Articles (2020)

Adventure Medical Kits Thermo-Lite Bivy Sack

Adventure Medical Kits Thermo-Lite Bivy Sack


Manufacturer’s Website:
www.adventuremedicalkits.com

Specifications

One Size

  • Four-ply, waterproof, windproof Thermo-Lite® fabric
  • Total Bag Weight: 6.5 oz.
  • Shoulder Girth: 72″
  • Length: 84″
  • Stuffed: 3.75″ x 6″
  • MSRP: $22.50

General Description

The Emergency Bivy Sack is a simple rectangular bag sewn along the bottom and one side. It is touted as a survival bag for safety on the unexpected night out. The Thermo-Lite material is waterproof but not breathable. For access it has 3″-long Velcro patches at 9″ intervals along the top and half of one side.

It has a 3″ by 6″ mesh window at the bottom to allow ventilation and control condensation buildup.

It comes with a heavy-duty nylon stuff sack that weighs 0.7 oz and so adds 10% to its weight. The stuff sack has a mesh base to drain water and make it easy to confirm that the bivy sack is inside.

Construction

The Thermo-Lite material is a soft, waterproof, windproof fabric. It is made from four-ply non-woven polyolefin and vaporized aluminum. The fabric has a papery feel and can be ripped with a firm pull but is considerably more durable than thin Mylar. The outside has a dull silver coating. There is no seam sealing.

The packaging hints that the non-conductive material is better in a thunderstorm than other reflective materials (presumably they are referring to Mylar). The material is quite flammable, which may be an issue when the user is huddled next to a fire.

Function

This bivy sack is roomy for one person and in an emergency two can squeeze inside. This could be life-saving when hypothermia threatens. Compared to a Mylar space blanket the material is quiet and the soft fabric feels warm against the skin.

The Velcro-opening side should be helpful in getting an injured person into the bivy sack. The bivy sack is long enough to cover a tall person completely and the Velcro tabs on the top allow it to be closed over the head or fastened around the neck.

The material is waterproof but not breathable, so there is potential for condensation and dampness inside the bag. This makes it more suitable as an emergency bag than for normal use. Along with the mesh patch at the foot, the 6″ gaps between Velcro patches allow for some ventilation. Ironically, the ventilation features prevent the bag from being thoroughly sealed for use as a vapor barrier.

The Emergency Bivy Sack is more than twice the weight and nearly three times the cost of the Mylar Adventure Medical Kits Emergency Sleeping Bag, but it offers improved comfort, easier access, and better durability.

It is a cheap, light alternative to carrying a fully featured waterproof-breathable bivy sack. This bag is half the weight of most of the lightest of these, and it is 25% lighter than an Epic breathable-but-not-fully-waterproof bivy sack.

Overall Impression

This is a functional, waterproof, non-breathable bivy sack for emergencies. The Velcro and soft fabric make it more comfortable and easier to use than a space blanket. Light and affordable, this bag and a warm jacket may get you through an unplanned night out in fine fettle.

Functional Designs Sweetie Pie Summer Bag Doubler

Functional Designs Sweetie Pie Summer Bag Doubler


Manufacturer’s Website:
www.functionaldesign.net

Specifications

Doubler Size

  • Temperature Rating: Summer Doubler +40 deg F
  • Shell Material: Black 50 denier Ripstop Nylon
  • Fill Material: Polarguard 3D
  • Total Weight: Summer Doubler 12 oz. (18.4 oz – BPL.com measured)
  • Length: 58″ (56″ – BPL.com measured)
  • Shoulder Girth: Additional 60″
  • Hip Girth: Additional 60″
  • MSRP: Summer Doubler $79

General Description

The Sweetie Pie Bag Doubler is light synthetic filled quilt that zips to a standard single- person sleeping bag to make a two-person sleeping system. Functional Designs intends the Doubler for use above the sleepers, with a standard sleeping bag underneath.

Other reviews of the Sweetie Pie bag doubler unblushingly beckon couples to paradise inside a single sleeping enclosure. So we forwarded our product sample to a particularly intimate review team and gave them free reign to design and implement a testing program that will see if the bag doubler lives up to its name or is just another piece of dry cake.

Our review team intended to test the bag doubler with their mummy bag of choice, the de facto standard Porsche of the lightweight backpacker: Western Mountaineering’s 28-oz UltraLite. If the bag doubler and the UltraLite are able to serve the needs of two close sleepers, that would result in a sleeping bag weighing 46.4 oz for two people that is comfortable in most three-season conditions. Our review team had mixed results.

Construction

The Doubler is a handsome, well-made product. It is simply a flat quilt with Polarguard 3D insulation, offset stitched in 15″ baffles and shelled in black ripstop nylon taffeta (1.9 oz/sq yd). The lining fabric has a warm and soft feel (“silky,” says she). It is shaped like the business end of a ladybug – almost circular but then tailored straight across at the top and pulled down into a shallow tail at the foot end (see the photo, where the black Doubler is zipped to a blue sleeping bag).

There is no draw cord along the top. A set of YKK #8 zippers (the industry standard for sleeping bags) ring the outer curved edges of the piece, shielded by 1.5″ wide draft tubes. The weight of the product as measured was 18.4 oz, more than 1.5 times the advertised weight of 12 oz (but still less than most sleeping bags it might replace).

The usable space in this bag (distance from zipper to zipper) measured 56″ at the widest point (not the 58″ claimed by the manufacturer), near where the sleeping couple’s hips might end up.

Our product was the summer-weight Doubler, rated at 40 deg F. Functional Designs also makes a three-season version rated at 10 deg F and will soon release an expedition-weight Doubler.

Function

Attempting to mate the Doubler with the Western Mountaineering UltraLite, our reviewers were dismayed by the fact that the UltraLite uses a non-standard YKK size in order to save weight, and so the two could not zip together. We learned that this is the case with most other bags in WM’s ultralight series. The moral is this: YKK #8’s may be the industry standard, but exceptions may exist on certain bag models, especially with lighter sleeping bags, so be sure to check!

So, our reviewers paid a visit to a local outfitter and tried the Doubler with several popular-brand mummy bags. Most mummy bags of a standard design (for example a North Face Kilo and a Mountain Hardwear Down Upgrade bag) accommodated the Doubler beautifully and made quite a lovely nest, even for a rangy sales clerk who was nearly six feet tall. Members of the gear shop staff oohed and ahhed at this unfamiliar but clearly useful piece of gear.

The bags that are most suited to a Doubler transformation are ones that zip very nearly to the bottom, because otherwise there’s a single-bag pocket at the foot end — in the very center of the setup — that accommodates the taller person’s feet and leaves the other person in cramped quarters indeed. Ones that zip around the bottom (like many semi-rectangular ones) are not appropriate: too much of the Doubler’s length is spent traveling across the bag’s bottom.

We reflected on the fact that, with the Doubler in place in the expected configuration, the couple would be sleeping under this $79 piece, using possibly a $370 down bag as nothing more than a mattress pad, probably in the process compressing areas of down that never otherwise get slept on. Perhaps it would be wiser to flip the whole thing over and sleep on top of the Doubler and under the bag. This “off-label” use might be entirely appropriate, enabling two people on a cold night to pool body heat under a single very warm bag with a minimal insulation layer beneath the bag to control drafts and improve cushioning somewhat. It would achieve great economy of weight, though the couple would have to conquer the breeze gap between their necks. In fact a couple might snuggle in comfort under bags of various weights in various climates with the summer-weight Doubler serving for all; on a given trip they would also have the option of placing the lighter or heavier bag above them according to the weather.

This flipped-over configuration (Doubler on the bottom) might seem problematic with a hooded bag. But the hood tends to cup nicely over the shoulders of one of the sleepers and it would give a bit of extra length to a setup that’s a little stingy in that dimension. In addition, when the sleeping bag (whether hooded or not) is the top cover, its draw cord can be used to snug the top layer at the neck. With the sleeping bag underneath, its cord is not as easy to adjust and cinching it would not conserve heat as effectively: recall that the Doubler, which would then be on top, does not have a draw cord.

Overall Impression

The Sweetie Pie Doubler made a good first impression on us. It presented some unique possibilities in a sleep-system configuration for two people and was compatible with many popular bags. Still, many lightweight backpackers will do some arithmetic and wonder just what the Doubler will accomplish for them. If they are already using a pair of ultralight bags or blankets in the 40-degree range (e.g. high-fill down bags from Western Mountaineering, Nunatak, or Rab Carrington), each piece might already weigh less than the 18-oz Doubler, meant for such temperatures, or scarcely more (the typical range in this group is 16-19 oz). Such customers will not be motivated to attach the Doubler to some other bag that will inevitably be heavier. It certainly is true that the heavier a pair of bags is, the more weight a couple saves by substituting the Doubler for one of them — and probably many backpackers don’t have summer bags, so many will in fact stand to save weight. That’s IF the Doubler can be married to the bag, which in the case of many of the lightest bags, with their slender zippers, it can’t. Backpackers interested in the Doubler should do the calculation for their particular bags and make their decision accordingly.

The Doubler realizes an ingenious idea and executes it nicely. Perhaps the Functional Design people will see their way to making a variant that adapts to some of the bags the lightweight community favors, especially since their idea is conceived as a weight saver. An optional narrower-gauge zipper will make it that much lighter, and perhaps for the lightweight crowd they’ll even use more delicate shell material (e.g. 0.85 oz/sq yd nylon). For now they’re off to a good start: their Polarguard pancake will work well for some, and the design, developed further, would probably work well for most.

Integral Designs Endurance Bivy

Integral Designs Endurance Bivy


Manufacturer’s Website: www.integraldesigns.com

Specifications

Size: Small, Regular, Large

  • Pertex Endurance MVP PU coated nylon (1.9 oz sq yd)
  • Orange / Lilac / Aluminum
  • Total Bag Weight: 10 oz, 11 oz, 12.5 oz
  • Length: 70″, 75″, 80″
  • Chest girth: 66″, 66″, 66″
  • Hip girth: 60″, 60″, 60″
  • Foot girth: 46″, 46″, 46″
  • MSRP: Short ($120), Reg ($130), Long ($140)

General Description

The Integral Designs Endurance Bag Cover is what most of us call a bivy sack. It is made of very water-resistant Pertex Endurance fabric and has taped seams. The fabric is almost waterproof. Pertex Endurance is a reasonably breathable fabric, breathing nearly as well as popular waterproof-breathable fabrics with laminates, membranes, or microporous coatings. However, do not expect the Endurance Bag Cover to remain condensation-free in wet, humid conditions.

The Endurance Bag Cover is one of two mass-market bivy sacks using Pertex Endurance. (The other is the Rab Carrington Survival Zone, available only in the UK.) The Endurance Bag Cover is also one of the very lightest of the bivys in the waterproof or nearly waterproof class of fabrics. It is also one of the simplest designs on the market with no zippers, bug netting, pad straps, or such.

At $130, the Endurance Bag Cover is in the price range of many bivy sacks and costs less than many heavier and more complex ones. It is a feasible purchase for many mainstream backpackers.

Intended Use

Integral Designs intends the Endurance Bag Cover to be used with both a groundsheet for protection from wet ground and a tarp for protection from overhead moisture. Because Pertex Endurance is not completely waterproof (based on our own objective testing), we think that this is an appropriate recommendation. We put the bag cover through its paces as per Integral Designs’ recommendations, but as well we extended its use range to more extreme conditions. We used the Endurance Bag Cover in snow caves, under tarps, and as a stand-alone shelter. Our reviewers agreed that it is ideally suited for use as a solo shelter for summer or otherwise fair-weather mountain hiking when the following criteria are met:

  • only intermittent rain is expected, and
  • the user is not sleeping directly on snow.

In addition, the Endurance Bag Cover is ideal for use with a tarp. With it our reviewers could “size down” their tarps and worry less about getting their sleeping bags wet with rain spray under the tarp. In addition, most of our reviewers did not need a ground cloth when they used the bag cover. We found that with minimal care in campsite selection, Pertex Endurance is durable enough for extended use.

Fit, Styling, and Aesthetics

The average weight of the samples we reviewed was 13.2 oz, although we found that products being delivered more recently are less than 11 oz in the regular size. The Endurance Bag Cover was roomy enough to accommodate a 1″ thick, full-length, sleeping pad as well as a typical three-season down sleeping bag (with 5-6″ of loft). Winter sleeping bags with a larger girth and more loft (7-8″) were a tight fit. With an average-sized user (e.g. 5’10”, 175 lbs) the bivy somewhat compressed the loft of a winter bag. There is enough room in the Endurance Bag Cover’s hood to stow plenty of extra clothing for a pillow, along with our water bottles and water filter (for protection from freezing on cold nights).

Product performance.

We tested the Endurance Bag cover during more than sixty nights in the backcountry, ranging from warm and dry conditions in the Desert Southwest, warm and humid conditions in the southern Appalachians, the cold and wet conditions of the Washington Cascades, and the cold and dry conditions of the northern Rockies. We made observations on condensation, wind and water resistance, and general ease of use.

Condensation Resistance

In our field tests, the Endurance Bag Cover was more resistant to condensation than similar bivy sacks made from Ultrex, two-layer Gore-Tex, and Conduit SL (Mountain Hardwear). However, it lacks a face-fabric layer (as in three-layer Gore-Tex and clone laminates). This made the bivy prone to condensation in humid conditions. In similar conditions, bivy sacks made with three-layer Gore-Tex and TegralTex (Integral Designs) had less condensation. Their inner layer (often a tricot knit) disperses droplets from water condensation across the fabric’s inner surface area, preventing them from clogging pores through which vapor “breathes.”

The greatest amount of condensation occurred in warm, humid conditions. However, we had significant condensation in cold (subzero), dry conditions when we slept in clothing that was damp from a full day of snowshoeing, skiing, or winter climbing. Neither of these results is very surprising. Under these conditions even the most breathable of bivy sacks would probably collect condensation as well.

Wind Resistance

Based on our experience inside the bivy sack in windy conditions, we believe the Pertex Endurance to be completely windproof. Air cannot be “sucked” through Pertex Endurance fabric; and we could not move measurable amounts of air through the Endurance fabric under a 20 psi vacuum.

Water Resistance

The bivy is made of highly water-resistant Pertex Endurance (1.9 oz/yd2) and has taped seams. In the field, the bag cover was impervious to melting snow and rain spray. However, when the user is sleeping on wet ground or snow, the high pressure caused by body weight seemed to allow some moisture to seep through the material. This effect was only an issue in a snow cave or on extremely wet, hard ground. We found that the Pertex Endurance has enough water resistance for almost all three-season backpacking in the mountainous areas of the West.

Features

The Endurance Bag Cover is simple in design: it consists of two pieces of mummy-bag shaped fabric sandwiched together with a head opening secured by a drawstring. A contoured foot box prevents compression of a sleeping bag’s loft in that area. It has no weight-adding items like zippers, bug netting, pad straps, or other gizmos. The bivy lacks a storm-proof head opening. This is a problem if you use the bivy alone (e.g. without a tarp) in serious rain. Our reviewers solved this problem by sleeping with the bivy “upside down” (i.e., with the head opening towards the ground rather than the sky). Unfortunately, this caused a variety of problems, not the least of which was difficult entry and exit, and increased condensation (due to poor ventilation of the warm and humid air inside the bivy sack). However, if it is to be used only occasionally in this mode, it may be only a minor inconvenience.

The design of the drawstring and hood, with its pattern cut, is unique, and it allows the chest of the bivy to be cinched tight while the hood remains wide open. This is a smart design that traps heat in the body of the bag cover while allowing free circulation of fresh air where it is needed the most — around the head so one can breathe easily. For the most part, we found the design to be both effective and comfortable. One reviewer who tested the bag on only four nights, found the design quirky and annoying.

Recommendations for Improvement

Integral Designs has designed one of the lightest waterproof bivy sacks on the market. During the early stages of testing, we were somewhat dismayed at the lack of “storm- proof-ness” (fabric leakage under high pressure and drawstring hood closure). However, over time and with experience in different conditions, we agreed that the weight loss justified sacrifice of these features. This was truer for reviewers who used a tarp with the shelter. Our reviewers agreed, however, that a more water-resistant floor (such as 1.4-oz silicone-coated nylon or 1.9-oz urethane-coated nylon) could be used in the floor to make the bivy more suitable for snow caves and very wet ground.

Summary

The Endurance Bag Cover is ideally suited for tarp camping in wet and stormy conditions. Paired with a lightweight poncho such as the SilPoncho (also from Integral Designs), the bivy-poncho/tarp combination can provide an incredibly light and versatile raingear-shelter combination for the backpacker skilled in tarp camping.

Final Grade B+

We found the bag cover to be a very good design, but we would have appreciated a floor that was waterproof under high pressure and the option (perhaps in another version) of a more storm-proof hood design.

Integral Designs
5516 – 3rd Street S.E.
Calgary, Alberta
T2H 1J9 Canada
Phone: (403) 640-1445
Email: info@integraldesigns.com
Manufacturer’s Website: www.integraldesigns.com

Big Agnes Zirkel

Big Agnes Zirkel


Manufacturer’s Website: www.bigagnes.com

Specifications

Regular Size

  • Temperature Rating: +20 deg F
  • Red Shell / Gray Lining
  • Fill Weight: 14 oz. 775 down
  • Total Bag Weight: 34 oz ( 37.5 oz as tested)
  • Shoulder Girth: 67.5″
  • Hip Girth: 64″
  • Stuffed: 7.75″ x 16″
  • Compressed: 7.75″ x 6″
  • MSRP: $279

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 Zirkel 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. Big Agnes intends the Zirkel for use in temperatures from 20 deg F to 60 deg F for a moderate sleeper; from 15 deg F to 55 deg F for a warm sleeper; and from 30 deg F to 65 deg F for a cold sleeper. Priced at $279 for the bag and $54 for the Air Core ground pad, it is aimed at the high-end market. It will appeal to anyone who has ever rolled off a pad at night and awakened because it was too cold. The Zirkel has a feature usually found only 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 the neck to prevent warm air from escaping and cold air from sneaking in.

Big Agnes’ 2.5″-thick Air Core mummy pad is innovative for its lack of foam. 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 Zirkel.

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 fill-power down — the highest quality available. 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 Zirkel will give years of service.

Function

Our review staff made preliminary loft measurements of the Zirkel and compared them with bags of known field performance. Based on this comparison, we anticipate that the Zirkel should work down to the rated +20deg F (we will report more in future issues on the field performance of this sleeping bag).

The 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 Zirkel’s cut is roomy for a light mummy: a 67.5″ girth compared to a Western Mountaineering Apache, at 61″, and a Western Mountaineering UltraLite, at 59″. Our larger and more restless sleepers liked the roomy cut — our medium-build and quiet sleepers felt that it might be drafty and a bit 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 Zirkel 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″ girth. For this reason, some of our reviewers preferred sleeping with the pad outside of the pad pocket. Others did not have a problem with this.

The Zirkel and Air Core pad combination weighs about a half-pound less than many light down bags in this temperature range paired with a light, full-length, self-inflating pads (e.g. Marmot Pinnacle and Thermarest Ultralight). However, the Zirkel alone weighs a bit more than narrow-cut mummy bags like the Western Mountaineering Apache. The combination of the Zirkel and Air Core mummy pad weighs about pound more than a narrow cut mummy bag paired with closed-cell foam pad (e.g. Mt Washington), although the Big Agnes combo has more features and comfort.

Overall Impression

The Big Agnes Zirkel is worth a hard look if you are in the market for a new +20 deg F bag. The Zirkel’s strengths lie in its design for comfort: a full-length pad you cannot roll off, a bit more room than most mummy bags, and a built-in pillow sleeve. It is reasonably priced in comparison with other quality light down bags. One of our reviewers appreciated the room and comfort of the Zirkel. He found it a special pleasure to sleep on a full-length pad after using a 48″ one. (The reviewer had been using a Western Mountaineering Apache and a 48″ Thermarest Ultralite pad.)

Beyond Backpacking, by Ray Jardine (Book Review)

Book Review: Beyond Backpacking

Beyond Backpacking. AdventureLore Press, Arizona City, Ariz. Library of Congress Catalog Number: 99-72758 First Edition, Third printing, 2001. 517 pages $19.95 in paperback 1 pound, 9 ounces

INTRODUCTION

The Pacific Crest Trail Hiker’s Handbook hit like a thunderclap for countless backpackers – current, wannabe and former – when it was published in 1992. Particularly for those who had missed the first go-round of ultralight backpacking in the early 1980s, the notion of heading into the wilderness with perhaps twenty pounds, total, was a revelation. Especially, the approach has enabled PCT and AT and CDT thruhikers to complete their journeys in one season, covering as much as thirty miles a day. More common loads and techniques cut that daily mileage essentially in half, making a four-month thruhike a pipe dream for all but the fittest.

The original sales-limiting title has become Beyond Backpacking and the text expanded to provide more detail and relate further refinements to the “Ray way.” What follows is a survey of this latest work, warts and all. We came to praise Ray, not to bury him. However, after a careful reading of Beyond Backpacking, we find we must do a bit of both.

Credit where credit is due: Ray Jardine has probably done more than anyone else in the last decade to alter the way backpackers approach planning and equipping their long-distance hikes. An experienced hiker, climber and adventurer, Jardine used his experience with carrying “traditional” loads and equipment to question and eventually toss out virtually every part of the accepted methodology – replacing them with new techniques and gear of his own design.

Jardine’s methods – the “Ray way” – knocked many of us out of our complacent belief that we knew all there was to know about planning and outfitting for a trip. We may once have thought of twelve miles as a long trail day, as we humped our forty-five-pound packs up and down the mountains, but the Ray way challenged us with images of as little as fifteen-pound total loads opening the door to marathon-distance daily mileage tallies. A big jump in the number of AT and PCT thru-hike finishers over the last ten years, some toting as little as ten pounds of gear and clothing, is evidence enough that Jardine has had a positive impact. This revolution isn’t limited to thruhikers (who, after all are a tiny fraction of the backpacking set). All who head out into the wilderness can carry a lightened load, increasing both their enjoyment and their range. Hence, this new book.

In response, the backpacking gear industry has merely yawned. The flood of eight-pound packs and tents and five-pound sleeping bags; and of two-pound stoves and water filters and rain parkas and sleeping pads and mess kits, not to mention the solar showers and chair kits and CD players and espresso makers and lanterns – this continues unabated. Yes, there is lightweight gear being made (including that of one company, GoLite, that is inspired by Jardine’s designs) but such gear remains a tiny niche market ignored by the major makers.

Jardine proclaims that we don’t need the manufacturers, and he backs up the claim by giving detailed plans for making everything we need to go hiking, from clothing on out. Something seems to have clicked: Beyond Backpacking is selling well: it’s in its third printing.

Jardine the man is the book’s biggest asset and simultaneously its biggest problem. The book’s foundation is solid as a slab of Sierra granite: toss out your preconceptions of how a backpacking trip ought to be planned and outfitted. Here are philosophies and methods proven to increase vastly your backcountry capabilities. Where the author gets himself into trouble is in blurring his theories – including some profoundly wacky ones – with fact.

This is a stroll through selected portions of the book, highlighting the strong, the weak and the what-planet-is-he-from-anyway? The early chapters form the book’s foundation, starting with…

The Myth of Heavy-Duty Gear

Jardine wisely begins by offering us the Grandma Gatewood model of backcountry travel, including this quote: “Most people are pantywaists. Exercise is good for you.” He discusses typical backpacking gear and the reasons we tend to over-rely on it – many of the reasons being fear-driven. He isn’t afflicted by gear-itis; many of us would like to be as free from this dreaded affliction.

Packweight

Jardine calls upon his own growth as a hiker in showing the reasons for and benefits of slashing pack weight. As we follow along on his path of self-discovery, we can really begin to appreciate the vast amount of experience and willingness to tinker and try new things that led to the Ray way. There wasn’t a “Eureka” moment – it’s all the result of a lot of work over the many very long hikes that he and his wife have taken. The man has trail “cred.” But here also the dubious claims begin, including a graph that seems to argue if you can carry fifty-five pounds ten miles you can exceed forty miles a day carrying nothing. Specifically, he claims that a fifty-eight-pound pack carried ten miles requires the same energy as ten pounds carried thirty. Whatever the arithmetic, the point is well taken: less weight equals more miles. Simple. However, the lack of any sort of data to support the metrics presented remains a chronic problem throughout the book. Jardine frequently and repeatedly proffers indefensible numbers in support of various claims.

Problems aside, we’re well advised to note and retain the following passage:

“Remember that behind each piece of gear and clothing is a philosophy for using it to best advantage. And too, that the type of gear we need depends almost entirely on what we think we need.”

The lightweight gear overview comprises the Packweight chapter’s central core, and it preps the reader for a concise discussion of how to reduce that weight, including the all-important “Concentrate on heavy items first.” Management-theory buffs will recognize this as an application of the Pareto Principle. The discussion and arguments are well presented and form an effective backbone for the rest of the book.

The critical equipment discussions in Beyond Backpacking revolve around what might be called the equipment tripod: pack, shelter and bed. It’s easy to notch up twenty or more pounds for just these items (more weight than many lightweight hikers carry, total). Jardine has developed replacements for everything comprising the tripod – slashing the weight for all to as little as five pounds. An astonishing breakthrough.

The Backpack

Jardine describes his stripped-to-the-bone, sub-one-pound pack – essentially the pack many will recognize as the GoLite Breeze. It’s a rucksack of lightweight fabric with no frame and no waistbelt. The discussion, which touches at various points on the history of backpacks, is fascinating, and it compares Ray’s simple pack with the typical bells-and-whistles bombproof commercial backpack. Jardine begins the dubious claims as he attacks the competition:

“An internal or external frame pack with its hip belt cinched acts as a brace, limiting the natural movement of the spine, and restraining these motions. Over the long haul this saps energy. Furthermore, by constraining the spine, designed for suppleness in absorbing shocks, both the hip belt and the frame increase one’s chances of injury – for example should one step off a root or rock without thinking, and land too hard. Crunch!”

This is but one of many times the author asserts the correctness of his way by attacking what he views as the competition. He similarly dismisses sternum straps, which he calls “chest corsets,” claiming that using one prevents proper breathing.

One has to wonder, though, whether he didn’t abandon the humble sternum strap and waist belt too soon, based on his single-shoulder carry: “I found it far more comfortable and less restrictive to carry the pack on one shoulder only.” Ironically, this note may provide the strongest argument as to why a simple rucksack might not be the very best way to carry even a reduced load: the most influential proponent appears to have concluded that it’s not comfortable.

The pack-loading sequence on page 60 warrants several re-readings.

Tarps and Tents

Shelter is the second leg of the equipment tripod. Jardine is a vigorous champion of the tarp as opposed to a tent or other options. In doing so he sets the tent alternative up as a straw man. He remains far too fixated on his early backpacking experiences and fails to consider tent designs that may fare better in the conditions he singles out. This doesn’t negate the strength of his pro-tarp arguments – most are well considered and well presented – but he falls into the trap of overstating the tent’s faults, needlessly damaging the entire discussion.

Dubious claims: · “During the night the hiker’s body gives off several pounds of moisture.” Jardine is claiming here that we lose several pints of water nightly through exhalation and through our skin. He doesn’t define several (three, five, twelve?) nor does he cite quantifying research or note the relative losses from exhalation and from insensible sweating. · “Most tents have a so-called ventilating gap all around the perimeter of their rain flies; and hot air balloons have gaping holes in their bottoms. Neither ventilates the interior, since the buoyancy of the warmer air keeps it from dispersing.” This appears to be a goes-up-and-stays-put model of air movement. He stops short of proclaiming the formation of little rain clouds moving in opposing circles due to the Coriolis effect, depending on the hemisphere in which one finds oneself sleeping. Matching each piece of gear – shelter in this instance – to the destination and expected conditions is wise, but it seems foolish to accept blindly the notion that sleeping in a tent assures one of a drenching, be it a drenching in one’s own sweat and breath or in rainwater from a failing tent fly or floor. It might likewise be foolish to embrace the counterproposition that selecting a tarp banishes moisture issues.

Strength – tent and tarp compared

Jardine maintains straight out that a tarp is stronger than a tent. Tents surely can and do fail, but tarps suffer similarly, whether from ripped fabric or ripped moorings. Battened down with enough guylines and attachment points, a flat tarp will generally stay put, but I’ve seen torn fabric and pulled-out grommets too often to give tarps the unequivocal nod over all tents for strength. Match the tool to the task.

Jardine’s more-engineered tarp with “beaks” is an improvement over a flat tarp if you’re committed to the basic A-frame pitch. It’s going to be stronger and more rain-resistant and it should flap less. I get a little concerned about his many, many guylines, as well as the complexity of the bug-tent-under-the-tarp combination that he offers up for insect season. The combination blurs the line between tarp and tent and has a kludged look that raises questions about its ease of use. Still, his knack for clever innovation shines through and gives the backpacker new options to consider.

Warmth – tent and tarp compared

The section begins with a discussion of perspired and respired moisture and what happens to it underneath a tarp. Jardine notes that the moisture will condense to liquid when the dew point is hit – on what it condenses depends on the temperature and relative humidity. If the temperature is low enough, condensation will form in the sleeping bag’s insulation. He maintains that the humidity in a tent on a cold night will necessarily reach one hundred per cent and at that point, all this moisture will stay put, eventually soaking the occupants. He concludes: “The net effect is that on cold nights a tarp is warmer than a tent.”

This is a bold claim. Thermometer readings routinely show a tent as being 10 deg. F. warmer inside than out. Add the reduced wind chill and you have a strong argument for a tent’s being warmer than a tarp, not colder. While it’s likely that in specific conditions moisture accumulation overwhelms these advantages and tilts things in the tarp’s favor, we’re left wondering how commonly that crossover point occurs.

Jardine really stacks the deck discussing tents in the rain – spinning a tale of dumb tent user and dumb tent design to show that the tarp wins in a head-to-head rainy-day comparison. Regardless, his tarping process is well thought through and can be considered required reading for the proto-tarper: several readings would be about right. But in all fairness, tenting in the rain can and does work too, without the misery related here. Thousands do it every night. Enough said.

The information on the many different tarp configurations and pitches to accommodate a variety of sites and weather conditions is terrific. It might be good to photocopy (half-size, of course) these pages, with their instructive diagrams, and take them along. Advanced tarpology is learned over time under many conditions, and some crib notes could be just the thing to facilitate the pitching process on a cold, windy, rainy night.

Dubious claim: “Black (tarps) lose more heat at night.”

This is Jardine’s first of several mentions that dark colors lose more (radiant) body heat in the cold and dark. Along with a test of the theory that black cooking pots are more heat efficient, I’d love to see some data from the field to back up the claim. My suspicion is that, even if it is measurable in the lab at all, the effect is phantom in the field.

In “A sense of connection” Jardine shares a little secret: sleeping under a tarp or under the stars puts us more in touch with our surroundings. He’s got a point – it can be wonderfully liberating. Still, it’s not easy for everyone to give up the cozy tent environment – any kid who has a cardboard-box fort immediately understands the sheltering joys of that little nylon envelope. Hikers need to decide for themselves which they prefer. You can carry a tent and still be “lightweight.”

Groundsheet and Pad

The topic is handled well, and Jardine takes the opportunity to reinforce the importance of site selection. There’s a visit from what I call Bizarro Ray too:

“To me the shortcomings of a thick mattress go far beyond its weight and bulk. Due to its thickness it lessens one’s connection with the earth. Heavy boots do the same. They reduce the communication from the earth into our feet and on up our body and into our mind and heart. The connection works in the other direction too: from the heart and mind, to the body, the feet, and down into the earth. I believe that we are meant to walk on the ground by day and lie on it by night. The earth communicates with us in ways that science is only beginning to discover, and the less we insulate our feet and bodies from the earth’s vibrations, resonance and energies, the more we benefit.”

Am I alone in thinking that the reason Ray isn’t a practicing aerospace engineer is that his his bark-and-maize rocket designs wouldn’t fly?

Jardine describes achieving his minimum pad size and thickness through trimming, trimming and trimming until he could trim no more – ending up with a torso pad. Yet he also notes that on longer trips, one must guard against losing critical core body heat over time, and this may entail retaining more of the pad. He’s absolutely correct in this, all the more so when at times caloric intake isn’t adequate. Pervasive cold can devastate morale and turn an otherwise wonderful trip into misery. (My recommendation to the mixed-weather ultralighter is to consider packing one obscenely warm clothing item, despite the hit on packweight and bulk. A small indulgence, it could be a trip-saver.) Really he’s right both ways, that the ultralight hiker should carry no more pad than necessary, but also no less.

Quilt and Sleeping Bag

Jardine details the development of his quilt system – quilt and pad forming the third leg of the tripod of major gear items. The philosophy, design, construction and use are all well presented, and the system comes across off as a very intriguing option. Since we flatten a sleeping bag’s bottom insulation underneath us, why not dispense with a traditional bag and rely on a quilt tossed over a foam pad? It’s an ingenious option, and it can be quite versatile under varied conditions while being efficient in both weight and bulk. Jardine chooses to use synthetic fill, citing down’s susceptibility to moisture. Fair enough, but he also claims that down compressed into a stuff sack is irretrievably harmed. This flies in the face of the limited life of synthetics, generally recognized, and down’s ability to last decades:

“The first time you cinch down those compression straps, you snuff out, permanently, approximately 10% of a sleeping quilt or bag’s loft. And you can subtract an additional 2% for each subsequent compression.” Do the arithmetic: after forty-five nights, your down bag’s stuffing has – pfft – disappeared.

Remaining Equipment

In a catchall section, Jardine touches a variety of gear and clothing. Surprisingly, he spends little space on the kitchen hardware, and he discusses cookfires separately.

Jardine prefers little wood fires to stoves. Nothing wrong with that, presuming you have adequate fuel and skill – there’s certainly less to carry and to break down. Having to melt snow or boil drinking water, or hiking where wood fires are not permitted (including stretches of the PCT) means a stove or cold food. He argues that his little fires are more environmentally responsible than carrying fuel:

[On stove cartridges] “Still, we cannot escape the fact that the empty cartridges are an ecological disaster, considering the huge quantities of them going into the landfills. Some types are recyclable, which is nice in theory but rarely practiced.” First, to claim there’s a grievous mass of backpacking stove cartridges appearing amidst our urban detritus is silly. We also can’t presume that recyclable cartridges aren’t recycled: since most backpackers are very responsible with their trash, why presume that they can’t toss an aluminum cartridge into the recycle bin? It’s insulting. Saying “ecological disaster” is hyperbole. Wouldn’t it be better and more ethical for Jardine simply to state why he’s opposed to stove-cartridge use? Something like “they are the least efficient of the many ways to carry stove fuel” would make the point nicely.

Ray surprises me, given the many reports of his espousing a raw food diet, that he doesn’t recommend it in Beyond Backpacking: “Jenny and I have experimented extensively with non-cook foods. And we have hiked for weeks without a stove, eating pre-cooked and dehydrated foods. So it can be done, but we have never found it satisfying. Nor have we found it particularly energizing. In our minds, the energy and vitality provided by freshly cooked meals is well worth the trouble.”

He launches an attack on nonstick pans: “Yet, I wonder whether even these coatings are safe. I have seen reports that indicate that most types of plastic are themselves health hazards, when used with food and water. However, I am not quite ready to start carrying glass water bottles.”

Proof please, before wrongly frightening the large percentage of readers who have used Teflon and other nonstick pans. Even should one accept the odd premise about “most types of plastic,” it’s a Gumby-esque stretch to condemn approved pot coatings. I’m surprised he doesn’t bring up aluminum and Alzheimer’s while he’s at it. Ironically, Ray neglects to note the PAHs (polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons) his cooking fires add to the food. He’s got to be aware that smoking wood puts carcinogens into your dinner. Bon appetit!

Compass and Navigation

There’s a lot to take away from this discussion, including Jardine’s cautionary tale of completely circling a mountain while trying to descend in the clouds. Even experienced wilderness travelers get lost! We must pay attention to where we are and where we’re headed. Bizarro Ray boldly steps forward with this note, following a discussion of certain animals’ ability to follow magnetic north: “Scientists say that humans have the same type of gland. Obviously, modern mankind has lost touch with this little device, but many of the more primitive earth-connected peoples apparently used it very effectively. It might be possible for modern-day people to get back in touch with this long-lost skill.”

Let’s leave my glands out of this.

And this from the discussion on doing without a flashlight, “Using this method, you can find your way even in complete darkness.”

Ray has evidently neither been deep in a cave nor unloaded film in a darkroom. Believe me on this point: in the complete absence of light, no primitive ability emerges allowing you to see.

Trekking poles

Ray dismisses poles: “In actual fact the poles add to the total stress, because of their weight. Let’s say that each pole weighs 16 ounces. Two pounds lifted from the ground between each of 2,000 steps equals two tons of unfavorable stress that the poles add – per mile – to your entire body.”

Jardine is perhaps confusing stress with work: to be sure, carrying the poles’ weight is work, more work than if you leave them in the store and go without. (If the poles, however, are also replacing tent or tarp poles you’d otherwise be carrying, they may represent no extra weight/work at all.) Regardless, poles reduce stress associated with impact shock to your knees, ankles and hips. But instead of considering the benefits, we’re handed an argument, with metrics, that simply misses the point.

Clothing and Footwear

The Clothing section is solid. I especially appreciated the value Jardine places on routinely cleaning clothes while on the trail. The Footwear section discusses swapping traditional hiking boots for lightweight hikers or running shoes. There are a couple of chuckles in the hiking barefoot and moccasin segments, and I think his assessment of hiking in sandals is right on target. Re: wet feet – considerable discussion is offered on the futility of keeping one’s feet dry while hiking in the wet, and on how to cope with wet shoes and socks. Good stuff. Jardine also covers fit, insoles, orthotics, shoe construction, and in-field modifications. He’s certainly gone through more than his share of shoes. He makes an excellent point about avoiding injury by retiring worn-out shoes that still appear okay.

Food

Up to this point in Beyond Backpacking, as I read along for the first time, I was completely willing to forgive Ray his eccentricities, since I was easily able to separate the wheat from the chaff and had learned a lot and gained a number of things to try. But in the literary equivalent of throwing a car into reverse on the freeway, the book then headed on to discussing food and water, and my outlook changed. Nothing encountered up to this point adequately prepared me for the Food section except, perhaps, for this early passage back on page 36:

“Locate a line of ants marching towards who knows where, and dribble a bead of white flour across their path. This will confuse them greatly, but eventually they will find their way around the flour and resume course. Now pour a bead of freshly-ground [sic] whole-wheat flour across their path. Immediately they will start feeding on it. They know real food when they find it.”

Thus Ray sets up the noble ant as spokesbug for his viewpoints on food and nutrition. So far so good, if just barely. But next Spaceship Ray blasts off and takes us along on a fear-and-loathing cruise through the Galaxy of Industrialized Food. He doffs the gloves right away with “Not all ‘food’ is food.”

(Please note: Much of the discussion is moot for the typical hike of a week or less, during which most could probably make do with thirty-seven Ho-Hos and a fifth of Jack Daniels.)

People planning thruhikes, high-daily-mileage hikes and severe-condition hikes need to pay close attention to their food: what and how much to take, and how to prepare it. The problem in Beyond Backpacking is that Ray spends so much time attacking the food and agriculture industries that he buries what useful information he presents. In short, denigrating these industries is more important to him than helping his reader. Some excerpts: · “These food companies are large and prosperous, and they use every resource in their arsenal to sell their wares. We, the consumers, are their prey.” · “Processed flour is the nation’s most popular food staple. Americans eat more if it than anything else. Yet it is so lacking in nutrition that it hardly qualifies as food.” · [Endosperm!] “This lifeless part of the grain is then further processed, refined, bleached and treated to become the nutritionally desolate version of wheat known as white flour. It has a long shelf life because microbes cannot subsist on it very well, and neither can we.” · [On Paul Stitt] “He says that the food giants do their best to stifle these types of studies because ‘too often these tests show their “foods” are incapable of sustaining life.’ ” · [On semolina] “Consumed in such high quantities it will sap your energy, and it can turn your summer’s journey from one of enjoyment to one of drudgery. [Here it comes.] Many long-distance hikers, myself included, have eaten corn pasta for nearly every meal while on journey, and with excellent results. Not so with white-flour-based pasta.” · [On “excitotoxins”] “Many types of foods popular with backpackers contain chemicals designed to make our brains interpret the foods as tasting good. In fact [sic], most commercial foods contain such chemicals. Neuroscientists call them ‘excitotoxins’ because they excite the neurons in our brains to the point of killing many of them, causing brain damage to varying degrees. Evidence suggests that MSG, aspartate and a whole class of similar chemicals play a major role in degenerative brain disease, including Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and Huntington’s. When these chemicals appear on a packaged food’s list of ingredients, which they rarely do, their names are almost always disguised. Yet, despite their damaging effects, the food industry finds them enormously helpful in bolstering profits.” Reread this last passage. For someone trained as a scientist (engineer), the author has emptied a sack of extraordinarily wild and dubious claims and accusations. (Replace excitotoxins with alien technology and the food industry with the Pentagon and you’ve got a good three- or four-part “X-Files” episode.) How are we supposed to take the book seriously after reading this screed?

He’s not done though, by a long shot.

· [Quoting Blaylock] “More and more diseases of the nervous system are being linked to excitotoxin build-up in the brain. For example, disorders such as strokes, [blah, blah, blah – lists several] and even AIDS dementia [!] have been linked to excitotoxin damage.”

At least Ray manages to stop before blaming AIDS itself on food additives.

He’s still not done, because he needs to attack: · Energy Bars · Sugar and candy · Coffee · Alcohol · Freeze-dried foods · Grains that are…”dead”

If you make it that far, you’ll find that Ray does sanction certain foods late in the chapter. He makes an important point on caloric density, using an analogy to rocket fuel. He extols fresh foods – certainly we all crave them after a few days on the trail, and with good reason – but can’t refrain from suggesting eating potatoes raw. He slips in attacks on the meat and dairy industries and genetic engineering: “Frankenstein food and Terminator technology.”

Corn gruel is suggested to those for whom corn pasta isn’t corn enough. He says a positive thing or two about powdered milk. Attacks granola bars. Attacks dehydrating. Says some useful things about home packaging tools and techniques.

The gaping flaws in Jardine’s food theories are exposed each thruhiking season by many, perhaps most, of the finishers. Do yourself a favor and read some of the many fine online thruhiker journals – it’s amazingly common for successful finishers to have subsisted on diets of Pop-Tarts, ramen, mac ‘n cheese, Lil’ Debbies, and Stovetop Stuffing mix, supplemented by pigouts every time they hit town, on anything that can’t run away fast. A common, perhaps the prevailing, thruhiker philosophy is to shovel in as many calories as possible and let the body sort it out.

Somehow it works. Recommended? Only your stomach knows for sure.

In short, this chapter leaves the future thruhiker needing some educated, well-reasoned and applicable information. Any decent textbook on nutrition will be more useful than what is presented here.

Food leads inevitably to…

Water

I’m a big believer in the value of hydration and, of course, Jardine has me outdone. After declaring we’re all “walking waterbags” he recommends drinking a quart an hour. Well. In a ten-hour hiking day that means knocking back twenty pounds of the stuff. Whether this is even possible depends in part on whether you have to carry your day’s water along with you (ironically, likely to be in conditions where you actually need that much: e.g., the desert). Further, it is not unlikely that anyone consuming two-and-a-half gallons of water without scrupulously replacing electrolytes would experience some problems.

Bizarro Ray takes his rightful place on stage: · [On the Batmanghelidj book about water] “The book’s subtitle is ‘you are not sick, you are thirsty! Don’t treat thirst with medications.’ In particular, if you know anyone who suffers back pain, neck pain, headache, migraine, anginal pain, high blood pressure, hypertension… hand them a copy of the ‘Batman’ book.”

Thanks, but I thought all those maladies were caused by excitotoxins?

And this, on the “shortcomings” of water purification: · “While training for our fifth thruhike we drank directly from clean, natural sources, a few sips at first, then gradually increasing in quantity over the weeks and months. In this way we helped condition our bodies to the water’s natural flora. Then, during the actual journey we drank all our water straight from the springs, creeks, and sometimes the lakes – after carefully appraising each source. And for the first time in years I remained symptom-free…”

In wrapping up the water section, Ray eulogizes The Force:

· …being able to drink freely of the earth’s life-force provided a refreshing connection with the natural world.” · “Normally spring water is safe to drink. And in many cases the algae growing in it is [sic] safe to eat.” · [On springs] “I have come to think of them as sacred – as did many Native American peoples. I did not perceive them as such when relying on water filters. But now when I drink from a pure, flowing spring, I feel like I am making a closer connection with the earth and its life-force. And I think anyone could feel the same, whether they filter that water or not. I see pure spring water not merely as another commodity, but as a priceless gift from the Creator for the continuance of life. And I always give thanks for that, in appreciation of the water’s true worth.” · “Previously, when people and animals ingested the protozoa or cysts they were not nearly as prone to disease and illness. [Ray seems unaware of diarrhea’s role as a leading cause of death in the third world.] This is because they produced antibodies that fought off the microbes or at least staved [sic] their effects. But within the past several decades, two factors have contributed to the increased risks of our contracting giardiasis. · [Ready?] “As a result of living in civil sterility, our bodies have essentially quit producing the antibodies necessary to maintain our natural immunities. This civil sterility comes from drinking municipally treated tap water or bottled water that is free of giardia (in most cases), and by taking medicinal antibiotics, eradicating any pre-existing giardia parasites in our bodies.”

Ray closes the water section by suggesting we leave “some small token of nature” as a gift in return for having accepted the gift of water. I’ve taken to leaving pinecones in the office sink.

Returning Gently, Gently to Terra Firma

After the boulder-strewn rapids of the Food and Water sections, things smooth out considerably in the rest of the book. The depth of Jardine’s experience comes through in the chapters on physical conditioning, hiking pace, foot care, walking-related stress injuries, stretching, hygiene, and first aid supplies. Get yourself into hiking shape and care well for yourself once you begin. Limit your and others’ exposure to disease. Keep your body and clothing reasonably clean and in order; in return, you can accomplish your goals in good health.

In the Obstacles section, Jardine talks about dealing with rain, lightning, snow, creek fording, and heat. He tackles poisonous plants (oak and ivy) and critters of all kinds: flying, crawling, biting – eight-, six-, four- and finally, two-legged. Bottom line: knowledge and some realistic fear management can see us through these encounters. Most here is well worth reading, despite moments like Ray’s quote of someone who declares we can overcome mosquitoes by controlling our smell and our “vibrations.”

Jardine is perhaps at his best in chronicling the nitty-gritty details and the positive mental attitude that are paramount to pursuing our dreams of a long hike. Everything from finances to drift boxes to partners to “supercharging mileage” is here. A great deal of the success of any military campaign lies in supplies and logistics (my metaphor, not Ray’s). It’s conceivable that a person might thruhike the AT with a minimum of planning and supply by simply hopping off-trail to stock up and perhaps “decompress.” The approach won’t cut it on the CDT and PCT. Regardless of what other Jardine techniques you may embrace, supply and logistics methods are necessary to success.

If you’re handy at all with a sewing machine, Beyond Backpacking will earn its $19.95 price if using it you complete just one of the several plans presented. Sew a pack, a quilt, a pair of shell pants, a tarp…here’s how to create nearly all your major gear and clothing at a tiny fraction of what you’ll shell out retail. You’re likely to end up with gear better suited to your frame and your needs than you can possibly buy on the open market. (It may take a few tries though, especially with the clothing.) As a non-sewer, I very much admire those who craft their own gear.

Conclusions

There is a solid 400-page book between Beyond Backpacking’s covers, and a less-detailed review might focus on the best of it, legitimately declare the book a success, and issue a cover blurb. Because of the estimable reputations of both the book and its author, it deserves a closer examination than that. It is Jardine’s very stature in the backpacking community that brings the magnifying glass to bear on the book’s shortcomings. The Food and Water sections are a train wreck. Not only do they fail to inform, they sidetrack the reader on a journey into the author’s peculiar mind. Taken by itself, Ray’s nature-boy philosophy might provide a homespun and quirky charm to the book’s solid technical core — perhaps the inevitable outcome when somebody’s been out in the woods a bit too long. But Bizarro Ray with his fear and loathing of the food and ag industries throws the book completely off track. He hates the trappings of modern life (like municipal water treatment and sidewalks) and the way they have suppressed all our good Primitive Man abilities. This, along with his zeal for the teachings of charlatan health “experts,” demonstrates Ray’s willingness to travel with two yardsticks: the steely one he holds up to the trappings of modern western life and the fuzzy live-grained one he uses to measure advice from various faddist gurus. This would be merely annoying in a fireside conversation but, presenting himself as an expert and a leader of the inexperienced, Jardine risks taking on the mantle of fraud. How did this happen? My guess is that, as a lifelong DIY’er, he doesn’t avail himself of an editor. This is a book in need of an aggressive edit.

Does this mean I don’t recommend Beyond Backpacking? No, there’s too much good information presented to dismiss it. Instead, I recommend it to all experienced backpackers and to beginners who’ve completed one of the more established backpacking books, such as The Complete Walker IV or Backpacking, One Step at a Time. Jardine’s methods and philosophies are better read after one has first developed a frame of reference. It’s not a book for beginners, or the squeamish.

Adventure Medical Kits Mylar Emergency Sleeping Bag

Adventure Medical Kits Mylar Emergency Sleeping Bag


Manufacturer’s Website:
www.adventuremedicalkits.com

Specifications

One Size

  • Mylar material
  • Total Bag Weight: 2.5 oz.
  • Shoulder Girth: 72″
  • Length: 84″
  • MSRP: $8.00

General Description

Adventure Medical Kits (AMK) Emergency Sleeping Bag is the classic Mylar space blanket taped along the sides to form a bag. The packaging promotes it as an emergency sleeping bag to ‘survive the unexpected night out’.

Construction

The AMK Emergency Sleeping Bag is made of polyester plastic film coated with a thin, sprayed aluminum coating. The bag is shiny, crinkly and when held up to the light you can see through it – barely. It is taped along two sides and reinforced around the opening with yellow polyester tape.

Function

The bag provides a vapor barrier, preventing heat loss by evaporation and convection. The shiny surface will reduce radiant heat loss by up to 90% according to the packaging. The bag will not prevent heat loss by conduction in any significant way.

The advantages of a bag over a space blanket are increased wind resistance and the ability to remain in place with tossing and turning. It will also provide a much more effective vapor barrier. Its disadvantages include difficulty getting an injured person into the bag and the potential for condensation inside the bag. However, on a cold windy night, it would be much easier to convert this bag into a space blanket than taping up a space blanket to form a bag.

The bag can be torn on sharp sticks or rocks and rips can propagate rapidly once started. The tape along the entrance of the bag probably reduces this possibility. The bag is labeled as an emergency sleeping bag. The rustling noise and fragility of the bag would stop most people from using it for anything more than emergencies.

The bag is generously sized for one person but is a real squeeze for two. When hypothermia threatens it is often desirable to get two people into a bag. While two people can get in this bag, it appears there would be a serious danger of ripping it.

There are many uses for a large waterproof sheet like this in an emergency including: collecting rainwater, keeping rain off a sleeping bag and using it as a sunshade.

An alternative would be to carry a polyethylene plastic trash bag for dual service as a pack liner and emergency sleeping bag. A similarly sized polyethylene bag is approximately twice the weight of the Emergency Sleeping Bag.

Overall Impression

The AMK Emergency Sleeping Bag is an improvement over the traditional space blanket if you think you may get caught out without a sleeping bag. This bag and a warm jacket may be enough to get you through an unplanned night out. The Emergency Sleeping Bag is cheap and light and it may be worth considering for your daypack or survival kit for times when you don’t carry a sleeping bag.

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.