Articles (2020)

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review

A warm, refined sleeping bag, but not the lightest in its class.

Description

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review - 1
The Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 features 15 denier shell fabric, 800 fill power down, a full length zipper, and a sculptured hood. Weight is 23.1 ounces (measured) for size Regular.

A three-season down sleeping bag is a core item for ultralight backpacking because it offers the best combination of warmth, light weight, and seasonal versatility. I prefer a mummy style bag rated at around 30 F for mountain backpacking. The mummy design eliminates drafts, I can wear extra clothes inside and “mummy up” to extend the bag’s warmth on cold nights, and I can open it up and use it as a quilt on warm nights.

The popular Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 sleeping bag (with a temperature rating of 32 F) has been around a few years. Its main features are 15 denier (0.85 oz/yd2) shell fabric with DWR, 800 fill power down, a full length side zipper, and a six chamber sculptured hood.

It has received a few refinements along the way, and Mountain Hardwear deserves kudos for keeping the upgrades nearly weight neutral. The original Phantom 32 had a 2/3-length side zipper and weight of 22.7 ounces, while the current bag has a full side zipper and weighs 23.1 ounces. Weight saving refinements throughout the bag nearly offset the added weight of a longer zipper.

The Phantom’s lightweight shell fabric has a very soft hand, and its taffeta lining is very durable. The #5CN YKK zipper auto locks, so it doesn’t open when you expand the bag, and it operates from outside or inside the bag.

Performance

I measured the bag’s average double layer loft to be 4 inches (single layer 2 inches), which agrees with the manufacturer’s specification and is similar to other bags with the same temperature rating. From our table of estimated temperature ratings based on measured loft (read our Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings), 1.8 inches of single layer loft translates to about a 30 F rating, so the Phantom 32 has a little extra loft. Please take the time to read the referenced article and note that sleeping bag warmth depends on a number of factors.

Mountain Hardware describes the Phantom’s sizing as a “snug mummy fit.” Size Regular fits a person up to 6 feet tall; that’s my height, and it fits me perfectly. When looking at sleeping bag dimensions, I look for adequate shoulder girth. A snug bag is good for staying warm (no excess volume inside to warm up), but it also has to be roomy enough inside to wear extra clothing without being too tight. I found the Phantom 32, with 60 inches of shoulder girth, to be just right for me.

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review - 3
I tested the Phantom 32 on seven late spring, summer, and early fall backpacking trips in the mountains of southern Colorado. Nighttime temperatures ranged from a cool 38 F down to a frosty 15 F.

Although the Phantom 32 is not the loftiest bag around with a 30-32 F temperature rating (see comparison table below), I found it to be quite warm. In my field testing, my methodology was to wear my basic sleepwear (dry wool socks and microfleece top, bottom, and cap) inside the bag initially, then add insulated clothing later in the night if I got cold, noting the time and temperature when I got chilly. On most nights down to freezing, I stayed adequately warm in my basic sleepwear, although I got a little chilly when the “4:00 a.m. freeze” occurred. I noticed that the temperature when I felt chilly varied somewhat, from 30 to 35 F, depending on weather, shelter, and metabolic activity. I felt the coldest when I was hungry during the night.

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review - 6
There is a small Velcro tab at the top of the zipper to further insure the zipper doesn’t open unintentionally. The right tab includes a patch to park the Velcro so it doesn’t catch on clothing. The Velcro doesn’t stick to the bag’s fabrics.

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review - 2
The “single-handed drawcord” on the hood (left) actually requires two hands to operate: squeeze a small cordlock with one hand and pull the drawcord with the other hand. There are actually two drawcords: an elastic drawcord in the lower part of the hood and a grosgrain drawcord in the upper half that are tied together and tighten simultaneously when pulled. The hood (right) has six down chambers that wrap around the head and covers the face well, and places a breathing hole right at your mouth.

On three really cold nights – down to 19, 18, and 15 F – I wore my insulated camp clothing plus my rain jacket and pants inside the bag all night, and managed to stay warm. On the 15 F night I was camped at 12,500 feet following the passage of a cold front that produced 45 mph winds the night before that had me hanging onto my Tarptent. I knew it was going to be a cold one, so I wore everything in my pack at bedtime, and ate some nuts to generate metabolic heat. It worked and I managed to stay warm at 15 degrees in a 32 F rated sleeping bag. On warmer nights I unzipped the bag and used it as a quilt. That’s the versatility of a three-season down mummy bag – with a little resourcefulness I can use the same bag to comfortably sleep with nighttime temperatures ranging from 50 down to 20 F, and occasionally colder than that when you have to.

The Phantom’s shell is quite downproof; I observed very little down coming through the shell fabric or stitching during my testing.

Comparisons

The following table compares the Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 with some popular 30-32 F rated ultralight mummy style down sleeping bags. All of the bags have baffled construction. Data are manufacturer information for a size Regular bag.

Manufacturer Model Temperature Rating (°F) Single Layer Loft (in) Weight of Down (oz) Fill Power Total Weight (oz) Cost US$
Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 32 2.0 10 800 22 290
Western Mountaineering SummerLite 32 2.0 10 850+ 19 315
Marmot Hydrogen 30 2.0 11 850+ 25 319
MontBell Spiral Down Hugger #3 30 1.9 10 800 20 229
The North Face Beeline 30 2.4 10 850+ 22 279

As you can see from the table, the Phantom 32 compares favorably to similar sleeping bags in loft, weight, and cost. The Western Mountaineering SummerLite bag is three ounces lighter, but it costs a bit more too. The MontBell Spiral Down Hugger #3 appears to be the best value.

Assessment

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review - 5
Although the bag has a narrow grosgrain strip on each side of the zipper to create a channel for the zipper to glide in (left), it simply does not work very well. The zipper snags easily and frequently (right) on the grosgrain strips, draft tube, lining, and outside shell. It helps a lot to straighten the zipper before zipping it.

Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 Sleeping Bag Review - 4
The stuff sack provided has two drawcords to stuff the bag down to bread loaf size. It’s simply too tight. In my opinion, the two drawcord design is overkill, extra weight, and overstuffing may damage the down over time. I prefer a stuff sack that does not overstuff a down bag, although it takes up a little more room in my pack.

Overall, the Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 is a highly refined sleeping bag. It’s filled with 800 fill power down and has good loft, but it’s not the loftiest among its peers. It has a number of important factors on the positive side of the ledger: snug sizing (but has adequate room to wear clothing inside), down filled draft collar, two-way locking zipper that operates from the outside and inside, excellent hood, lightweight downproof shell, durable lining, and no Velcro damage to fabrics. However, there is a negative side too: the zipper snags badly, and the stuff sack is over-engineered.

From an ultralight point of view, its full length zipper may be a drawback too. Personally, I am content with a one-third or one-half length zipper, or none at all. A short zipper still allows easy entry and exit, and allows the bag to be unzipped and used as a quilt on warm nights. However, manufacturers seem to perceive that consumers want a full length zipper; even Western Mountaineering puts a full length zipper in most of their bags. What do you think? Post your opinions in the attached forum.

Specifications

  Manufacturer

Mountain Hardwear

  Year/Model

2009 Phantom 32

  Style

Hooded mummy with full length zipper

  What’s Included

Sleeping bag, stuff sack, mesh storage bag

  Fill

800 fill-power down, 10 oz (283 g) size Regular, 11 oz (312 g) size Long

  Construction

5-inch baffles

  Measured Loft

4.0 in (10 cm) average double-layer loft, manufacturer specification 4.0 in (10 cm)

  Manufacturer
Claimed Temperature Rating

32 F (0 C)

  Stuffed Size

7 x 10 in (18 x 25 cm)

  Weight

Size Regular tested
BPL Measured Weight: 1 lb 7.1 oz (655 g)
Manufacturer Specification 1 lb 6 oz (624 g)

  Sizes

Regular fits to 6 ft (1.83 m)
Long fits to 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m)

  Fabrics

Shell is 15d Superlight 0.85 oz/yd2 (29 g/m2) high tenacity nylon with DWR, lining is 20d 1.2 oz/yd2 (41 g/m2) nylon taffeta

  Features

Full length two-way auto-locking zipper with anti-snag panel and down filled draft collar, zipper pull operates from inside or outside, small Velcro tab at top of zipper, six chamber sculptured hood with down filled face gasket, single handed elastic/grosgrain drawcord on hood, comfort footbox

  MSRP

Regular US$290
Long US$305

Backpacking: Baby on Board

Hiking through the French Pyrenees is challenging for any young couple hoping to enjoy some relaxation and romance in between climbing passes and breaking camp. The afternoon heat – often ending in a violent thunderstorm – brings more than one overloaded backpacker to boiling point. Now enter a six-kilo, breast-fed, three-month-old baby. Great family trip or a bad idea?

Editorial assistance provided by Roger Caffin

Let’s Get Some Fresh Air

 

It all started long before our first child arrived, with the simple idea to walk the Pyrenees from coast to coast, a distance of about 900 kilometers (560 miles). Previous experiences in the same mountains were pleasant, and after 3,000 km (1,860 mi) in the Indian and Nepalese Himalaya, walking was almost equal to being. The only real challenge seemed to be making the existential experience of walking in nature as pleasant and healthy for our daughter Flora as it already is for me and my wife, Fany.

By the time we set off on the Atlantic coast, reaching the other coast seemed a dream from the past, just a little too ambitious, but this big dream gave us the motivation needed to carefully prepare ourselves. Besides, at least we got started on some trek. We both get the shivers at the thought of succumbing to social pressures to finally act like we’re “supposed” to: buy a car and go for all-inclusive Club Med holidays. So we decided to at least give it a try and see where we would get. As soon as we could no longer guarantee our daughter’s safety, which happened 250 km (155 mi) later, we called it quits. Before that point, all three of us enjoyed a trekking and camping experience that I would recommend to any newly expanded family who feels the need to get some fresh air after the first hectic months with a newborn. I would also recommend it to any baby who wants to get to know the parents and the world he or she just entered.

Getting Started

Hendaye, France, on the Spanish border. What a place to start: A magnificent bay where lush green mountains meet the Atlantic Ocean, and two countries embrace each other.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 1
The beach front at Hendaye, our starting point.

For a large chunk of our gear, the journey started earlier. Three packages with diapers, gas cartridges, and weight-saving items such as toothpaste samples and exact amounts of instant coffee and muesli bars had left the French West Coast to spots on the map that sparked our imagination. Every five or six days, we picked up a package that saved us from carrying a few extra kilos of oversized food-packs and from panicked searches for diapers, in case the only grocery shop in the village just ran out of stock. We could always start this logistic operation over for the next stretch, if we wanted to move on.

Walking meant preparations like buying ultralight equipment and leaving impromptu discussions with pediatricians behind. The doctor we have, here in Belgium, advised us to walk below 3,000 meters (~9,800 feet), sleep below 2,000 meters (~6,500 feet), and go up slowly, which is no problem in that area. When we presented our coast to coast idea to her, she was more encouraging than worried, adding that carrying our daughter that much would be great for her development. With adrenaline pumping though our veins, every single of these first steps felt like a victory, every new view a discovery. Being on the move is what brought Fany and I together in the first place, and after a month on the move with Flora, I can surely conclude it has brought us, as a family, together as well. This strong flow of inner energy more than compensated for the deep fatigue my wife still felt, only three months after a complicated marathon delivery.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 2
Happy girls.

It was not always easy for Fany to even think of starting such a long trek. In the first six weeks, Flora cried doggedly, sucked all the energy out of my wife, and did not give us any respite in the nights. These were the strange times when even my wife, who earlier had hated to end a rather exhausting 500 km (310 mi) honeymoon trek in West Nepal, entertained some doubts about the whole idea. That’s also when we discovered that internet forums can be a rough environment with lots of harshly expressed opinions, especially when you head off with a false start, but with some balance, they can also be a useful tool to solve your problems and get motivated again.

With the help of experienced hikers and all the other information available on Backpacking Light, we managed, among other things, to cut our pack weight just enough to bring our new passenger in without carrying more kilos than before. Carrying an Osprey Exos 46, with 14 kilos (31 pounds) that included a full water and food load, went rather well. However, in combination with the sling to carry our daughter in front, the load did get really heavy, not because I was reaching a third of my own body weight, but because the shoulder straps were not close enough to my shoulders due to the sling. With some help from the chest strap, the setup worked for the few times that I carried Flora for the last two or three hours of the day.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 3
A fully-laden Nick with pack and Flora.

For the most part, my wife was fine with her old and heavy Marmot pack that came to around 5 kg (11 lb) when filled, plus a total weight of around 7 kg (15 lb) in front: Flora and her sling. Being sandwiched between a baby and a backpack does not give your body much room to cool down, but the small Marmot pack is carried on the hips, and the tiny shoulder strip is just for balance, not for carrying. She bought the 1-kg, 10-liter pack four years ago (much lighter options exist today) when a hernia in the neck threatened to keep her from backpacking at all.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 4
Fany and Flora, ready to go walking.

It took a mental switch to be so intensely gear-oriented for this trip, but the end justified the means. With a baby, there’s not much of a choice if you want to go trekking and camping: it’s going to be a lightweight trip or no trip at all.

Learning from Experience

One of the advantages of the GR10 is how you start. On day one, you really walk away from the hectic city and the coastal boulevard into the tranquility of the first forested hills dotted with little lakes. Leaving the beautifully painted and charming village of Sare at 4:00 p.m. on the second day, we soon bumped into a Belgian couple we had seen earlier. She stood silent at some distance from him, her face showing signs of a recent cry, which Flora repeated just a little later. No wonder. Although we had taken a four-hour siesta under a shadow-giving tree in the hottest hours of the day, the sun was still frying backpackers like a broiler. Before you freak out with “Oh, my goodness, they fried their baby!” please know that Flora never felt a glimmer of a sunbeam on her skin. She had a big sunhat and just to be sure, we always walked with a black storm-proof and lightweight mini-umbrella.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 5
Nick with Flora in front and a big umbrella for shade.

Even then, day two showed us that our walking strategy wouldn’t work. The 100% cotton Maya Wrap sling was the best one available for walking in warm weather, but we soon learned up to which temperature Flora agreed, and 30 C (86 F) in the shade was way above her comfort level. The limited amount of baby-safe bottled water came in handy on that day as an extra dose of fluids above and beyond the breast milk, but we decided to stop walking at noon from the next day onwards. Plenty of gites, refuges, small hotels, and camping opportunities allowed us to choose the length of our daily walks, as we had figured out before we got started.

Getting walking no later than 6:00 a.m. has disadvantages, but experiencing the awakening of nature before the majority of mankind gets up compensates for the early morning bleariness. The bakery was not yet open at that early hour, but when we left Ainhoa on day three and asked a lonely old guy sitting in front of his home when it did open, he spontaneously went inside and came back with some bread. The hospitality of the Basques or the advantage of walking with a baby? It did not take us long to discover that trekking with a baby on board often made things easier, from making contact with the locals to being given the best room or camping spot.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 6
Flora in the tent.

Better Than Going To A Movie

Before you think we just used our baby to get extra benefits, a few words on why carrying a baby around for a couple of hours every single day is actually a healthy, enjoyable, and good thing for the baby as well (as long as it’s not too hot or wet). I guess you can easily fill a library with books and leaflets on how to take care of babies. Every author seems to claim a radically different approach, many times contradicting each other. Ask any scientist or pediatrician and there’s a little less confusion on the benefits of carrying your baby for a few hours a day. Extensive research showed that increased carrying reduces infant crying by 43% on average1. We didn’t use a stopwatch for every second she cried, but our own experience lies along that plane: she cried much less on the trail than she did at home. Many other studies show that carrying your baby gives him or her a good balance between safety and freedom, resulting in confidence towards the surrounding environment and ultimately leading to a better self-confidence and self-image2. I don’t seriously think Flora realizes she’s laughing at herself, but as a matter of fact, she does love to be before a mirror ever since our trek.

But back to the science. According to our pediatrician, babies who are carried have much less chance to develop back pains at a later age and contrary to popular belief, science has even shown that carrying a baby can improve the backs of the parents who carry them. Even for Flora’s reflux problem (throwing up too frequently and painfully), studies have shown that being carried helps better then lying down the whole day.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 7
Descending a steep hillside with Flora.

I will not go into detail on the many important health benefits of being able to swap our polluted city air – where ozone frequently passes alarm levels in summer among many other air pollution problems – with fresh mountain air for almost a month. I prefer to elaborate on a few simple observations we made, complementary to what science and doctors told us. The day Flora was born, the midwife told us that she’s a very curious person. Many friends with babies also observed and remarked on this. We got a better understanding what that meant on her first camping trip at the age of six weeks.

After walking for three hours in which she mostly slept comfortably in her sling, Flora woke up upon our arrival at the camping site. This was the usual time to cry as loudly as her small body could manage in order to get her evening meal as quickly as possible, but when she left the sling surrounded by greenery, flower smells, and singing birds she was just stupefied. For at least a full ten minutes, a very long time in the world of hungry babies at evening hours, she just quietly looked, mouth fully open. Despite some rain in the night, the first camping weekend surely begged for more.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 8
Traveling safely through rough country.

While trekking through the Pyrenees, it soon became clear that Flora just loved it. I can imagine that if she was able to talk, babies in the daycare center she now spends time in would envy her. Imagine sitting in a sling and being carried around. You can choose from two constantly playing movies showing you all kind of different colorful images, one on the left and one on the right. Natural smells and sounds change frequently. The air is fresh. If you don’t like the left movie you can switch to the right one and back, at any time you like. You can also go to sleep as soon as movie-watching gets boring or as the comfort of feeling the body warmth, hearing the heartbeat, and recognizing the smell of your now familiar parent just brings you in a perfect mood for some cozy napping. Most of the time, Flora opted for sleep after some ten to fifteen minutes of curious movie-watching, making her total sleep time higher then when she was at home. The only problem for us parents: once she was in the sling, she wanted to see a movie and even once she was asleep, she also wanted you to keep moving. We like walking, so it wasn’t a major problem, but the toilet stops were real pit stops: every single second counted!

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 9
Flora warm in mummy’s fleece.

On the Trail

An early start in perfect, crisp morning temperatures, an old basque cemetery, walking on an easy trail along a ridge and arriving at noon in a farm (Ferme Esteben) – a gite with rooms and good local food… what more can you wish for? To top it all off we met Richard again. Richard is an Australian guy who first survived cancer and was now walking the whole coast to coast on his own, at the age of sixty-one. From day one, our paths crossed once in a while, but now, with the gite just for the four of us and some personal stories exchanged, it felt like an intense mutual understanding of something we can’t share with most of the people we know and love. Finding meaning in life by the steady movement of our bodies in fresh air, by contemplating on the border and horizons in view and in life, by the healthy fatigue and hunger after a good day of walking. The life with just ourselves, then some total strangers who can so suddenly become friends. At that point, whether you are sixty-one, a nursing mother, a father, or a three-month-old doesn’t matter. We’re all humans searching for a pure bond with nature, ourselves, and other human beings.

At Breaking Point

On day four we took our first shortcut, avoiding a stretch described as a technical descent on loose rocks. It turned out that the easy track that briefly went into Spain still became a little more adventurous then we anticipated. We only just got started when strange noises rapidly came closer. We stopped. Grab some rocks! While Fany reached for the ground, a deer jumped over the track, some ten meters behind her. The wild boar that had been chasing it didn’t follow, and while we couldn’t see the boar, I know only one animal which makes the sound we heard. Fortunately, those guys are actually vegetarian, and the small deer must have just bothered him. The insect that got hold of Flora’s neck shortly thereafter was clearly non-vegetarian, and with her screams filling the valley for a few minutes, day four did become a headache.

When arriving in Bidarray later than expected and more tired than we had hoped, our luck turned back. We knew the camp site had some rooms available, but we could never have dreamt of arriving at this cosy little chalet and having it totally to ourselves, surrounded by flowers and with a lovely and remarkable larger-than-life host. Errekaldia was like a lost paradise, tucked away in a deep corner of the Pyrenees, and as we were not in any hurry, we just stayed and socialized with the locals for a full four days, taking it a day at a time, not even knowing if we would continue our trek. Having a one-way ticket, plenty of time, and no real time table, we just chilled. We lingered long enough to empty our heads, play with Flora, cook and eat together with the locals, get to know the Basque culture, recharge our mental batteries, and only then think of the best possible way to get going again.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 10
Strolling along in the hills with baby.

There was a last train station two days from here, and we thought it would be good to end our holiday with at least two more easy days of walking, then see what to do. However, once we did get on our feet again, it was with such joy and new energy that on this fifth day of walking we trekked 23 km (14 mi) in less than six hours time, shortcutting two long GR10 stages in one day to arrive in Saint-Jean-Pied-de-Port before noon. It turned out that the decision to stay put for a full four days without even thinking of the walk before us relieved any remaining stress and gave us wings. Having been so close to giving up, persisting and then seeing that actually it was possible to enjoy it, for all three of us, the whole day long, was as great as a bonding experience on the trail can get. It was still dark when we left the medieval little town early the next morning, and from that day we walked 18 km (11 mi) on average, often arriving at 10:00 or 11:00 a.m., with sufficient energy left to enjoy the afternoons as well. We deviated a lot from the GR10 and walked more on asphalt than anticipated, but the main point was that we walked, and we all enjoyed it very much.

The Tricky Parts

Before you, as someone who probably came in touch with the walking virus and as a trek-loving new parent or as aspiring parents start planning, packing, or making babies, there are, unfortunately, just a few things we do want to mention… and some excuses that we have to make.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 11
Nick making camp, while Flora stretches.

To those few campers sleeping in tents located within a range of, say, 50 meters (~165 ft) around our tent at the camp site of Saint-Engrace, the night of 23 July: we’re really terribly sorry. You might think we tortured our child between 12:33 and 12:55 a.m. To me it seemed like two hours, but my wife did check the time. Our best guess is that Flora really didn’t like her nightmare and constantly kept on repeating that observation as loudly as she could for some horrible twenty-two minutes. It took her another hour to get back to sleep, but that was just our problem, not everyone else’s. For once, getting up early and leaving before the rest awoke had another advantage as well, but in case you were there: again, we’re really sorry.

Although we had had successful calm nights in dormitories or rooms with no sound protection for neighbors before that, and even knowing that night was a big exception, we decided that we would keep more distance between us and other trekkers in the nights. I had to run three times with soup, spaghetti, and dessert up and down from the cozy refuge in Arette-la-Pierre-Saint-Martin to our tent located downhill, outside hearing distance, to feed the mum who stayed there with Flora, but this seemed less inconvenient then sleeping next to other people again. Speaking of food: we only ate dry packed food once and managed to find good meals, fruits, and vegetables all along the way so Fany and Flora got their daily vitamin intake properly, together with the vitamin drops that we also give at home.

So yes, we had to make some compromises. We switched from cheaper refuges and dormitories to small and better isolated hotels and rooms, or camped, with one exception later on. Another hard part was the afternoon, when us parents decided not to show Flora any movie because of the heat. A few small toys came in handy for the time awake, and we found plenty of volunteers to keep her busy for a few minutes, but going to sleep was harder with both movement and darkness missing. We managed, but today we sometimes find ourselves wiggling from one foot to the other while standing in a bookshop, even without Flora or a sling in front.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 12
A shady campsite, Fany cooking.

We also managed to avoid the worst weather problems by getting to our destinations really early and checking both the forecast and cloud developments during the day. It helped that I am in the habit of trying to read weather developments, and I did some reading up on predicting mountain weather. Despite a few short but intense thunderstorms passing by in afternoons, we never had a single drop worth a mention while walking. There was an unexpectedly furious wind storm in Iraty at the surprisingly early hour of 6:00 a.m., without a cloud in sight, but we managed to tuck the baby away sufficiently and walk slowly but safely. Although Flora started the trek with a minor cough, for which we visited a doctor two times in the first four days, she got over it while walking and never had any health problem whatsoever for the rest of the trip, apart from that single insect bite.

The only really threatening weather situation we encountered with a baby in the mountains turned out to be neither storm nor heat. While crossing the tree line above Saint-Engrace and entering a vast pasture with nothing standing out but a few cows and their drinking tubs, we suddenly stepped into a soup of clouds embracing us like a blanket. It felt like meeting the wrong guy at the wrong place and time. At this very spot, the guidebook warns about a lack of trail and way-marking for only a very short stretch, and indeed, at some point there was just a grass-covered hill disappearing into the fog, ten meters from anywhere. By staying calm, using whistles, and sending out one person to go and search on compass course from a fixed point and back, we managed to cross the section after two frightening hours and many false leads. I don’t know how precise GPS devices are these days, and perhaps they could have shortened our search a bit. However, retracing our steps towards the village, which we had left three hours earlier, would not have been too difficult along the forest trail.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 13
Feeding time for Flora, above the murky valley weather.

We never lost each other and there were trekkers before and after us. Once we crossed the section and got back to clear way-marking and a path, we met a group of three older, panicking, stranded walkers with no decent jackets, maps, route descriptions, or ideas on what to do since the thick fog blocked them, over two hours before. Needless to say that if you can’t even prepare the basic gear for yourself, follow a clear path even in the fog, and stay calm in any situation in the mountains, don’t even think of bringing a baby on board.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 14
An early start for Col d’Iseye, before it gets hot.

Three days later, we crossed the Col d’Iseye (one of the several 2,000+ m passes we navigated) while the fog was playing hide and seek with us. When it came up, the blanket was complete; when it retreated, we enjoyed great views of peaks cleaving through a sea of clouds. We were in and out of the soup in seconds, but with clear way-marking, a good map, and experience in trail-finding we never got into trouble. Despite the fog’s best efforts fog at disorientation, we confidently walked the last meters straight into the sun, which just came up from the other side. While Flora was watching a predator bird pass just beside us, we stood there in silence, looking at the peaks popping up from the fog on both sides. Although not on the GR10, the crossing of the Col d’Iseye turned out to be one of the most stunning moments of the whole trip.

There’s a Time for Everything

The main reason why we called it quits after the Col de Torres was surprisingly more a technical problem than fatigue, health, or weather problems. Taking big high steps on a steep and, for the first time, wet hill with rounded stones and a baby in the front, while sometimes needing one hand to hold on to a rock, quickly becomes tricky. As we have experienced before, the highest central Pyrenees have plenty of such steep sections, and safety was our number one concern.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 15
The wild one!

The problem was that any detours are harder to find there. If we really wanted, we could have continued by using major roads or a very long detour, but that would have been a real shame. We had already walked more asphalt than ever before, avoiding the most difficult sections of the GR10, but several days along a road was not worth the compromise. When we added all things up and looked back on what we had already done, we decided that we were satisfied for now.

We may try that stretch next year. By then, Flora will be old enough to ride in a papoose on the back, not hindering us on the big uphill steps. If we can leave early in July, before the worst thunderstorms, in good dry weather and somehow manage the logistics and, where necessary, some detours, expect to meet us somewhere along the trail between Arrens-Marsous and Bagnères-de-Luchon in 2010.

Backpacking: Baby on Board - 16
The freedom of the hills.

 
Nick’s
Pack Fany’s
Pack Flora’s Bits & Pieces
Gear and Clothing grams ounces grams ounces grams ounces
Tent 1827 64.4
Backpack 1060 37.4 1025 36.2
Sleeping Bags (703 grams each) 1406 49.6
Therm-a-Rest Mats 433 15.3
Foam Mats + Garbage Bag 223 7.9
Fleece Jackets (2) 628 22.2
T-Shirts (2) 403 14.2
Socks (2) 159 5.6
Underwear (2) 112 4.0
Gore-Tex Shells (2) 790 27.9
Pants (2) 574 20.2
Misc Toiletries: Toilet Paper, Soap, Tweezers, Nail Clippers 72 2.5 60 2.1
Towel 69 2.4
Sunscreen 72 2.5
Toothpaste, Brush 22 0.8
Sunglasses 53 1.9 78 2.8
Compass, Map & Case, Guide, Pen 189 6.7
Notebook 28 1.0
Paperback 145 5.1
Camelback 207 7.3
Softsided Water Bottles (2) 70 2.5
Stuffsack 87 3.1
Buff/Scarf 32 1.1 137 4.8
Garbage Bag Liner 75 2.6
First Aid Kit 27 1.0
Pot, Lid 310 10.9
Cups (2) 46 1.6
Pot Grabber 44 1.6
Matches, Lighter 27 1.0
Stove 94 3.3
Average Gas Weight 255 9.0
Windscreen 46 1.6
Pocket Knife 83 2.9
Sporks (2) 20 0.7
Torch, Batteries (2) 162 5.7
Lumix Panasonic Camera, Case 177 6.2
GSM, Extra SIM Card 82 2.9
Ear Plugs, Eye Cover 22 0.8
Plastic Bags 18 0.6
Tickets, Passports, Cards 82 2.9 82 2.9
Bumbag 38 1.3 38 1.3
Water Filter 283 10.0
Cellphone Charger 80 2.8
Spare Battery 20 0.7 0.0
Emergency Blanket 81 2.9 81 2.9
Repair Kit 46 1.6
Umbrella 249 8.8 249 8.8
Cord 30 1.1
Whistle 12 0.4 12 0.4
Baby Stuff
Baby (1) 6500 229.3
Sling 607 21.4
Diapers (4/day, Post Package/5 days, 2 Spares) 440 15.5
Toilet Paper 20 0.7
Vitamins 45 1.6
Baby Oil 25 0.9
Thermometer 12 0.4
Skin Cream 15 0.5
Towel 23 0.8
Socks 26 0.9
Short Bodysuit 108 3.8
Long Bodysuit 83 2.9
Pyjamas 112 4.0
Sweaters (2) 316 11.1
Trousers 73 2.6
Warm Hat 24 0.8
Sun Hat 23 0.8
Toys (3) 92 3.2
Mattress
Bib 24 0.8
Ear Cleaner, Nose Cleaner 23 0.8
Anti-Reflux Gel 55 1.9
Baby Powder 16 0.6
Plastic Bottle 28 1.0
Mineral Water 250 8.8
Average Food and Water Weights
Vitamins 15 0.5
Spices 15 0.5
Cheese 100 3.5
Mixed Nuts 100 3.5
Dried Fruit 100 3.5
Chocolate 75 2.6
Tea, Coffee 25 0.9
Sugar 25 0.9
Bread 250 8.8
Water Filter 1000 35.3 1000 35.3
Biscuits 200 7.1
Soup Mix 60 2.1
grams ounces grams ounces grams ounces
Average Distributed Weights 12828 452.5 4158 146.7 7751 273.4
kilos pounds
Nick’s Load (Pack) 12.8 28.3
Fany’s Load (Pack + Flora + Bits & Pieces) 11.9 26.3

1 Hunziker, U.A., Barr, R.G. (1986). Increased carrying reduces infant crying: a randomized controlled trial.
2 Kirkilionis, E. (1995). Wahrnehmen, Erfaren und Üben beim Körperkontakt. Praxis der Psychomotoriek.

Rab Microlight Jacket Review

Trim-fitting ultralight three-season down jacket with a great shell and basic feature set, but its numerous horizontal seams allow down fragments to leak out.

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 1
The Rab Microlight Jacket has a Pertex Microlight shell, 750+ down fill and weighs 11 ounces (size Large). Rocky Mountain goats in the background, Rocky Mountain old goat in the foreground.

Introduction

An ultralight three-season down insulated jacket with high loft down, very light shell fabric, a minimal feature set, and weight under 14 ounces is an essential part of an ultralight or lightweight backpacking kit for summertime backpacking in the mountains or shoulder season camping most anywhere. Down insulation provides the most warmth for its weight, so it’s the insulation preferred by backpackers and mountaineers in all but very wet conditions. An array of jackets is available – differing in fabrics, features, and amount of down insulation – so there’s a jacket to fit most hiker’s needs and preferences. Look for a Backpacking Light State of the Market article on ultralight three-season down insulated jackets in Spring 2010 that will present the options and assist with the selection process.

Description

The Rab Microlight Jacket, as the name implies, utilizes Pertex Microlight fabric for the shell. Microlight, like other Pertex fabrics, is made of microfine filament yarns with an extremely close weave, and they are calendared to make them windproof and downproof. The fabric’s high density weave also enhances insulation by trapping more air inside. However, Microlight at 1.3 oz/yd2 is a bit heavier than Pertex Quantum at 0.9 oz/yd2. Microlight features DWR+, which is a unique durable water-repellent treatment which encapsulates each filament of the fabric with a hydrophobic polymer. This treatment gives excellent water shedding, and since it is not a continuous coating, breathability is not impaired. Another unique property of Pertex fabrics is their ability to disperse water. Where most nylon fabrics wick moisture directly through the weave, Pertex spreads it over a broad area by capillary action, so it evaporates more rapidly.

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 2
Front and rear views of the Rab Microlight Jacket. Features include a full front zipper, stand up collar, two side pockets, and zippered chest pocket.

The Rab Microlight Jacket shares several design elements with its siblings, the Microlight Alpine Jacket (hooded), and Microlight Vest. All have sewn-through 1.5-inch horizontal quilting to hold the down in place, two hand pockets, one zippered chest pocket, and elastic piping on the cuffs and hem.

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 3
The Microlight Jacket has two unzippered handwarmer pockets (left), and one large zippered chest pocket (right) that doubles as a stuff sack.

The down insulation in the Microlight Jacket is 750+. I asked Rab why they don’t use 800 fill power down to keep up with the competition, and their response emphasized the "+" sign after the "750," meaning their down has a minimum of 750 fill power, and is closer to 800 on average. Rab prefers to use a very conservative rating rather than inflate it for marketing purposes (not that others do…) so they call it what it is at the very minimum. From a consumer point of view, it still begs the question: "Is it, or isn’t it, comparable to ‘800 fill’ used by other manufacturers?"

Performance

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 4
Rab Microlight Jacket worn while backpacking on a cold fall day.

I tested the Rab Microlight Jacket on several summer and early fall backpacking trips in the southern Colorado mountains, where I camped at elevations up to 12,500 feet (3,810 m) and encountered snow, wind, rain, cold nights, and lots of beautiful scenery. I wore the Microlight Jacket as an outer layer on cold days, as a midlayer with a shell over it for extra warmth and wind protection, and in my 30 F (-1 C) sleeping bag to extend its warmth on below freezing nights.

The jacket has a trim fit, both in the body and sleeves, so it will only layer over a base layer and a thin sweater. Sleeves are set-in at the shoulders and are plenty long.

I really like the jacket’s roomy hand pockets, which will hold a bunch of smaller items in camp and keep them handy. The side pockets are not zippered and the elastic band in the binding has minimal stretch, so items can fall out if the pockets are overloaded. I found the zippered chest pocket handy for holding my digital camera to keep it dry and secure.

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 5
The jacket’s Pertex Microlight shell is very wind resistant and functionally waterproof (see next photo).

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 6
I tested the jacket’s waterproofness by placing a puddle of water on the shell for an hour, then checking for leakage. Nothing came through! Water eventually soaks through the seams in many jackets, but the Pertex Microlight shell on this jacket didn’t allow any water to soak through.

The Microlight Jacket is warm down to about freezing at a low activity level, and warm down to colder temperatures when worn as a midlayer while hiking or skiing. From past experience with a Pertex Microlight windshirt, I find the fabric not very breathable (because it’s calendered), but breathability is less important in an insulated jacket shell. Overall, the Microlight Jacket is extremely versatile (as are all ultralight three-season down jackets) and it saw a lot of use. I wore it during the day as needed, every evening and morning in camp, and inside my sleeping bag.

Rab Microlight Jacket Review - 7
Although the Microlight Jacket’s 1.5-inch horizontal quilting is stylish and holds the down in place, the numerous seams also provide an easy route for down to escape. This microfleece top is covered with down fragments after wearing it under the Microlight Jacket in a sleeping bag overnight.

Comparisons and Assessment

Two jackets closest to the Rab Microlight are the Patagonia Down Sweater and Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket. The following table compares their specifications; manufacturer data for size medium are shown.

Jacket Shell Fabric Insulation Features Weight (oz) Cost (US$)
Rab Microlight Pertex Microlight (nylon) 750+ down 2 unzippered hand pockets, zippered chest pocket, elastic cuffs and hem 11.3 190
Patagonia Down Sweater Polyester 800 down 2 zippered hand pockets, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 11.0 200
Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Polyester 800 down 2 unzippered hand pockets with flap, zippered chest pocket, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 11.0 220

Compared to the closest competition, the Rab Microlight Jacket holds up well. Its Pertex Microlight shell is a plus, the down insulation seems to be comparable (see explanation above), and it’s a better value. Of course, this is a limited comparison; there are numerous other jackets on the market with different constructions and feature sets.

Overall, the Rab Microlight Jacket is perhaps a little more versatile than many of its brethren because of its medium level of insulation, trim fit, lack of a hood, and its pockets. This combination allows the jacket to more easily be worn as either an outer layer or midlayer, in a variety of outdoor sports, as well as for sport-casual dress. However, its numerous horizontal seams allow down fragments to exit. Also, the binding on the hand pockets does little to keep items from falling out; I would prefer to see an elastic piping like that used on the jacket’s cuffs and hem.

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer:

Rab (http://www.rab.uk.com/)

  Year/Model:

2009 Microlight Jacket

  Style:

Full zip hoodless jacket

  Fabrics:

Outer shell 30d 1.3 oz/yd2 (43 g/m2) Pertex Microlight with DWR finish, lining is a generic 30d downproof nylon

  Insulation:

4.4 oz (125 g) of 750+ fill power down

  Loft:

Measured two layer loft is 1.5 in (4 cm)

  Features:

Sewn through construction with 1.5-inch horizontal quilting, down filled stand up collar, full front #45C YKK zipper with one slider and storm flap under zipper, two hand pockets, one zippered chest pocket, elastic cuffs and hem, 1.25-inch dropped tail, jacket stuffs into its chest pocket

  Weight:

Size Large tested, measured weight 11 oz (312 g), manufacturer specified average weight 11.3 oz (320 g)

  MSRP:

US$190

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review

The E-620 is the lightest mid-sized or “crop sensor” format DSLR with all the functionality and image quality for serious backcountry still photography – even in difficult situations like handheld shots in low morning and evening light.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 1

Introduction

  • MSRP: $599.99 (body only), $699.99 (with 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Lens)
  • Manufacturer Claimed Weight: 1.04 lb (body only)
  • BPL Measured Weight: 1.05 lb (body only)
  • BPL Measured Weight: 1.15 lb (0.52 kg) (body, memory card, battery)

The Olympus E-620 is the lightest DSLR with:

  • Mid-size format sensor (i.e. smaller than full 35mm, includes 4/3, APS-C, and Sigma DP1/DP2
    Foveon sensors)
  • True optical, through the lens, viewfinder
  • Many high quality lightweight, compact lenses
  • In-camera image stabilization
  • Articulated view screen
  • Backlit controls

Put another way, the E-620 is the lightest mid-sized or "crop sensor" format DSLR with all the functionality and image quality for serious backcountry still photography – even in difficult situations like handheld shots in low morning and evening light. In addition, there are a large number of lightweight Olympus 4/3 lenses with excellent image quality available for the camera. And with 4/3 lens cross-company compatibility, the E-620 can use 4/3 lenses from other manufacturers as well.

In Comparison

  • Cameras in roughly the same class as the E-620 (e.g. Canon EOS Digital Rebel T1i, Nikon D5000) are larger, heavier and more expensive. They lack the depth of the lightweight high quality lens selection available for the E-620 and do not have in-camera image stabilization or the industry-leading Olympus dust-reduction system, a serious disadvantage if you change lenses in the field.
  • While as recently as a year ago, well-intended photographers tended to dismiss 4/3 format cameras as lagging in image quality with the best APS-C cameras (lacking dynamic range, resolution, and ISO performance) the 4/3 format image quality is now acknowledged to be on par with the best small DSLRs from Canon and Nikon.
  • The new µ4/3 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic use a similar image sensor (the Olympus E-P1 uses the same sensor). They are 10-20% lighter and smaller than the E-620, but µ4/3 cameras lack true optical viewfinders (by design spec), which can introduce significant problems for composing photographs in the field and holding the camera steady. At the time of writing, µ4/3 lens offerings are limited, and only a few lenses are of decent optical quality. It will be hard to take the µ4/3 format seriously until a wide range of excellent lenses, both zoom and primes, are available. It is also not clear at this point how well the new µ4/3 cameras like the Olympus E-P1 and Panasonic DMC-GF1 will do at producing high quality images in the backcountry.
  • Smaller and lighter "compact" mid-sized sensor cameras, for example the Sigma DP1 and DP2, lack interchangeable lenses or zoom lenses, are slower to use, have fewer features and lack image stabilization.
  • The smaller sensors of compact point-and-shoot cameras (about 1/6 to 1/10 the area of a midsize sensor), even very good "enthusiast oriented" ones, like the Panasonic Lumix LX3 and Canon G-10, cannot match the image quality of the E-620.
  • In the end the Canon Rebel T1i, which has similar image quality, probably provides the stiffest competition for E-620. It shoots HD video, has a higher resolution LCD display, and has a larger viewfinder. But the Canon Rebel T1i is also heavier, does not have in-camera image stabilization, and does not have the broad selection of lightweight, high quality lenses that are crucial to first-rate backcountry photography. It is the Olympus 4/3 lenses that give a significant nod to the E-620 as the lightest camera for serious lightweight backcountry still photography (e.g. the 281-g, Olympus E 9-18-mm f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko lens – perfect for lightweight landscape photography), especially when considering the E-620’s in-body image stabilization. Finally, the E-620 costs a lot less than the Rebel T1i.
Comparison of Mid-size Sensor Digital Cameras
Class Camera grams ounces
Midsize Sensor Olympus E-620, 25mm f/2.8 ED Zuiko "pancake" lens 615 21.7
  Olympus E-620, 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko ED Zoom 710 25.0
  Canon EOS Rebel T1i, EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS 730 25.7
  Nikon D5000, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX 895 31.6
µ4/3 Olympus E-P1 with 14-42 lens 560 19.8
  Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens 630 22.2
Compact Sigma DP1 with fixed 16.6mm lens 285 10.1

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 2
One of the best assets of the Olympus 4/3 system is the depth of high quality lightweight lenses that are a perfect fit for backcountry photography. My favorite lens is the new Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6. Only 9.7 oz, it takes excellent panoramic shots. FL 9mm, ISO 200, 1/320 sec, f/9

Field Performance

Controls and Operation

I found the E-620 quick and easy to use. Almost every function/adjustment is one or two button presses away. Many direct access external controls (buttons, control knob, and Super Control Panel) give zippy access to all commonly used functions. There is little need to get buried deep in the complex menus that sometime plague sophisticated DSLRs, though the camera is also extremely customizable if you want. The camera controls are so intuitive that my wife, who rarely uses a DSLR, came rapidly up to speed using the E-620. She mastered its basic adjustments and was taking good pictures after just a few hours in the field.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 3
I was off scouting a route when my wife took this picture of an approaching storm over a skulled cairn. FL 15mm, ISO 200, 1/320 sec, f/10, Zuiko Digital ED 9-18 mm F4.0-5.6 [Photo: Alison Simon]

The E-620 has fast, effective, multi-point autofocus, and I found the exposure quite accurate. When it was off, the E-620 tended to underexpose and preserve highlights, which is what you want the camera to do.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 4
Between the direct access buttons on the top and back of the camera and the Super Control Panel (left on the swivel LCD screen), almost every commonly used function or adjustment is just one or two button presses away.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 5
The Super Control Panel is my favorite operational feature on the E-620. It is so fast and easy to use that I end up making far more adjustments for individual shots than I would if I had to dig deep in the menus of other DSLRs. This yields higher quality photos with only slightly more effort than just leaving the camera in its standard settings.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 6
The rear camera controls: The flip LCD display can rotate so that the LCD faces inward and is completely protected. The "Fn" button in the upper right below the control knob is programmable for any camera feature you want to assign to it. While most functions are already readily accessible by dedicated buttons or the Super Control Panel, the "Fn" button gives you rapid access to a function like white balance. A number of the buttons are backlit for ease of use in low light.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 7
Top of the camera showing the mode control knob, the single function adjustment knob, exposure control button, and the self-timer/remote button on the far left (which I use often in the field).

Optical Viewfinder

An optical viewfinder allows you to focus and compose your image in a way that an LCD display cannot match, especially in low light or bright daylight. LCD displays are lower resolution; it is difficult to see fine detail for precise shot composition or sharp focus (especially for P&S and compact cameras without optical viewfinders). LCD displays are also quite hard to see in bright daylight and, in low light, are grainy with skewed colors. Finally, they often have slow refresh rates and difficulty tracking and focusing on moving subjects. These cons are often also true for LCD-driven viewfinders (EVFs) like on the µ4/3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 (although the viewfinder version of the LCD display does solve daylight readability issues). Finally, it is easier to hold a camera steady when it is pressed against your face with an optical viewfinder. LCD-screen-only cameras, usually held out at arms’ length, introduce more camera shake.

In an improvement over the E-520, the E-620 has the largest and brightest viewfinder for a small Olympus DSLR (excluding the E-3 and E-30). While a bit smaller than some other manufacturers’ mid-size DSLR viewfinders, I found the E-620’s viewfinder more than adequate to focus and compose shots, even in the low light of early morning or late evening.

Dynamic Range

The E-620 has made a significant improvement in dynamic range over its predecessors, especially in the ability to capture highlights. In fact, at ISO 200, it has one of the largest dynamic ranges of a lightweight DSLR. A high dynamic range, or the ability to capture both shadow and highlight detail in high contrast scenes, is one of my most important criteria for a backcountry camera. It can make the difference between a superb photograph and a throwaway.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 8
This picture did not happen as anticipated. The sun was supposed to come up from the east and shed a glorious morning light onto the carpet of wildflowers in front of our tent. Instead, a blanket of low eastern horizon clouds blocked the most direct sunlight and kept the flowers lightly shaded, making the sky above the ridgeline much brighter in comparison. I was quite pleased that the sky exposed mostly blue (not white) and that there was definition in the clouds. FL 14mm, ISO 200, 1/125 sec, f/6.3, Zuiko Digital ED 9-18 mm F4.0-5.6

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 9
This is the worst time of day to take a picture with the highest contrast – deep shadows underneath an overhang on the dark side of the canyon and brightly lit upward facing surfaces on the sunny side of the canyon. The E-620 handles the contrast with detail in both, and beautifully conveys the sense of being in the hot canyon with a blazing desert sun. Bonus for the budding archaeologists: there is a small ruin in the picture, if you can find it. ISO 200, 1/320 sec, f/10, Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6

Shadow Adjustment Technology

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 10
Morning after thunderstorms: Alison is not only shadowed by the sun rising behind her, but also by the tent wall. Yet, her face and the inside of the tent have reasonable detail, and there is nice sky detail without blown highlights. This is due in part to the E-620’s excellent dynamic range and in part to the camera’s Shadow Adjustment Technology which "adjusts the exposure in the shadows while retaining all the detail in the bright areas." The price you pay for the increased shadow detail is a bit more noise with the detail. I like the effect in this picture and many others. I can usually live with a bit of shadow noise for the increased dynamic range to handle high contrast situation, so I tend to leave this function enabled. If I don’t like the result, I can revert to the RAW image, in which the effect is not applied. FL 14mm, ISO 200, 1/100 sec, f/5.6, Zuiko Digital ED 9-18 mm F4.0-5.6

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 11
I am not quite as happy with the Shadow Adjustment in this photograph. The noise in my face is a bit much for my taste, while the native cutthroat suits me right down to the ground. I’d guess that, backlit and with shade from the hat, my face would probably be dark and missing detail if not for Shadow Adjust. FL 30mm, ISO 200, 1/250 sec, f/9, Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 [Photo: Alison Simon]

High Quality JPEG Images

The excellent JPEG output from the E-620 is time- and hassle-saving. In the past, I would usually only process the RAW images from my DSLRs. The JPEG output was so disappointing that it was usually faster to go to the source (RAW) and reprocess the photo from there. While giving me excellent final photographs, shooting RAW had a couple of disadvantages:

  1. Large RAW files ate up memory cards and filled up my computer hard drive at an alarming rate – a significant expense and inconvenience.
  2. All that processing of RAW files takes time, which slows throughput. This is a major disincentive to get started on the project at all. For me, photographs are much less likely to end up posted to the web or printed out and hung on the wall if I have to process RAW.

After shooting for almost three months with the E-620, I have learned to trust and appreciate its JPEG output to the point that I usually do not shoot RAW except for artificial light situations (or a few special circumstances outdoors). The JPEG files have a dynamic range large enough that I do not have to go back to RAW files to try and recover blown highlights (the E-620’s excellent exposure helps as well). Shooting JPEG only, my memory cards last a long time. And with only light processing of the JPEG files required, my actual output of pictures to the web or photographic prints has increased. And really, isn’t that the point of taking photos in the first place?

Low Light, High ISO Performance / Image Stabilization

To be truthful, with a base ISO of 200 and in-camera image stabilization and seldom shooting at focal lengths longer than 25mm (50mm; 35mm equivalent), I rarely find it necessary to go to a higher ISO for my field shots – even handheld at dawn or dusk. The Zuiko lenses are usually quite sharp at larger apertures, which also helps. That being said, the Olympus E-620 does quite well up to ISO 800, with little noise or loss in detail. I would not shoot higher than ISO 800 unless there was absolutely no other way to get a photo.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 12
This is a fairly typical early morning photo that poses little problem for a sharp handheld photo. There was no need to go to a higher ISO or use a tripod. FL 21mm ISO 200, 1/100 sec, f/5.6, Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6

The only time I recently needed to move to an ISO higher than 200 was at the SPOT Press Conference at the OR Summer Market. The indoor light did not support shooting at longer focal lengths, and I needed to shoot from a distance. Combined with the E-620’s in-camera image stabilization, I was able to get reasonably sharp images without a lot of ambient light.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 13
Astronaut and adventurer Scott Parazynski introducing SPOT Gen 2 at a press conference at ORSM 2009: It took both pushing the ISO to 800 and the in-camera image stabilization to get a reasonably sharp image shooting indoors without a flash. FL 40mm, ISO 800, 1/30 sec, f/5.5, Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6

Available (High Quality) Lightweight Lenses

One of the best assets of the Olympus 4/3 system is the depth of high quality lightweight lenses that are a perfect fit for backcountry photography. Obviously, these lenses contribute to overall image quality, but because they are smaller and lighter than many competing manufacturers’ lenses, they lighten your total weight of camera gear .

My favorite lens is the new Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6. Only 275 g (9.7 oz), it takes excellent panoramic shots. I don’t think anybody else sells an ultra wide angle zoom at anywhere near the 9-18’s weight/pricepoint. The environmentally sealed Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 SWD, while heavier than the 9-18, is regarded as one of the best digital zoom lenses on the market. Another highly regarded lens is the exceptionally sharp Zuiko Digital ED 50mm F2.0 Macro.

Note: 4/3 format has a 2x crop factor, meaning that the 35mm format equivalent focal length is twice the 4/3 format focal length listed above. Thus, the 9-18 mm Olympus 4/3 lens is the equivalent of a 18-36mm lens in 35mm format.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 14
Here I was able to capture most of a lake, shooting at 11 mm using the very light 9.7 oz Zuiko 9-18mm F4.0-5.6. The photo is quite sharp with little noticeable distortion. FL 11mm, ISO 200, 1/200 sec, f/11, Zuiko Digital ED 9-18 mm F4.0-5.6

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 15
A detail of the lake, showing good detail and sharpness.

Small Infrared Remote

The E-620 works with a small 11-gram (0.4-oz) RM-1 infrared remote unit that came with one of my Olympus P/S cameras about five years ago. It is great for self-portraits and as a "cable release." I love that Olympus has retained compatibility for this small and light remote, especially after I ended up paying $80 for a heavier cable release for a Nikon D300.

Carrying the E-620 in the Backcountry

The E-620 with stock 14-42 lens or 9-18 fits into a 170-g (6-oz) Lowepro Mini-Zoom case, which is easily carried with the strap over my shoulder and the camera resting on my chest. The whole setup, case included, weighs less than most mid-size sensor DSLRs.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 16
Compact for a DSLR: The 6-oz Lowepro Mini-Zoom case easily accommodates the E-620 and Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens (left) versus the 24-oz Lowepro Toploader Zoom used by many to hold larger DSLRs (right).

My first thought at carrying a DSLR, even a small one like the E-620, on my chest while backpacking was "Not gonna happen, no way, nuh-uh." Still, tempted by the image quality improvements of the larger camera, I decided to give it a try. I was surprised how little it impacted my backpacking. Carrying the camera on trail is a cinch, but it usually stays on my chest for much of my time canyoneering and during cross-country mountain travel. At around Class III climbing, the camera goes into the top of my pack. Even so, I end up taking the camera out of the pack for more photos than I thought I would. The results are so good, I’m inspired to keep taking more pictures.

Olympus E-620 Digital SLR Camera Review - 17
The anticipation is that this huge bulky thing bouncing around on your chest will drive you crazy, significantly impacting your hiking ability and marring your wilderness experience. In reality, the camera sits quietly on my chest, and much of the time I hardly notice it’s there. Obviously, the small size and weight of the E-620 tucked into a (comparatively) small case helps a lot. And when a photo opportunity arises, the camera is conveniently there and ready to go. [Photo: Richard Dixon, Nikon D40]

What’s Good

  • First-rate out-of-camera JPEGs (a significant increase in highlight capture vs. the E-520). Little incentive to shoot or process RAW files for much of your photography. A big savings in time and hassle, plus far more images on each storage card and better burst speed response.
  • Excellent dynamic range at ISO 200 – Set it there. Leave it there!
  • Many superb, lightweight Olympus 4/3 lenses available. In particular for backpacking use:
    • Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 SWD, environmentally sealed (regarded as one of the best digital zooms)
    • Zuiko Digital ED14-54mm F2.8-3.5 II
    • Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6
    • Zuiko Digital ED 50mm F2.0 Macro
    • Zuiko 76.5g (2.7 oz) 25mm pancake lens (only decent optics, but extremely light)
    • Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6. (stock, kit lens; solid, if not superb, optical performance, light – only 6.7 oz – and compact)
    • Zuiko 40-150 kit zoom (honorable mention)
    • Zuiko 35mm macro (cheapo but amazing)
    • Zuiko EC14 teleconverter (honorable mention)
  • Effective in-camera image stabilization. Works for any 4/3 lens, regardless of manufacturer, also works for legacy manual-focus prime lenses.
  • Good multi-sensor auto focus.
  • Consistent metering system.
  • Good performance in low light (viewfinder, focus, image stabilization and ISO performance).
  • Extremely fast and easy to use. Many direct access external controls: buttons, control knob, and Super Control Panel to quickly access all commonly used functions, plus customizable controls.
  • Large, bright, swivel LCD display.
  • Shadow Adjustment Technology works to capture shadow detail in high contrast situations.
  • Compact enough to fit into the smallest Lowepro-Zoom case.

What’s Not So Good

  • No video recording capability.
  • Viewfinder is a bit tunnel like compared to heavier APS-C cameras (although it’s an improvement over the E-520, and perfectly usable in the field). It is far superior to LCD-only cameras, and even EVF (electronic viewfinder) cameras.
  • LCD display not as high resolution as some of the heavier APS-C cameras.
  • Not quite the high ISO performance as the best (but heavier) APS-C cameras. The E-620 is solidly competitive to ISO 800/1600, and with in-body image stabilization, I have yet to go higher than ISO 400 in the field.
  • Adopting the smaller capacity and lighter battery from the E-4xx series rather than the larger battery used in most Olympus DSLRs yields decent, but not the longest, battery life. My battery life is in the range of five to seven days in the field. (Extra batteries are small and light. It’s easy to carry one or two more.)

Conclusion

In the end it is a matter of personal choice where you draw the line on image quality versus weight and bulk. Some are happy taking pictures with a cell phone; others will never part with their 3.5-pound, full-frame Canon 5d mk II. I’ve even run into view camera photographers lugging ten to twenty pounds of camera gear deep in the canyons of southern Utah.

For me the E-620 hits the sweet spot of weight to performance for a backpacking camera. It comes very close to image quality of the best DSLRs at a fraction of the weight, bulk, and cost. It is light enough that it does not impact my hiking or wilderness experience. Thus, I take the camera on more trips and produce more high quality photographs. At the sizes I print, the E-620 yields large, sharp photographic prints, with excellent color and dynamic range – photographs that I am proud to have hanging on my wall. In summary, carrying the E-620 has reignited my enthusiasm and love for serious backcountry photography.

My only regret is that Olympus did not see fit to add HD video to the camera. With 1080p, 24 fps HD video with a decent codec and a jack for an external stereo microphone, this would be close to the perfect lightweight tool for professional quality still photography, and near professional quality backcountry videography. I can only hope the E-630 will add this feature. (If they do, I would expect a significant increase in price.)

Specifications

  MSRP:

$599.99 (body only)
$699.99 (with 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Lens)

  Dimensions (W x H x D):

5.11 x 3.7 x 2.36 inches (excluding protrusions)

  Weight:

Manufacturer Claimed Weight: 1.04 lb (body only)
BPL Measured Weight: 1.05 lb (body only)
BPL Measured Weight: 1.15 lb .52 kg (body, memory card, battery)

  Memory:

CompactFlash Type III (UDMA), Microdrive, xD-Picture Card

  Sensor size:

17.3 mm (H) x 13.0 mm (V)

  Lens mount:

Four Thirds Mount

  Megapixels:

12.3 effective (maximum available is 13.1 at 4:3 aspect ratio)

  Screen:

Hypercrystal LCD, 2.7 inches diagonal, 230K dots

  ISO sensitivity:

Auto: ISO 200 – 3200 (customizable, default is 200 – 800)
Manual ISO 100 – 3200, 1/3 or 1 EV steps

  Exposure modes:

Auto, Program AE, Aperture Priority AE, Shutter Priority AE, Manual, Scene Program AE, Scene Select AE
  Metering: EV 1-20, digital ESP, center weighted average, spot
  Focusing: Single AF, Continuous AF, Manual Focus
  File format: RAW (12-bit lossless compression), JPEG, RAW+JPEG

  Recording image size:

RAW 4032 x 3024 pixels
JPEG 4032 x 3024 pixels – 640 x 480 pixels

  Image Stabilizer System:

Built in (Imager shift image stabilizer)

  Drive modes:

Single-frame shooting, Sequential shooting H, Sequential shooting L, Self-timer, Remote control
  Flash: Pop-up, plus hot shoe

  Viewfinder

Eye-level single-lens reflex viewfinder

  Dust reduction:

Supersonic Wave Filter (dust reduction system for image sensor)

  Shutter speed:

P(Ps), S, A, M mode- 60, 14000 sec.

  Anti shock mode:

Available (1 to 30 sec. selectable)

  PC interface:

USB 2.0 High Speed for storage and camera control (MTP mode is available)

  USB/Video connector: –

Dedicated multi-connector (Video NTSCPAL selectable, Optional Remote cable RM-UC1 is available)

  Battery:

BLS-1 Li-ion battery (included)

  Included:

Camera Body, Li-ion battery BLS-1, Li-ion battery charger BCS-1, USB/Video Multi cable, Eye piece cover EPC-1, Shoulder strap, OLYMPUS Master CD-ROM, Instruction manual, Warranty card

Sno-Seal Original Beeswax Waterproofing for Leather

Treat your leather nicely, THEN abuse the ever-loving daylights out of it.

Sno-Seal Original Beeswax Waterproofing for Leather Review - 1
Sno-Seal in containers (courtesy Atsko).

Overview

Some walkers like shoes with a leather trim, and some cross-country skiers prefer leather boots to plastic. Some people even wear leather shoes at home and to work. But no matter what the shoes and how the leather was tanned, if it gets wet again and again, it can suffer. The original leather treatment can get washed out, leaving the leather to go hard and shrink when it dries out. Once dry, it’s also likely to crack on flexing. Of course, wet leather is much heavier too.

You can use a range of treatments on leather, but many of them have problems or don’t work very well. In my experience, silicone treatment fails after a few hours: it just rubs off. Boot polish is better, but it is hard to get enough on the leather to really make a difference. Oils and greases go too far into the leather, get messy, and wash out easily. Fats let the leather rot over time and can go rancid. Beeswax, as used in Sno-Seal, apparently stays mainly near the surface of the leather, but seems to have the desired effect (lubrication of the leather) right through it. According to Atsko, once the solvent in Sno-Seal has evaporated, the beeswax stays a soft solid inside the pores of the leather up to 63 C (146 F): it does not leak out to get on socks etc.

Atsko claims that leather treated with Sno-Seal will still pass moisture, so you can treat the leather on shoes with a Gore-Tex membrane, and the membrane will still work. I don’t have much experience of this, but then my feet are rarely dry inside a membrane shoe anyhow.

Field Experiences

Sno-Seal Original Beeswax Waterproofing for Leather Review - 2
My wife’s Salomon shoes after six weeks in Switzerland. Inset is the small pot of Sno-Seal we packed with us.

Atsko’s claims are not fanciful waffle either. The picture here shoes my wife’s Salomon joggers after six weeks walking in Switzerland in the summer of 2009, going over Alpine passes (a pass a day keeps boredom at bay…). The leather exterior on the joggers is still supple and in good condition, because I took some Sno-Seal in the little plastic pot shown and applied it with a bit of rag every couple days when the shoes were wet. The total weight for the pot of Sno-Seal and rag was a bit over 40 grams (1.4 oz), but I didn’t use the full pot by any means. I would have used more if the weather had been wetter. As to weight added, I would guess I used between 5 and 10 grams for the pair of shoes each time. Some of this would have worn off after a while.

Contrast that with what happened in 2007 in the French Alps when I didn’t look after her shoes this way. The leather exterior got soaked through for weeks on end, which stripped any tanning out of the material. When the weather cleared, the leather dried out, shrank, and cracked. My wife was nearly crippled by the reduced volume of the shoes: her feet were badly injured with internal bleeding, which started to leak through to the soles of her feet. Fortunately we caught the problem early enough that the damage to her feet was not permanent. I took the footbeds out of her shoes to make more room in them, and she managed to hobble to the next town – which very fortunately had a shoe shop. It was a worrying experience way up in the mountains at the time though (which is why we took the Sno-Seal in 2009).

Sno-Seal Original Beeswax Waterproofing for Leather Review - 3
My XC Nordic ski boots.

In 1991 my wife and I took up Nordic cross-country ski-touring, with light leather three-pin boots. My original pair of Scarpa Nortour boots are shown here, still in excellent condition in 2009. Actually, I had to repair some of the stitching at the toe early on, but the leather has been treated with Sno-Seal before every trip, and the boots are like new. A pity I outgrew the boots (size EU 42) recently!

Finally, I regularly use the Sno-Seal on yellow (pig-skin) riggers gloves for working around the farm. If I don’t do this, the gloves might last a year before cracking and breaking up; with the Sno-Seal treatment, the gloves seem to last up to five years easily. Since they are not cheap, it’s nice to get more bang for the buck with a little preventative maintenance.

Specifications

  Manufacturer

Atsko

  Year/Model

1933-2009

  Manufacture

USA

  Material

Beeswax and solvent

  Capacity

1 qt can, 8 fl oz jar, 4 fl oz tube, 1/2 flo oz sachet

  MSRP

US$7.30 for 8 oz jar

What’s Good

  • It works as advertised
  • Inexpensive
  • Environmentally friendly
  • Preserves leather
  • Allows persiration through (a bit)
  • Multiple uses

What’s Not So Good

  • Can’t think of anything

Transitional Hiker – An Australian Story

How books about or by famous UL walkers, a sewing machine, and the most devoted UL community on the planet got me back on the trail and going light.

Setting the Scene

I live in Australia. It’s the smallest continent, but also the largest, most remote, and most isolated island. To top off all of that, I live in Perth, the capital of Western Australia, which is the most isolated capital city in Australia, and thus, in turn, the world. This creates some unique and interesting challenges.

The move to lightweight for me was more of a necessity rather than a personal goal to see how light I could hike, although my motivation is now changing. My frame and build do not allow for carrying heavy loads comfortably at all, and I figured that as I was out hiking to enjoy myself then I should do just that. More recently I was involved in two car accidents weeks apart and, as a result, have several prolapsed disks from C2 through to C7, which make things a little uncomfortable at times.

Initially I started hiking with the Cubs and then Scouts as a child. Back then, gear consisted of heavy external frame packs that provided no comfort at all with most, if not all of the weight, right on the shoulders. I recall carrying canvas tents, large Trangia stoves, and enough food and lollies to feed a small nation. Then one of two things happened: I lost interest, or being in the Scouts was no longer the cool thing to do. I don’t recall which it was, but none the less I gave hiking and backpacking up.

Transitional Hiker - An Australian Story - 1
Memories of Scouting days – this is from a recent group I met whilst out performing track maintenance along the Bibbulmun Track. The group was out for a single night, yet managed to look like they were out for a week. As penance for having been so noisy during the night, I spent some time the following morning educating them on ‘Code of the Campsite.’ This involves things such as Be considerate and share the shelter; Protect the environment; Be clean – Pack it in, pack it out; Stay cool – Cook safe.

It wasn’t until late 2005, when my son was born, that I went down to the local hiking store and bought myself a nice pair of shoes (probably the only item I still use now), a pack, a sleeping bag, a stove, and a few other items I was advised were a must. I prepared myself to reacquaint with the hiking world. Looking back, I have to admit that one of the reasons I wanted to get back into hiking was simply because of the amount of new gear there was to explore (trap number one and the first of many). Another reason was so that I could prepare myself and be comfortable in my abilities to take my son out hiking when he was old enough. That time has now come, Cameron is four years old and enjoys being outside more than he does in. We have yet to go on an overnight hike together, but that is only a matter of time.

My first time back on the trail for a true overnight hike was along the Bibbulmun Track in Western Australia to a place known as Mount Cooke. At a total height of around 540 meters (1,772 feet), it’s one of the highest peaks along the trail (no altitude sickness there!). This hike was probably the best I have ever been on, and I still reminisce about it now. Not for the actual walk itself, although it was good, but more for the realisation that this stuff was way harder than I ever remembered it being as a youngster. My pack was heavy, and there had to be a better way to do this; surely there was lighter gear out there to make this more enjoyable. The gear list below will give you an idea of what I was carrying. There are probably even more items that I didn’t record at the time – you know, that stuff you just have to take with you, like an extra can of isopropane gas, just in case the one cup of water you boil runs the first can dry.

Transitional Hiker - An Australian Story - 2
One heavy pack, over 13 kilos (28.6 pounds). I’m using a shoe cleaning station while out on a four-day hike along the Bibbulmun Track. These stations play a very important part in preventing the spread of Dieback, a destructive disease predominant in the area. Of course, the seat also provided some relief for the day’s walk.

Getting a UL Education

Being off the trail for so many years, along with my recent trail experience, meant I needed to spend some time researching lightweight gear and its pitfalls. The most obvious place to start was the internet. It wasn’t long before I found a few websites that proved to be excellent resources. The first was a locally run Yahoo group, Aushiker, which connected me with some local hiking enthusiasts. One of the people I met online soon became a very good friend and hiking companion. One of the other people I met was the famous (infamous?) Roger Caffin, who soon put me onto Backpacking Light. His precise words to me were “PS: you need to subscribe to Backpacking Light to keep up with all this UL stuff.” I still don’t know why I hadn’t done my research before I had bought a heap of gear.

I happened to stumble across a Backpacking Light forum post where the topic was focused around a hiker in the United States by the name of Ray Jardine, who was apparently the godfather of lightweight hiking. I just had to know more about this guy, so I bought his book Trail Life and read it cover to cover over a weekend. That fact still amazes me, as until that day I had never read an entire book, I kid you not. I was so amazed by what I learned that I grew ravenous for more about Ray’s style. I jumped online, ordered a quilt kit, and put that together with attention to detail like I had never done before. I was so proud my achievement; I had made a quilt and knocked 300 grams off my weight with no real effort. The lightweight world was banging at my door and was also in my head continually. I dreamt about gear (still do, in fact!) and how much lighter it could be. After the Ray Jardine quilt and successful field trips with it, I progressed to a GoLite Ultra20 quilt and removed a further 360 grams from the original weight of my traditional sleeping bag, a Mountain Designs Travelite (1200 gram reduced to 540 grams).

My book collection started to expand, and included Hike Your Own Hike by Francis Tapon, The Last American Man by Elizabeth Gilbert, 98.6 Degrees: The Art of Keeping Your Ass Alive by Cody Ludin, and a host of many more, which have provided great inspiration. Research soon brought me a little closer to home, and when I looked at Australians who have motivated me to seek a lighter pack weight, there is the typical high profile thru-hiker or well known personality, but there are also people like the indigenous Aboriginals and bush swagmen of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

The Aboriginals led a nomadic lifestyle where they walked in search of fertile areas to hunt and gather, living off the land with as little impact to the surrounding areas as possible. This was the original “leave no trace.” The Aboriginals had the right idea from the start, which was about 50,000 years ago. They travelled light, generally carrying only what they needed to survive, a kylie (boomerang) and a gamai or spear. They built shelters (mia) out of tree branches, covered them with bark, and bound them together with grasses. When it was time to move on, these were generally left standing for the next tribe that passed through. Bush tucker was collected from the native plants and may have consisted of wild fruits such as figs, bush pear, and appleberries and vegetables such as rainforest spinach and potatoes. Kangaroos, emus, goanna, snake, and fish were common sources of meat and easily caught buy the skillful hunter.

The swagman, on the other hand, was not so much of a hunter and gatherer; he was simply a lone traveller walking from town to town looking for work on the farms. Much like the Aboriginals, swagmen carried only what they needed to survive, but rather than a kylie and gamai, it was a swag and a billy. Swag is an Australian term for a bedroll, and a billy is a pot or can with a wire handle used to boil water or cook food in. There were no tents or other luxury items.

If the Aboriginals and swagmen could do without, I saw no reason I couldn’t do the same. Now, I’m not saying I’m going to walk the trails with a spear or just carry a swag, but that mentality makes gear selection a little more careful and planned. I questioned my need to carry extra gas, then wondered if I needed gas at all, or if an open fire would do the job. In those areas where open flame is permissible, I packed accordingly. Those areas with fire bans forced me to consider what else I could bring that was still light in weight. For me, deciding what’s achievable in going lightweight is about looking at history, and what our ancestors and past civilizations did, how they lived, how they travelled. It is about knowing my limitations both physically and mentally, being comfortable with what I am carrying and ensuring it really is necessary – and most of all, doing all of this safely.

Manly Men Sew

One of the challenges I faced in my quest to carry light and be a true lightweight hiker, apart from the lack of local resources due to geographical isolation, was funding. How was I going to pay for all this gear? Like most lightweight hikers, I turned to “Make Your Own Gear” or MYOG (at least now I speak the lingo of a lightweight hiker!). Pepsi can stoves were the first item I wanted to master, and boy, did I drink a lot of Pepsi over a short period. The stoves were successful to a point and served their purpose well. Going from an MSR Pocket Rocket to the alcohol style setup was interesting, and it taught me a lot about making things simple, with fewer moving parts to worry about. I later discovered titanium and have since used a Vargo Decagon stove and now more recently an Ultimate Survival Technologies WetFire stove. Continuing on with my newly found skill of MYOG, I went out and bought myself a sewing machine (my wife still ribs me about this), for a whopping $15 from a very good mate with whom I hike on a regular basis. I started with small stuff sacks and progressed to making my son a backpack. I have also made an insulated vest and a bivy based on the Six Moon Designs Meteor.

My first solo attempt at going lightweight backpacking didn’t come until March of this year, when I went out to one of my favourite spots, known as Helena Hut, in the Helena National Park. I had just purchased my first lightweight pack, a ULA Relay, second-hand from a forum and still think it’s one of the best things I own. I packed my gear for an overnight stay and hit the trailhead with a total weight of 6.5 kilograms (14.3 pounds) from skin out. I even carried my pack on one shoulder, just as Ray Jardine does, to see if it really was as effective as he says, and it was great. I was on my own with a pack the lightest it has ever been, and things were all coming together nicely.

Transitional Hiker - An Australian Story - 3
First solo hike, ULA Relay Pack. Here I am on my first solo hike to a favourite spot known as Helena Hut. My weight from skin out was 6.5 kilograms including food for the night and water. This time of the year, winter clothing is not needed, so I was able to save a few kilos. Water is also not an issue, as there are two large water tanks at the campsite that are fed by the guttering system on the shelter.

Transitional Hiker - An Australian Story - 4
First solo hike with my Ray Jardine quilt. Spending a night in Helena Hut with my newly sewn quilt was a great experience. Here I used a Tyvex groundsheet and my old Therm-a-Rest Prolite 4. The style of the shelters is very similar to that along the AT. My understanding is that during the construction of these shelters, some guidance was received by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, with several visits from the ATC made out to Australia.

As my thirst for lightweight increased, so did the effort I had to go to get hold of things. One the drawbacks of being so isolated is that it takes a few years longer for some things to catch on, and hiking was one of those things. There are still no cottage-type companies running from here, and lightweight gear doesn’t enter into any conversations with store sales reps. In fact, they seem to promote carrying more as some kind way to increase the pleasure of walking, though I think it just increases the pleasure of a commission. I recall being in a store one day listening to the rep selling a couple everything they needed and didn’t need for a thru hike they were embarking on. I had to really bite my tongue when they were sold a six-egg holder to go with an open fire bread toaster. Something tells me that they may have eaten well, but were probably miserable on the trail.

Lightweight Evangelism

One of the things that has kept my motivation going and helped me move towards an even lighter pack weight has been the generosity and helpfulness of the hiking community. I don’t know that I would be where I am now in achieving my goal of a 6-kilo pack had it not been for these people. Perhaps one of the best experiences came when I posted a note about wanting to buy a down jacket on the Backpacking Light forums. Shortly thereafter, I received an email letting me know there was one available, like new, and all I had to do was pay postage. How could I pass that up? I ended up with a Marmot down jacket that weighs 690 grams (24.4 oz).

Along the way, I’ve learned a few lessons:

  • Don’t buy something because it’s shiny.
  • Research and learn from others (they have been there and done it before).
  • Get lots of advice, but only use the parts you want to, what feels right to you.
  • Have fun (probably the most important tip I got!).

What I’m focused on now is going even lighter, hiking smarter and safer, refining my gear list to something that I am comfortable with, and educating others met on the trail that there is a better way to do things. Bush tucker and survival skills are also something that I will be concentrating on in the coming months. I now volunteer myself to the Bibbulmun Track Foundation for trail maintenance and want to give something back to a place that has given me so much enjoyment.

Continuing my UL journey into my everyday life off the trail is helping me to better appreciate the non-materialistic things in my life. As someone once told me, “The best things in life are not things”.

Transitional Hiker - An Australian Story - 5
Me and Andrew, Gringer Creek to Canning, Bibbulmun Track Western Australia. Photo taken at the trailhead close to Gringer Creek campsite before starting an ambitious four-day hike covering over 100 kilometres (62 miles) of the most undulating part of the track. It was during this hike that the lightweight style showed its true value, and it was STILL very tough going.

 
Gear List
Pre-Lightweight Post-Lightweight
Sleeping Weight (g) Weight (oz) Weight (g) Weight (oz)
MD Travelite 500 Sleeping Bag 1,200 42.36 GoLite Ultra20 Quilt 540 19.06
Therm-a-Rest ProLite 4 Mat 736 25.98 Therm-a-Rest NeoAir 410 14.47
Therm-a-Rest Pillow 264 9.32 Removed 0 0.00
Tarptent Double Rainbow 1,274 44.97 Tarptent Contrail 690 24.36
Tyvek Groundsheet 198 6.99 Tyvek Groundsheet 198 6.99
Total 3,672 129.62 1,838 64.88
Cooking
Gas 234 8.26 Esbit Tabs 4 0.14
MSR Titan Kettle 128 4.52 Heineken Pot 30 1.06
MSR Pocket Rocket 86 3.04 Esbit Titanium Wing Stove 13 0.46
Orikaso Bowl 32 1.13 Orikaso Bowl 32 1.13
Light My Fire Knife/Spoon Set 10 0.35 Light My Fire Knife/Spoon Set 10 0.35
Plastic Cup 58 2.05 Plastic Cup 58 2.05
Total 548 19.34 147 5.19
Clothing Worn
Sea to Summit Quagmire Gaiters 342 12.07 Sea to Summit Tumbleweed Gaiters 80 2.82
Hat 84 2.97 Hat 84 2.97
Hiking Shoes 984 34.74 Hiking Shoes 984 34.74
Jumper 700 24.71 Marmot Down Jacket 691 24.39
Long Pants 624 22.03 Long Pants 320 11.30
Total 2,734 96.51 2,159 76.21
Clothing Carried
Beanie 56 1.98 Beanie 56 1.98
Gore-Tex Rain Coat 240 8.47 Gore-Tex Rain Coat 240 8.47
Socks Bridgedale(second day) 96 3.39 Socks DeFeet (second day) 48 1.69
Shirt (second day) 251 8.86 Shirt (second day) 251 8.86
Thermals Top and Bottom (sleeping) 310 10.94 Thermals Top and Bottom (sleeping) 310 10.94
Thongs 290 10.24 Removed 0 0.00
Total 1,243 43.88 905 31.95
Misc
1.5L Water Bladder (full) 1,614 56.97 1.5L water bladder (full) 1,614 56.97
Nalgene Large (full 1L) 1,120 39.54 Water Container (full 1L) 1,025 36.18
Nalgene Small 94 3.32 Removed 0 0.00
Osprey Aether 60L Pack 1,360 48.01 ULA Relay Pack 520 18.36
First Aid Kit 386 13.63 Mini First Aid Kit 148 5.22
Garmix eTrex GPS 200 7.06 Garmix eTrex GPS 200 7.06
Sea to Summit Silnylon Pack Cover 90 3.18 Sea to Summit Silnylon Pack Cover 90 3.18
Petzl Tikka Plus Headlamp 76 2.68 Petzl eLite 46 1.62
Toilet Paper 50 1.77 Toilet Paper 50 1.77
Tealights x 3 52 1.84 Removed 0 0.00
Toothbrush 4 0.14 Toothbrush 4 0.14
Toothpaste 8 0.28 Toothpaste 8 0.28
Batteries x 2 AA 48 1.69 Batteries x 2 CR2032 6 0.21
Suncream 60 2.12 Suncream – Smaller Container 20 0.71
3G Mobile Phone 92 3.25 3G Mobile Phone 92 3.25
Total 5,254 185.47 3,823 134.95
Food
Breakfast x 1 – Cereal 100 3.53 Breakfast x 1 – Cereal 100 3.53
Lunch x 1 200 7.06 Lunch x 1 200 7.06
Dinner x 1 – Store Bought Dehydrated 320 11.30 Dinner x 1 – Home Made Dehydrated 126 4.45
Coffee or Tea Bags 8 0.28 Coffee or Tea Bags 8 0.28
Total 628 22.17 434 15.32
From Skin Out 14,079 496.99 9,306 328.50
kilos lbs kilos lbs
14.1 31.06 9.3 20.53

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review

Lower volume ultralight backpack with removable stays and other components – so you can set up the pack for individual trips and personal preferences to your heart’s content.

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review - 1
The new Gorilla backpack is Gossamer Gear’s latest and greatest – 2800 cubic inches and 24.5 ounces (size Large). It’s constructed of durable fabrics and mesh and has a new contoured removable aluminum frame.

Introduction

I still have my original Gossamer Gear G4 frameless backpack. It has a few holes in the bottom from scraping over rocks, but it’s still a perfectly good pack. Fast forward to the new Gossamer Gorilla pack, and you will notice some familiar features – front and side mesh pockets, rolltop closure, wide shoulder straps, sleeping pad sleeve, and you can still stuff socks for padding in the shoulder straps and hipbelt if you want. Conceptually, Gossamer Gear packs have not changed, but there are huge improvements in the details that make them a whole lot better. The new Gorilla backpack, with its durable fabrics and removable curved aluminum frame, is state-of-the-art Gossamer Gear. (And you can still purchase a new G4 if you need a replacement.)

Gossamer Gear introduced an ultralight removable frame in their Mariposa backpack back in 2004, consisting of two straight carbon fiber stays (0.9 ounce/pair) inserted into sleeves on the backpanel. The Mariposa could be used either as a frameless backpack or with the stays inserted to increase its load carrying capacity. The concept was a big advancement at the time (an ultralight frameless or internal frame backpack ALL IN ONE!), but the straight stays were less than ideal for pack fit and load-carrying comfort. After experimenting with several prototypes, they developed a curved aluminum stay (3.4 ounces) that fits into the same sleeves on the backpanel. I have tested both versions and can unequivocally say that the curved stay, along with other improvements incorporated into the Gorilla pack, are a big improvement. This pack is near perfection!

Description

The new Gossamer Gear Gorilla is designed to be as versatile as possible. The pack comes in three sizes (S, M, L) and three hipbelt sizes are available. The pack body is the same for all pack sizes; the shoulder straps are simply sewn on at different heights to create different pack torso lengths. Many components (frame, hipbelt, sternum strap, shoulder strap and hipbelt padding, bungie system) of the pack are removable, so the user can choose the components he/she wants to use. Accessory hipbelt pockets are available for hikers who want to add them.

The Gorilla (2800 cubic inches, 23.2 ounces size Medium) is the second lightest internal frame backpack available. The lightest is the Gossamer Gear Mariposa Plus (3600 cubic inches, 22.3 ounces size Medium), which is constructed of lighter fabrics and has the same stay (yes, the stay is interchangeable, and older Mariposas can be easily retrofitted).

The key factors that differentiate the Gorilla (besides its lower volume) are more durable fabrics (210 denier PU coated ripstop body and durable stretch nylon pockets) and removable curved stay. The revised Miniposa (14.5 ounces size Medium) has the same dimensions and feature set, but it is constructed of silnylon and does not have a stay. The difference in weight between the two packs is 7.8 ounces, which is the weight added to the Gorilla by the removable frame and durable fabrics.

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review - 2
Views of the Gossamer Gear Gorilla: The front view (top left) shows the pack’s large front pocket made of durable stretch nylon. There are six loops in the side seams to attach a bungie system (not shown). The backpanel view (top right) shows the pack’s wide shoulder straps and backpanel sleeve to hold a sleeping pad. The hipbelt pocket on the left is my camera case, and the right pocket is a Gossamer Gear add-on hipbelt pocket ($15). A side view (bottom left) shows a lower mesh pocket designed to make water bottles reachable. And the top view (bottom right) shows the pack’s drawcord closure and top compression strap.

Suspension System and Features

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review - 3
Gossamer Gear’s new curved stay (left) is made of aluminum tubing and weighs 3.4 ounces. It easily slips into sleeves sewn on the inside of the pack’s backpanel (right). A silnylon hydration sleeve is visible inside the pack.

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review - 4
Like other Gossamer Gear packs, the Gorilla has a mesh sleeve on the backpanel (left) that allows the user to insert a sleeping pad for padding. The mesh used in the sleeve is much improved over previous versions. Shoulder straps (center) measure nearly four inches wide from edge to edge, have removable closed cell foam padding, and are faced with 3D wicking mesh on the inside. The removable hipbelt (right, 4.1 ounces size Medium) is a similar width and construction.

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review - 5
The new stretch nylon pockets on the Gorilla are really stretchy and very durable. The bottoms of the three exterior pockets (one front, two side) are 210 denier ripstop nylon for increased durability.

Note that the Gorilla pack does not have a torso length adjustment, so it’s important to measure your torso length and choose the correct pack size. Hipbelt sizes are based on hiker girth. The only pack fit adjustment on the Gorilla is the shoulder strap length; the pack does not have load lifter straps or hipbelt stabilizer straps.

Field Testing

I tested the Gorilla on a number of on-trail and off-trail summer backpacking trips in the southern Rockies, carrying weights ranging from 10 to 25 pounds. For one quick overnight trip, I stripped the Gorilla down to a 15.6 ounce minimalist frameless backpack (I did leave the 0.4 ounce shoulder strap pads in) and carried 12.5 pounds. I also tested the pack fully equipped on walks near home with weights ranging from 25 to 35 pounds to determine its comfortable weight carrying capacity.

Gossamer Gear Gorilla Backpack Review - 6
Fully loaded Gorilla pack with 21 pounds (left), and the same pack used on a day trip from a base camp (right).

My immediate (and continuing) impressions of the Gorilla are as follows:

  • For me, the pack volume is perfect for ultralight backpacking (same for the Miniposa). It has the right amount of room for my ultralight gear kit, plus room for food, water, and fuel for up to eight days.
  • The construction is excellent. Stitching is close and tight, and there are adequate reinforcements in stress areas.
  • The new curved aluminum stay is golden! I really like the pack’s fit.
  • I love the pack’s wide shoulder straps for distributing weight, and the 3D mesh backing resists sliding on my shoulders.
  • The new stretch nylon exterior pockets really stretch out and will hold a lot of gear, and they’re very durable. Outside pockets on some packs are tight and hard to get items in and out, but not so on the Gorilla.
  • The backpanel sleeping pad sleeve is much improved; it has stretch nylon panels on the side and 3D wicking fabric face, and it doesn’t stretch out of shape and bleed dye like the mesh used on the old Miniposa.
  • The side pockets are shorter and angled to make a water bottle reachable with the pack on, but I use a hydration system, so I would prefer taller side pockets that would hold more (can’t satisfy everyone!).
  • It’s easy to access the hydration sleeve, and it’s very easy to pass a drink tube through a port and down a shoulder strap.
  • The Gorilla functions well as a daypack for going on a day hike from a base camp
  • I really like the durable fabrics; this pack is built to last. The added weight is about 4.3 ounces.
  • The hipbelt requires some effort to remove because it has a Velcro patch on both sides. It’s much easier to put back on.
  • Likewise, the sternum requires some effort to remove and replace. A screw driver helps.
  • The stay is very easy to remove and replace. The curvature can be changed by bending it over something round, but I found the pre-bent curvature just fine.

The heavier loads I carried with the Gorilla were 21 pounds on a base camping trip with my wife, and 25 pounds on another trip where I carried a friend’s ridiculous 7-pound tent to help reduce his 40-pound-plus load (we talked a lot about how to reduce his pack weight!). I found the Gorilla, with all of its components, surprisingly comfortable carrying these weights. The wide shoulder straps really function well to distribute weight, so I did not have any shoulder strap pain at all, and tightening the hipbelt worked as expected to transfer weight to my hips.

From my weighted pack tests I conclude that the maximum weight carrying capacity (for me) for the Gorilla is about 30 pounds, and the comfortable weight carrying capacity is around 25 pounds. The stay in the Gorilla pack simply resides in sleeves on the backpanel. It is not anchored to the hipbelt at all, so there is no structural connection to support the weight. My opinion is that 25 pounds is a comfortable maximum weight for this pack, but it can easily carry up to 30 pounds when needed.

The Gorilla can be stripped down to a frameless backpack weighing 15.6 ounces (with 0.4 ounce shoulder strap padding left in). It requires some effort to remove the hipbelt and sternum strap, but once it’s accomplished, pack weight can be reduced by half a pound. The Gorilla is delightful to carry frameless with a light load; the wide shoulder straps distribute weight very well, and the 3D mesh backing minimizes sliding on the shoulders.

Comparisons

The following table compares packs currently available that have removable stays, allowing the pack to be used either frameless or with an internal frame. Note: information is manufacturer data for a size Medium pack.

Pack Total Weight With Stays Volume (cubic inches) Fabric Stay Description Stay Weight (ounces) Adjustable Torso Cost (US$)
Gossamer Gear Gorilla 23.2 2800 210d ripstop Contoured aluminum tubing 3.4 No 165
Gossamer Gear Mariposa Plus 22.3 3600 70d ripstop Contoured aluminum tubing 3.4 No 160
Six Moon Designs Starlite 30.0 4200 210d Dyneema 2 flat curved aluminum 5.0 Yes 175
Six Moon Designs Traveler 31.0 3800 210d Dyneema 2 flat curved aluminum 5.0 Yes 190

Note that all comparable backpacks have a much larger volume than the Gorilla, so the Gorilla is in a class by itself. If you are looking for a smaller volume backpack with removable stays, the Gorilla is the only one available. If you need more volume for lightweight backpacking or bulkier loads, you have a choice of three pack models that have removable stays. Of those, the Gossamer Gear Mariposa Plus is the lightest by 8 ounces, but it does not have an adjustable torso.

Assessment

Some readers may wonder why a 2800 cubic inch backpack needs a frame at all. The general rule of thumb is that a frameless backpack is comfortable to carry with loads less than 20 pounds. Of course that number will vary a bit up or down depending on hiker size and strength. For carrying more than 20 pounds, an internal frame backpack is recommended, and the sturdiness (and weight) of the pack will increase as the load increases. The Gossamer Gear Gorilla pack is extremely versatile because it can be used as a frameless backpack up to about 20 pounds, and the lightweight stay can be added to comfortably carry loads up to 25 pounds, or more. With food, water, and fuel, my pack weight is usually in the 17- to 21-pound range, occasionally higher for longer trips, so I find the frame to be a benefit on most of my trips.

Another potential issue may be the need for heavier, more durable fabrics in an ultralight backpack. There are definitely lighter packs available for ultralight backpacking, but they are strictly frameless backpacks. A removable frame backpack requires stronger fabrics to avoid damage from the stays wearing through or seams blowing out when the pack is under stress from heavier loads.

More durable fabrics also extend the life of the backpack considerably. The initial trend in ultralight frameless backpacks was to make them as light as possible, which meant really light fabrics like spinnaker and cuben fiber. And, yes, it is nice to have a super light pack for the times you want to backpack as light as possible. However, the current trend is to balance lightweight and durability, as evidenced by many of the current backpack models offered by Gossamer Gear, Six Moon Designs, Ultralight Adventure Equipment, and Mountain Laurel Designs. Pack designers and users have realized that incorporating durable fabrics into a pack does not increase weight that much, but it vastly increases durability and longevity. If you subscribe to that rationale, the Gossamer Gear Gorilla pack is an excellent choice.

Since I most frequently carry loads in the 17- to 21-pound range, I was inclined to use the Gorilla with all of its components because they simply work well together to provide a very comfortable pack that carries a moderate load very well. I personally found all of the features on the Gorilla worth their weight, except the bungie system, which I don’t find very useful, but it’s easily added when it’s needed. The 1.6-ounce SitLight pad provided with the pack is also very useful as a backpanel pad, if you don’t use a sleeping pad that is compatible with the pad sleeve (like the Big Agnes Clearview pad or Therm-a-Rest NeoAir pad). The bottom line is the Gorilla comes with a full complement of features, and most of them are removable, so you can set up the pack to match the trip and your personal preferences to your heart’s content. Or, if you simply use the pack the way it comes out of the box, it’s still very light and very comfortable to carry with moderate loads.

Specifications

  Year/Model

2009 Gossamer Gear Gorilla (www.gossamergear.com/)

  Style

Removable internal frame, top loading, roll down top with top compression strap

  Volume

2800 cu in (46 L) total
2,400 cu in (39 L) in main pack body and extension collar
400 cu in (6.5 L) in front and side pockets

  Weight

Size L tested, includes pack, frame, shoulder and hipbelt pads, bungie attachment system.
Measured weight: 24.5 oz (695 g)
Manufacturer specification: 24.2 oz (686 g)

  Sizes Available

Unisex S, M, L; 3 hipbelt sizes

  Torso Fit Range

Small: fits torsos 13-17 in (33-43 cm)
Medium: fits torsos 16-20 in (41-51 cm)
Large: fits torsos 20-24 in (51-61 cm)

  Fabrics

210d PU coated ripstop nylon, 30d silnylon, 4.5 oz/yd2 stretch nylon

  Frame Material

6061 aluminum tubing

  Features

Durable fabrics, removable curved aluminum stay, removable hipbelt available in 3 sizes, removable/adjustable sternum strap with whistle buckle, removable padding in shoulder straps and hipbelt, removable front bungie system, sleeping pad sleeve on backpanel, one front and two side stretch nylon pockets with 210d ripstop nylon on bottom, twp side compression straps, Y-top compression strap, extension collar, drawcord closure, 3D wicking fabric on inside of shoulder straps and hipbelt and on the backpanel, hydration sleeve with two hose ports, ice axe loop, haul loop

  Volume To Weight Ratio

114.3 cu in/oz (based on 2800 cu in and measured weight of 24.5 oz)

  Maximum Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

25 lb estimated comfortable load for an average person carrying the pack all day

  Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

16.3 (based on 25 lb and a measured weight of 1.53 lb)

  MSRP

US$165

  Included

Pack with curved aluminum stay and hipbelt, closed cell foam pads for hipbelt and shoulder straps, bungie system, SitLight pad for backpanel

What’s Good

  • Lightest lower volume removable frame backpack available.
  • Pack volume is just right for ultralight backpacking.
  • Three pack sizes and three hipbelt sizes to fit most hikers.
  • Removable stays allow use as a frameless or internal frame pack.
  • Many components are removable, allowing the user to set up the pack for individual trips or personal preference.
  • Durable fabrics and mesh.
  • Contoured tubular frame is very lightweight and fits well.
  • Stretch nylon pockets are very durable and stretch easily to hold a lot of gear.
  • Fits well (if you choose the correct size).
  • Comfortably carries moderate loads.

What’s Not So Good

  • No backpanel ventilation.
  • Frame not anchored to hipbelt.
  • Shoulder straps may be too wide for some hikers.
  • Grosgrain loop on frontpanel interferes with tightening the top strap.

Recommendations For Improvement

  • None, the Gorilla pack is as ideal as it gets.

MYOG Technical Note – Catenary Curves

The whys and wheres of catenary curves, with downloadable spreadsheet for calculating your own MYOG curve masterpieces.

MYOG Technical Note - Catenary Curves - 1
A straight ridge line in a tarp.

Introduction

Consider the ridge line of the simple tarp shown here. There are crinkles all along the length. When it rains, these crinkles fill up with water (yes, a hose test confirmed that). Also, when the wind blows, the tarp is going to flap around the ridge line. Can one do anything about this?

Curved Ridge Lines

MYOG Technical Note - Catenary Curves - 2
Examples of catenary curves on ridge lines. Left: Gossamer Gear SpinnTwinn Tarp Review by Will Rietveld. Right: GoLite Shangri-La 4-Man Tent, in GoLite’s New Shelter Line for 2008 (ORSM 2007) by Will Rietveld.

The solution is of course well-known: you cut a curve into the ridge line, as shown in these two pictures, solving the problem – provided the curve is done correctly for that tarp or tent.

MYOG Technical Note - Catenary Curves - 3
Example of a non-catenary curve on a ridge line.

However, it would be a serious mistake to think that the curve has to be a catenary curve. Other solutions to this problem exist, as shown here. This is a Macpac Olympus mountain tent, and I can testify that it can handle a storm without moving. In this case the ridge line is far more complex and is designed to keep the tent poles in exactly the right place.

However, the catenary curve has become traditional, and many people would like to be able to create one for their MYOG designs.

Mathematics – the Curve

The origin of the catenary curve is appropriate for this: it is the curve taken by a freely-hanging chain suspended from the two ends. The simple version of the mathematics is for the case where the two ends are at the same height. Now while this seems appropriate, there are several cautions to be mentioned.

First, many tarps do not have their two ends at the same height. We may ignore this for our purposes, as the next point will dominate.

Second, the curve is for a freely-hanging chain, not for a chain with all sorts of tension being applied along its length. A tarp has guy ropes at various points, which will always interfere with the pure curve. Once again, we may ignore this for our purposes provided the curve is not too severe.

MYOG Technical Note - Catenary Curves - 4
The basic catenary curve.

The curve itself is described by a COSH(theta) function. Fortunately, this function is available in most spreadsheets. We have plotted out a version here just as an example. You can calculate your own curve using this spreadsheet. You must change the ‘a’ and ‘b’ coefficients to suit your case. In this case, ‘a’ is the HALF-length of the curve, while ‘b’ is the amount of sag in the curve. Note that you MUST use the same units for the two parameters. The units can be feet, metres, furlongs or hand-widths – the math doesn’t care.

Once you have fiddled the curve to describe what you want, print out the table of XY values and plot them out on your fabric. Note that the curve generated may be used to describe the seam on your fabric OR the profile of the ridge line. If you put a three-inch sag in the curve on your fabric, the actual sag in the ridge-line will be less than this. However, this doesn’t matter one iota.

I suggest you experiment a bit before cutting out the curve on the ridge line of your fabric. Cut the fabric out with a straight ridge line – no curvature. Then mark out the line for a small sag, pin it together and string it up. Now you can see what that looks like in reality. If there isn’t enough sag, take it down, increase the sag parameter (b) a little, and try again. If you approach this from the ‘not-enough-sag’ side, rather than overestimating and having to reduce the sag, the pin holes will always be on the bit you cut off.

Once you have what you want, add the hem allowances, cut, and sew.

One Night At A Time

Quit making it so hard: jeepers, just cram a few things in your pack and let’s go!

Editor’s Note: This feature originally ran in Issue 8 of the BackpackingLight Print Magazine.

Pencil Pushing

My desk is boring. On a nice summer day, I get all itchy. I work at home, and looking out the windows, I see mountains. This lovely view can really needle me, those mountains whispering that I ditch the desk and enter.

I live in a beautiful place. Home for me is rural Idaho, just three miles from the Wyoming state line. When I look out my window, I can see the rolling foothills of the Tetons across the border in Wyoming. Beyond is the astounding backcountry of the Jedediah Smith Wilderness and the big peaks of Grand Teton National Park.

Right next to my desk there’s a clock, and over the last few summers I’ve made good use of that thing.

In summer, when the days are long, I can quickly pack up all the essentials for a single overnight and walk out the door. It’s a short drive to the nearest trailhead. From backing out of my driveway to hiking on the trail: about twenty minutes. In mid-summer, there is plenty of time before the sun goes down. With a light pack on my back, I can take advantage of this additional daylight and get surprisingly deep into the mountains to set up camp with a headlamp.

If I leave my house at 6 o’clock, I can walk for a few hours, sleep out under the stars, wake up early and walk around, and be home before noon. Then, back at the desk, I’m rejuvenated and content. The computer and pens are a little less oppressive, and my work is a little more enjoyable.

It’s Not a Marathon

These little one-night excursions now feel like something essential to my psyche. They are an exercise in spiritual renewal, a much needed revival of the soul. Yes, I know that sounds all lofty and snooty. I’ll put it a different way: It can be really nice to get away from all the trappings of "this" world and get out into "that" world, even if only for a few hours. The lessons I’ve learned from this are simple and rewarding. The most important is that sleeping outside in the forest is easy. Grabbing some gear and just going is always an option. It’s not difficult.

My calling: Make it even easier. I can look out my window, and I can usually get a pretty good idea what the weather is going to do in the short term. If it all looks good, I leave the weight of the shelter behind and sleep out under the stars.

I want to share this with friends, so I’ll get on the phone and pester them to join me, and they’ll tell me how wonderful it sounds. They act enthusiastic, but all too often they never come along. They really seem to want to, but their hurdle always ends up being, "My camping gear is all stored away, and it’s just too complicated to get it all organized."

It’s a sad excuse. How much gear is really required? The thing that has made this easy for me has been to simply have all my gear ready to go, all summer long. It’s merely in a big cardboard box, and I rummage through and toss stuff in my pack. Why does it seem so difficult? Somehow camping has become a reflection of our gadget hungry consciousness In their eyes, it’s all equated to problematic loads of tricked-out materialism.

We’ve separated ourselves from Mother Nature, and the simple act of walking out into her nurturing embrace should never be daunting. Jeepers, just cram a few things in your pack and let’s go!

Doesn’t Have to Be Perfect

Another bonus of these modest outings: It’s a good way for me to fine tune my ever-evolving system. As a way to challenge myself, I’ll always try to do something different. It’s a fun experiment to tweak the contents of my pack on every one of these outings. Cut the sleeping pad even shorter? Leave the stove behind? Jolt caffeine gum instead of coffee?

Maybe someday it’ll become perfect, but where’s the fun in that? These little one-nighters allow me to refine my skills at ultralight backpacking and camping, and I reap the benefits when it comes time to plan those more ambitious multi-day trips.

More than anything, I go into nature for my own sanity. It’s a metaphysical fix, and even if it’s only one night, there’s a renewal of the spirit. On such a deep and simple level, sleeping on the ground is truly rejuvenating. I love the smell of the pine needles, the sound of the crickets and the connection I feel lying upon this magnificent earth. I experience an alteration of my busy mind, and I delight in its result.

How difficult is it, really? I am very fortunate to live so close to such impressive wilderness, but we all must have someplace beautiful and secluded nearby.

I lived for a time in New York City. Just a little bit north of that urban prison, I had a perfect flat spot, just big enough for me to lie down, and it was easy to get to from the confines of my apartment. I slept there often.

It can be done.

Get Out Now!

Six steps to streamline your planning from dreaming up a trip to walking out the door.

Editor’s Note: This feature originally ran in Issue 3 of the BackpackingLight Print Magazine.
***

If industry leaders are correct and scarcity of time is what keeps us from getting out more, then perhaps the most sensible thing to do is to figure out how to streamline the process of taking a backcountry trip. Maybe it’s time to redefine what constitutes a satisfactory foray into wild country. Maybe it’s time to eliminate, as much as possible, the friction that keeps us from going backpacking.

After all, scarcity of time notwithstanding, many of us still seem to end up spending a few days every so often at some ill-advised gathering with people that annoy us. So why is it that we can take the time to fulfill some of our less compelling social obligations, but we can’t find the time to throw a pack on our back and head into the hills for some spiritual sustenance?

The following six steps should help you streamline the process of getting ready for a trip into the backcountry. The idea is to reduce the friction of planning and preparation to an absolute minimum. This, in turn, transforms every gap in your calendar into an opportunity to start your own little cultural revolution.

1. GEAR CHECKLIST

Create a standard checklist for most of the trips you take. This list need not be set in stone, but should provide a good jumping-off point for all of your backcountry travels. Adjust as necessary, but you won’t have to reinvent the wheel every time you get ready to head out.

2. GEAR BOX

Store your gear in a big plastic box – all of your gear, all the time. This way you’ll always have everything you need for a quick trip organized and in one place. My favorite is a clear plastic 110-liter Sterilite box that I found at a local hardware store. Storing your equipment this way means that everything in your gear box is essentially dedicated backcountry gear. Keeping your gear box stocked with all of the equipment you need for a trip eliminates the hassle of frantically digging through your junk drawer looking for your headlamp or multi-tool while your hiking partner simmers in the car outside, half an hour past your agreed departure time. Taped inside the lid of your gear box should be a manila envelope with copies of your standard gear checklist. Everything that goes into your pack or on your back should be in the box. A quick run through the checklist before departure ensures that you won’t arrive at the trailhead without some essential piece of equipment.

Get Out Now! - 1
The contents of the author’s gear box.

3. READY-TO-GO MENU

Rather than trying to make every backcountry sojourn a culinary orgy, create simple and straightforward two-, three-, and five-day menus that are easy to shop for and package. Again, you can adjust as you see fit, but the idea is to reduce the friction of planning and packing to an absolute minimum.

4. FOOD BOX

The food box is a second clear plastic container that you store excess backcountry food in. It provides a rolling stock from which to provision your trips. Like the gear box, it has a manila envelope taped inside the lid with copies of shopping lists for your respective menus. When you are getting ready for a trip, you simply grab the most appropriate shopping list and head to the grocery store with the kind of laser-like focus that will have you pointed toward the trailhead pronto.

Get Out Now! - 2
The contents of the author’s food box.

5. RELOAD

For this system to work well, it is important that when you return from a trip, everything goes back in its place. You clean and restock as necessary. That way, the next time you open up your calendar and see a little daylight, getting ready to hit the trail will be virtually effortless.

6. RETHINK TIME REQUIREMENTS

In addition to getting your house in order from an organizational standpoint, it also makes sense to reassess just how much time you need to pull off a successful and rewarding backpacking trip. A while back, I was talking with a friend who has a family and a demanding job. After he had described a litany of very cool trips he’d taken during the last year, I asked him how he’d been able to get out so often, given the obvious demands on his time. His response? Overnight trips. So if you have trouble knocking loose for more than a day or two, head out anyway. You might be surprised at how much satisfaction you can pack into what seems like only a handful of hours.

Get Out Now! - 3
All the gear a backpacker could want, in easy reach.

All the Gear a Guy Could Want

I like gear. I collect gear with an almost rabid enthusiasm, and I almost always have a place to put it.

Editor’s Note: This feature originally ran in Issue 3 of the BackpackingLight Print Magazine.
***
“Store your gear in a big plastic box,” writes Matt Colón in his “Get Out Now!” article.

His favorite box: a 110-liter Rubbermaid storage bin. The presumption is that organization and tidiness of your gear store will decrease the time required to plan a backcountry trek, improving the chances that you’ll actually take one.

I started out with one of these boxes, full of all the gear a guy could ever want.

But my duties as a product tester eventually moved me to two, and then three boxes, which eventually occupied a closet. Finally, I invested in a box caddy, which of course expanded to hold twelve boxes and now enjoyed its own space in the garage. It too, held all the gear a guy could ever want.

When the prospect of adding another twelve-box unit to the garage threatened Stephanie’s ability to park her car inside on those negative-thirty-degree Montana winter days, I was demoted – no, wait, promoted! – to my very own off-site storage unit. This, of course, greatly simplified matters. When it came time to prepare for a trip, enjoy some time alone, read a book, or just kick back and drink a glass of milk, all I had to do was drive a few blocks to my storage unit and enjoy any one of these activities surrounded by, what else? That’s right: all the gear a guy could ever want.

Until the storage unit got full.

Backpacking gear, day-hiking gear, winter backpacking gear, ski gear (randonee, tele, and alpine), pontoon boats, fly rods, sleds (and pulks – why, yes, of course there is a difference), and more.

So I moved into a warehouse. And then a bigger warehouse. At one point, my office occupied the top floor of the warehouse and I was again surrounded by… all the gear a guy could ever want.

And for 90% of my trips, I fit what I actually need into a thirty-liter backpack. And once I’m on the trail… it holds all the gear a guy could ever want.

The North Face Beeline Sleeping Bag Review

The specifications look great, but the devil is in the details.

The North Face Beeline Sleeping Bag Review - 1
The 30 F rated North Face Beeline sleeping bag is filled with 850+ fill power down, has a 15 denier shell, and weighs 22 ounces (size Regular).

Description

For summertime mountain backpacking or spring/fall backpacking in warmer climates, I prefer a mummy style ultralight down sleeping bag rated at around 30 F. Cold nights near or below the bag’s rating are not uncommon, and a mummy style bag has certain advantages: there are no drafts, I can easily wear clothes inside to extend the bag’s warmth, and I can “mummy up” to seal the warmth inside.

The North Face’s Flight Series gear “utilizes the latest technologies and most innovative materials to shave weight and enable the outdoor athlete to go fast and light, while still staying protected by the elements. It’s a collection featuring the latest in ultralight, packable, adaptive, and multi-purpose gear.” The Flight Series Beeline sleeping bag is their lightest 30 F sleeping bag.

The Beeline is filled with 850+ fill power down, has a 15 denier ripstop shell, and is rated at 30 F. The feature set is spartan, which is typical of an ultralight sleeping bag: down insulated hood with elastic one-handed drawcord, 1/3 length zipper, down-filled draft tube, vaulted footbox with zipped vent, and heat-transfer logos. The only thing unusual is the zippered vent on the footbox, which some hikers will find useful and others won’t.

From the description, the Beeline sounds like a top notch ultralight down mummy-style sleeping bag. However, the devil is in the details. Read on…

Performance

I measured the bag’s average double layer loft to be 4.75 inches (single layer 2.4 inches). This is significantly greater than many similar bags with the same temperature rating, which have a measured single layer loft of around 2 inches. From our table of estimated temperature ratings based on measured loft (read our Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings), this translates to about a 20 F rating. Please take the time to read the referenced article and note that sleeping bag warmth depends on a number of factors.

In spite of its higher loft, I felt chilly in the Beeline when the nighttime temperature dropped into the low 30s F, which is typical (for me) for a 30 F rated sleeping bag. To stay warm on a cold, frosty spring 25 F night – the lowest temperature I experienced in the Beeline – I had to wear a lightweight down jacket (North Face Thunder Jacket) and insulated pants (Backpacking Light Cocoon 60 Pant). On that same frosty night, I found that the Beeline’s shell readily repelled heavy condensation inside my single-wall shelter.

The North Face Beeline Sleeping Bag Review - 2
I tested the North Face Beeline on six mountain backpacking trips from May through August. On each trip, I was in either a single-wall solo tent, like the Gossamer Gear One (left), or the North Face Meso 22 two-person double-wall tent (right). Nighttime temperatures ranged from 25 to 40 F.

Thus far, the Beeline’s positives are its high lofting 850+ fill power down, high measured loft, and its lightweight highly water repellent shell. However, as I mentioned, the devil is in the details, and overall the Beeline is a “mixed bag,” as the following photos show.

The North Face Beeline Sleeping Bag Review - 3
The Beeline has a 1/3 length side zipper – which I consider a positive because it reduces weight – but the zipper can only be operated from the outside (left). Other sleeping bags have a revolving zipper pull that enables zipper operation from the outside or inside. The only extra feature on the Beeline is a zippered footbox opening (right) to allow ventilation on warm nights. This is a feature that some hikers will like and others can do without.

The North Face Beeline Sleeping Bag Review - 4
The Beeline’s hood is a disaster. The left photo shows the hood’s maximum closure, which is not enough face coverage on a really cold night. I also don’t like the bag’s exceptionally long elastic drawcord (shown), but I suppose it’s necessary so you can expand the hood opening to reach out and operate the zipper. There is a Velcro closure at the top of the zipper, but it has a nasty habit of sticking to and damaging the grosgrain zipper stiffener that is next to it. The grosgrain stiffener is lightweight, but it doesn’t do much to prevent zipper snagging.

The North Face Beeline Sleeping Bag Review - 5
Here’s a look at the Beeline’s hood fully open (left), laid next to the hood on the Marmot Hydrogen sleeping bag. The North Face calls it an “open hood,” meaning it lays flat and is not sculptured like the Marmot hood. I found the Marmot hood much more to my liking in both its operation and face coverage.

Comparisons and Assessment

The following table compares the North Face Beeline with some popular 30-32 F rated ultralight mummy style down sleeping bags. All of the bags have baffled construction. Data are for a size Regular bag.

Manufacturer Model Temperature Rating (F) Single Layer Loft (in) Weight of Down (oz) Fill Power Total Weight (oz) Cost US$
The North Face Beeline 30 2.4 10 850+ 22 $279
Western Mountaineering SummerLite 32 2.0 10 850+ 19 $315
Marmot Hydrogen 30 2.5 11 850+ 25 $319
Montbell Spiral Down Hugger #3 30 1.9 11 800 20 $229
Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 32 2.0 10 800 22 $290

As you can see from the table data, the Beeline compares favorably to similar sleeping bags in loft, weight, and cost. The Western Mountaineering SummerLite bag is a couple ounces lighter because of its very lightweight shell fabric, but it costs a bit more, too. The Montbell Spiral Down Hugger #3 appears to be the best value.

Overall, the North Face Beeline is a “mixed bag.” Accolades for its high loft down, lightweight water resistant shell fabric, and generous loft are offset by a zipper that operates only from the outside, an inadequate zipper stiffener, a Velcro patch that sticks to the zipper stiffener, and a terrible hood design. Unfortunately, the Beeline falls short of TNF’s claim of “utilizing the latest technologies.”

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer

The North Face

  Year/Model

2009 Beeline Sleeping Bag

  Style

Hooded mummy with 1/3 zipper

  What’s Included

Sleeping bag, stuff sack, storage bag

  Fill

850+ fill-power down, 10 oz (283g) size Regular, 11 oz (312g) size Long

  Construction

Trapezoidal baffle

  Measured Loft

4.75 in (12 cm) average double layer loft

  Claimed Temperature Rating

30 F (-1 C)

  Stuffed Size

11 in x 6 in (35.5 cm x 20 cm)

  Weight

Size Long tested, measured weight 1 lb 6.7 oz (644 g); manufacturer specification 1 lb 7 oz (652 g)

  Sizes

Regular fits to 6 ft (1.83 m), Long fits to 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m)

  Fabrics

Shell 15d HelioLite Ripstop with DWR, 20d lining

  Features

Down insulated open hood with elastic one-handed drawcord, 1/3 length zipper, down-filled draft tube, vaulted footbox with zipped vent, heat-transfer logos

  MSRP

Regular US$279, Long US$299

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft

We entered at Benchmark (on the South Fork Sun), exited at Silvertip (on the Spotted Bear), and had the time of our lives over a few relaxing days while making long miles in a packraft on the South Fork.

Introduction

Outside of Alaska, options for wilderness packrafting in remote areas of the United States are limited. The number of wilderness floats in excess of twenty miles are few and far between, and generally limited to America’s three largest wilderness complexes: the Bridger-Teton (Wyoming), the Frank Church (Idaho), and the Bob Marshall (Montana).

The Bob Marshall offers three large rivers in particular (the South Fork Flathead, the Middle Fork Flathead, and the Spotted Bear) that collectively provide more than one hundred wilderness miles of outstanding packraftable water. Through the years, I’ve found so many of the creeks and smaller rivers in “The Bob” provide excellent packrafting (at least in June and July) that I’m coming to realize it may be the premiere wilderness packrafting destination in the continental United States.

In addition to the South Fork, the Middle Fork, and the Spotted Bear, I’ve floated the White, Dearborn, North Fork Blackfoot, Young’s Creek, Danaher Creek, Gordon Creek, Big Salmon Creek, Shafer Creek, Strawberry Creek, the North and South Fork Sun (and the West Fork of the South Fork Sun), and portions of other creeks even smaller than these. Opportunities for wilderness packrafting treks in The Bob abound!

Finally, The Bob offers packrafting for all skill levels. From the whitewater gorges of the Middle Fork Flathead to a lazy day meandering down Danaher Creek, there is something for everyone.

Having explored The Bob with a packraft for several years, I find myself coming back to repeat a few stellar experiences: floating the rowdy Spotted Bear and Young’s Creek at the peak of runoff and floating the more tame South Fork Flathead as the water recedes. The latter, in particular, may be the finest Class I-II wilderness float in the Lower 48. It’s certainly the longest: combined with several miles of Danaher Creek or Young’s Creek (its two major headwaters), a float of the South Fork in late June through mid-July to Meadow Creek Gorge offers an incredible forty plus miles of water. This length is exciting to me, because it means that I can do a long traverse (one hundred miles or more) of The Bob with a meaningful amount of miles traveled in a packraft.

And so, this was the context for a trip in July 2009 with a few friends. We entered at Benchmark (on the South Fork Sun), exited at Silvertip (on the Spotted Bear), and had the time of our lives over a few relaxing days while making long miles in a packraft on the South Fork.

We also cheated a little. I wanted to give my pals an experience of the Wild West, so we rode horses from Benchmark to the Stadler-Hoadley divide, cutting off eighteen miles of walking. So, remarkably, by the time we reached mile sixty-five on our one-hundred-plus-mile route, we had walked a paltry eight miles – and none of it uphill! I reckon that “backpacking light” comes in all sorts of packages… pardner.

The Bob is home to big, long, and wild rivers, one of the nation’s finest cutthroat trout fisheries, and 160 miles of the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail. This year (2009) is one where my intimacy with this wilderness will grow dramatically. In addition to the trek in July featured in this photo essay, I enjoyed the rhythms of living on nearby Flathead Lake for a week while at the Melita Island Boy Scout camp with my son, and I’ll return for another week of wilderness raucousness while participating in Le Parcour de Wild in October.

I hope this essay conveys my passion for the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex and leaves you with a positive taste for wilderness travel.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 1
We spent our first night at the Benchmark Wilderness Guest Ranch, enjoying the hospitality of the Heckmans, which included meals served family style, stories from past generations, and these rustic accommodations. It was good to be out of cell phone range and off the grid.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 2
The Heckmans packed us and our gear for eighteen miles to the Stadler-Hoadley divide and the crest of the Continental Divide. Here, Bridger’s horse, like us, anticipates some trail time.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 3
Product testing for the manufacturer of the lightest ridin’ shoes on the market!

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 4
Danny and Matt begin their descent of the Continental Divide from the pass. Six miles later, we’d reach the Danaher Creek valley and scout a put-in for the packrafts.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 5
Our first camp on Danaher Creek after a long day on the horses and trail was welcomed with fire and food.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 6
The next morning, we meandered down Danaher Creek to put in below a big logjam.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 7
Matt’s first time in a packraft. He’s now twenty-five miles from the road, probably thinking, ‘Oh man, am I really going to do this?’

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 8
Danaher Creek is a sleepy, meandering float over cobbles, interrupted here and there by logjam portages, willows, and a curious bankside grizzly bear.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 9
I used a GoPro Wide Helmet camera to take packrafting (and fly fishing) video. You can find a link to the review here.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 10
Unsettled weather provided dramatic and beautiful natural light as we floated downstream.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 11
The trout fishing on the South Fork Flathead is spectacular. Every tributary, and the main river itself, is full of fat cutthroat. This was my first long backcountry trip where I relied exclusively on a Tenkara rod (read the review here). I can no longer imagine fishing any other way in the backcountry. My name is Ryan, and I’m a Tenkara addict. So much so, in fact, that Backpacking Light and Tenkara are partnering to develop a brand new version of the Tenkara rod designed specifically for backpackers.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 12
After twenty miles of floating, we pitched camp on a high bank overlooking the South Fork Flathead below its confluence with the White River. Soft evening light and the sound of the gentle riffles – it was an amazing experience in what might otherwise be a river corridor with roads and trophy homes, if not for the Wilderness Act of 1964.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 13
Breaded trout cooked over the Zia Titanium Grill. Everything tastes better when cooked over a camp fire.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 14
My shelter and sleep system on this trip consisted of a bivy sack and quilt and … that’s it, I suppose. The weather varied wildly throughout the trip (Montana proverb: If you don’t like the weather, give it five minutes.), so I chose my campsites carefully. Sleeping under this pine was my favorite, reminding me of trappers and cowboys that may have traveled through here 100 years ago. Maybe one of them spread their bedroll near here, too.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 15
The view upstream from my sleep site. The White River, another exceptional wilderness float, flows into the South Fork on the left.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 16
This was to be my final trip with my last remaining pair of Montrail Vitesse shoes. Long a staple of my backcountry excursions, I held on to them for months, waiting for an adventure that warranted their graceful retirement.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 17
A cold and stormy day down splashy rapids sent us scampering into the woods to warm up at one point. Our teeth were chattering and our hands and feet were numb. Being in a packraft when it’s 45 degrees and raining is nothing short of pure misery and truly makes you appreciate the gift of fire.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 18
The western slopes of the Continental Divide in northern Montana are lush well into the summer season, when much of the rest of the state starts to toast a golden brown. Mossy brooks and shades of green dominate the forest here.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 19
Being able to reliably count on fish for dinner means that you can reduce your food weight significantly. Whenever I expected good fishing, I cut my dinner rations to two ounces of spicy potato breadcrumbs for trout cakes. I and my belly are happy to report that my gamble paid off.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 20
Our camp at Mid Creek was dark, chilly, and wet when we arrived. This may have been the most welcome fire of the trip, and we built it big and inviting.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 21
Mid Creek crashes into the South Fork amongst some of the most beautifully colored cobbles I’ve ever seen. The riverbed here is painted pink, orange, and green.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 22
The staple of my summertime cook kit: the new BPL 900 pot. This one is a prototype that we hope to bring to market in 2010. It’s more durable and has a nicer finish and a pour spout – improving upon the old design without a weight penalty.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 23
While hiking, I stowed my Tenkara rod into the handle of my packraft paddle.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 24
Gazing downstream from the mouth of Mid Creek, I was wistful about running the Meadow Creek gorge on this trip. Instead, we’d travel up Mid Creek and cross the mountains into the Spotted Bear drainage.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 25
Forced into this camp by an encounter with a grizzly bear and her cub that blocked access to the upper canyon, we initially agonized over the possibility of a windstorm and blow-downs. Fortunately, the weather was fine, the night was still, and the eerie pillars reminded us of the power of nature. I woke the next morning satisfied to have spent the night here, and the experience was one of my favorites of the summer.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 26
Collecting water from upper Mid Creek, wondering if the mama bear was spying on me from the thick willows guarding the riverbank.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 27
I don’t dream a lot, but long after this trip was over, I still find myself waking up in a cold sweat thinking about this day. We were ants trekking through matchsticks at the rate of three hours per mile (hpm). Frustrating and painful, it highlighted those features a map leaves out.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 28
Once we broke out of the deadfall, the slopes steepened, but our spirits rose. Our burn camp from the night before was well down the valley to the right.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 29
Upon reaching the ridge, we experienced our first sweeping vistas of the trip. The hypothermic chills, the saddle sores, the blowdowns – all was forgotten as we surveyed the lay of the land from what felt like the spine of the world.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 30
The euphoric high did not last long, however. We were faced with a difficult descent down a gully of razor sharp limestone scree and talus that tore at my shoes, my pants, my hands, and my pride.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 31
After a harrowing descent of the shown ridge (our route is a nondescript steep line just to the right of the center high point), we entered the worst bushwhacking of the trip, not making it into the Silvertip Creek valley to camp until late in the evening. Climbing the next ridge (from where this photo was taken), we looked back and felt proud to have battled the climb, traverse, and descent with grace and humility and hardly any cursing.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 32
Crossing the next pass after yet another morning of steep bushwhacking, we were pretty excited to be among high, jagged peaks. It was so far removed from the low forest and water of the South Fork that the boats and paddles tucked into our packs seemed the height of incongruity.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 33
Entering the Amphitheater – one of my absolute favorite places on the planet.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 34
Once inside the Amphitheater, we shifted gears from trekking to ambling (moseying, if you will). We must have spent two hours walking one mile. The terrain wasn’t difficult, by any means – we were walking on soft tundra meadows the entire time – but the magical remoteness of this place was refreshing, and we immersed ourselves in it. At this point, Danny simply closed his eyes and just listened. Yes, Wilderness has a sweet sound to it.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 35
Our camp in the Amphitheater was nestled among small stands of subalpine fir. We bedded on buttercup-laced tundra.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 36
Storms came in that night, and the absence of big trees to shelter my head meant that I had to set up my packraft for a little extra protection. Having a fully inflated packraft far from any floatable river was a bit surreal, though my dry head was glad for the very slight shelter I managed to eke out.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 37
Exiting the Amphitheater, we were once again reminded of the power of nature’s wrath when we had to cross huge swaths of fresh spruce and fir leveled by an avalanche only a few months prior.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 38
Back on a high ridge, we have been off-trail for three days at this point. Matt surveys the lower elevations – thick forests that we will be forced to reenter that afternoon as we plan our exit from the wilderness.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 39
Sweeping panoramas of the mountains of the northern Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex, accentuated by storm clouds and invisible-though-keenly-felt high winds, reminded us that we’re pretty small people in an awfully big place.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 40
As we descend, we find ourselves bushwhacking yet again, winding our way down steep, chossy, limestone cliff bands. Matt found himself in a precarious spot here, noting that the security of a foothold is more illusion than reality, and that I was busier taking photos of him trying to descend than actually helping him do so.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 41
After four days of bushwhacking, we are relieved to be back on trail, if only to avoid the prospect of limestone cuts and sidehilling in soft shoes. As we descended a small creek canyon towards the Spotted Bear River, we discovered this fascinating crime scene, which would occupy our detective skills and storytelling prowess for the next several miles.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 42
Upon reaching the Spotted Bear River, I finally came to the realization that our trip would be over soon. Psychologically, this is the hardest part of any expedition for me – those last few days of easy, downhill travel are often anticlimactic, and a reminder that expeditioning is only a temporary novelty in my life. Through the years, however, I’ve learned to cope with reentry better. As my relationships with my wife and son have deepened, my eagerness to come home to them overpowers the depression that comes with a wilderness exit.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 43
On the last night of a trip, is it too much to ask for a little sunshine? Still, I slept like a baby, and I remember falling asleep looking up at the packraft gently bobbing in the breeze, like the swinging watch of a hypnotist.

Photo Essay: A Traverse of the Bob Marshall Wilderness by Foot and Packraft - 44
On our way out, we passed this fellow coming in with his trusty donkey. They’d clearly both traveled their fair share of miles here. We asked him about his itinerary, and he replied with no hesitation, ‘Oh, I reckoned I’d just fill up these boxes and wander around til they were empty…’ At which point I finished his sentence, ‘…and then head on home, eh?’ He squinted at me kind of funny and corrected me, saying ‘No, son, that’s when I’ll start fishin’.’ I could tell he was a kindred spirit.

The North Face Thunder Jacket Review

Not the lightest down jacket to be found, but it’s an excellent balance of warmth and durability, and versatile the year around as an outer layer or midlayer.

Description

An ultralight insulated jacket with high loft down, very light shell fabric, minimal features, and weight under 14 ounces is an essential part of an ultralight or lightweight backpacking kit for summertime backpacking in the mountains or shoulder season camping most anywhere. Down insulation provides the most warmth for its weight, so it’s the insulation preferred by backpackers and mountaineers in all but very wet conditions.

The hoodless North Face Thunder Jacket is part of their Summit Series intended for alpine use. According to The North Face, Summit Series products "are built to endure extremes of weather and terrain while delivering the highest level of performance from base camp to summit." In that context, the Thunder Jacket is designed as a midlayer; for alpine use the shell is not durable enough as an outer layer.

The North Face Thunder Jacket Review - 1
The hoodless North Face Thunder Jacket is insulated with 800 fill power down, has a Pertex Quantum shell and lining, and weighs an average of 14.2 ounces.

Semantics aside, the Thunder Jacket is currently TNF’s lightest down jacket, and is well suited for three-season lightweight backpacking where temperatures are expected to plunge down to freezing. From the perspective of a lightweight backpacker, this jacket can definitely be used as an outer layer. Its 20-denier 0.9 ounce/square yard Pertex Quantum shell is, in fact, one of our favorite fabrics, noted for its tight weave, durability, and light weight.

The Thunder Jacket has sewn-through construction. Overall quality is excellent. Compared to other lightweight down jackets I have tested, the sizing of the Thunder Jacket is roomy, with lots of room inside (including the sleeves) to layer over another jacket. The length of the back is 28 inches (size Large), which is 1 to 2 inches longer than many other jackets in this class, and covers the bum very well, as shown in the photos.

The Thunder Jacket goes a little beyond the spartan feature set of lighter down jackets. The hand pockets are zippered and it has an adjustable drawcord in the hem. The YKK Vislon zippers are a step heavier than the #3 zippers used on other jackets. And the elastic binding on the cuffs is a bit heavier, and the inside seams are bound. Overall, the Thunder Jacket is more ruggedly built compared to other ultralight down jackets like the Western Mountaineering Flash Jacket or the Montbell Alpine Light Down Jacket. The former North Face Flash Jacket (Flight Series), insulated with 900 fill down, is a closer comparison to the other jackets mentioned, but unfortunately it has been discontinued.

Although the Thunder Jacket weighs 14.4 ounces (size Large tested), and is a bit more durably built as described above, it is also a bit warmer than other ultralight down jackets. Although the amount of down in the jacket is not specified (only a few manufacturers provide that information, bless them), the Thunder Jacket with 2 inches of double layer loft is at the warmer end of this class of ultralight three-season down insulated jackets.

Performance

I am very impressed with the Thunder Jacket’s Pertex Quantum shell fabric. It’s very light weight, soft as silk, and very strong. The DWR treatment is superb. On several occasions I walked in rain or snow to test the jacket’s water repellency and found it to be very wind and water resistant, but eventually wetting through at the seams. I verified that the fabric is also quite durable; it survived several unintentional brushes with tree branches while camping or bushwhacking.

The North Face Thunder Jacket Review - 2
Unlike other ultralight down jackets, the Thunder Jacket has zippered pockets. The left pocket doubles as a stuff sack. There is a drawcord pull inside each pocket allowing you to tighten the hem drawcord with your hands inside the pockets.

The Thunder Jacket is a good choice for summer backpacking in the mountains and shoulder season backpacking, where nighttime temperatures can get down to freezing. A down-insulated garment gives the most warmth for its weight, and the Thunder Jacket provides plenty of warmth for chilly mornings, as well as extending the warmth of a 30 F sleeping bag in below freezing temperatures. The Thunder Jacket saved my bacon several times on spring trips when nighttime temperatures dropped down into the 20s F.

While many hikers use a lightweight down jacket for only three-season use, I find it to be much more versatile than that. I am a devout believer in the layering system, so rather than carry a heavy down parka for winter backcountry skiing or camping I prefer to take two lightweight insulating jackets so I can wear them separately or together. An ultralight down jacket worn as a midlayer under a shell is sufficient for backcountry skiing on a cold day, or to don during breaks to prevent a chill. On winter camping trips I have stayed toasty warm at -16 F wearing a heavy wool baselayer, a lightweight synthetic insulated jacket, and an ultralight down jacket over that. As needed, I wear a shell jacket over one or more of the underlayers.

The North Face Thunder Jacket Review - 3
Although the Jacket’s Pertex Quantum shell is very strong and durable, it is not completely downproof. I observed occasional feathers coming through the fabric itself as well as through needle holes in the seams.

Comparisons

The real question is – how much warmth do you need? My personal preference is an ultralight, spartan down jacket in the 9-10 ounce range, like the Western Mountaineering Flash Jacket (hooded, 9.5 ounces size Large) or the PHD Designs Ultra Down Pullover (hoodless, 9.1 ounces size Large).

Many lightweight backpackers may prefer the extra durability and warmth of the North Face Thunder Jacket, in which case it is a good choice. The closest comparison to the Thunder Jacket, and perhaps a better choice, is the Western Mountaineering Flight Jacket (850+ down, 11.5 ounces size Large, $250). It costs a bit more, but it’s loftier and weighs nearly 3 ounces less. However, it’s less durable.

Overall, I found the North Face Thunder Jacket to be very warm, durable, wind/water resistant, and versatile. It’s not the lightest down jacket to be found, but it’s an excellent balance of warmth and durability, and will be useful the year around as an outer layer or midlayer.

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer:

The North Face (http://www.thenorthface.com/)

  Year/Model:

2009 Thunder Jacket

  Style:

Full zip hoodless jacket

  Fabrics:

Outer shell and lining are 20 denier 0.9 oz/yd2 (30 g/m2) Pertex Quantum with DWR finish

  Insulation:

800 fill power down

  Loft:

Measured two layer loft is 2 in (3 cm)

  Features:

Sewn through construction with 3-inch horizontal quilting, down filled collar, full front zipper with fleece chin guard and storm flap under zipper, two zippered hand pockets, elastic cuffs, drawcord hem with two in-pocket adjustors

  Weight:

Measured Weight Men’s Large: 14.4 oz (408 g)
Manufacturer Specified Average Weight: 14.2 oz (402 g)

  MSRP:

$229 US

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review

Totally synthetic, luggy soles, and a breathable draining upper, plus a range of width fittings including really wide (4E). (Updated 9/22/09)

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 1
Courtesy New Balance.

 

Editor’s Note: This review was updated September 23, 2009. See added text below.

Overview

The very low-cut Australian-made Dunlop KT-26 joggers, which I often wear when out walking, are very light (327 grams or 11.5 ounces each shoe) and have superb friction on rock. But, they have a very thin flexible sole as well, and in some country it is useful to have a shoe with a firmer sole and bigger lugs. For instance, slithering around on muddy farm trails in France (the cows had used the track as well…) proved a bit difficult as the light tread on the KTs just could not grip. The same problem happened on snow-covered granite scree.

Where I run into a problem with so many brands of joggers is the width. I have wide feet – EEEE width in fact, and many brands only go up as far as EE. Actually, many well-known brands don’t even tell you what the width is, which really irritates me. And if anything is going to give you sore feet at the end of the day, it is shoes which are just that bit too narrow for your feet. Yes, there are other factors as well, like the width of the heel and the height of the arch, but the width at the front of the shoe is what concerns me most of all.

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 2
Camp and relax up in the mountains.

Fortunately, the New Balance company not only makes shoes in several different lasts, but also makes them in several different widths, and the company states the available widths on their web site. This is quite unlike so many other well-known shoe companies, which give you no idea at all what the widths are. In addition, their SL1 last in an EEEE width suits me fine. So, I rather like the New Balance shoes. But please note, the last and width which suits me may not suit you; select your shoe fittings carefully.

I recently reviewed the New Balance MT1110GT joggers and found that they may run just slightly larger than some other brands. For the MT1110GT shoes I tested in the winter, I had a US size 11 EEEE, and found that they were big enough for two pairs of socks. This was good in the snow. With another well-known brand, the US 11 was only big enough for one pair of socks, but the width fitting is only an EE on those. For these MT875OR shoes, I dropped back half a size, to US 10.5 EEEE, and wore them with one pair of Darn Tough Vermont ‘Hike Trek Boot Sock Full Cushion’ over a thin Gobi Wigwam nylon liner sock. This is a very reliable and quite popular combination among experienced walkers.

Product Details

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 3
The lugged sole, courtesy New Balance.

The web site specifications for these shoes contains the usual array of fancy marketing buzz word names for the various bits. I’ll skip them. The rubber sole has fairly good lugs: you can see the pattern in the picture here. The lugs are about 5 millimeters (0.2 inches) deep over most of the shoe, dropping to about 4 millimeters (0.16 inches) at the front. The rubber is the usual grippy stuff.

The one place where some may find the New Balance shoes a bit light is in the amount of cushioning in the soles. New Balance describes them as ‘A highly responsive lightweight trainer built for the off-road runner,’ and that is what they are. They are not a big heavy trekking boot. The description goes on to mention ‘exceptional cushioning and ground contact,’ which is a contradiction in terms in my opinion. Lots of cushioning usually means not very good ‘ground contact.’

The inner sole is an ‘Ortholite’ – it looks like a standard inner sole. The laces are lumpy, like on the MT1110GTs: New Balance calls them ‘Sure Lace.’ The body is synthetic and mesh: no leather to get wet and heavy, then crack. The top edge comes up at the back of the heel as usual – exactly why I am never sure, because my favourite KTs don’t and suffer no problems from that. But, at least the back edge is well padded and causes no problems.

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 4
The lining layer.

Where life gets interesting is inside the shoe. The outer surface of the upper is two strong mesh layers, and inside that is a padded layer. The padded layer is different from most other joggers, however. While it is sewn at the bottom to the bed of the shoe, it is free-floating around the top edge. Pull it away, as illustrated here, and you can see in between the mesh layer and the padding. While not visible in this photo, you can actually peer out through the mesh layer if you try. The padding is not going to crumple up either, as it supports one side of the orange tapes which hold the laces. It extends all the way around the front of the shoe as well.

Exactly what benefits this construction are meant to bring are not clear at this stage. But the construction does mean you should hesitate before wearing these shoes while river walking. The potential for getting a heap of sand and gravel in between the mesh and the padding is high. On the other hand, it would be very easy to wash the sand back out again. That said, the side of the tongue does press against the top of the orange padding layer, so there is some resistance to the inflow of debris.

The plastic finish on the outside of the mesh is rather shiny, and this makes the shoes look just a little ‘tacky.’ It would have been better if a matt finish had been used. However, that stuff is mainly just trim and not very structural.

Field Testing

The shoes were worn around home a bit, just to check, and were then taken on a twelve-day walk through the Australian Alpine region. This was a bit of a high speed hoon trip on tracks, rather than a bushwhacking trip through scrub and rivers. We covered 290 kilometers (180 miles) with 4,600 meters (15,000 feet) of major ascents and descents – not counting all the little ups and down. The longest day, when things went just a little wrong late in the day, saw us doing nearly 40 kilometers (24 miles) with full packs. There was no water where we had hoped to camp, so a 6 kilometers (3.7 miles) and 600 meters (2,000 feet) descent had to be made as the sun went down. The next morning started with a savage 400 meters (1,300 feet) ascent straight from the tent site. There were a few creaks.

The point of mentioning these details is that you don’t want big heavy boots or uncomfortable shoes on your feet when you are dragging down the last half hour to camp. These MT875OR joggers were feeling just fine when we hit the river at the bottom of that long descent, and I was able to delicately hop across rocks to cross the river dry-foot. In fact, most evenings in camp, I was still wearing the shoes while cooking dinner: I felt no urgent need to get them off my feet.

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 5
Dirty toes at the end of a long day.

In places, we were walking on some very dry dusty dirt on the tracks – no rain for a long time. Inspecting my toes at the end of the day showed that the mesh construction had let some dust through. And if there is that much dust on my toes, through a pair of Darn Tough Vermont Boot Socks and a pair of Gobi Wigwam liner socks, then the socks themselves are going to pick up a bit of dust as well. This happens with the mesh uppers on such joggers. Our standard solution is to carry two sets of socks and to wash one set every two days. However, while some dust did get in, I did not find any build-up of dust or sand between the mesh and the orange padding shown above.

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 6
The soles, before and after.

Many of us have read some horror stories about very light joggers collapsing after just a few days wear. The first-generation GoLites quickly became infamous for this. The picture here shows the soles of the MT875OR joggers ‘before’ and after the trip. (The before photo is actually a New Balance marketing photo.) There is a little bit of wear visible in my photo, but not very much. And the uppers came out looking just as good. The insides of the shoes and the footbed also look much the same as when new.

I dislike shoes with very thick cushioning or big air-bags in the soles: I find I lose contact with the ground and this makes it easy to sprain an ankle. On the other hand, light shoe weight usually means a limited amount of cushioning between your foot and the ground. And so it is with these shoes. This does not mean that every stick and stone dug into my soles; far from it, but I did find that I could ‘feel’ the surface I was walking on. I could tell whether I was on a smooth bit of grass or a potentially unstable bit of scree, and this let me control how I drove my feet. I found I could dance across small rocks while crossing a river with some delicacy.

All in all, my legs may have been very tired by the end of the trip, but my feet were relatively happy.


September 23, 2009 Update

Six Weeks in Switzerland

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 7
Trails in Switzerland.

Starting in the middle of July 2009, my wife and I spent six weeks walking in Switzerland, doing the Chamonix to Zermatt trail and the Via Alpina trail right across Switzerland. Both routes seem to go over an Alpine pass a day, with nights spent in a valley at 500 – 1000 metres (1,600 – 3,200 feet) and the passes typically being from 2,500 to 2,900 metres (8,000 – 9,500 feet). In some cases there were several close passes in one day, but no matter. That meant we were typically climbing and decending over 1,500 metres (4,800 feet) each day, with packs.

Some of the walking was on a smooth track, but rough, stony limestone country and hard snow, shale, and serious boulder scree figured very prominently (left to right in photo above). There was practically no bushwhacking at all, though there was still plenty of abrasion on the soles and the sides of the shoes, especially from the limestone country and the scree.

New Balance MT875OR Joggers Review - 8
Wear on the shoes.

Of course the shoes suffered some wear – any shoes would! This was compounded by the fact that these NB875OR joggers are definitely lightweight shoes. The depth of the lugs on the soles was significantly reduced under the ball of the foot. I also noticed that the sole was a shade thin for some of the very rough surfaces encountered, and the lug pattern was a bit minimal under the ball of the foot (especially towards the end). Both were adequate, but a bit more thickness and a bit more tread pattern might have been nice. The result would have been a heavier shoe though, and the light weight of these shoes was really appreciated every afternoon.

The mesh at the sides of the shoes suffered towards the end. You can see the rips and wear holes in the photo. Frankly, I think the mesh was a shade light and weak: a stronger version would heve been good. Of course, brushing the sides of the shoes against sharp limestone for days on end can be expected to have some consequences, so maybe the mesh didn’t do too bad a job under the circumstances.

When I first looked at these shoes, I thought that the trim over the top near the front would probably die fairly quickly. It looked like cheap vinyl, and I expected it to crack and tear off. I’m talking here about the thin ribbon sections pointed to by the red arrows, not the toe-cap around the front. Well, the leading corners of the trim did start to peel off fairly soon from abrasion against all that rock, but that was a failure of the sewing, not of the trim material. I solved that by sewing the trim bits back on with some saddlery thread from my repair kit – very strong stuff. You can see my stitching in the photos. The fault here was in the design of the trim: you should never create a leading corner like that. Fortunately, once resewn there were no further problems there.

In fact, the trim material survived very well. Sewing through it and the rest of the shoe with a #100 sewing machine needle required a very high amount of force too: it is not cheap vinyl by any means! I inquired of New Balance about the material, and they replied that it was "a polyurethane based synthetic leather with a non-woven backer." Well, to me it seemed rather like the Hypalon they use on snow shoe decks. A bit glossy, but very, very strong stuff.

These comments have been forwarded to the design group at New Balance. I note that a later model of trail shoe from New Balance (which will be reviewed here in due course) has stronger mesh at the sides and no forward-pointing corners on the trim, while still using the same trim material. It would seem the design guys do take some notice.

In summary, despite being very light, these shoes proved to be strong enough to handle both our Australian and Swiss Alpine trips: almost eight weeks of continuous hard use. That seems a good enough life to me.


Specifications

  Manufacturer:

New Balance

  Year/Model:

MT875OR / Late 2008

  Manufacture:

China

  Materials:

Synthetic fabrics and rubbers, no leather

  Last:

SL-1 (see the New Balance site for further definition on their lasts)

  Size:

7 through 15, with half sizes 7 through 12; in D, EE, and EEEE fittings

  Weight:

Quoted 340 g (11.9 oz) each
Measured 385 g (13.6 oz) for US size 10.5 EEEE (BPL measurement)

  Colour:

Grey: what you see is what you get

  MSRP:

$100 US

What’s Good

  • A low weight
  • A wide range of width fittings (including 4E)
  • A flat inner sole and footbed (no arch support)
  • Good friction and good lugs on the sole
  • No leather or suede anywhere
  • No air cushioning to destroy ‘ground-feel’

What’s Not So Good

  • Dust gets into your socks and onto your feet
  • Sand could get inside the shell when river walking (but it will wash out easily)