. Hobbies are the most common source of extra gear. Also contributing are an interest in nature, the love of reading, the lure of good trail food, the hunt for the wily trout, etc. Type A personalities and the easily distracted may want to carry some source of entertainment. All of these items seem quite legitimate – so how do we feed our habits and still keep things light?

This far into adulthood, I still require frequent counseling on self-restraint. That means both not taking every gadget I might possibly want, and not taking the most over-the-top (heavy) version of a given gadget. There’s a world of difference in weight and bulk between a 50-band radio and an ear-bud FM receiver, or between 12×50 binoculars and a 6×18 monocular. Tradeoffs, my friends, is the name of this game.

What follows is a smorgasbord of goodies. As the sign says, “Take all you want, but eat all you take.” The list is, of necessity, long on bulk and short on specifics. Many of the item groups warrant an article of their own (a discussion of lightweight cameras and photography alone deserves its own book). Because backpackers are tremendously varied in our areas of interest, you’ll think of more categories than I have put together here. That’s okay – we can write more articles (they don’t weigh anything).

I’ve chosen to lump everything into one of two groups: stuff that takes batteries and stuff that doesn’t (no letters please about your handcrank radio, battery free Leica M-3 or squeezy Russian flashlight).

Stuff that Takes Batteries

Cameras

I promised myself I’d keep this section short but I failed miserably. Feel free, encouraged even, to simply skim for useful tidbits. Cameras are a subject dear to my heart – as gadgets, they cannot be beat. Today there are so many options that I truly feel the pain of a newcomer to this field. I also feel sorry for myself, as I seem unable to catch up with everything that has happened in the last several years. Some basic categories: 35mm single lens reflex (SLR), 35mm point and shoot (P&S), 35mm rangefinder, one-use disposable, APS, digital. There are also mid format, the true minis and lastly, there are the video camcorders.

What to do, confronted as we are with this embarrassment of riches? Let the need decide the medium. Do you want snapshots as simple reminders of where you’ve been or do you want to create artfully detailed scenics? Do you want portraits or action footage? Do you want wildlife or wildflower close-ups? For viewing, do you want prints, live video, web page images, slides? Is moderate picture quality (resolution and color saturation) acceptable or do you want gallery quality? I suppose I should also ask, do you want color or black and white?

APS cameras have the greatest “gee whiz” appeal to me – they’re small, light and more or less foolproof. Sadly, I have had to stay away due to their small negative size (reducing print quality and enlargement range) and extremely limited film choices (no slide film at all). But, if snapshot-quality pictures are what you’re after, APS cameras are an excellent choice for the lightweight hiker. Tiny metal-clad models from Nikon, Canon and Contax are especially intriguing, and will coax the most quality from this film medium.

Snapshot-quality is also what you’ll get from disposable cameras and many 35mm point-and-shoot (P&S) cameras. That said, I was pleasantly surprised recently at the quality of the prints from one of the better disposables – a Kodak model that sports an improved lens, an optical viewfinder, and a flash. Fuji makes something similar. Disposables are both cheap and lightweight. Don’t overlook the fact that if you ruin one, you’re not out much money. Of course, if you’re going for very long you may have to pack several, eliminating the weight and space advantages.

Inexpensive P&S cameras deliver similar quality to disposables, with the obvious advantage of allowing you to use any (print) film you’d like in any length. All have a built in flash and some come with zoom lenses. Most have autofocus capabilities. As you go up in price, size and complexity, P&S image quality improves. Too, zoom ranges become greater and the lens speeds, faster. Some P&S models are water-resistant and some have remote controls. Note that only the best P&S cameras give reliable results shooting slide film. Olympus has an impressively lightweight range of P&S models (Stylus Epic series) that are fairly well-regarded in their quality. Pentax has larger ones that are more rugged and produce good results. For the cost-is-no-object crowd, Leica, Nikon, Minox and Contax make some of the finest P&S cameras on the market that are capable of producing gallery-quality photos from both print and slide films. Only a couple of these qualify as lightweight options.

I don’t own a P&S, but if I did, it would have a reasonably fast fixed focal length lens that was up to the task of shooting slides. It would allow as much manual control as possible (over shutter speed, lens aperture, auto focus, film speed setting, fill flash, backlight compensation). I also prefer metal cladding to plastic. Such cameras exist and they aren’t cheap. [Editor’s Note: cameras that might fit Rick’s bill here include the Olympus Stylus Epic, Yashica T4/Super, and the Contax T-series].

35mm SLRs are the Swiss Army knives of the camera world. They’re available in all shapes and sizes and all levels of capability and complexity. SLR lenses span an astonishing spectrum and represent the zenith of sophisticated optical design and construction. 35mm film choices are likewise unlimited and, with the murderous competition between major film manufacturers, incredibly inexpensive for what they deliver.

For those on a budget there are easily 25 years’ worth of good used 35mm camera gear to pick from, with the advantage of giving you access to some purely mechanical older cameras that don’t die along with their meter batteries. New, there are plenty of fairly compact, plastic-bodied SLRs with competent zoom lenses that will handle eighty percent of the shooting needs you’ll encounter. Auto-focus, complex metering schemes, built-in flash, and speedy automatic winders are now all common. Don’t forget to pack extra batteries!

35mm (interchangeable lens) rangefinders are included here because that’s what I’ve been using most recently. They’re similar to smaller SLRs in size and weight, but offer certain advantages in lens size and design, and they eliminate SLR mirror blanking and vibration when shooting. In my view the biggest advantage that rangefinders offer is that their lens designs don’t suffer from the design compromises necessitated by the SLR configuration, and are capable of delivering stunning quality at a fraction of the size and complexity. Some are even affordable (a relative term in photography). Voigtlander, Konica, Contax and Leica are contemporary makers of 35mm rangefinders.

Rangefinders of special merit: if you want simplicity, low weight and good optical quality, the old Rollei 35 series and Olympus XA fixed lens rangefinders may be the best backpacking cameras ever made.

I mention mid-format cameras in passing only because I once lugged a Hasselblad, two lenses, two film backs, a prism finder, and meter on a long hiking trip. Once was enough; the gear alone weighed the better portion of ten pounds. Some noted nature and wildlife pros shoot in mid format. God help them all.

Digital still cameras are the most rapidly advancing segment in photo technology. There is a veritable flood of digital cameras hitting the market with an even greater wave to come. As recently as two years ago most were worthless for anything more than a rudimentary photographic record but today, image quality can be remarkably good. The ability to load directly to a computer, or print directly from the camera itself, is hard to resist. I’m not qualified to give a detailed briefing on digital cameras or to recommend any models. What I’d look for if I were buying one would be a quality optical zoom lens; high pixel resolution; a high capacity, common and affordable removable storage medium (e.g., compact flash card or recordable disc); interchangeable batteries (preferably something common); and both optical and electronic display viewfinders.

The biggest disadvantage of the digital medium is the rapid obsolescence of digital cameras. But for the lightweight fan, there are some miniscule prototypes in development that, if they make it to production, will give us an imaging system that weighs a couple of ounces and takes up the space of a candy bar. Who could resist that?

While I don’t personally understand why people lug video camcorders on a hiking trip, I see enough of them to know they’re popular. Inevitably, the camcorder-lugger is panning from a peak or pass, doubtless zooming in and out like mad at the same time. Because they have benefited from the magic of miniaturization, camcorders are reasonably within the realm of the lightweight backpacker, many weighing less than an SLR with a telephoto lens. Digital camcorders seem like the obvious choice of the breed, since they let you capture good quality still images along with your footage for the next Blair Witch release (“Who Stole My Little Debbie Bar?”). As with digital still cameras, battery type and longevity are important considerations. In addition, all this electronic stuff hates water and cold, and cannot be bounced off rocks.

True Mini Cameras

There have been some tiny camera options over the years, the best known perhaps being the Minox – which records an unbelievably small eight by eleven millimeter image on special film (compare that to 35mm’s 24 by 36mm image). You’ve probably seen them used in ‘60s spy flicks. Amazingly, Minoxes are still made, beautifully in fact, and are also pretty darn expensive. Not intrigued yet? Their smallest model weighs 55 grams. (Minox also markets 35mm P&Ss, so don’t be confused if you happen to see one of these.) For less of a financial bite you might look for one of the 110-series cartridge cameras widely sold in the ‘70s. There were a handful of “serious” models fitted with good quality lenses, and I still occasionally see the film for sale.

Camera Support

I’m coming to the realization that when I’m backpacking, I can’t hold a camera steady. Between a racing heartbeat and shaky muscles, only the highest shutter speeds will yield a really sharp image. Tripods, monopods and other camera-steadying gizmos are all worth consideration for the backcountry photographer. Some hiking poles come with a camera attachment. The little “Ultrapods” accessory tripods are small, light and can be strapped to other objects (trees, ice axes, etc.). Some folks even use a beanbag to steady their camera – how about trying your trail mix?

Cellular Telephones

Cell phones are a love-it-or-hate-it gadget. If you’re headed to an area where you can get reception, a cell phone can be a lifesaver in an emergency. When I carry mine it doesn’t make me sleep any better but someone back at home does. So, I’ll lug the extra weight because it provides four ounces of domestic feather-soothing! I leave it in the pack because I’m not hiking and conducting business as though I’m on a golf course. The lightest cell phones I’ve seen are around three ounces. The digital phones seem to have a much longer battery life than the analog types. I’ve never seen a cell phone that takes standard batteries, meaning you’ll have to rely on its rechargeable battery pack.

Global Positioning Systems

Teetering between toy and necessity, the GPS has become accurate, light and affordable. I had one that I received as a Christmas present until recently, when I sent it down a mountainside (long story). The point is this: I miss it. The lightest are now under six ounces (and Casio even has a wristwatch version). The best GPS units offer map overlays that will also store proposed routes, and can communicate with mapping software on your PC. GPS units record your actual routes and display your waypoints. Some also have electronic compasses and barometric altimeters. GPSs are becoming very popular in sports other than backpacking, so they will undoubtedly receive a great deal of R&D attention. As a consequence, you can continue to expect smaller, lighter, and more functional units – I don’t think that a two ounce, AAA-powered GPS unit is out of the question in the next few years. If you get one, make sure it’s waterproof and has only the features you really want. More features mean a higher price tag and a lower battery life.

Personal Digital Assistants

I have to bring up PDAs because so many folks are now married to these things. When you think about it, storing route information, recipes, first aid instructions, and who knows what other references on a PDA makes sense – a PDA has a huge capacity to store and display documents for no added weight. Some hikers compose their journals on them and then download over the phone when they arrive in town, in order to update friends and family about their trip progress. Many can also handle email and web browsing tasks. Think of it – get the latest articles from BackpackingLight.COM from town while you’re doing the laundry! Some also store MP3 music for those in need of their Walkman fix.

The big PDA technology dividing line is the presence of a keyboard. If you’re a writer, a keyboard is probably mandatory. If simply jotting notes, a Palm-type touchscreen is probably fine and keeps the unit smaller and lighter. Many run off standard batteries – those with built-in rechargeables are ill-suited to long trips. Color screens are suck the juice out of batteries and are impractical for backpacking.

Radios

AM, FM, TV, MW, SW, WB, CB…there are a host of possible reasons to carry a radio. The lightweight backpacker will quickly focus on the truly tiny options. Simplest are the headphone-only AM/FM models. These can weigh less than two ounces with battery and earphones. Size, complexity and weight increase as you increase features. In my opinion, long hours tent-bound provide a legitimate reason to have a small radio. Getting weather forecasts are an even better one. If someone were to make a waterproof headphone-only AM/FM weather-band radio that runs off one AAA battery, they will be immediately inducted into the lightweight backpacking hall of fame. I’m waiting.

Stuff that Doesn’t Take Batteries

Mono / Binoculars

There are a lot of good reasons to take a monocular or binocular hiking. Route-finding, sightseeing, astronomy, birding and other wildlife, trout stalking, even butterflies. The range available is huge in both cost and weight. The lightest binoculars I know of are 4 ounces, several monoculars are even less, some as little as two. Two important considerations are optical quality and water and shock resistance. It’s a sad fact that the weight goes up along with quality and ruggedness. For the minimalist, a watertight monocular is the closest to lightweight nirvana while retaining good optics. The downside is that you lose the 3-D effect of stereo vision that binoculars offer. There are more quality makers than you can shake your hiking pole at, and even more economical brands than that. In no particular order: Steiner, Celestron, Meade, Nikon, Leica, Swarovski, Canon, Minolta, Zeiss, Pentax, Orion, Bushnell all make worthy glass (although not every model from certain brands is worth carrying). Do yourself a favor and avoid poorly made optics, they’ll never leave your pack—the worst kind of weight to carry.

Books

I’ll lump books into two categories – reading and reference. If you can stomach bibliological violence, you can rip a hunk of pages out of the section of the book you’d like to read as one way to save weight (a great idea for garage sale novels). If you’re holed up in the tent during a lengthy storm, it’s considered good mountain manners to rip your reading book into sections and share it with your tentmates.

Field guides of many kinds are a temptation to lug – some are even made small and light with the hiker in mind. Check your outdoor outfitters and naturalist stores for ideas. I sometimes photocopy sections of much-used books (including guidebooks) at 50 percent reduction, giving me tiny quarter-of-original sized versions to keep in the pack. You may only be able to read the tiny type if you have 20-year old eyes, however.

Special gear symbiosis note: a shade tree, a lightweight chair kit for your sleeping pad, and a book on a layover day is a hard-to-beat gadget combination.

Frisbee

It’s a toy, it’s a dinner plate; it’s a dog dish; it’s a snow scoop; it’s a raft paddle; it’s a stove base; it’s a Frisbee! Get the glow-in-the-dark one for leg-breaking good nighttime fun. For the lightweight and low-volume pack, check out nylon fabric versions.

Games

Cards and board games are available in miniaturized versions. I have a tiny magnetic backgammon set that weighs less than two ounces. I’ve seen game boards imprinted on bandanas. Warning: don’t use your bandana for its intended purpose if you’re going to share it later for a game of checkers with your hiking partner. I’m still waiting for someone to drill a cribbage board pattern into a hiker’s trowel.

Journal & Pen / Pencil

Some folks keep journals. You can do that in a book or on a PDA. Science field books are made of waterproof paper and are fairly small and light. Lighter still are a few sheets of paper in a baggie. Certain pens refuse to write in the cold and wet, others explode with inky blobs at altitude. Choose wisely (there’s a shorty “SpacePen” that seems to be a good option). Pencils remain a nice low-tech option and can be resharpened with your pocketknife.

Multi-Tool

Covered in passing in the previous section on essentials, multi-tools have multi-plied to the point that there are now hundreds to choose from. Ninety-eight percent of them are too heavy to consider lugging on a backpacking trip. Leatherman, Buck and others make tiny versions that have some truly useful features. Your biggest decision is whether you want one designed around scissors or pliers, as the blades are always secondary considerations in the designs. My vote is for scissors, but there may be times when pliers could be a godsend (particularly in the area of gear repair).

Star Chart

Underappreciated as a backcountry gizmo is a star chart. This can be the wheel type that is good for all seasons and times of day or simply the correct page from a guidebook or magazine. As a city dweller I only see real night skies when I’m in the mountains, and I get true pleasure from knowing a little about what I’m watching. The chart is a perfect companion to binoculars. On a clear night you can make out a number of the Messier objects, and the moon and planets become your personal playground. Make sure your chart is matched to your latitude (and hemisphere, for that matter). I have one (a Phillips) that weighs less than an ounce.

Batteries

If you’re toting electrical gadgetry you need to feed it – that means you have to carry batteries. If you’re going for any length of time, you’ll also have to carry extras. Lithium equivalents are available for AAs, but not yet for AAAs. Most contemporary cameras take one or two specialty power cells that can’t do double duty in other devices (like your flashlight). The diligent backpacker selects all their gadgets around a single battery size to allow interchangeability. Best of luck if you’re carrying several kinds of gadgets at once.

Recharging in the field is possible and occasionally done. Small photocell rechargers are available for AAs and AAAs, and are probably worth a look for the long-term hiker out for several weeks without access to resupply parcels, especially in the sunny Western U.S. and Canada. NiCad batteries don’t store a charge very long, so aren’t a good choice if you can’t recharge in the field. NiMH and Li-Ion batteries fare better, which is why they’ve become more prevalent in electronic devices.


Part 9: Ultra-Light, Ultra-Cheap

by David J. Schultz

Introduction

When shopping, it is relatively easy to get high quality goods if you throw lots of dollars at the purchase. You want a great bottle of wine, a fabulous car, or a superb suit, just tell the nice salesman that “money is no object”. He’ll fix you right up. But getting what you need on the cheap, well that is another thing entirely. Getting what you need without a lot of cash can take time, research, experience, and luck – unless you have some friendly advice to point you in the right direction. Well my hiking friend, let me show you the way…

Before We Get Started…

For about three hundred dollars you can outfit yourself with all the gear you need to have a great trail hike in moderate weather and keep that gear weight at about 15 lbs. If you spend a bit more, you can extend your hiking season and shed a few more pounds off of your pack. In general, if you spend more, you will get some combination of lighter weight, higher quality, more flexibility, and greater utility in your gear. While I have hiked many hundreds of miles with the same gear that I am about to tell you about, my current hiking “kit” is considerably more expensive. It does however, allow me to hike in a much wider range of conditions. Also, for gear heads like me, buying new and interesting gear is, in and of itself, a hobby.

I spent a few hours on the internet and cruised a few hiking retailers to find most of the gear in this article. The rest of the items you will have at home or can easily get at local stores such as Walmart, Target, Sportsmart, etc. Be sure to check the clearance section of the web sites you cruise – this is where many of the best bargains can be found. While I mention brand and store names for many items, you could certainly do well with other manufacturers and obtain gear through many other sources. I am not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or retailers mentioned here.

Since you are probably new to ultralight hiking, I’m going to assume that you will be hiking on established trails for two or three day trips in moderate weather. That is, you are not going to start out by bushwhacking, cross country in the snow. Remember: When hiking ultralight you must match your gear and your experience to the worst conditions that you expect to encounter.

What To Get and How To Get It Cheap

Pack

The good news is that even some of the cheapest packs are excellent and there is a huge selection of packs available at local sporting goods stores and on the web. The bad news is that sometimes you do not know whether a pack really feels good until you spend several hours in it. Remember: Wear the pack for a few hours around the house and treat it gently until you decide if you like it. Make sure that you understand the return policies of your retailer. Brands like Camp Trails, Kelty, Rokk, Jansport, and many others can be found for under $70 dollars. With a little minor surgery (cutting off excess or unneeded straps, removing frame stays , etc.) 2.5 to 3 pound weights for 3000+ cubic inch packs are often achieved. For those of you that really want the very lightest weight pack available anywhere, try the GVP4 or the Golite Breeze. The GVP4 is a 13 oz, 4500+ cubic inch pack, with a hip belt. If you like the way that it carries, it is a great way to shed a few pounds. I often use my GVP4 for winter hikes. The Breeze is only 12 oz but lacks a waist belt.

Sleeping Bag

Unlike packs, with sleeping bags you really do get what you pay for. At any given temperature rating, as sleeping bag weight goes down, price goes up dramatically. While $40 will get you a sleeping bag that will be comfortable in 20 degree weather, this bag will likely weigh in at around 6 lbs. On the other end of the spectrum, a 20 degree bag from a quality manufacturer like Nunatak or Western Mountaineering will cost over $300, but weigh around 2 lbs. Since cheap is the word of the day, I will let you in on one of the few exceptions to the weight versus cost rule…down bags sold under the Campmor brand name. Now these bags are not ultra-conservative in their temperature ratings, nor do they have a lot of frills, but I don’t know of anywhere else where you can get a 20 degree, sub 2.5 pound down bag for under $110 dollars. Other cheap, light bags are made by companies such as Kelty, Coleman (Peak 1), and Ferrino. Remember: The temperature ratings claimed by manufacturers are mostly optimistic – what really matters is the inches of loft in the bag above your body.

Sleeping Pad

For going ultralight on the cheap, this is a relatively easy choice. Local retailers will sell generic blue foam pads for well under $10. Or, if you want a much more comfortable pad, High Country Outdoor Products makes an excellent pad called the Mt Washington ($20). The popular Z-Rest pad by Cascade Designs is also a good choice, but it seems to loose its “cushion” with relatively little use. Regardless of which foam pad you buy, you should consider cutting it down in size to reduce weight and bulk. When you do this, cut off small amounts in stages so as to not cut off too much.

Shelter

For most ultra lighters, the main question in shelters is “Tent or Tarp?”. Tarps are generally lighter and cheaper, but harder to set up and may not be as weather or bug proof as tents. Cheap tarps are available locally at hardware stores or online for under $35 dollars. The lightest tarps are made of silicone-coated nylon and can still be had for about a dollar per square foot from many online sources. Very nice custom tarps can be ordered from Moonbow and Oware at about the same price as most off-the-shelf tarps. If you are like me and really hate bugs and other creepy crawly things, you will need to get some netting to keep the critters off while you are under the tarp. Remember: Tarps require skill to set up under good conditions and can be downright difficult during a windy storm. Practice, practice practice.

Cheap tents are easily found at local discount and sporting goods stores under brand names such as TexSport, Wenzel and Coleman (Peak 1). These tents usually sell for $30 to $90 and weigh from 3 to 4.5 pounds. While these tents are not fancy and add 2 or 3 pounds over the weight of a tarp, they require no skill to set up and are reasonably weather proof. For what it is worth, in a survey of over 100 through hikers who completed the AT, there really was very little difference in satisfaction ratings between expensive tents and really cheap ones. I have spent many a rainy night under a Texsport Hike ‘n Bike that I bought several years ago for around twenty dollars. Remember: It is an absolute must that you seal the seams of your tent fly and all tarp seams if you want to stay dry.

Stove

Stoves are generally classified by what type of fuel they burn. There are four types of stoves that are widely used by ultralight hikers at this time: white gas, solid fuel, alcohol, and pressurized gas (canister). I won’t discuss white gas stoves here as I consider them too heavy and too expensive for short trips in moderate weather.

The table below compares the remaining three types of lightweight stoves.


Alcohol

Solid Fuel

Canister

Advantage


ease of use

simple with practice

depends on fuel tablet quality and wind

no-brainer, especially with piezo ignition

CANISTER


stove availability

do-it-yourself in less than an hour and $10

available on the Internet and sporting goods stores for about $10

MSR and Peak 1 both make models under $35

tie: SOLID FUEL, ALCOHOL


fuel availability

alcohol can be purchased in hardware stores, auto supply stores, and grocery stores; cost is 5-10 cents per ounce

fuel can be hard to find locally but ordered off the Internet; quality is variable; cost is 15-50 cents per tablet

canisters are available in most sporting goods stores; cost is 50-60 cents per ounce of fuel

ALCOHOL


heat output and efficiency

boils 2 cups of water in 5-11 minutes on 1-2 ounces of fuel

boils 2 cups of water in 8-13 minutes with 1-2 one-ounce tablets

boils 2 cups of water in 2.5-4.0 minutes using 0.2-0.3 ounces of fuel

CANISTER


cookpot residue after flame exposure

very little

significant

none

CANISTER


package weight (stove, fuel container, fuel)

3-6 oz + fuel

2-3 ounces + fuel

2.5-5.0 ounces (stove weight) + 3.5 – 5.0 ounces (canister weight)

SOLID FUEL & ALCOHOL have the edge on short trips, CANISTER STOVES or more efficient over the long haul


For me, alcohol is a clear ultra-cheap winner because of its light weight, reasonable boil times, ease of finding fuel, and low “mess” factor. I feel that the best of the alcohol stoves is a design called the Photon Stove (named after the trail name of its inventor, Don “Photon” Johnston). Also check out “Wings stove archive” on the Internet (Google it) which provides instructions and links to many different types of home made alcohol stoves. You should carry your alcohol in any small plastic bottle that does not leak. I use a 4 oz shampoo container for short trips.

Water Treatment and Storage

The most common type of water purification systems found at outdoor gear stores usually are expensive pumps that weigh at least ¾ of a pound. In the past, you really had few other choices: use chemicals to kill the nasties in the water, boil the water, or drink it without treatment and take your chances. Recently however, a lightweight alternative has been developed by a company called SafeWater Anywhere. They have a small lightweight filter that can be used in the construction of a gravity fed water filtering system. This company sells the filters both alone and in a complete filtering system. If you make your own system, you can save a few ounces and a few dollars. I have used this filter for many hundreds of gallons of water over the last two years and am thoroughly impressed with its performance.

If you want the lightest possible solution to making your drinking water safe, chemicals are the answer. These are available online and in local stores under names such as Polar Pure, Aquamira, and Portable Aqua. They all seem to work and are available for between 4 and 10 dollars depending upon the brand. Remember: You must follow the directions on these chemical products to the letter, or you may not kill the nasties. This is especially true if the water is cloudy or cold. The lightest options for water storage are water bladders (widely available at sporting goods stores for about $5) or empty plastic soda containers (free). I have used both with excellent results.

Kitchen Gear

Many hikers tend to take far too much cooking equipment when all that is really needed is a small pot, a bowl, a cup, and a spoon. The best, cheap, light pots that I have found are the small Mirro brand aluminum sauce pans (with the handle removed) or the aluminum “Grease Pot” carried at Walmart. You can easily drill small holes in each of these pots to attach a wire bail handle. The total weight of each of these pots is about four oz. And they cost about $6 each.

Most supermarkets now carry reusable/disposable plastic containers that are tough, cheap and ultralight. These containers make a great cup and bowl. My favorites are the Ziploc brand of round, 20 oz containers which are about 75 cents each and weigh in at less than one ounce with lid. As an added bonus, when these containers are nested inside each other they make a fine insulated cup/bowl. As for utensils, a disposable plastic spoon will work, but can break easily. I can tell you from experience that eating hot beef stroganoff without the benefit of a spoon is no fun at all. Personally, I find it worth the $2 to go with a tough Lexan spoon.

Light

All that is needed for most hiking trips is a small light that use 2 AA dry cell batteries. While a small pen light can be purchased for as little as 3$, I find that a light that can be worn as a headlamp is far superior. Cheap 2 x AA headlamps can be found at local stores or on the web for $7 and weigh 4.5 ounces. However, they eat batteries fairly quickly and have bulbs that burn out with regularity. This means that you must buy and carry extra bulbs and batteries. Small LED (Light Emitting Diode) lights weigh less, have no bulbs to burn out and can have 10 or more times the battery life. While these lights cost more, they may be cheaper to operate in the long run. Small LED lights, such as the Photon, Princeton, and Pocket Bright (my favorite) brands provide enough lite for camp chores at night, but not quite enough for any serious hiking. They cost from $7 – $20 and weigh under ½ ounce. LED headlamps, such as the Petzel Tikka may be used for serious hiking on trails and start at $35 in price and under 3 ounces in weight including batteries.

Knife

The venerable “Swiss Army Classic” knife with a small blade, nail file/screwdriver, scissors, toothpick, and tweezers weighs 1 oz. and be purchased for $12. This knife packs a lot of utility into a very small and inexpensive package. Make sure you do not get a poorly made copy, however. The few extra dollars that you pay for the Victorinox or Wenger brand names are dollars well spent. These are easy to loose so I thread a bright orange necklace length loop through mine to make it easier to spot.

Fire Starters

For most purposes, disposable lighters and matches work just fine. I have seen disposable lighters as low as 4 for a dollar. Remember: Always carry a spare lighter and matches in a watertight container.

Plastic Bags

I carry lawn and garden size black plastic bags and three, one gallon size freezer Ziploc bags. The big bags can be used as pack covers, ground cloths, emergency rain gear, etc. The freezer bags can be used to carry out trash, as emergency water containers, to hold water for washing, etc. Roll up and secure them with a few rubber bands. The rubber bands often come in handy too.

First Aid/Emergency Kit and Grooming

I have lumped these together because most of these items can be found around your home with the exception of a whistle ($2, 1 oz) and a signal mirror ($7, 1 oz). Each is available locally or on the web. Generally, I would try to stay away from prepackaged first aid kits as they tend to be expensive and inadequately supplied.

Clothing

This is one of those areas in which you can save a huge amount of money. While the highest quality outdoor clothing still costs an arm and a leg, you can do just fine for a lot less money. High tech Fibers, such as CoolMax, that were only available in expensive name brands a few years ago are now common in the discount houses. Also, the fleece that is now available from discount stores is far superior to what was available just a few years ago at these stores. Almost all of my fleece clothing has come from Target. It has kept me warm and has held up well to repeated hard use. I have picked up most of my nylon cargo shorts and many CoolMax socks at Target as well.

The only really specialized pieces of clothing that I carry are my Frogg Toggs rain gear. This is ultralight, marvelously breathable and, compared to most of its competitors, ultra cheap ($65 and 15 oz. for the complete suit). Besides use as rain wear, I find that I wear my Toggs almost every night around camp as it gets chilly. I also wear them as a wind shell when I hike. While Frogg Toggs are very versatile, they are not ideal for bushwhacking. Frogg Toggs are durable enough for use on trails, but not on rough, off trail terrain. They would soon be shredded in the brush. If all that you expect are light to moderate showers, an inexpensive poncho such as the $40 silnylon version made by Equinox might suit your needs. Ponchos double very nicely as ground cloths.

A Few Sample Gear Lists

In the sample gear lists that follow, I have omitted prices for items that I assume would be either free or readily available around the average home. I have also not included clothing that is worn while hiking in the total pack weight.

Presented are three lists encompassing different options across the cost spectrum: lowest cost, lower cost, and low cost. As might be expected, higher cost results in lower weight as you buy into more advanced ultralight technologies.


(individual item weights in
ounces are approximations)

LOWEST
cost

LOWER
cost

LOW
cost

weight

cost

weight

cost

weight

cost

PACK


ultralight nylon frameless pack

14

$75

lightweight internal frame pack

48

$50

48

$75

SHELTER


ultralight silicone-coated nylon tarp and bug net

18

$75

lightweight polyurethane-coated nylon tarp

23

$32

discount store tent

32

$89

SLEEPING BAG


600-fill down mummy bag, 20 deg

36

$109

36

$109

600-fill down mummy bag, 45 deg

32

$89

SLEEPING PAD


eggshell-type closed cell foam pad

7

$20

flat closed cell foam pad

11

$8

11

$8

STOVE


solid fuel tablet stove

3

$10

home made soda can alcohol stove

3

$10

3

$10

WATER


inline gravity filter system

6

$40

chemical treatment (e.g., iodine
tablets or chlorine dioxide kit)

2

$4

2

$10

1L soda bottle x 2

2

~

2

~

2 liter flexible plastic water bladder

2

$6

KITCHEN


1L aluminum discount store pot

4

$6

4

$6

4

$6

2 x Ziploc bowls

2

$2

2

$2

2

$2

disposable plastic spoon

0.5

~

Lexan spoon

0.5

$2

0.5

$2

LIGHTING


1-LED push-button light

0.5

$11

0.5

$11

incandescent 1xAA flashlight

4.5

$7

4.5

$7

multi-LED mini-headlamp

2.5

$40

MISCELLANEOUS


Swiss Army-type knife (discount brand)

1

$10

1

$10

1

$10

disposable lighter

1

$1

1

$1

1

$1

matches

0.5

~

0.5

~

0.5

~

2 x lawn & leaf plastic trash bags

2

~

2

~

2

~

3 x 1-gallon Ziploc freezer bags

1.5

~

1.5

~

1.5

~

PERSONAL CARE ITEMS


sunscreen

1.5

~

1.5

~

1.5

~

DEET-based insect repellent

1.5

$4

1.5

$4

1.5

$4

toothbrush & baking powder

2

~

2

~

2

~

toilet paper

2

~

2

~

2

~

alcohol gel hand sanitizer

1.5

$1

1.5

$1

1.5

$1

FIRST AND EMERGENCY GEAR


first aid kit (tape, gauze, moleskin, bandaids,
medication, antibiotic ointment, etc.)

5

~

5

~

5

~

spare flashlight batteries (if needed)

2

$3

2

$3

2

$3

spare lighter

1

$1

1

$1

1

$1

firestarting tinder

0.5

~

0.5

~

0.5

~

whistle

1

$2

1

$2

1

$2

mirror

1

$8

1

$8

1

$8

duct tape

1

~

1

~

1

~

CLOTHING


2 extra pair socks

5

$2

5

2

5

$2

fleece cap and gloves

3 (cap)

$5

5 (both)

$11

5 (both)

$11

cotton tee shirt and shorts (worn), OR

synthetic tee shirt and shorts (worn)

~

~

$22

~

$22

insulated jacket (down or synthetic)

23

$60

200 weight fleece jacket

16

$20

100 weight fleece pants

10

$15

10

$15

10

$15

100 weight fleece top

10

$15

10

$15

ultralight polypropylene laminate
rain jacket and pants

15

$65

15

$65

lightweight polyurethane-coated nylon poncho

14

$20


TOTAL (weight in pounds)

15.1

$298

13.3

$437

11.8

$541


Book Review: The Ultralight Backpacker

Book Review: The Ultralight Backpacker

The Ultralight Backpacker, by Ryel Kestenbaum. Ragged Mountain Press (2001), 139 pages (softbound, illustrated), $15.95. ISBN 0-07-136828-0.

Book Outline (Table of Contents)

Introduction: The Ultralight Way
1. Backpacks
2. Shelter
3. Sleeping Bags
4. Footwear
5. Clothing
6. The Rest of the Gear
7. Food
8. Health and Safety
9. Walking
10. The Ultralight State of Mind
11. On the Long-Distance Trail
Appendix 1. An Ultralighter’s Overnight Pack
Appendix 2. Manufacturers and Suppliers
Appendix 3. World Wide Web Resources

Synopsis

The cover of The Ultralight Backpacker states: “The complete guide to simplicity and comfort on the trail.” In our view this claim is overstated, as this slender book, 138 pages long, can be read in an afternoon and is far from complete and will likely disappoint the experienced lightweight backpacker yearning for new information about equipment and techniques not treated in other texts. However, for the newcomer to lightweight backpacking, The Ultralight Backpacker will not disappoint – it provides an introduction to lightweight backpacking that will certainly put you on the right track to shedding pounds from your pack.

In-Depth Review

Writing Style

The book was written in an informal, conversational writing style. Perhaps this was intended to engage the reader with its informality. A minority of our reviewers enjoyed the tone, claiming that it made for easy reading. To the rest of our review panel, however, this style detracted from the message and did not convey a sense of authority that is a hallmark characteristic of serious how-to writers. All of us were somewhat surprised that the book came from Ragged Mountain Press, which usually offers professionally-written titles.

Content Overview

Kestenbaum is a former outdoor retail shop employee, and his bias towards heavily-marketed, commercially-available equipment is reflected in his discussions of gear choices and the gear list he presents in an appendix. To his credit, he did include several pictures of a hiker carrying a GVPGear G4 pack; on the other hand, the G4 was mentioned nowhere in the text. Missing from the book is any serious discussion about homemade equipment, which must be addressed if any ultralight backpacking guide is to be considered “complete.” Thus, we would have liked to have seen recognition of gear from both cottage industry manufacturers and do-it-yourselfers, which are as responsible for advancing the lightweight hiking movement as any Backpacker Magazine advertiser.

If you are a traditional backpacker not yet well versed in lightweight backpacking practices – and we know there are many such – The Ultralight Backpacker will provide a general overview of equipment and techniques to get you started, including information about how to compare items at your local outfitter’s. However, if you are an experienced lightweight backpacker, you are unlikely to learn new skills or gain significant new insight. You will note, for example, that Kestenbaum does not provide a serious analysis of the real-world performance of different types of gear, taking care instead to discuss the most heavily-marketed products in a given category; we find ourselves wondering to what extent he has had the opportunity to explore the full variety of approaches to ultralight equipment and technique currently in practice. This is most evident in the clothing chapter, which promotes a traditional system of layering (synthetic wicking base layer, fleece insulating mid layer, and waterproof-breathable outer shell layer). Kestenbaum touts windproof fleece (without mentioning either unlined or lined windshirts) and Patagonia Regulator insulation as some of “the most exciting new fabrics to come on the market,” but he fails to include synthetic or down high-loft insulation as a lighter, more compressible alternative to fleece. To his credit, he does question the practicality of waterproof-breathable shell clothing, preferring either the less expensive polypropylene rain gear or well-vented waterproof-nonbreathable garments, but he doesn’t treat the subject in enough detail to offer new insight to an experienced backpacker. Given the products and information currently available, we expected a more comprehensive discussion of different alternatives in a new book.

Most of the chapters are devoted to the discussion of equipment, as expected. Although some on-trail technique is addressed in those chapters, technique (food and nutrition, health and safety, and walking) is the focus of a much smaller (30-page) section. From our perspective, there is much for the ultralight backpacker to master in these crucial areas, and the information in such a brief section is necessarily superficial, leaving the reader with too little guidance about how to apply lightweight practices in the field. The book proceeds to discuss ultralight philosophy in a six-page chapter on the “ultralight state of mind” (treating a potpourri of subjects from meditation to leave-no-trace wilderness ethics); and it ends with an eight-page chapter on long distance hiking, concerning itself mainly with a conventional approach to physical training.

One of Kestenbaum’s core principles, expressed time and again throughout the book, is the importance of being strictly in tune with nature, so that the hiker leaves every luxury out of the pack, including books, a camp chair, and even toilet paper. While only a small minority of backpackers would hold rigidly to this line, we appreciate the way this perspective reminds us why we go into the wilderness in the first place.

Conclusion

Our litmus test for value in a how-to book is a simple one: does it offer new insight or a unique perspective into lightweight backpacking philosophy, technique, or equipment that has not been addressed in earlier texts?

Unfortunately, we felt that Kestenbaum’s attempt to develop a guide to ultralight backpacking fell short of our expectations in this respect. Even so, although The Ultralight Backpacker is not comprehensive or original enough to become a major and authoritative new reference source, it might still earn a place in your home library, simply because it is one person’s perspective on lightweight backpacking, against which you can further articulate your own, and because you will undoubtedly find tidbits of information in it that will make you a better hiker. Despite our overall disappointment, even we, serious students and practitioners of lightweight backpacking, found some valuable tips that we can apply on the trail.

We are all still learning, and we learn from each other. And for that, Mr. Kestenbaum, we offer our sincere and heartfelt thanks for your courageous contribution to our field.

The Laughing Curmudgeon’s Guide to Going Light

The Laughing Curmudgeon’s Guide to Going Light

1. Do you already have gear?

If “yes” go to item “1a.” If “no” go to item “1a” anyway.

1a. DON’T BUY ANYTHING, YET!

You’ll only end up replacing it later.

If you have no gear, you probably haven’t backpacked much, so go slowly until you discover whether you really like backpacking or not. Not everyone does. Go to item “2.”

If you have gear, keep it until you know there’s something lighter that fits your personal needs. There might not be, and you may have to modify something you already have. Go to item “3.”

2. Read Ray Jardine’s book, Beyond Backpacking.

Don’t take it too seriously, as gear selection is a highly personal thing and Ray is into the “guru” thing. He will offer one perspective.

Subscribe to the BackpackingLight Email Group (www.yahoogroups.com/group/backpackinglight). There you will find a wealth of perspectives. Lurk. Think. Link. Ask. Ask again. If you like what someone says and how they say it, ask them to send you their gear list. Get at least three different lists, and ask the owners to explain why they made certain selections. You can do this on or off-line. Don’t worry about bothering these folks; most of them love the attention.

Read gear reviews, but remember that commercial magazines are in the business of selling their advertisers’ gear. When you think you know what you want, find a way to try it out before buying. Borrow. Rent. Buy only what you can return in good condition if you don’t like it.

Get an inexpensive scale. Weigh everything and keep adding it all up. Try stuff out in your living room, then your back yard.

Then think about it some more.

3. Go Back to #2 One More Time

You’re going to have to reform your thinking. After all, you bought all that heavy stuff in the first place. Then go to item ”4.”

4. The Practice that Never…Ever…Ends

a. Make a list of all your gear. Include two blank columns on the list entitled “used” and “didn’t use.”

b. At the end of each trip for the next year make two piles of gear on your living room rug – one for the stuff you actually used and one for the stuff you didn’t. Put a check in the appropriate column for each piece of gear. Think about why you did or did not use it.

c. Underline on your gear list each piece of gear that you did not use because you didn’t need it, or did use only because you had it with you.

d. On each successive trip, leave behind one piece of gear that you didn’t use because you didn’t need it, or did use only because you had it with you. See how it feels. Don’t be a slave to this process and fail to take essential clothing, first aid or health maintenance supplies, but subject all these things, too, to the same scrutiny.

e. At the end of the year make a new list of the gear you absolutely have to take with you in order to be comfortable and feel safe.

f. Reread item “2,” then replace each item on your new gear list with the lightest, most functional and multi-functional product that you can afford. If a piece of gear is not commercially available or is out of your price range consider modifying the gear you have or making your own.

g. Don’t take any of this too seriously. Have fun. Whatever gear you have, get outside and use it.

Face-Off: First Aid and Emergency Gear

Face-Off: First Aid and Emergency Gear

Introduction

There are a few categories of equipment that can be the subject of hostile discussion around a campfire. First aid and emergency equipment certainly are among them. We’ve met hikers with first aid / emergency kits ranging from a baggie full of Band-Aids to five-pound expedition kits.

The purpose of this article is to highlight some of the differences in first aid and emergency equipment selection among three self-proclaimed “lightweight” hikers that reflect opinions on the subject that span a broad spectrum between “conservative” and “why the heck do I need this?”

We’ll start with Bill and Dave critiquing each other until Ryan joins in, no longer able to tolerate the banter.

The Debate
Dave’s List

Dave’s Rationale: Over the last several years, my business has taken me all over the United States. On these trips, I have been lucky enough to find the opportunity to hike extensively in areas that were totally new to me. Unfortunately, I also tend to push my personal envelope a bit and have a unique talent for getting lost. When I go hiking with other folks, they are usually newbies who don’t have a lot of outdoor skills, don’t always have the best equipment, and often push themselves a bit harder then they should. Being well prepared is essential for where and how I hike, so I carry 25 ounces of preparedness for those times when things didn’t go smoothly.

These items, along with my general equipment, help me handle a wide range of medical problems. My goals in selection are:

  1. Management of the little ailments that can spoil a trip, e.g., blisters, diarrhea, stings, cuts, minor pains, etc.
  2. Treatment for moderate problems and control of major pain so that a walk out is possible.
  3. Stabilization of larger problems and control of major pain until a rescue can occur.

Dave’s List

First Aid Supplies

  • Pain meds in a film canister with instructions – Ibuprofen, Percogesic (325 mg acetaminophen and 30 mg phenyltoloxamine citrate), Percocet
  • Decongestant and antihistamine tablets in a film canister with instructions – Benadryl, pseudoephedrine
  • Digestive system meds in a film canister with instructions – Imodium, Tums
  • Topical Meds – Alcohol prep pads, Iodine prep pads, Triple antibiotic ointment, Ophthalmic ointment, Burn ointment, 20% benzocaine gel
  • Blister kit in a small Ziploc – Spenco adhesive knit (moleskin), knife w/scissors, Bioclusive breathable dressing, Curad Blistercare pads
  • Closure kit – Coverstrip closures, bandaids, Small straight hemostats, Sutures (#3 and #5 in gut and nylon)
  • Sterile gauze pads, 1″ breathable plastic tape, 3 oz. bulb irrigation syringe, .5oz 10% povidone-iodine solution, pencil
  • Pair latex gloves

Survival Equipment

  • Two one-gallon freezer ziploc bags
  • Fire starters in a waterproof wrapping – lighter, matches, tinder
  • Signal mirror, marine type signal whistle, LED light
  • Water purifying tabs
  • Large garden trash bag

Repair Supplies

  • Duct tape
  • Hot patch repair kit , needle, dental floss, 4 large nylon wire ties, 4 small nylon wire ties
  • 2 x AAA batteries
  • Pouch for carrying Emergency/first aid kit

BILL THORNELOE: Dave, your list is excellent and quite reasonable, particularly given the weight. I suspect that our kits look quite similar, but this kit may be closer to the contents of my top compartment Ziploc bag. This would serve someone very well, but I suspect that there is duplication and some outdated equipment here.

DAVID SCHULTZ: It could be that my relative inexperience in the healing arts leads me to be overly cautious. I know that if I mishandle a small problem, my lack of skill and experience means that I have a higher chance of failure if the condition worsens. This is why I emphasize items needed to clean and disinfect a wound.

BILL: Why carry moleskin and Bioclusive dressings and Curad blister pads? Why not just the Bioclusive dressings?

DAVE: While the Bioclusive dressings are very useful in that they are waterproof and breathable, they are relatively fragile and do not breathe well when compared to the non waterproof, but tougher, Spenco Adhesive knit. So for ultra heavy sweaters like myself, I find that the Adhesive knit works better. For low perspiring folks like my wife, Bioclusive dressing keeps the blister clean in a relatively dirty environment. I also use the Bioclusive dressing for covering cuts and other non-weeping wounds.

BILL: Why carry both Percogesic and Percocet, neither of which will treat major pain (I carry two 20-mg OxyContin tabs)?

DAVE: The only reason I carry the Percogesic (over-the-counter or OTC med), is that my wife tends to get an upset stomach from ibuprofen. I have found Percocet (prescription or RX med containing acetaminophen and the narcotic oxycodone) to be quite effective on moderate to severe pain and far more effective than any non RX meds available. Certainly there are stronger alternatives (OxyContin 40, MS Contin 30, etc.), but not being a medical professional, I have limited access to RX meds. Before moving, I had a long relationship with my family physician and getting a few RX meds was not such a problem. Now I must use a large and impersonal managed care group and can no longer acquire RX meds for a field kit.

BILL: Why carry iodine prep pads, alcohol pads, povidone-iodine solutions and water treatment tabs? I can see the povidone to help adhesion of skin closures…but the rest?

DAVE: It is far easier to use a prep pad to disinfect a small area than it is to mix up some povidone-iodine solution. But, if I had to clean or irrigate a larger wound, the prep pads would not be sufficient, so I carry both. I am intrigued with the idea of using the water treatment tabs to mix up a batch of wound irrigant/disinfectant. This deserves exploration. Omiting the povidone-iodine will save about an ounce.

BILL: Why carry the extra and non-waterproof packaging of sterile gauze pads, instead of a plastic wrapped Kling roll gauze?

DAVE: Ease of use and sterility.

BILL: Why breathable tape and duct tape and skin closures?

DAVE: You’ve got a good point here, Bill. I could lose the breathable tape. I’ll keep the Cover Strips though. They are quick and easy to use.

BILL: Why carry gut sutures as any “stitches” will be removed and revised on arrival at the emergency room (ER)? I suspect the nylon or silk suture (I carry but did not list) would be more visible and also useful for gear repairs. Heck, a curved needle and the dental floss could service in a crisis.

DAVE: Again, good point. The main reason that I carry a few gut sutures is that I learned that they were preferable for use in severe mouth lacerations. Granted, I have never run into such an injury. I imagine this could be very tricky.

BILL: Why carry a heavy first aid kit package when you have 2 gallon Ziplocs as well as latex gloves (i.e., for an emergency water container)?

DAVE: I used to use Ziplocs, but found that they were beat up so much that they were often replaced.

BILL: Why bring an irrigation bulb? I would use my Platypus and tubing to direct the flow, and squeeze the bag for more pressure.

DAVE: Excellent idea for when I am in a group. It will save 3 ounces. When I go solo, however, I usually only carry one bladder and no backup water container.

BILL: Have you considered orthopedic injuries and means of splinting or otherwise stabilizing a fracture?

DAVE: I considered carrying a SAM splint, but figured I could improvise by cutting up my closed cell foam pad and using duct tape, poles from my Nomad shelter, sticks, etc.

BILL: Overall, I believe I am picking nits on these questions. I suspect our real gear is identical, and that the choices of medications, wound treatments and such are solely personal preferences.

Bill’s List

Bill’s Rationale: My first aid kit responds to three questions. – First, what happens if I lose all or part of my gear? – Secondly, what are the most likely medical problems I will encounter? – Thirdly, what am I carrying that can be used for more than its intended use? I should know my gear and be able to accurately assess a wound or emergency. If I do not understand a piece of gear, it should be left at home. Without understanding the hazard, I am likely to make the situation worse by trying to intervene blindly. The most likely acute emergency will be trauma. I anticipate falls, fractures, bruises, abrasions, stings and bites. Burns may happen, but preparation for other trauma provides gear for this. Digestive tract (GI) distress with upset stomach, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea likely to impede my walk. I prepare for dehydration, hypothermia and hyperthermia. Infection concerns come next, addressed by water purification, hand cleaning, toilet hygiene, and wound cleansing. Finally, I consider comfort issues like sun burn. What would happen if I lost everything by the trail while I go for water? If I broke my ankle slipping on a mud bank by a creek bed, I would need to be able to alert someone of my location, stay warm, and avoid bleeding and shock. Hence, my lanyard kit. A lanyard or pocket kit, always with me, would provide for splinting and allow scrambling back to the trail. If I wandered away from a shelter wearing my fanny pack from the top of my pack, the contents of the top pocket would make a similar injury easier to manage. I also have the beginnings of good treatment for other problems including temperature regulation and dehydration. Unfortunately, dehydration and temperature problems are often first detected by confusion and cognitive deterioration. I have not figured out a reliable means for a solo hiker to recognize when their brain is going South, much less how to intervene. The closest I have found is attention to the UMBLES – Grumble, Mumble, Fumble, & Stumble – treated initially with sitting down in the shade, drinking water and assessing the circumstances. My clothing and backpack are integral to trauma care. I can fashion slings and braces for a variety of upper extremity injuries, dislocations and lacerations (cuts and scrapes) with clothing and well placed diaper pins. I can rig a splint with back pack stays and trekking poles using the closed cell mat or clothing to cushion the splint. I could even rig a litter with trekking poles or available sticks, clothing and diaper pins. My tent and sleeping bag are excellent for treatment of hypothermia, along with a warm cup of Jello. My water treatment and Platypus bags give me disinfectant, means to irrigate and cleanse a wound or foreign body in an eye. There are few GI problems that do not respond to Pepto Bismol, unless they demand a visit to a local emergency room. I carry much more on a canoe trip, especially medications and allergy treatments. When desert hiking, a larger mirror for signaling comes along. I don’t carry a Sawyer Extractor, as I have not been exposed to either severe bee stings or snake bite. Poisonous snake bites require immobilization of the area bitten and evacuation of the patient by the quickest means possible. I don’t carry Epinephrine as I have no history of anaphylaxis (shock) in response to allergy. Anyone with this susceptibility should provide their own and be able to use it immediately.

Bill’s List

Lanyard Kit (worn on me at all times)

  • laminated photo ID
  • whistle
  • Swiss Army clone pen knife, scissors, tweezers
  • compass with mirror
  • Photon light – red
  • Magnesium block and steel
  • 3 feet of nylon cord

Primary First Aid and Emergency Items (in top pocket of pack, stored in a 1-Quart Ziploc bag)

  • 1 emergency mylar blanket
  • 3 pairs of latex gloves, with the following stored in the fingers: one 20 gram tube of Silvadene 3 bandaids for child use 1 roll of Kling gauze 4 inch by 4 yards
  • 1 tin with 8 tabs Aspirin & 2 tabs slow release oral narcotic
  • 1 roll of TUMS
  • 6 tabs Pepto Bismol in foil
  • laminated ID card with inventory, phone numbers, insurance info and medical history info
  • envelope of electrolyte replacement powder and 1 pack of nutrasweet (in weather below 40 degrees)
  • 1 pack of Jello
  • 1 oz tin of bag balm or petroleum jelly
  • 1 bottle of Polar Pure (water treatment and wound disinfectant)
  • 4 packs of Bioclude dressings
  • 4 oz bottle of Purell alcohol hand sanitizer – out of the Ziplock
  • 8oz bottle of honey (excellent sugar source and topical antibiotic)
  • paper and pencil (to record chronology of an emergency)
  • fire starter (long handled lighter which is easier for cold and tired hands)
  • silicone based GOOP adhesive
  • 8 waterproof matches and striker

DAVE: Well Bill, it looks like you’ve got all the bases covered. In comparing each of the items in my kit with their functional equivalent in your kit, my only question is: What do you do if you get a really bad case of the trots? Pepto Bismol just doesn’t have enough “stopping” power, in my experience.

BILL: Severe diarrhea in the backcountry can be deadly, with attendant risks of dehydration and electrolyte disturbances. Sure, Pepto Bismol has limited “cork” potential, but is effective for most mild to moderate events, and should help slow the flow of a severe diarrhea. I aggressively push Pepto until symptoms begin to fade. I expect to use copious water and electrolyte replacement with Nutrasweet to help treat the dehydration, and Gatorade once that is exhausted. I would consider a narcotic, especially if I were already immobilized by diarrhea. Severe diarrhea is like a fracture – it takes us off the trail and on the way to an ER.

DAVE: The main differences I see in our approaches to emergency kits is that mine has a bit more emphasis on convenience and I try to make up for lack of experience with 4-5 oz additional gear.

BILL: I agree with the observation that our “kits” vary only in convenience and compartmentalization. I depend much more on “making do” with items originally designed for other uses. I carry a bit more than needed as I anticipate providing attention to others when on my own walks. This goes with the job. I expect that a first aid kit of a couple of bandaids and a waterproof match would be plenty for many, but too little for my confidence.

RYAN JORDAN: You two are a piece of work. I assumed that I could put two opinionated souls together, give you free license to hammer each other and you end up getting cozy and complimentary. What’s up with that? Are you guys really serious about bringing an entire pound – or pound and a half – of first aid and emergency equipment? So I say, rid yourselves of all the nonessentials, use your head, and what the heck – roll the dice a bit. My kit weighs a paltry 5 ounces.

Ryan’s List

Ryan’s Rationale: I prepare primarily for two things, minor ailments and light weight. Period. I’ll try to use my brain for the big stuff. Sure, that might be risky, but that’s what going light is about.

Ryan’s List

Blister Treatment and Wound Care Supplies

  • Spenco 2nd Skin dressing and adhesive knit, 3 sq. in. of each, primarily for blisters
  • compound tincture of benzoin for a tape adherent
  • a few feet of duct tape
  • two needles
  • kevlar thread
  • tweezers and one tiny pair of scissors from a swiss army classic pocketknife; tweezers for splinters and ticks, scissors for tape cutting
  • two iodine impregnated wipes for wound sterilization
  • triple antibiotic ointment, about 1/3 oz

Medicines

  • ibuprofen, 8 caps
  • acetominophen, 6 caps
  • acetaminophen with codeine, 4 caps
  • Immodium, 4 caps
  • Benadryl, 4 caps
  • menthol throat lozenges, 4

Emergency Survival Equipment

I limit this primarily to a firestarting kit, storm matches, birthday candles, and a mini-Bic lighter in a cardboard match box with extra strikers, vacuum sealed in a heavy waterproof plastic. Also a single mini-LED light (0.3 oz) and a tiny waterproof whistle (0.1 oz) for emergency signaling.

RYAN: That’s it. All of these supplies weigh 5 oz and are stored in a 2” x 4” x 6” bright yellow silnylon stuff sack.

BILL: You have really trimmed your stuff down in the medicine department. Are you willing to rot in place without means of alerting rescue for significant trauma?

RYAN: What do you mean? I carry a Photon single-LED mini-light for signaling (smile). The advertisements say that it’s visible for a mile.

DAVE: Now Ry, I agree that a decrease in weight can lead to an increase in risk, but with all of the wild stuff that you do (much of it solo as I understand), you ought to consider a bit more preparedness.

RYAN: “All that wild stuff?” It’s a matter of perspective. I really toned it down after I become a father! I think it’s high time you explored your wild side, my friend.

BILL: Dave?

DAVE: Bill?

BILL & DAVE: “Git a rope.”

BILL: OK, Ryan, why would you want iodine wipes unless you fail to bring iodine for water purification?

RYAN: What is with you guys and your iodine? It’s time to get with the program and use something that actually works for water disinfection. While iodine is still appropriate for virus protection, viruses are the least of your problems, at least here in the U.S. Bacteria and protozoan cysts (Giardia and Crypto) pose a more serious threat to backcountry water. I opt for a chlorine dioxide chemical kit (e.g., Aqua Mira) due to its greater efficacy towards microorganisms. Hey, thousands of city water treatment plants around the world that are using chlorine dioxide can’t all be wrong. But the bottom line for iodine wipes is this: simplicity of use. Hassling to make a concentrated solution of iodine using Potable Aqua tablets is not my idea of a great time. In addition, with iodine crystals, you also run the risk of incompletely dissolving the crystals when preparing a topical solution. If an undissolved crystal comes into direct contact with flesh, it can cause damage to the tissue via a pretty aggressive oxidation reaction. But that should be just fine with you guys, since y’all are also carrying burn ointment!

BILL: What’s the point of triple antibiotic ointment? “Triple” is useless and potentially dangerous for open wounds. Vaseline or bag balm or skin lotion/sunscreen would be more practical, along with 20 grams of Silvadene for a burn or real infection.

RYAN: The primary purpose of the cream is to provide a barrier to outside contamination – not unlike Vaseline or bag balm as you suggest. The secondary purpose is to disinfect the skin surrounding the wound and preventing these bacteria (e.g., Staphylococcus epidermidis) from colonizing the wound. Most OTC antibiotic creams are ineffective at treating massive wound infections – that is not the purpose here – but they are indeed effective at preventing the onslaught of a wound infection. Remember, the goal with these ointments is preventative treatment, not reactive treatment. As for danger, the antibiotic components of triple antibiotic ointments (which vary somewhat, but may include neomycin, bacitracin, or polymyxin B) can cause kidney damage or renal failure, but in most cases, this is only an issue when administered orally (as is commonly done to treat intestinal infections in pets). Applied topically (i.e., to the eye as part of an opthalmic infection treatment strategy) or to superficial (skin-deep) wounds, the chance that the antibiotics will be absorbed into the bloodstream at a high enough concentration to induce a life-threatening condition is extremely low. I do agree with you, though, that application of this ointment into a deep open wound is probably not a wise decision, since you’ll have a rapid and direct path to the bloodstream. I do like your suggestion for Silvadene when faced with having to treat a serious wound infection that has already exploded.

BILL: Why so much Ibuprofen, Tylenol and Tylenol with codeine?

RYAN: I don’t take meds on the trail for routine conditions like muscle aches. Thus, eight caps of ibuprofen provide two healthy doses to control serious inflammation, as might occur for a sprained ankle. Six caps of Tylenol provide three doses to help tolerate such common problems as severe headache caused by dehydration or acute mountain sickness. Sure, we can be careful and drink our water at regular intervals, or acclimatize by only climbing 1,000 feet per day, but that’s simply not a reality in the mountains.

BILL: The variety of meds you carry enhances the risk of misidentification.

RYAN: Fair enough, but I eat wild mushrooms, too.

BILL: And codeine? It’s too mild and short term and too frequently allergenic to be used reasonably in the backcountry.

RYAN: Each of us reacts differently to narcotics. I respond well (hey, calm down, I’m a clean-livin’ good old boy). Tylenol 3 was successful at quenching the pain of a jumping molar nerve (which subsequently required an emergency root canal) while on a hike. Two years ago, I hiked 40 miles out of an extremely remote area on a broken talus bone (foot) using Tylenol 3, where emergency extrication was an option, but I chose to take the responsibility myself, since the injury wasn’t life-threatening. The fact that Tylenol 3 is mild is the very reason I use it; it provides a nice balance between desensitizing myself to the pain and keeping my head clear enough to make reasonable decisions. Of course, I’m not allergic to it and I certainly don’t administer it to others while in the woods for fear of an allergic reaction.

BILL: Immodium is useful only if diarrhea is the only GI event expected. Why not Pepto tabs?

RYAN: Immodium is a more aggressive plugger-upper than Pepto, and has the power to arrest diarrhea before it begins to severely dehydrate you, which Pepto won’t do in a short time frame. Pepto can handle vomiting for me. I have had adverse reactions to it in the past.

BILL: Throat lozenges? How about some honey or hard candy?

RYAN: You bet. Any of the above. I just like the menthol high that comes with some throat lozenges. The real purpose here is to fend off the Russian Army Hat Tongue and sore throat that often accompany dehydration at altitude. The addition of menthol clears sinuses and nasal passages and for this hay fever-prone hiker, really helps breathing when working hard.

BILL: And Benadryl? For what real purpose?

RYAN: Benadryl offers a few massive (prescription-strength) doses for a bee sting allergy. I’ve not responded well to epi-pens in the past, but have done great with benadryl.

DAVE: So, Ryan, what do you do when you slip off of one of those big rocks that you are so fond of climbing in your cross country treks and tear an eight inch chunk of meat out of your (fill in the body part)? If this is not bad enough, you also abrade a good patch of skin off of your (pick another part). Sure you could just pack the void that used to be filled with flesh with gauze (if you had any) and wrap it up all neat with duct tape. But, how are you going to get the crud out and disinfect that wound? Your iodine wipes just ain’t going to be enough. Adequate cleansing is the most important aspect of wound management…

RYAN: I agree wholeheartedly with the cleansing part. The scenario you describe is similar to one I experienced while hiking near Cimarron, New Mexico, in 1986. I had just climbed a peak and was descending a steep talus slope, lost my footing and tore quite a lot of flesh from my upper thigh in the fall. Treatment required thorough cleansing – it was a very dirty wound – and took about 3 hours. My immediate approach was to flush the wound with my remaining water, which was about a liter. I then packed it with toilet paper (TP), wrapped a bandana around it, and high-tailed it down into the valley with access to a stream. Then I sterilized about a gallon of stream water (using iodine tablets) and used tweezers to pick every piece of grit I could find out of the wound, all the while rinsing with water and letting the wound bleed itself to prevent clotting while I was cleaning. I used triple antibiotic ointment on the outside edge of the wound, dressed it with some TP that had been soaked in some triple antibiotic creme (my barrier to outside infection), more TP on top, followed by six layers of a cotton t-shirt that I cut up, with duct tape to hold it all in place. This was an agonizing process for someone who is normally pretty impatient, but you do what you must. I hiked out the next day and within 36 hours after the injury was at a health clinic where I received kudos for wound cleansing and treatment but a lamenting lecture about hiking down talus slopes in sneakers.

DAVE: …except that you also had a bad case of “the runs” early on in the trip and you only brought four Immodium tablets, so your TP has long since been used up.

RYAN: I actually only use TP to “polish” things up, relying instead on more natural sources for doing the dirty work. This becomes even more important when you have the trots. It’s amazing how much comfort a prickly alpine spruce bough provides – if you wipe with the needles facing the proper direction. I’ve also long since replaced normal TP with those tough blue “shop towels”. They make great TP for loose bowel movements because they are so absorbent, and are also ideally suited for wound dressings.

DAVE: If you knew that you would be found in a darn quick hurry, all of this might not be quite so bad. I notice though, that you don’t have much signaling equipment so you might be hanging out for a while.

RYAN: In addition to the whistle and see-for-a-mile-LED-mini-light in my kit, I often carry a LED headlamp and a mirror in my toiletry kit (used primarily for grooming and tick checks). Finally, what happened to the power of fire? Three fires arranged in a large triangle can’t be beat for night signaling. In daytime, a big wet smoky fire has the power to attract attention from miles away.

DAVE: OK, so your light runs out of juice in the middle of one of your night hikes. What do you do? You don’t have any extra batteries.

RYAN: This is why I’ve gone to LED headlamps. I install fresh batteries, lasting between 40 and 120 hours, for any hike of more than a few days and use lithium batteries if the light will take them. I’ve yet to run out of juice, even on an all-night winter escape from a Teton summit, where the low temps can really suck the life out of batteries. But, if worse came to worst, and I didn’t have the luxury of a moon or sixth sense to rely on, I’d just stop and camp.

DAVE: You are hiking deep into an area that has little water. While cooking dinner you accidentally knock your burning canister stove into the water bag on your hydration/filtration system. Now, not only can you not filter the small amount of water that you can scoop from the hoof prints that you find around the dry watering hole, but you can’t carry any of the putrid water with you. A couple of Ziplock bags and some water purifying tabs could come in handy here.

RYAN: All of my food is packaged in Ziploc bags, either sandwich-sized or gallon-sized. I don’t burn my garbage. I have enough Ziplocs in a week-long food supply to carry a few gallons of water. As for filtering, I always carry some kind of backup – usually, a chlorine dioxide chemical kit. And as a last resort, you can always boil the water to treat it, even using a fire if your stove fuel is gone.

BILL: Why is your firestarting kit vaccuum sealed? You need fire starters anyway. I’d carry the matches on me and leave the Bic in the first aid kit.

RYAN: I vacuum seal it for total waterproofness. The matches and lighter in this kit are to remain untouched except in an emergency – absolutely no exceptions. The fire is the last line of defense between you and hypothermia. When all of your equipment has failed, it is the only source of heat, other than your body, available in the backcountry. I carry a few backup matches in my stove kitl, although my stove uses a piezo ignition. The only other reason for a lighter is sterilizing a needle to pop blisters. On those rare occasions I use a match from in my stove kit stash.

BILL: By the way, where are your ID and your medical history? The search-and-rescue (SAR) folks who find you rotting away will be curious about who you were.

RYAN: Under the crown of my Tilley hat in a waterproof Ziploc with business cards that read: “If I’m alive, I’m a Backpacking Light subscriber. If found dead, please cancel my Backpacker subscription.”

BILL: Ryan, you may want to throw your organ donor card in that Tilley hat of yours.

DAVE: As well as your term life and disability insurance policies.

Conclusion

What can be learned from this discussion? Four overriding themes stand out:

  1. It may be impossible to compartmentalize a first aid and emergency kit as there are many dual use items in your other gear that can be used in a first aid or emergency situation.
  2. No amount of equipment can substitute for the knowledge required to actually use it in an emergency situation.
  3. Your creativity and resourcefulness with a solid base of knowledge about first aid and emergency assessment, are the most important components of your kit. The weight? Zero. It’s all in your brain.
  4. Your choice of equipment reflects your style and approach to backcountry travel. If you want to peer into the soul of a backpacker, check out their first aid kit. And always look in the crown of their Tilley Hat.

On the Trail With Lynne Whelden (Interview)

Lynne Whelden is known in the backpacking world for his documentary films and instruction videos on the various aspects of hiking. His “How to…” videos are considered a valuable resource for many thru-hikers preparing to hike the Appalachian, Pacific Crest, and Continental Divide Trails. A resident of Pennsylvania, Whelden has recently expanded his talents to include the design and sale of a line of lightweight backpacking equipment, the most popular of which are the components that make up his “One Pound Series.” This system, consisting of the “big three” pieces of backpacking gear: a pack, a tarp and a sleeping blanket, has a combined weight of three pounds. Competing with the traditional outdoor equipment companies through his online enterprise, LWGear, Whelden’s designs are used by many lightweight backpackers throughout North America.


Eric Jensen: How did you get started backpacking?

Lynne Whelden: In the 60s, I was a Boy Scout. In a nearby town there was a Scoutmaster named Jerry Cobleigh who was trying to hike the AT in sections. I asked him if I could come along on some of his trips and he very graciously said yes. Over the next few years we did sections of VA and GA. Looking back, I’m amazed he was willing to put up with such a novice. I really didn’t have any gear to speak of. An army issue down bag, a mess kit, and a canteen that my mom had used as a Red Cross worker during World War 2. No tent. Some cotton jeans and T-shirts. Eight inch high work boots and cotton athletic socks from Sears. A big plastic poncho and a canvas external frame pack from a BSA store. When you’re 16 and you don’t know any better, it’s amazing what you can do. Nowadays when I’m trying to spread the lightweight message I realize that a person has to make all the mistakes before he or she is willing to consider a better way. When you’re a teenager or in your 20s there’s this macho thing about lugging a heavy pack into the woods. One of the greatest challenges for any proponent of lightweight backpacking is to reach the younger generation. If the idea catches on there, the economic impact in the backpacking industry will be so strong they can’t ignore us anymore.

EJ: What have been your most rewarding long distance hikes?

“I think the important thing is to get out there and spend uncompressed chunks of time in the woods. That’s when the magic happens.” LW: I don’t like the term “long-distance hike.” It implies that there are schedules to be kept, mileages to be met, places to go, and important rendezvous to be made. Aren’t we going into the woods to escape that kind of goal-oriented mentality? I prefer to call it “long-term hiking” instead. I think the important thing is to get out there and spend uncompressed chunks of time in the woods. That’s when the magic happens.

So to answer your question, the magic happened for me about 6 weeks into my ’92 AT thru-hike and about the same 6 week period into my ’97 PCT thru-hike. It was a moment maybe 10 minutes long that can only be described as transcendent. An epiphany. A vision. Whatever you want to call it, it was unexpected and it was profound. It’s significant that it happened when it did. I’ve found that the first few weeks of a hike are occupied with just trying to get everything to work correctly. Feet need to be broken in. Muscles need to be toughened up. Routines need to be established. Head noise has to be dealt with. A month or so into a hike is when I’ve hit my stride. However, after about two months just the opposite starts to take place. My body starts to break down. I find myself getting tired of the now all-too-familiar routines. I’m ready to try something else. But because I’ve set this athletic goal in front of me I keep chugging on. That’s when I get a bad attitude. So I’ve learned that two months is about the maximum amount of time for me to be away from home. Consequently I’ve become much more sympathetic to section hikers these days. I’ve also become intrigued by the art of walking. Thoreau’s statement from his essay “Walking” hits me right between the eyes. “If you are ready to leave father and mother, and brother and sister, and wife and child and friends, and never see them again–if you have paid your debts, and made your will, and settled your affairs, and are a free man–then you are ready for a walk.” I ask myself, am I truly free? On my AT hike I was trying to run my video business from phone booths along the way. On the PCT hike I had to worry about the health of my 80-year old mother who was living alone while coping with senile dementia. But this is what’s so cool about lightweight backpacking and long-term hiking–they strike to the very core of our existence with life-changing implications.

EJ: What made you decide to pursue a lightweight approach to backpacking?

LW: I really beat myself up on the AT hike. My pack weights were like everyone else’s–40 to 50 pounds. I had a really sore spastic muscle in my back that forced me to change my internal frame for an external one. And I had an even more painful Morton’s toe developing in the ball of my foot. So when I encountered a hiker somewhere in VA who was hiking with 10 pounds on his back, needless to say it got me thinking. I spent the next five years experimenting and talking with other lightweight enthusiasts to come up with a system that works. The result was a two-hour video called “Lightweight Backpacking Secrets Revealed.”

EJ: Which lightweight backpacking principle or technique was the easiest to adopt? Which was the most difficult?

LW: I don’t think there was anything easy about the transition. I was really attached to all my gear. After all, this was the stuff that got me through my AT thru-hike. My stove and pack and sleeping bag had become old friends to me. I knew the story behind each dent and scratch and patch. It was a long process. I’d try fuel tablets and found that they really worked. So then I’d sell my stove. I’d have a friend sew me a blanket and then I’d sell my sleeping bag. Ray Jardine’s book “The Pacific Crest Trail Hiker’s Handbook” [now updated as “Beyond Backpacking”] had a big impact on me.

EJ: Ray Jardine calls his style and philosophy of lightweight backpacking “The Ray Way”. If a style and philosophy were to be coined “The Whelden Way” what would its key principles be?

LW: May that phrase never be. I’m not one to seek the limelight. Not until my fourth video did I even inject my voice into the soundtrack (and then it was only one question at the end while the credits were rolling). And not until “Secrets Revealed”–my seventh video–did I appear on camera. I see myself as someone who can take a bunch of confusing information and distill it down to its essence and then present it in a digestible form. A promoter of sorts. You mention Ray Jardine. It’s unfortunate that the man has somehow managed to get in the way of his message. It’s amazing what emotions hikers feel towards Ray. Everything from utter disdain to pure adulation. This is obviously not a good situation because it can give lightweight backpacking a bad reputation by mere association. (“Isn’t that the guy who says corn pasta is magical?” “Well, yes but….”) You’ll also note that in my video I have eight other opinions in addition to my own. No one has a corner on the truth. I’m where I’m at now by standing on the shoulders of giants. Ray was one of them. “I’m where I’m at now by standing on the shoulders of giants. Ray [Jardine] was one of them. “

EJ: What would you say is the greatest innovation or practice in lightweight backpacking to date? What do you think might be the next innovation or practice?

LW: For me the greatest eye-opener was to realize that you could make your own gear. Again, I have to thank Ray for that insight. Somehow I’d thought that packs and sleeping gear and clothing were just too technical for us mere mortals. The fabrics and sewing techniques originated from the bowels of some corporate giant like Kelty or Coleman–names that made us tremble. So to be able to circumvent that whole scene was real freedom. Using $10 worth of material to make a pack was a real rush. And I could make it according to my own particular needs–totally wild!

“I think the next great innovation in lightweight will be in the area of food…we carry much more food / calories than we really need.” I think the next great innovation in lightweight will be in the area of food. Our food bag is the heaviest item in our packs. When we’ve just resupplied, that food bag weighs a ridiculous 10-15 pounds. Recently I’ve been experimenting with fasting while hiking. 

Let’s face it, the conventional wisdom of us hikers needing thousands and thousands of calories per day is based on standard heavyweight backpacking practices. We have to toss the rulebook out when it comes to lightweight. I really believe that we can easily cut our food weight in half. If you’re used to eating two pounds of dried weight of food a day, you can get by on one. If you’re a one pounder per day, cut that in half. The stomach is a muscle that responds to discipline. The science of nutrition needs to make its mark on hiker’s diets. There are ways to intelligently modify one’s diet so that you feel satiated on less. Also, certain foods can deliver more of a consistent energy boost than others. Food is the last frontier in lightweight backpacking.

EJ: In your opinion, are there any lightweight backpacking principles that should not be followed by certain types of backpackers?

“…the more fears we have
the heavier our packs will be.”

LW: In my enthusiasm for certain principles, it’s easy for me to overlook the fact that some people simply cannot do certain things. For some older hikers who have abused their bodies from a lifetime of toting heavy packs, there may be physical limitations. Thus they might not be able to wear low-cut trail running shoes. Some people may have spines that are too short or too curved to comfortably accommodate a frameless pack. People with compromised immune systems or thyroid problems may not be able to take the chance with iodine tablets. I think it’s important to determine whether these limitations are real or imagined, however. I often hear people talk about their weak ankles as they try to rationalize why they wear heavy leather hiking boots or why they use hiking poles. Do they have real proof they have weak ankles? Or is this some vague notion that originated years ago when they once twisted their ankle and have forever clung to that bias? Can they get a physician to document their “weak ankles?” I doubt it. Our fears are what dictate our choices. Or to put it another way, the more fears we have the heavier our packs will be. You may not like to call your “weak ankle” excuse a fear but that’s what it is. And until you’re willing to change, there’s nothing that can be done to make your backpacking experience a more pleasant one. There’s a strange empowering force that operates in tandem with our fears. The more we’re willing to try something new, the more strength (courage) we find in some remote corner of our being. I recently did an interview with two women who are hiking the AT barefoot. They mentioned that as long as we keep our feet bound up in shoes, the muscles will never be allowed to fully develop. Only when they freed their feet did they discover muscles they never even knew existed–muscles that then could prevent their ankles from being twisted and arches from falling.

EJ: While making your hiking videos of the AT and PCT, were traditional backpackers receptive to or cautious about a lightweight approach?

“Some people also believe that going light
means skating on the edge of disaster.”

LW: Everyone’s always receptive. The funny part is that most people think they’re doing lightweight backpacking anyway. Many folks will do one thing towards lightening their load like leaving behind their stove. But they’re still toting a five-pound tent and six pairs of socks! They just don’t get it. Lightweight backpacking is a tightly woven system and those that benefit the most are those who have committed to a total integration. Some people also believe that going light means skating on the edge of disaster. I’ve never advocated going without fundamental items. In fact, my approach doesn’t require any major sacrifices to be made. I’m not saying leave your foam pad behind and let exhaustion be your mattress. Nor am I advocating use of materials that can easily rip and tear. I’m not a fan of thin-soled running shoes, either. As long as you’ve decided to encase your feet, there’s a certain amount of sole protection that’s necessary and thin running shoes don’t deliver. There is a certain level of confidence in one’s wilderness skills that has to enter into the equation. Anyone thinking of getting into lightweight has to have a base knowledge so they can cope with the unexpected. But it doesn’t mean you have to be an expert in survival either.

EJ: Do you videotape while you hike? If so, are you able to reconcile your lightweight backpacking principles with the equipment demands of taping along the trail?

LW: Once upon a time I thought I could. But it was a horrible experience. I cringe when I think back to 1986 when I was shooting “Five Million Steps.” One night in the Smokies I was carrying a super 8mm-film camera, a tripod, a tape recorder and microphone, batteries and extra film. All this in addition to my camping gear. Needless to say, that pipe dream lasted for all of one night. Then in the 90s when miniature camcorders were a reality, I tried it again on the PCT. I had a Sony PC-7 that weighed maybe a pound and a half. I also had a hiking pole that I had rigged to be a monopod. At the base of the pole I had a heavy lithium expedition battery. And the usual extra tape and cables. Again it was a disaster. So I’ve done these videos by meeting hikers along the way, usually at some point where I can conveniently drive and walk to. I haven’t given up on the notion of carrying video gear. With the Sony PC-5 it’s down below a pound. But it’s a bummer when you’re slugging up a hill and you know that several pounds in your pack are totally useless to the hike itself. Without the filmmaker’s vision, I would have never pursued such a course.

EJ: Besides fame and fortune (grin), what motivates you to create videos of the hiking experience?

“As long as lightweight principles are discussed only in esoteric hiking circles, I’ll be frustrated. I want the average Joe Sixpack to get out into the woods and to have a good time doing it.” LW: I think it goes back to my situation at home. I grew up in a family where my dad left us when I was 6, leaving behind a brother and a sister who was brain-damaged and totally invalid. My mom had been an adventurer in her younger days and was now confined to taking care of my sister 24/7. So I found a certain pleasure in being able to bring home my adventures to her. Plus I have a real desire to educate the masses. As long as lightweight principles are discussed only in esoteric hiking circles, I’ll be frustrated. I want the average Joe Sixpack to get out into the woods and to have a good time doing it. When we can get the world to spend significant amounts of time (I emphasize the time) in the woods, preferably alone, then we stand a chance of actually changing it for the better. And isn’t that what our purpose in life should be?

 

EJ: In developing your own line of lightweight gear, LWgear, what have been the greatest challenges and successes? What would be your advice for the enterprising backpacker keen on starting up their own cottage industry for the hiking community?

LW: To see some of my gear end up in some mutated form or another in the Campmor catalog has been encouraging. It almost seems like the message is seeping out into the masses when something like that happens. But I still don’t think that the corporate world gets it. I still see salespeople pushing ridiculously heavy gear onto unsuspecting buyers. I think the mom and pop lightweight gear manufacturers are going to be the heart of the revolution. They’re the ones that can respond to change quickly and incorporate new ideas. They don’t need to deal with committees or boards or stockholders or be obsessed with the bottom line. I think some folks feel Ray Jardine has sold out to this corporate mentality. Here’s someone who in his second book said not to buy anything that had a bold logo you couldn’t remove. And now his gear sports logos that–I kid not–are embroidered in bright yellow. You couldn’t remove them even if you wanted to. Isn’t it odd that Backpacker magazine seems to only review companies who advertise with them? I’ve sent them promotional literature for years on my videos and my gear. I’ve called them on the phone. I’ve written letters. Back in the 80s I even took out one-inch high classified ads advertising my videos (to the tune of $400 per inch). But you won’t see LWgear mentioned in any articles on lightweight gear now. So I say, long live the folks who are operating out of their homes and garages. We won’t get rich but we’ll be giving the people what they need.

EJ: In your company’s website, you state that that one of your motivations behind the making of your “Lightweight Backpacking Secrets Revealed” video came from what you called dishonest practices in the retail trade. Do you believe these practices also exist within the specialized lightweight equipment trade?

LW: Hard to say. I don’t really follow the lightweight industry all that much. I don’t participate in on-line chat rooms. I don’t even subscribe to Backpacker. I might check a copy out at the library once in a while just to see what’s going on.

EJ: What project(s) are you working on currently?

LW: I’m toying with the idea of writing a booklet on lightweight backpacking. I say bookLET because it seems incongruous that a book on simplifying one’s pack should require many hundreds of pages.

EJ: Lastly, what one or more item do you take hiking that you consider a luxury (either lightweight or non-lightweight)?

LW: A radio. I need it for mental stimulation. I haven’t found anything lighter than the Sony ICF series that weighs 8 ounces and offers AM, FM and shortwave. If anyone knows anything better, give me a holler at lwgear@juno.com.

Filmography/Videography

  • Lightweight Backpacking Secrets Revealed: Let the Revolution Begin
  • Five Million Steps: The Appalachian Trail Thru-Hiker’s Story
  • 27 Days: A Senior Backpacking Adventure on Vermont’s Long Trail
  • Amazing Grace! The Incredible Story of the Blind Appalachian Trail Thru-Hiker Bill Irwin
  • Doc on the ‘Sock: A Physician Discovers the Loyalsock Trail
  • Free Food?! Vol. 1: A Guide to Edible Plants for Backpackers (and other people on the go)
  • How To Hike The Appalachian Trail
  • How To Hike The Pacific Crest Trail
  • How To Hike The Continental Divide Trail

For more information about Lynne Whelden and LWGear:

http://www.lwgear.com

Biography, Eric Jensen

Eric Jensen lives with his family in Kirkland, Washington where he enjoys the close proximity to the Cascade and Olympic mountain ranges. Working in Seattle as an Urban Planner for King County, Washington, he is currently hiking the Washington section of the Pacific Crest Trail. Eric’s outdoor activities include nordic/biathlon and alpine skiing during the hiking off-season.