Articles (2020)

GoLite Ultra Quilt Review

High-quality, 800-fill down quilt with Pertex Endurance “Arid Zone” patches at head and foot is a solid value.

GoLite Ultra Quilt REVIEW - 1
GoLite Ultra Quilt (Image courtesy GoLite)

Introduction

We tested two of the prototype version of the Ultra Quilt this past fall and early winter, with one going to experienced quilt user Ryan Jordan, and one to me, Steve Nelson, a first time quilt user. We used the quilts in Montana, Wyoming, California, and New York, in a range of configurations and shelters.

The Ultra provides generally-expected features like webbing straps for lashing it to a pad (the straps are removable) and a cinch cord at the neck, but adds the fresh touch of the WPB (waterproof-breathable) panels at head and foot.

We found that the quilt performed well across the board – the temperature rating may be a bit optimistic, but the range of the bag was easily extended using insulating layers of clothing, and the WPB panels did indeed provide an extra margin of protection against wetting out the down (though not in all conditions…more on that below).

What’s Good

  • Quality construction and materials
  • Waterproof-breathable fabric patches at each end (especially the one at the head) help mitigate moisture problems
  • Well-placed, removable webbing for strapping over a pad
  • Good price for this level of quality

What’s Not So Good

  • WPB fabric can wet out in more extreme conditions
  • Samples had uneven down filling and insufficient loft in some baffles, though a full production example did not seem to have this problem

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 GoLite

  Year/Model

 2008 Ultra Quilt

  Dimensions

 Advertised: 72” x 54” for Regular size (also available in Small and Large sizes)
Measured: 72” at longest point, 67” from shortest point at chin. 38” circumference at neck; 54” width at widest point (approx 21” from top of quilt). 37” circumference at foot, 42” circumference at start of footbox (16.25” up from foot)

  Shell

 Nylon lining and main outer shell; Pertex Endurance 6” deep at the top (head) end and 12” deep at the foot end of outer shell

  Filling

 800-fill down

  Other Features

 Two grosgrain webbing straps with thin buckles; cinch cord and toggle at neck

  Accessories

 Cotton storage bag; nylon stuff sack

  Rating

 20° F (-7° C)

  MSRP

 $225

  Weights

 Advertised: 19 oz for regular size; 0.55 oz. for stuff sack
Measured: 19.05 oz for my sample quilt

Performance

The Ultra is constructed of turquoise nylon over most of its outer shell, with Pertex Endurance patches at the head and foot, meant to reduce moisture penetration from one’s breath and from condensation encountered by touching the wall of a shelter. The quilt is lined with soft black nylon and filled with 800-fill power down in 6” baffled tubes with 2-3” of single-layer loft. Quality and feel are excellent throughout. Both fabrics feel soft to the touch, with a slightly crinkly feel to the Pertex compared to the nylon shell and liner.

The bag is rated by GoLite at 20° F (-7° C). Both Ryan and I found this a bit generous, though some of the baffles on both of our pre-production quilts were underfilled, which doubtless affected our experience. However, I was able to examine a production quilt toward the end of our testing and found that it was impeccably constructed with even filling throughout. It exhibited none of the unevenness of our samples, so I’m betting temperature discrepancy is a non-issue for the full production run.

The Ultra has two grosgrain straps and thin buckles underneath that allow one to strap the quilt over a pad as shown here:

GoLite Ultra Quilt REVIEW - 2
Ultra quilt over a sleeping pad, showing the two grosgrain straps (image courtesy GoLite)

The straps are removable, so you can shave an ounce or so off the weight of the quilt if you don’t need them. The Ultra also has a snap and cord and toggle at the neck (same story on saving a few more grams if you remove the cord and toggle).

GoLite Ultra Quilt REVIEW - 3
One of the loops securing the removable straps. Note also the black lining and blue shell fabric.

The Ultra comes with a moderately sized cotton storage sack and a lightweight nylon stuff sack. The latter brings the quilt down to a compact 5”x8” for packing for those who don’t mind heavy compression.

GoLite Ultra Quilt REVIEW - 4
The Ultra packed in its compact stuff sack.

Field Testing

We tested the GoLite Ultra Quilt in fall and winter, with temperatures ranging from 50° F down to just over 0° F, at locations in Montana, Wyoming, California, and New York. Ambient conditions ranged from clear and dry to rainy and humid, at settings on rock, soil, and snow. The quilt was used in tents, a tarptent, and an ultralight bivy sack, on top of foam and inflatable insulated pads.

Overall performance of the quilt was good – it is sized so that it fully wrapped around me with room to spare, and loft is sufficient to provide performance near, if not entirely down to, the claimed rating of 20° F. Both Ryan and I were able to push the quilt past that rating by wearing other insulative clothing and found that the quilt has sufficient girth to support wearing clothing with a couple of inches of loft for folks of our size (I’m 5’9” with a 40” chest; Ryan is 5’8” with a 38" chest).

As a novice quilt user, I experimented with several different setups. First, I tried the quilt using the “tuck” technique – that is, I simply draped it over myself and tucked the sides back under me any time I shifted position. I’m a side and partial stomach sleeper, and I found this technique worked just fine in the moderate conditions I experienced in the Adirondacks (no colder than the high 30s F) and the California coast (even warmer). In slightly colder weather, I used the quilt inside a bivy sack with the same technique and found the technique even more reliable for blocking drafts, though I experienced a bit more moisture collapse of the down than I had when the bag was in the open. On most occasions I also tried the quilt with a silk liner, which added some additional comfort and some very slight draft protection.

GoLite Ultra Quilt REVIEW - 5
Adjusting the Ultra Quilt in a bivy sack near the Northern California Coast

I also tried strapping the bag over a 3/4 length ultralight Thermarest pad and a tapered InSul-Mat. This was a new experience for me, and it felt a bit more constricting than the other method, but required less fiddling once I got settled. The buckles are very light and flat and are fairly easy to use (I’d find them a bit fumbly when wearing mittens or gloves). The quilt has a neck snap, plus cinch cord with toggle; in practice I rarely used them, and only when the bag was strapped over a pad.

In all of the above cases, the Ultra was a fine performer – the coverage worked for me, even when I was sleeping on my side (Aside: I decided I prefer leaving it loose and tucking in the sides, except in really cold weather.).

Finally, I tested the quilt as an overbag for a Valandre La Fayette sleeping bag inside a bivy sack; this was less successful, because the footbox really isn’t big enough for a sleeping bag of the La Fayetter’s loft to fit within the Ultra. Still, I believe it might be a good way to extend the range of a lighter bag, especially if using a vapor barrier liner instead of additional layers of clothing.

The Pertex Endurance panels at the head and foot were generally effective, but not infallible. In the challenging conditions of the Adirondacks, I found that the fabric wetted out at the foot when the quilt was used in a lightweight, low airflow tarptent in high condensation conditions with temperatures in the low 40s. Moisture from contact with the walls of the tarptent, as well as spray knocked off the inside of the shelter by heavy rain, coated the foot sufficiently to wet out the fabric and cause some loss of loft.

GoLite Ultra Quilt REVIEW - 6
Foot of Ultra Quilt in the Adirondacks, showing wetted-out Pertex and damp down

Ryan and I both thought the Pertex at the head of the quilt did an excellent job at preventing breathing-induced condensation and loft degradation, particularly in the very cold (<15° F) conditions Ryan experienced on one trip. However, he also found that the Pertex was less successful in the foot area of the quilt and experienced a footbox collapse over the course of a multiday trip. Ryan noted that he’s experienced this collapse with every one of his down bags, so this is not unique to the Ultra…but the Pertex panel did not eliminate the footbox collapse, and a case could be made that the Pertex contributed a bit to the collapse by reducing permeability of the footbox from the inside.

I did a “faucet test” at home and noted that, after sixty seconds of exposure to running water, the Pertex fabric and down underneath remained completely dry, with water beading up and running off the fabric the entire time. The nylon shell and inner lining both started to show slight darkening after forty-five seconds, and both shell and lining, and the down underneath, were only just damp to the touch after sixty seconds of exposure.

All things considered, Ryan and I agreed that the Pertex patches are a positive feature, particularly for reducing breath-related wetting and frosting in colder temperatures, and will offer a small additional level of protection for the ends of the quilt when used under a tarp without a bivy sack.

The underfilled pre-production baffles in other areas of the quilt collapsed more than the properly-filled ones, as one might expect. In particular, the baffle over my chest ended up with inside and outside fabric touching and little, if any, down in between (and not enough down to shift around to make up for this). Again, this definitely was not the case in the production model I examined and should not present similar problems.

The Ultra comes with a cotton storage bag, which I use for keeping the bag uncompressed at home, and a stuff sack, which I found convenient and compact. I generally don’t compress my down bags so tightly, preferring to put them loose in a plastic liner in the bottom of my pack, but, on one occasion, the compact size of the Ultra in its stuff sack was a necessity to fit it in along with all the rest of my gear in a 48” pulk for a multi-day snow camping trip.

Assessment

The GoLite Ultra is a good value for its quality and performance. The Pertex patches are valuable in some conditions, and the quilt provides standard features for flexibility in use at a nice light weight. While some might find the temperature rating a bit aggressive, it can certainly be comfortable well below freezing, and we recommend it.

What’s Unique

The Ultra incorporates Pertex Endurance “Arid Zones” to provide additional moisture resistance around the sleeper’s face, as well as where the footbox might meet the wall of a shelter.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Consider adding another few ounces of down to bolster loft, or consider reducing the bag’s rating to 30° to reflect its somewhat sparse filling (though, to be fair, this sparseness may have been due to the fact that our models were pre-production).

Green Waste? Trends in Retail Packaging for Outdoor Industry Products

Attractive and durable packaging is one thing; green packaging is quite another. The best companies have both. Learn about green packaging and see the best and worst of what the Outdoor Industry has to offer.

Click an image to view the slideshow

RETAIL PRODUCT PACKAGING IN THE OUTDOOR INDUSTRY – THE BEST AND…NOT SO BEST.  Attractive and durable packaging is one thing; green packaging is quite another. The best companies have both. View the gallery by clicking on a thumbnail to see our votes for the best and worst of what the Outdoor Industry has to offer.

 

retail-packaging-chilton - 1
THUMBS DOWN! ICEBREAKER MERINO. While the product may be green, the box certainly isn’t. Each garment is housed in a shallow box that slips into another and is covered from end to end with ink. As one Icebreaker sales rep at the 2008 Outdoor Retailer Winter Market put it, “An expensive product demands an expensive package.” Really? Although the attractive packaging may have won design awards from others, it certainly gets a low mark from us.

retail-packaging-chilton - 2
THUMBS DOWN! PLATYPUS WATER SYSTEMS. The amount of packaging that goes into delivering this product outweighs the product itself. While these hard plastic, materials-intensive packaging systems (called “blister packs”) have lightened up in recent years, using less plastic in the construction, the use is still as prevalent as ever. Though this type of packaging is recyclable, plastic recycling is limited in many communities, making its likely destination the closest trash can.

retail-packaging-chilton - 3
THUMBS DOWN! DALE NORWAY THERMALS. Cardboard, heavy inks, and Velcro go into this single use, single garment, non-reusable container. The sturdy construction of the packaging – a product in and of itself – makes us wonder whatever happened to … hangers?

retail-packaging-chilton - 4
THUMBS DOWN! SIGG FLASKS. The hard, semi-opaque plastic boxes that hold the flask also have spacers and plastic wrapping on the inside. The beauty of the bottle is thus completely hidden from the consumer. The box collapses easily and is somewhat awkward, making reusing it before recycling it difficult and unlikely. The company plans to rework the packaging of the flask, and we look forward to seeing what they come up with. (Sigg redeems itself by landing a product on our Thumbs Up! list as well.)

retail-packaging-chilton - 5
THUMBS DOWN! CAMELBAK WATER SYSTEMS. Hard plastic and cardboard? Seems like a lot of packaging for a pretty minimalist product. We’ll concede that soft water bottles need some type of protection to prevent damage in transit, but isn’t there a better way?

retail-packaging-chilton - 6
THUMBS DOWN! BRUNTON BLISTER PACK. Again with the hard plastic. According to some retailers, blister packs are sometimes the only way to package and sell a product in the store without damaging it…which we find disingenuous. These products are made to be taken into the wilderness and heartily used, so if normal in-store handling results in product damage, perhaps its wilderness utility should be questioned. The reality is this: Commodity accessories, like the ones sold by Brunton and dozens of others, are distinguished primarily by a company’s ability to market them, especially as we see an increasing number of brands using the same factories for manufacturing commodity products that are becoming increasingly homogenized.  Marketing is one of the few ways they have to differentiate themselves.

retail-packaging-chilton - 7
THUMBS DOWN! CAMELBAK WATER BOTTLES. We couldn’t resist the temptation to include one company twice on our Thumbs Down! list. Shrink wrapped Lexan bottles? Say it isn’t so! In addition to the shrink wrap, you also get two stickers and a nifty little metal chain connected to the multi-page, glossy, catalog-style tag. Other Lexan bottle companies don’t shrink wrap their products. Nalgene, the most recognizable manufacturer of Lexan bottles, utilizes a single sticker and hangs the bottle in the store by the funky little lid-leash.

retail-packaging-chilton - 8
THUMBS DOWN! OUTDOOR RESEARCH – AND JUST ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE – CATALOG TAGS. Paper, plastic and ink intensive, these tags are (sadly) the norm in the outdoor industry when purchasing higher-end technical gear and apparel. This sample from Outdoor Research is representative of many brands. The multi-page tag tells you everything and more about the product, which some consumers like. However, the same information can be found on their websites, in their (big) printed catalogs, and in the millions of printed catalogs from their different retailers. In addition, not all catalog tags are made with recycled paper, soy inks or can even be recycled at all. If you have to use them to sell your product, an eye towards something smaller, or at least recyclable, will score a few more points with us.

retail-packaging-chilton - 9
THUMBS UP! PATAGONIA THERMALS. Top of the list is the most innovative packaging we’ve seen so far: Two rubber bands and a piece of 100% post-consumer, 100% recyclable tag delivers this product to the consumer. While we do realize that rubber bands aren’t entirely eco-friendly, they are certainly reusable and a better alternative to any other materials-intensive thermal underwear packaging we’ve seen.

retail-packaging-chilton - 10
THUMBS UP! PATAGONIA FOOTWEAR. While reusing shoeboxes to store odds and ends around the house isn’t a new concept, having a good looking one that you’ll want to display is. Unfold the box and re-fold it inside out to find attractive modern designs for adults and fun animal designs for kids. 100% post-consumer materials and soy inks make this box 100% recyclable. Even the additional spacers and paper that come with the shoes are recyclable.

retail-packaging-chilton - 11
THUMBS UP! TEKO SOCKS. When this company decided to use greener, smaller packaging, they also found that they could ship more socks in the same amount of space and stock more product in retail stores. A simple 100% post-consumer, 100% recyclable tag printed with soy inks tells you everything you need to know about their organic socks, while delivering even more information on the company’s green ethics. Very slick.

retail-packaging-chilton - 12
THUMBS UP! SIGG WATER BOTTLES. Redemption! The simple – dare we say artistic? – design of a Sigg bottle screams to be allowed to sell itself to consumers without heavy tags, boxes, or packing. The only drawback is that the sticker, which is hidden on the bottom of the bottle, unfolds to reveal a multi-page tag. The company is looking to further reduce this one piece of packaging to a smaller, simpler sticker in the future, making the packaging for this product almost completely non-existent.

retail-packaging-chilton - 13
THUMBS UP! TIMBUK2 BAGS. One piece of recyclable plastic is used to hang these bags from displays in stores, in addition to the tags. The one square inch tags are recyclable and allow consumers to pick up, handle, and even try on the bags prior to purchase. Thankfully, this type of packaging is typical on what is often our heaviest pieces of gear: backpacks, sleeping bags, and sleeping mats – so long as the manufacturers do not succumb to the temptation to attach mini-catalogs to each product.

retail-packaging-chilton - 14
THUMBS UP! KEEN FOOTWEAR. When Keen first came onto the market, their shoeboxes were made of heavy black cardboard and filled with spacers and plastics. Now the popular company has done a complete turn-around with their lighter, 100% post-consumer, 100% recyclable, soy inked box that even uses water-based, non-toxic glues to hold it together. The lighter weight of the box means less fuel consumption to ship the products. Responsible, attractive, and practical (nicely reusable, for a shoebox), Keen gets noticed.

retail-packaging-chilton - 15
THUMBS UP! BULK PACKAGING. Yes, it is possible to sell some products in bulk. Tent stakes? Rope? Bolts? These things do not need their very own plastic and cardboard containers. You can find some of the necessary backcountry bits and pieces being sold out of large bins and containers, depending on the retailer. Check with your local retailer to see what they offer, as manufacturers are unlikely to offer bulk packaging to the end consumer.

Introduction

Going light can be addictive.

You start by slowly reducing your gear and redefining what you truly need for backpacking. The extra miles, happy knees and ankles, and more enjoyable trips feel great, so you dive in deeper. You make lists, buy a scale, and start bugging sales clerks about the weight of each piece of new gear. You even start making your own “adjustments” to your gear – a little snip here, a small hack there.

Then, before you know it, you start lightening the load in other areas of your life.

You pitch belongings out of your car, purse, briefcase, desk and gym bag, all too happy to throw out those excess ounces and grams…until you go after your kid’s school backpack with a pair of scissors, and your spouse jumps in to tell you to take a break from the lightweight thing.

But what’s so wrong with taking lightweight principles into mainstream everyday life? At Backpacking Light, we are happily preoccupied with how to make things lighter, stronger, and better for backpackers and the planet. It is a daily obsession that easily grabs our attention no matter where we are. So, when outdoor industry companies started reducing the weight of their retail packaging, and looking for ways to leave less of an impact on the planet, we took notice.

Trends Toward (and Away From) Greener Waste

At Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008, it was nearly impossible to find a company that wasn’t on the “better and lighter” packaging bandwagon. Whether it was reduced packaging, eco-friendly soy inks, 100% post-consumer paper, or even reusable bags and boxes, nearly every exhibitor there was doing something to reduce their impact, and subsequently, their own costs.

Some claim that one-third the volume of America’s solid waste is retail packaging, so this trend toward lightening up shouldn’t be a surprise, especially in the outdoor industry, where eco-consciousness reflects not only good stewardship, but also intelligent and trendy marketing.

Being green is a central tenant when marketing to a demographic that is, by and large, focused on and concerned about the environment. What these particular consumers do and buy in order to visit the wild places they love may impact how long those places will exist.

From a marketing standpoint, having greener, more eco-friendly products and packaging caters to the beliefs and practices of the consumers who are a part of the ever-growing $33 billion dollar industry for outdoor recreation consumer goods. To ignore the concerns and beliefs of a consumer base is normally considered bad business.

However, not all companies are reducing their packaging or switching to greener packaging materials.

For example, the increasing use of miniature catalog-style tags that promote not only the product to which they are attached, but also other products offered by the company, reflects a significant shift in product tagging practice from “product support and information” to “catalog marketing.” Such “catalog” tags adorn garments, sleeping bags, backpacks, and are even tucked into shoe boxes.

Other companies continue to over-package their products, such as encasing durable Lexan bottles in shrink-wrap under the pretext that it is for sanitary reasons, while other Lexan bottle companies use only one or two stickers. Even still, some companies produce a product that is green, then sell it to consumers in packaging that isn’t eco-friendly. Worse yet, companies who recognize the changing, greener landscape of the outdoor retail market are producing packaging that looks green while selling a product that certainly is not.

The Hidden Agenda of Green Packaging

However, so-called “green packaging” is not just about serving a more eco-conscious customer base. If a company reduces packaging, it also reduces costs, making going green a money-saving operation. Retail giant Wal-Mart is projected to save $3.4 billion dollars in five years after reducing their overall packaging costs by only five percent. Numbers like these make other manufacturers and distributors take notice, and a trend of packaging reduction can be found in all major retail industries throughout the first world.

Legislating Green Packaging

In 1991, Germany enacted the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) law,  which held the manufacturer responsible for the disposal of all of its products’ retail packaging. A first of its kind, the law stated that upon purchase, a consumer could give the packaging back to the retailer, who in turn would return it to the manufacturer for reuse or recycling. This law developed into what is known as the Green Dot, part of a non-profit that collects, separates and recycles the packaging through a curbside recycling program. Through this system, the manufacturers take responsibility for the disposal of their packaging without having to involve the retailer. In its first four years, overall packaging in Germany decreased by seven percent.

Three years after the inception of the EPR law in Germany, the European Union (EU) enacted similar laws aimed at reducing packaging. Canada, Australia and most of South America have also established EPR laws. Asian countries, including South Korea, China and Taiwan have also adopted EPR laws and have taken steps to reduce their overall packaging beyond producer responsibility. Most recently, China has banned the use of lightweight, white plastic grocery bags nationwide, calling this particular kind of waste “white pollution.” At the time the ban was put into effect in June 2007, the Chinese plastic bag habit was up to three billion bags per day. In the United States, the first city to ban plastic grocery bags was San Francisco, with American stores, such as the grocery chain Whole Foods, banning the bags as well.

However (perhaps unsurprisingly), as the world’s most demanding consumer of packaged retail goods (and perhaps, the greatest sucker for what is printed on that packaging), the United States has yet to adopt EPR standards or legislation.

Defining Green Packaging

So, what does it mean to have a better, or greener, retail package? (While a marketing company might believe that “better retail package” means a package that moves more product or increases brand awareness, we are using “better” in regards to a package’s environmental impact – a less-is-more approach.)

How can a company create a package that costs them less to produce and ship, while at the same time being better for the environment? For some companies, being green means reducing the overall weight of the package, thereby reducing their transportation costs (e.g., the amount of fuel used to deliver goods to consumers). For others, a green retail package means using more post-consumer materials in packaging, then ensuring the finished packaging product is recyclable as well. Some companies are focusing their efforts on making a retail package that can be reused by the consumer before it is recycled, allowing for a longer life for the materials.

Reduced Packaging

The widespread move to more environmentally conscious packaging in the outdoor industry has been well received by both consumers and retailers.

Outdoor apparel giant Patagonia has introduced the minimalist “sushi roll” concept for packaging its base layer apparel. The underwear is rolled into a tight, cylindrical form, which is then bound by two rubber bands and accompanied with one, post-consumer based, 100% recyclable cardboard tag. Previously, the thermals had been sold in plastic bags that cost about twenty cents per unit to produce. After switching to the sushi roll, the packing cost fell to six cents per unit, and sales went up. Eco-conscious Patagonia customers still recognized the product (a key factor in most packaging is brand awareness), and they liked that they could touch the product prior to purchase.

Swedish-based bottle company Sigg is another example of the minimalist packaging that is possible when a product uses nothing more than a price tag and the mandatory information set forth by the country in which it is sold. A multi-paged accordion-style sticker and occasionally a tag are the only packaging needed for the company’s water bottle. Add to that a variety of colorful designs that take the place of a fancy box, and you have one of the most minimalist yet functional retail presentations on the shelf. In-store displays for the bottles hang them in neat rows, allowing customers to both see and handle the product. According to Robert Rheaume, VP of Sales and Field Marketing for Sigg USA, plans are underway to further reduce their packaging by converting to a single sticker.

Reduced packaging adheres to the monetary and sustainability benefits of going lighter, relying on the product to sell itself on its apparent merits, rather than on a manufacturer telling the consumer what the product’s merits might be.

Recyclable Packaging

For companies whose products require more packaging to protect the product prior to consumer purchase, using greener, more sustainable materials is another green packaging strategy.

The shoe company Keen and the sock company Teko both use 100% post-consumer paper in their packaging, which is also 100% recyclable. Soy and vegetable inks are used to print minimalist labels, a stark contrast to the multi-page mini-catalogs that are becoming increasingly popular with other shoe and sock manufacturers. In 2008, Teko’s recycling and reduction efforts cut their total packaging by forty-five percent.

Reusable Packaging

While the idea of “reduce – reuse – recycle” is not a new concept, the practice of reusing as much as possible before recycling is becoming a popular trend (the fewer times a piece of cardboard is recycled, the less energy is consumed by the act of recycling alone).

Shoeboxes, for example…most of us, at one time or another, have used an old shoebox to store photographs, baseball cards, vacation souvenirs, or seashell collections. Shoebox storage aficionados complement their reuse habit by adding dĂ©cor to their shoeboxes: wrapping paper rescued from old presents, scraps cut from the pages of old magazines, or even leftover house paint.

In fact, reappropriating old shoeboxes in American society is so popular that it has spawned an entirely new (and ironic) industry in the past two decades: decorative shoeboxes, sold empty.

Patagonia Footwear is currently selling its shoes in a shoebox that is designed to be reused after the consumer purchases the product. The box, which is made entirely of post-consumer materials and is 100% recyclable, can easily refolded inside out to reveal a trendy and attractive design. Patagonia Footwear’s children’s shoes are have animal designs on the inside that a child can color and decorate.

Patagonia remains committed to exploring responsible packaging technologies by setting the goal to have zero packaging for its footwear. Skeptics have said it cannot be done, as they said when the idea of the thermal sushi roll was first introduced, but the company remains diligent in its efforts.

Messenger bag company Timbuk2 is also using packaging that is meant to be reused. When a bag is purchased online, it arrives in a recyclable plastic bag, as opposed to a traditional cardboard box. The company’s bags, which are well known for their durability, require no protective packaging – the plastic bag is all that is needed to protect the product during shipping. Once the bag arrives, the consumer can cut out one side of the shipping bag to find a waterproof bike map of the San Francisco area. The remnants of the packaging can then be recycled. While a neat idea, we question how many of Timbuk2’s customers actually need a bike map of San Francisco. So, while the idea is innovative enough, it may lack the widespread appeal required for mass incentive to reuse packaging.

Conclusion

Providing packaging that has been recycled typically costs more for the manufacturer than packaging made with virgin material. In addition, offering recyclable packaging puts most of the burden to be green on the consumer and essentially absolves the manufacturer of any responsibility for their packaging waste.

The use of reusable packaging (e.g., boxes and bags) also puts the burden of responsibility on the end user, who can as easily toss the packaging in the dumpster as find a useful purpose for it later. Reusable packaging may be a more viable long term option than recycled packaging for slowing the filling of waste dumps, and it is certainly consistent with the lightweight philosophy of using items that can serve multiple functions.

However, the real appeal of green packaging lies in the reduction, even elimination, of packaging altogether.

Reducing packaging leads to lower fuel costs and resource use and costs less for the packager. However, it comes at the risk of having less materials available for marketing the company and its products. Consequently, the manufacturers that will be most successful at reducing their packaging will be those that offer the finest products that easily sell themselves based on their readily-apparent merits, or as often as not, their perceived merits based on the reputation of the company.

For the lightweight backpacker who adheres to the core tenet of our philosophy – doing more with less – purchasing products with reduced packaging is an attractive option as we continue to evaluate our answers to the question “How green can waste be?”

New Book on PACKRAFTING Sends Rapidly Growing Sport to the Mainstream

Backpacking Light Magazine to launch first book on Packrafting in June 2008.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 12, 2008

Contact: Andleeb Dawood
ana@backpackinglight.com
646-299-0532

New Book on PACKRAFTING Sends Rapidly Growing Sport to the Mainstream

BOZEMAN, MONTANA, March 10, 2008 – Backpacking Light Magazine has announced the availability of the new book PACKRAFTING! An Introduction & How-To Guide. Written by world-renowned packrafting instructor and adventurer Roman Dial, the book is the first book ever published on the topic of packrafting, offering unparalleled narrative and instruction in a beautiful, full-color volume with photographs from packrafting expeditions around the world.

PACKRAFTING! is about exploring wilderness and whitewater by packraft, a lightweight, portable boat usually weighing less than five pounds. Readers will learn about packrafting gear and technique as well as the many applications for packrafting. Packrafting can be combined with mountaineering, backcountry skiing, mountain biking or trekking as part of long expeditions, or short day trips.

Roman Dial has been a leader of the packrafting movement for two decades, from first descents of Class V creeks to multi-week traverses of Alaska’s Brooks Range to the first packrafting trek in the Grand Canyon in January 2008. Dial is a professor of Environmental Science, Mathematics, and Outdoor Studies at Alaska Pacific University, where he teaches packrafting courses.

Ryan Jordan, publisher of Backpacking Light Magazine and a pioneer of packrafting in the Northern Rocky Mountains, said, "There may be no better single tool for long distance wilderness travel than a packraft, and no better instructor for using it than Roman Dial. Roman has proved packrafting technique over and again. The rest of us will benefit immensely from his experience."

Jon Krakauer, author of Into the Wild, says "It was no accident that Roman was among the first people on the planet to understand that the packraft would revolutionize wilderness exploration."

Brad Meiklejohn, the Alaska Representative for The Conservation Fund said, "Roman Dial is the Pied Piper of Packrafting. If you’re not careful, his infectious enthusiasm will seduce you to squander every spare moment of your life in search of the next classic day of butt-boating."

PACKRAFTING! can be prepurchased at BackpackingLight.com for June 2008 delivery, and will hit booksellers later this summer. In addition, PACKRAFTING! will be made available for digital download at BackpackingLight.com.

Book Information

Packrafting! An Introduction and How-To Guide
By Roman Dial
Foreward by Jon Krakauer
Published by Backpacking Light (June 2008)
ISBN 978-0-9748188-3-2

Media Resources

The following media resources are available upon request:

  • Press/review copies via digital download.
  • Book excerpts/chapters for republication.
  • Hi-resolution images of the author, packrafting, and the book cover/inside pages.

About Backpacking Light

Backpacking Light is the premier magazine for lightweight hiking and backcountry travel, and has published extensive information about packrafting, including techniques, expedition reports, gear lists, and more. Visit Backpacking Light online at www.BackpackingLight.com.

Podcast: The Fight to Permit Packrafting in the Grand Canyon

Carol Crooker interviews Roman Dial about his experience with the NPS for securing a permit to packraft the Grand Canyon.

PODCAST SPONSOR

This Podcast is sponsored by Newfoundland and Labrador Tourism. One step on the Tablelands, a barren mound of rust-colored rocks thrown up from the earth’s mantle half a billion years ago, and you are literally standing on the center of the earth. Not a bad place to forget about modern life. To hike in the most easterly point in North America, call Maggie at 1-800-563-6353 or visit NewfoundlandLabrador.com/hiking.

Overview (By Carol Crooker)

Roman Dial makes history by securing the first permit for a packraft/backpack trip in the Grand Canyon and on the Colorado River.

Floating the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon is a once in a lifetime thrill for some and an oft repeated adventure for others. Highlights are the magnificent scenery, killer rapids, and camaraderie. The typical expedition floats in large, multi-person rafts, but the Colorado has been tackled by a menagerie of other types of craft. John Wesley Powell and his men famously ran the Colorado in 1869 in wooden boats as part of a geological survey. Paddlers in kayaks and, more unusually, three women on river boards (four foot long boogie boards) have also run the big Grand Canyon rapids.

What hadn’t been done (legally) until this year was run it in a packraft. Packrafts are inflatable rafts small enough to fit into a backpack and light enough to be toted enjoyably for a combined rafting and hiking expedition. The Grand Canyon is ideal for packrafting, with world class backpacking terrain surrounding miles of exciting river.

Roman Dial, a long time packrafter from Anchorage, Alaska, wanted to share a Grand Canyon packrafting/backpacking adventure with his son. He considered an outlaw run, but his wife Peggy vetoed that idea, as it would set a bad example for twenty year old Cody Roman. So Roman the elder set out to secure a permit for the trip. He studied the regulations: Under the newly revised river runner’s permit system, some undesirable, unclaimed launch dates can be claimed by phone. Several dates were available during his son’s winter break from college. On December 12th, Roman was able to lock in a launch date from Lees Ferry for December 25th.

…But Roman had no intention of being in Arizona on Christmas day. The typical winter raft trip through the Grand Canyon starts from Lees Ferry and ends at Diamond Creek several weeks later. Roman wanted his dream trip to last about a week. They would hike down to the Colorado River from the South Rim, run a section of the river, then hike back to the Rim. He figured he could fit the trip in any time during his twenty-five day permit period. Roman’s initial e-mail to a Park Ranger describing his trip plans was met with astonishment at his misunderstanding of the river permit system and a rejection of those plans.

Roman enjoys a challenge, and he took the Ranger’s response as merely the first volley, thereby opening communications between the Park and packrafters. Here, Roman talks about the communications adventure of turning reluctant Rangers around to become inventive allies in meshing Park regulations with packrafting.

The Story (by Roman Dial)

In many ways, getting to the point where I could write this was as challenging as the big rapids. Jackson Hole packrafter Forrest McCarthy and I had volleyed an amorphous plan to bandit a packrafting trip in the Grand Canyon over the last year. This progressed to the point of enlisting my son and Alaskan Brad Meiklejohn, who proposed an amazing trip highlighting the Great Thumb Mesa and its surrounding canyons. At one time, we were even invited as alternates on a non-commercial, standard big-boat river trip, but remained alternates when the trip kicked off…so our only recourse was going be as outlaws.

Then, Forrest and Brad got cold feet – or maybe their stories that Forrest had to work on his thesis, and Brad had to close a big conservation deal were legit – leaving me and Cody Roman with vague plans to sneak the Grand Canyon in January.

My wife Peggy frowned on this idea: “I don’t want you going there alone with our son, and I don’t think it’s responsible to take him there illegally. What kind of role model does that?”

Fortunately, in my search for packrafting alternatives of our own, a mutual friend sent Colorado Plateau’s adventure artist Glenn Rink’s email. Glenn indicated that I might try for a river permit, as the new lottery system had left some launch dates open (launch date: the date that rafters start their river trip, a date that marks the start of the twenty-five days of the winter-length journey to the Diamond Creek take-out). The dates were Christmas Day, New Year’s Day, and January days outside of college vacations. These dates could be spoken for with a simple phone call, which I made on my way to work December twelfth, reserving Christmas Day with a $400 deposit. I figured we would have the whole twenty-five day window in which to do our planned seven day trip around the Great Thumb, as I indicated in my email to the Park Service:

From: Roman Dial
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:05
To: Steve Sullivan
Subject: Dec 25 trip

Steve,

It looks like my card has been charged, so perhaps we have the reservation for Dec 25. The trip that the two of us would like to do does not start at Lees Ferry. It is a packraft (http://www.alpackaraft.com/store/index.cfm?CategoryID=53&do=list) trip (see http://www.alpackaraft.com/forums/ for discussions and videos of what we do) that would hike down to the river, float the river for fifty or so miles, then hike back out.

This is our first choice for a trip:

Descend into the canyon from Apache Point on the South Rim (or alternatively on the Bass Trail), dropping down the Royal Arch Route and hitting the river just above Elves Chasm. Boat down through Conquistador Aisle and the Middle Granite Gorge, with a side trip up to Thunder Falls and Surprise Valley. Return to the river at Deer Creek Falls and continue down river past Kanab Creek, Matkat (Matkatamiba Canyon), and hike out Havasu, returning to our car near Apache Point.

As you can see, it is not a full river trip. There would just be two of us. Ideally, we would do this over a one week period in January.

My questions are these:

Would you be ok with this use of a river permit?

Do we still need to go to Lees Ferry on Christmas, or could we have the river briefing elsewhere and/or on a different date?

Have others used packrafts, and what is the Park’s view of them?

Thanks for your consideration.

Roman Dial

However, Steve had a different take on this:

From: Steve Sullivan
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:23
To: Roman Dial
Subject: Re: Dec 25 trip

Hi Roman,

Thanks for writing back. It looks like maybe you missed something very basic here – you were calling to claim a launch from Lees Ferry that would start on the 25th and not take-out until at least Diamond Creek and operate in full compliance the Noncommercial Regulations. Grand Canyon National Park does not permit these trips to launch from any place other than Lees Ferry, and no trips may take-out anywhere above Diamond Creek. Secondly, Grand Canyon National Park has never and does not intend to authorize the use of packaraft at this point (I just called the River District Ranger to confirm this). In other words, you cannot do what you said you hoped to do as stated in your second paragraph.

I’m not sure how you got this far with such a basic level of misunderstanding of what we would permit. If you really cannot do a full Lees Ferry to Diamond Creek trip on boats that Grand Canyon would authorize, then let me know. If this will not work for you and I hear from you right away, I can authorize your deposit to be refunded.

Sincerely,

Steve Sullivan

“Wow!” I emailed my packrafting friends, “They want to stop us, but I am not going down that easily!” So I fired a volley right back over their bow.

From: Roman Dial
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 12:49
To: Steve Sullivan
Subject: Re: Dec 25 trip

Steve,

Thanks for the quick response; however, the news is disappointing. I have carefully read and re-read the regulations posted by the Park Service and found nowhere that:

Lees Ferry is a mandatory put-in.

Diamond Creek is a mandatory take-out.

There is no allowance for packrafts.

Indeed, I was very excited that the regulations looked totally amenable to our planned trip.

Yes, when reading the regulations, it was clear that the Lees Ferry put-in was a mandatory meeting, but where is it written that it is a mandatory put-in? It does not say it is mandatory as a put-in anywhere I can find in this document: http://www.nps.gov/grca/planyourvisit/upload/Noncommercial_River_Trip_Regulations.pdf.

Similarly, I was unable to find anything about minimum boat length (although I recall there was once a minimum boat length requirement in the past). I missed the requirement that Diamond Creek was a mandatory take-out. Nor did I read anything about minimum trip lengths.

It’s too bad that the “Grand Canyon National Park has never and does not intend to authorize the use of packaraft at this point (I just called the River District Ranger to confirm this),” although I had no way of knowing this, since my asking around (of non-NPS people) seemed to suggest otherwise. Indeed, it says nothing in the regulations about this.

Unfortunately, a big boat, full river trip does not interest me. I think I would like to have a conversation with the Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent, as our trip can comply with both the spirit and letter of the regulations and do so in a very low-impact way. I do not want a refund until I have heard from the Superintendent how our planned trip violates the printed regulations.

Again, I am not trying to make a fuss – we just want to enjoy our National Park in a way that does not harm the resource.

Roman Dial

And he responded (graciously, I thought):

From: Steve Sullivan
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:13
To: Roman Dial
Cc: Michael McGinnis (with the NPS)
Subject: Re: Dec 25 trip

Hi Roman,

Thanks for writing back, and it is no problem to have this reviewed at a higher level. Both the idea of using katarafts [sic] and the idea of hiking in and out of the river are new here, so getting you an answer cannot be as quick as I would like. I have passed your request on to those above me in the NPS chain, and I have had quite a few follow-up phone conversations. It sounds like it will be Monday before we can get the Superintendent to take a good look at this and give his final judgment. We will write you back shortly after that and let you know the answer.

Thanks for your patience.

Sincerely,

Steve Sullivan

So personal emails flew for the entire weekend, and my mind could think of nothing but the Grand Canyon, and, of all things, a permit.

Some responses from packrafters, slightly edited:

“Hope things work out with the Park. I can’t believe he treated you in such a demeaning way…Did you see Into the Wild? Remember the Park Ranger at Lees Ferry? Steve was about the same caliber as that guy. It is not a myth that NPS personnel often miss the boat.”

“I thought you were just getting a backcountry hiking permit and not mentioning the river float. It is always good to test the water, these Park Service people get too complacent and too frequently attempt to interpret laws and regs. I do know that there are people who cross the river using packrafts.”

“Hats off for trying to do it legally. This is the b——- that makes us outlaws. Unlike Yellowstone, where all boating is illegal, Grand Canyon is discriminating against packrafters. I have had bureaucratic battles when getting permits for both Cataract Canyon and the Middle Fork of the Salmon. Both times it was over unconventional (they said “impossible”) access points, and our ability to carry all the required gear (fire pan, groover, etc.). In the end, packrafters prevailed. I figure we are a new type of user and need to break in land managers.

“So you got an actual Grand Canyon River Permit? Good of ya. Let me know if there is anything I can help with this battle. I want to see you win a victory for packrafters and the public at large. I am very excited that you are calling them on their b——-.”

Then, this support from Glenn:

From: Glenn Rink
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:04
To: Steve Sullivan
Subject: RE: Dec 25 trip

Hi Steve,

Roman contacted me regarding his idea to use packrafts to explore the Grand Canyon backcountry. I encouraged him to contact you, because I have had such good experiences with the River Unit when using the river corridor to explore Grand Canyon in other than traditional ways.

At this point, perhaps I could be of some assistance to both you and Roman while you work out Roman’s request.

In 1983, I requested and was granted a trip that allowed me to put-in (solo, kayak) at the confluence of the Little Colorado River. The details were worked out between me and Kurt Sauer. There may be a record of that trip that might assist you in sorting out policies related to alternate put-ins, take-outs, or craft type.

Another trip that might be of interest is the one taken by Julie Munger, made sometime in the last ten years. Her trip launched at Lees Ferry with belly boards as their sole craft. Maybe Julie could help with details related to that trip. At first, when she decided to use her river permit for a belly board trip through the Canyon, the Park was understandably taken aback by her unusual request, but upon review, the river unit determined that this was an acceptable use of the resource.

I am not aware that the regs specify a mandatory put-in at Lees Ferry, take-out at Diamond or below, and no use of packrafts? I haven’t seen that verbiage, though no doubt you are more familiar with the regs than I am. Perhaps you could paste this passage in the regs to us via email, or cite this material in a way that we can find it?

Facilitating Roman’s request may require coordination with the Backcountry Office. Todd Seliga of the Backcountry Office would be a good person to work with on this, since he is an avid packraft user, recently completing a river trip in Canyonlands National Park using packrafts as their sole craft. Like Roman’s planned backcountry takeout, Todd’s trip also utilized a backcountry takeout.

I hope we can find a solution that accommodates NPS concerns and, at the same time, allows for some not-so-conventional approaches to Grand Canyon experience.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Sincerely,

Glenn Rink

And finally, this piece of sweet news:

From: Steve Sullivan
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:06
To: Roman Dial
Cc: Michael McGinnis, Linda Jalbert, Marc Yeston (all with the NPS)
Subject: Re: Dec 25 trip

Hi Roman,

I have good news for you. We have quite a few excellent managers here at Grand Canyon, and together we have come up with an answer that should work for you. The Park will give you a permit and allow you and your friend to launch using your packrafts, provided you can meet the rest of the noncommercial regulations and the conditions for the permit. I’ll explain some more of these rules below.

First, though, I want to apologize for my original quick and negative answer to your request. You were asking for something Grand Canyon National Park has never allowed, something that never even came up in the Park’s recent river planning work. In addition, you said you planned to use a type of craft that remains new and untested to most of us. So, I gave you a reasonable answer, however, one that was fundamentally flawed – i.e. it denied your request solely because of nonconformity with the existing patterns. I’m glad you wrote back and pointed out that you could not find anything prohibitive in the language of our Noncommercial Regulations. After reading your comment, I did go back and re-read that document. I also read parts of the Colorado River Management Plan and the Environmental Impact Statement upon which it was based. I did not find anything concrete there either. This helped contribute to our discussions, and by Friday morning, my recommendation was for us to request that the Superintendent to overturn my earlier answer.

Here are the conditions upon which Grand Canyon National Park is allowing your trip and future packraft trips through Grand Canyon:

The trip leader must have secured a Lees Ferry to Diamond Creek launch through the noncommercial river permit system. (You have done this.)

The trip leader must do the Lees Ferry checkout on the day scheduled to launch and must take all the gear currently required for noncommercial trips.

For packraft situations (i.e. where boating gear and equipment are contained within backpacks that do not exceed the sizes of large, backcountry, non-rafting backpacks currently in use in the backcountry), the trip leader can choose to skip a portion of the river trip and hike in and out anywhere along the river provided all the following is true:

The actual date and place where the trip reaches the water must coincide with where a typical noncommercial trip during that season would have been had they actually launched from Lees Ferry. (In your case, you could launch from the Elves Chasm area on 1.6.07. If you need to change your put-in and take-out locations because of #4 below, please let me know so I can re-calculate the acceptable dates for your trip.)

The trip can choose to hike away from the river, but must have a valid backcountry permit to camp anywhere away from the river within Grand Canyon National Park. (I can help you with this also, and there should be space in that area during this time of year. Backcountry Permits cost $10 plus $5 per person per night.)

The trip can again rejoin the river, but only downstream of where they left the river. The actual date and place where the trip rejoins the river must coincide with where a typical noncommercial trip during that season would have been had they actually launched from Lees Ferry. (It doesn’t sound like you wish to do this.)

Only downstream travel will be allowed.

If the trip plans hike into or cross any tribal lands, permission from the tribe must be obtained before launch. (Getting permission to hike through Havasupai should be easy – getting permission from the tribe to hike across Great Thumb Mesa may prove extremely difficult.)

(Note, over the next few months NPS staff will be reviewing packrafting in Grand Canyon and tweaking the above conditions to ensure the ongoing consistency of packrafting with the intents behind our river and backcountry management plans. This is the best we could do with such short lead time.)

In addition, all other noncommercial regulations must be followed. Our River District Ranger (Mike McGinnis) wants to speak with you on Tuesday to help ensure you understand all that is required. I am copying him on this email. Would you please call him tomorrow? He can be reached at (number excised).

I hope all this helps.

Sincerely,

Steve Sullivan

To which I responded:

From: Roman Dial
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:47
To: Steve Sullivan
Cc: Michael McGinnis, Linda Jalbert, Marc Yeston (all with the NPS)
Subject: Re: Dec 25 trip

Thanks Steve.

I have read through this, but need to absorb it so that discussing it with Mike McGinnis will be effective.

I also appreciate your apology and accept it.

Mike, you can expect a call from me tomorrow.

Roman

Learn More About Packrafting

Backpacking Light has announced the release date of Roman Dial’s new book Packrafting! An Introduction and How-To Guide.

For more information about the book, read the press release.

Podcast: Cameron McNeish and the Emotional Value of Wilderness Hiking

Ron Craighead explores the emotional value of wilderness with author, adventurer, and magazine editor Cameron McNeish of Scotland.

PODCAST SPONSOR

This Podcast is sponsored by Newfoundland and Labrador Tourism. One step on the Tablelands, a barren mound of rust-colored rocks thrown up from the earth’s mantle half a billion years ago, and you are literally standing on the center of the earth. Not a bad place to forget about modern life. To hike in the most easterly point in North America, call Maggie at 1-800-563-6353 or visit NewfoundlandLabrador.com/hiking.

Cameron McNeish is a wilderness hiker, backpacker, mountaineer, author and broadcaster based in Newtonmore in the Scottish Highlands. Through his work as editor of the award-winning TGO (The Great Outdoors) Magazine and his popular BBC2 television programs, Wilderness Walks, Cameron is recognized as one of the UK’s best-known mountain walkers and commentators. In between expeditions to wilderness areas of the world, Cameron can be found climbing the hills and islands of Scotland every weekend, collecting material for his weekly newspaper column.

Website Review: UltralightLiving.com

UltralightLiving.com explores the extension of ultralight backpacking philosophies to other areas of your life.

Ever wonder if you could apply your happy-go-lucky lightweight backpacking principles to your everyday life? Have you ever found yourself in the cell phone store wondering which phone was lighter? Ever been in the market for a new car and asked the baffled salesman which Subaru weighed less? Have you recently looked at the hair of your friend/sister/spouse/child and considered how much weight they could save if they just chopped it all off? If you answered "yes" to any of these questions then you, too, might be thirsty for more information on how to go lightweight in the front country. Enter Ultralightliving.com.

The Portland, Oregon based website, which was started and is maintained by Jon Aebi-Magee, is a virtual cornucopia of links to lightweight living resources and information. Expanding beyond lightweight backpacking, the site offers information on new technology, gear and even lightweight lifestyle choices. You really can go to this site and read up on everything from where to find the best lightweight backpacking gear, to which airplane is lighter, as well as get up-to-date information on the latest and greatest lightweight technology.

"The ultra-light movement is really a new way of thinking. It’s about reducing the burden of weight. Backpacking is only a tiny part of that movement. You can see ultra-light in the news today, ranging from computers to clothing to commercial jetliners," says Jon. "By producing products that are lighter, manufacturers are also creating products that use fewer natural resources, use less energy, are more economical and have superior design." With multiple lightweight groups and companies that offer lightweight products linked to the site, it is possible to get lost for hours, fully indulging in the preoccupation of going light.

And why not indulge a little? Going light is becoming a way of life for many people and not just those who backpack. Less and lighter stuff means less of an impact on the planet and your wallet, more time available and more of a focus on the act of living itself. Even Michael Pollan, author of The Omnivore’s Dilemma, felt compelled to follow up his best-seller with a companion book, In Defense of Food, which, among other things, voices the reasoning that even eating less is better for us and for the planet. For the many people who casually refer to themselves as lightweight enthusiasts, going light can be about more than the type of gear they carry; it can about living with less in an effort to gain more.

The Ultralightliving.com site is a source of information for both the lifestyle lightweight enthusiast and those who are just getting started. In additional to the many links, one can find articles written by other lightweight enthusiasts, such as one contributor (who has also written for Backpacking Light) who wrote about backpacking with his two kids. Links to lightweight philosophy-centered weight loss programs and articles on tiny homes compliment the generous number of articles dedicated to gear, clothing, cars, and innovations. One downside is that while the information on the latest technology is copious and current, there are no forums to discuss that technology with other lightweight enthusiasts, which may leave the reader wanting more.

As a vehicle for taking your lightweight philosophies out of your pack and into the rest of your life, this site is a fabulous place to start.

 

Icebreaker Cross Cami SPOTLITE REVIEW

Women’s merino wool top with built in support.

Icebreaker Cross Cami SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1

Icebreaker Cross Cami SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
Manufacturer photos of the merino wool Icebreaker Cross Cami with shelf bra.

Overview

I’m a wool convert. I like wool next to my skin unless it’s really hot (then I don’t want anything next to my skin and hike in a loose fitting nylon sun shirt). I overheat less in wool when I’m exerting and chill less from sweat when I stop. A couple of years ago I started looking for a wool bra so all of my torso would be next to wool. I found one wool bra, the Ibex Balance Seamless Sport Bra. The only other option I found with support is this offering from Icebreaker, the Icebreaker Cross Cami.

The Cross Cami features a shelf bra in 140 g/m2 merino wool with the rest of the top in 190 g/m2 weight fabric. I wore the Cross Cami 24/7 for four days along the Tracy Ridge trail system in north west Pennsylvania and for three days of igloo living in south west Colorado. The top was very comfortable once I cut out the clear plastic hang loops. The shelf bra provides light support. An Icebreaker rep says they “recommend a B cup size for running/high impact sports and a C for anything else including hiking or backpacking.” The Cross Cami provided enough support for me (A cup) hiking and snowshoeing but is not the top to pick if you like a lot of support.

The top is very attractive and suitable for outerwear depending on your modesty preferences. I prefer to wear it under another layer since the combination of the shirt and bra fabrics is still quite thin.

Features and Specifications

  • Manufacturer: Icebreaker
  • Year/Model: 2008 Cross Cami
  • Material: Merino wool: 190 g/m2 (5.6 in/yd2) body, 140 g/m2 (4.1 in/yd2) bra
  • Sizes: XS – L
  • Recommended For: B cup size for running/high impact sports and a C for anything else including hiking or backpacking
  • Features: Shelf bra, elasticated straps, sporty back shape, curved side seams with feature stitching
  • Weight: 4.4 oz (125 g) size M
  • Available: Now
  • MSRP: $49.99 solid colors, $54.99 prints (Plant It ’08 print shown)

I/O Biocompatibles Contact Long Sleeve Crew SPOTLITE REVIEW

A new company provides another choice in technical wool clothing.

Overview

Wool is wonderful. I, and my companions, appreciate the low stink factor and, as a frequent desert crawler, wool suits me with its ability to release heat during the hot days and keep the chill off after sunset. Lots of companies offer thin wool base layers these days. I’ve worn merino wool next-to-skin layers from SmartWool, Icebreaker and Ibex and been pleased with all of them. Patagonia’s Wool 2 fabric feels great too. This review introduces another company with comparably priced options for those choosing wool – I/O Biocompatibles.

The I/O Biocompatibles Contact Crew is very thin (fabric weight is 160 g/m2) and soft. It fits like a second skin without binding. A pre-production run shirt held in warmth in the evenings on a six-day trip along, and on, the St. Joe River in Idaho in August. A production women’s size large fit perfectly in the torso and the sleeves stayed put on my wrists round the clock during a four-day backpacking trip in Pennsylvania’s Allegheny National Forest in January and on a three-day igloo excursion in Colorado’s San Juan mountains in February. Close fitting, stretchy sleeves often pull up – my SmartWool Microweight NTS Zip-T does not keep my wrists covered – so I’m very impressed with the Contact Crew sleeves. The merino wool fabric I/O produces has superb mechanical stretch and retains its shape even after days of constant wear.

Construction is very good except for three spots on one test shirt of loose straight stitches where the collar is attached. A nice touch – the inside seam attaching the collar is covered over with fabric at the back of the neck to prevent chaffing.

I/O Biocompatibles is associated with the Michell family of Australia who has been processing and selling wool for over 130 years. I/O controls wool production throughout the supply chain from sheep to shelf. Referring to fiber diameter, a company rep writes, "the Contact Crew is 18.5 microns, but because of the proprietary method of shaping and stretching the wool that I/O uses, it feels more like a 17." The fabric feels very soft and luxurious.

I like the clothes, but the slogans are pretentious and unintelligible:

"The divide between the outside world and the world of shelter dissolves, giving rise to a new mode of cross-living or transhabitation. Inside and Outside are one. I/O."

"Organic is a Myth. Nada es Pura. Nature was never pure or simple. I/O exposes the technology at the heart of the natural."

Huh?

Pieces available in this same fabric as the Contact Crew – Enigma – are men’s and women’s tights, 3/4 tights, long sleeve crew, and zip neck crew along with a short sleeve crew top for men and a cap tee for women. A variety of styles are available in other fabric weights and types.

Features and Specifications

  • Manufacturer: I/O Biocompatibles
  • Year/Model: 2008 Contact Long Sleeve Crew, women’s
  • Material: 160 g/m2 (4.7 in/yd2), 18.5 micron merino wool
  • Sizes: Women’s XS – LG, Men’s S – XL
  • Weight: 4.3 oz (122 g) women’s large
  • Available: Now
  • MSRP: $59.95 US

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW

This is a modern version of the traditional hardwood walking staff. Made of carbon fiber, it is much stronger and more robust than even the stiffest of trekking poles. It has an adjustable hand strap, breaks down into sections, and can even be converted into a “trail defense system”.

Introduction

The LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik is a walking staff in the tradition of hardwood walking staffs used by hikers for decades. However, it is much lighter, stiffer, and stronger than wooden walking staffs. It also has an adjustable hand strap, breaks down into 23 inch sections, and can be used as both a knife and a spear, should the need arise. If wimpy trekking poles aren’t for you, but you still enjoy the feel of a traditional walking staff, the LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik is a great choice.

What’s Good

  • At 9.7 ounces, it is much lighter than wooden walking staffs
  • Compacts to 23 inch sections for easy storage
  • Extremely stiff – the stiffest pole we’ve ever tested
  • Hand strap is comfortable for all-day treks
  • A complete trail defense system including knife and spear

What’s Not So Good

  • Much heavier than lightweight trekking poles (although this is not a trekking pole)
  • Sections can be difficult to separate
  • Tip packs with dirt and doesn’t bite well, causing slippage
  • The integrated knife makes for great conversation but may not be useful on the trail

Specifications

  Year/Model

 2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff

  Style

 Three-section collapsible

  Shaft Material

 21 mm (13/16 in) diameter carbon tube with aluminum inserts at section junctions

  Tips

 Anodized T-9 aluminum “fat tip”

  Grips

 Sliding prussic hand strap with rubber cover, no grip

  Grip Size

 n/a

  Weight
Per Pole (without baskets)

 9.7 oz (275 g) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification 9.0 oz (255 g)

  Pole Length

 53.5 in (136 cm); “grip height” is adjustable

  Collapsed Pole Length

 23 in (58 cm);

  Baskets Included?

 No – none available

  Basket Type

 n/a

  MSRP

 $125

  Options

 48 in, 1-section non-collapsible pole also available: 6.6 oz (mfr claim), $87

Performance

Trekking poles are not for everyone. Some hikers prefer the solid feel of a traditional hiking staff over a pair of lightweight poles with grips and straps. For these hikers, though, there are few choices in hiking staffs that use modern materials and fit well into an ultralight kit.

The LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik is an example of a modern walking staff. Constructed of huge 21 millimeter carbon fiber shafts, this is no wimpy trekking pole. Unlike hardwood staffs, this pole also breaks down into four sections (with the longest two measuring 23 inches) for easy stashing when hiking in more technical terrain.

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW - 1
The Big Survival Stik breaks down into four sections for easy storage.

A unique part of the Big Survival Stik is the “survival” aspect. In the tradition of secret knives hidden in canes and walking staffs, the top of the staff pulls out to reveal a 6 inch aluminum “needle knife.” According to LuxuryLite, “This scary ultrahard T-9 aluminum weapon is sharp enough to leave a big hole in any creature unwise enough to attack you.” If that’s not enough, you can even remove the tip and attach the dagger to the end of the shaft to create a 52 inch spear that I was able to throw quite a distance with accuracy. Beyond trail defense, the knife is not particularly usable (don’t expect to slice cheese with this) but it sure is a conversation starter! More about this “Trail Defense System” is shown in the video below.

 

For a better viewing experience, please download the Flash Player. The LuxuryLite “Trail Defense System” in action.

When not involved in trail combat, the four sections fit together with thick aluminum inserts that are angle cut to line things up more easily. They stay together with friction, eliminating the need for complex locking systems. Some twisting and force is needed when putting the sections together or taking them apart but I never had any issue with them coming apart on the trail – the tight fit ensures this.

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW - 3
The wrist strap is easily adjustable via the prussik cord.

The LuxuryLite staff includes a removable hand strap that is attached to the pole with a prussik knot. The cord is covered by a rubber tube to protect the hands while in use. This hand strap is used differently than a trekking pole grip; simply slide your hand through the loop and wrap your hand around the staff. The strap supports the side of the hand rather than the wrist. This oversized loop keeps your hand from sliding down the staff when hiking and allows you to grip the staff less firmly. I quickly adapted to the loose grip of the hand strap and found it comfortable for long days on the trail. Occasionally I would change hands when one arm got tired and this was easily done without stopping.

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW - 4
The oversized T-9 aluminum tip is slightly concave and quickly packs with dirt but leaves the hard edges exposed (left). It definitely leaves less of a mark in soft soil than a trekking pole tip (right).

The Stik tip is round aluminum rather than the sharp tip found in most trekking poles. In dirt conditions, it gripped reasonably well and had less penetration in soft soil and sand. This left less of a mark on the trail than trekking pole tips, which can leave an ugly divot. That said, the slightly concave tip packed quickly with soil and in sticky mud, the tip occasionally needed to be whacked against rocks to clear all of the soil. When climbing steep terrain and pushing hard on the staff, it also tended to slip more than a sharp-pointed trekking pole, leaving scars of a different kind. Overall, though, the tip worked fine.

Being constructed of four sections with only two of the same length, it is possible to configure the Stik to many different lengths for use with a variety of shelters. However, using the staff with shelters with grommets that are designed to be used with a sharp trekking pole tip may require some modifications or creative thinking.

Compatibility with trekking pole shelters Usable with this shelter?
Gossamer Gear/Tarptent Squall Classic (42 in/107 cm) Yes (108 cm length)
Tarptent Virga 2 / Squall 2 and Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo / Europa (45 in/114 cm) Yes (119 cm length)
Golite Trig 2 (48 in/123 cm) Yes (125 cm length)
MSR Missing Link (54 in/137 cm) Yes (137 cm length)

The LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik is the stiffest pole we have ever tested at BackpackingLight. Our new Pole Deflection Test involves supporting a pole on a rig with bolts at a 100 centimeter length and supporting a 25 pound weight at the center point. The deflection of 1.1 centimeters is substantially less than other poles we tested (among them the pre-2007 Bozeman Mountain Works Stix Pro, our previous stiffness champ).

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW - 5
The LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik being tested in the all-new BackpackingLight Pole Stiffness Test. It’s the stiffest pole we’ve ever tested.

Pole make and model Amount of deflection (cm) Pole weight (no baskets) oz (g)
LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik 1.1 9.7 (275)
Bozeman Mountain Works Stix Pro (no longer available) 2.1 3.2 (90)
Pacerpole 2-section aluminum/carbon hybrid 2.5 10.9 (308)
Komperdell Featherlight / Bozeman Mountain Works Stix prototype 2.6 4.8 (136)
Komperdell Nature Stick Carbon 2.7 5.3 (151)
Gossamer Gear Lightrek 3 5.1 2.8 (79)

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW - 6
The stiffness of the LuxuryLite pole makes it ideal for vaulting creeks or other aerial maneuvers.

In the field, this stiffness was very confidence inspiring. I used the staff to pole vault creeks and rocky sections and to fully support my body weight on steep descents – I never felt even a hint of flex. When intentionally trying to generate flex by putting all of my weight on the pole (see picture below), the amount of flex was extremely minimal. If you like the stiffness of a thick hardwood staff, this pole will replicate that better than any pole on the market.

2008 LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik Walking Staff REVIEW - 7
Even with my full body weight on the pole and trying hard to make it flex, only a very minimal amount of flex was noticed. This is one stiff pole.

At 9.7 ounces, the Big Survival Stik is not among the lightest of trekking poles. Then, again, this is not a trekking pole and it serves a slightly different purpose. When compared to hardwood walking staffs, it is much lighter. Even when compared to oversized aluminum walking staffs such as the Tracks Lite Staff (52 inch length, 10.5 ounces), the Luxury Lite is almost an ounce lighter. And the Tracks pole doesn’t break down, won’t be as stiff, and doesn’t include the knife and spear that make the LuxuryLite so unique.

So what is the difference between hiking with poles and hiking with a staff such as this? I am a dedicated trekking pole user and I have to admit that at first I was skeptical of large, oversized staff. But after several long hikes with the staff, I’ve become a real fan. While my trekking poles are definitely faster when trying to cover long distances and more efficient when making direct ascents, the slow placements of the LuxuryLite staff brought me back to a more relaxed, lumbering pace. I enjoyed having a hand free and appreciated the fact that the stiff shaft was so secure under the combined weight of gear and my son Henry on my back. When using the Stik I seemed to wander more and I like the change in gait and the more easy-going pace that came with it. For mellow walks, the LuxuryLite staff has become my favorite pole. Now, that’s not to say you can’t hike quickly with the Stik – it’s definitely able to move you along quickly. There’s just something about hiking with a staff that, for me, tends to bring a more easy-going pace.

At $125, the LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik is an expensive hiking staff. When compared to the price of hardwood poles, though, the price is reasonable. And when you consider the functionality, stiffness, and unique aspects of this pole, it’s a reasonable price.

What’s Unique

This is a unique product, no question. There is no other hiking staff on the market that is made of carbon fiber, is this stiff and light, or that serves as both a knife and a spear. If you are looking for a unique hiking staff, the LuxuryLite Big Survival Stik is it.

Recommendations for Improvement

As much as I love the knife, it does add weight, and it isn’t very functional. I would like to see a version of the staff that eliminates the knife and focuses on the lightest weight. Still, I think I would choose the knife for my staff!

The tip is a mixed bag. It leaves less of a scar in soft soils than trekking pole tips, but it also slips more, especially on steep slopes, and it packs with dirt in certain soil conditions. It would be great to have a tip that incorporated some sort of raised point in the middle to prevent soil build up and to provide extra traction.

Overall, this is a well thought out and executed product.

Golite Pinnacle Backpack REVIEW

The Golite Pinnacle is a replacement for the popular Gust pack and is the larger version of the popular Golite Jam2 backpack. It offers many upgrades over the Gust, but how do they affect the pack’s performance?

Introduction

The Golite Pinnacle is a replacement for the popular Gust pack and the larger version of the popular Golite Jam2 backpack. It offers many upgrades over the Gust such as side pockets, a sternum strap, a hydration sleeve, side compression straps, and the new Compaktor system.

What’s Good

  • At less than 1 ½ pounds, the Pinnacle is very light for its volume
  • With 3700 ci, it has 1100 ci more than the Jam2 – great volume for bulky lightweight loads
  • Compaktor system makes it possible to shrink the pack substantially for day trips or smaller loads
  • Good weight transfer to the hips
  • Large front pocket with a water resistant zipper, two side pockets
  • Reasonably priced at $130

What’s Not So Good

  • Lack of a frame means that you have to have high volume but lightweight loads
  • The pack bottom is the same fabric as the pack body; while we had no problems, some would like to see a heavier duty fabric in this area
  • Not as simple as the Gust pack it replaces and about 5 ounces heavier

Specifications

   Year/Model

 2007 Golite Pinnacle Backpack

   Style

 Frameless with a foam back panel, top loading

   Volume

 3700 ci (61 L)

   Weight

 1 lb 7.4 oz (662 g) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification (size small – as tested) 1 lb 7 oz (650 g)

   Sizes Available

 Womens: S (tested) and M (also available in Mens: M and L)

   Torso Fit Range

 Women’s S (tested) fits 15.5 to 17.5 inch torsos, women’s M fits 17.5 to 19.5 inch torsos; Men’s M fits 17.5 to 19.5 inch torsos, men’s L fits 19.5 to 21.5 inch torsos;

   Fabrics

 210d Dyneema Gridstop polyurethane-coated nylon

   Features

 Durable fabrics, contoured shoulder straps, large gusseted fabric front pocket with water-resistant zipper, two side stretch nylon/Spandex side pockets, two compression straps on each side that connect to the opposite side, 3-liter interior hydration sleeve, 11-inch extension collar, two bungee tool loops, Compaktor System for volume reduction, two ice axe loops, haul loop, sternum strap

   Volume To Weight Ratio

 158 ci/oz (based on 3700 ci and measured weight of 23.4 oz)

   Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

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

   Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

 20.5 (based on 30 lb and a measured weight of 1.46 lb)

   MSRP

 $130 US

Performance

The Golite Pinnacle replaces the popular Gust pack and is basically a larger version of the GoLite Jam2 Backpack. In fact, it is identical to the Jam2 except for the volume. While the Jam2 has a volume of 2600 ci (women’s) or 3100 ci (men’s), the Pinnacle’s volume is 3700 (women’s) or 4400 ci (men’s)- that’s 1100 ci larger in the women’s version and 1300 ci larger in the men’s.

Golite Women’s Pinnacle Backpack REVIEW - 1
The Pinnacle is large enough for bulky winter loads (or hauling a whole family’s insulation).

While the Pinnacle has substantially more volume than the Jam2, it still offers the same frameless suspension system. While the suspension system does a good job of transferring weight to the hips, I still found the maximum comfortable carrying capacity to be about 30 pounds. This makes the Pinnacle marvelous for hauling large volume loads such as bulky insulation carried in the winter. However, the Pinnacle requires high volume loads that are also lightweight; if you’re looking for a large pack to carry traditional gear or heavy climbing gear, it would be better to look at the framed packs in Golite’s lineup.

We used the Golite for family backpacks when one parent carried our son and high density items in a child carrier while the other carried all of the sleeping insulation and clothing in the Pinnacle. The Pinnacle was also used for winter trips where bulky (but lightweight) insulation filled the large capacity. In these applications where pack weight stayed below 30 pounds, the Pinnacle carried the load very comfortably.

Golite Women’s Pinnacle Backpack REVIEW - 2
The discontinued Golite Gust (left) and the Golite Pinnacle that replaced it (right).

The Pinnacle replaces the popular Golite Gust. Doug has used a Golite Gust for several years for winter backpacking and was able to compare the two packs side by side. While the Gust does a great job of hauling high volume, lightweight loads, it has an overly simple suspension system, minimal external storage and no side pockets, almost no options for compacting the pack, and few additional features. The Pinnacle effectively addresses these concerns in every area.

While the Pinnacle shares the frameless suspension and removable padded foam backpanel with the Gust, it has a hipbelt that is wider, lightly padded (versus no padding on the Gust), and wraps further around the waist. This makes load transfer to the hips much more comfortable and effective. The shoulder straps are narrower, contoured, and backed with mesh for better sweat transfer. Unlike the Gust, a comfortable sternum strap is also included as well as load lifters. Together, this makes the Pinnacle much more comfortable when carrying loads at or above its maximum capacity.

The Pinnacle has an external front pocket that is similar to the Gust. However, it uses a water resistant zipper and is slightly deeper. This makes getting in and out of the pocket snag-free and unlike large mesh pockets, it doesn’t fill with snow when glissading or skiing in powder.

Golite Women’s Pinnacle Backpack REVIEW - 3
Contoured shoulder straps with a sternum strap and loops for hydration tubes (left) are part of the new suspension system. Dual ice axe loops and Compaktor clips (right)

Like the Gust, the Pinnacle has dual ice axe or pole loops. However, the Pinnacle also has a hydration pocket for bladders up to 3L as well as tube ports on either side of the pack and loops on the shoulder straps to keep the tubes out of the way. A key clip is also included inside the pack.

While the Gust had only one compression strap which was largely ineffective in compacting the pack for smaller loads, the Pinnacle’s compression straps and Compaktor system shrink it to daypack size for day hikes and summit bids.

Golite Women’s Pinnacle Backpack REVIEW - 4
Three capacities for the Pinnacle: large (left, filled with extension collar in use), medium (center, with compression straps and no extension collar, and small (right, using Compaktor system and compression straps).

Maximum capacity of the Pinnacle is 3700 ci for the women’s version (tested) or 4400 ci for the men’s version. Both versions are available in two sizes (S and M for the women’s and M and L for the men’s). The torso length is not adjustable but the four pack sizes have a range from 15.5 inches to 21.5 inches, meaning that there is a size for just about any torso length.

The Pinnacle is able to change its capacity extremely well. At full capacity, the extension collar extends and both the top and side compression straps keep the loads in control. When you need a smaller pack, rolling down the extension collar and tightening the side compression straps makes medium sized loads very manageable. This is a huge benefit over the original Gust which became unstable when it wasn’t filled to capacity. However, the Pinnacle (along with the Jam2) takes it even one step further with the Compaktor system.

On those days when you need a daypack size for a day hike or summit bid, the Compaktor system shrinks the capacity to a very small size. Clips on the bottom of the pack near the ice axe loops clip to small loops at the base of the backpanel, shrinking the pack depth from 10 inches to just 2 inches. The side compression straps also snap into the buckles on the opposite side of the pack, cinching the middle of the pack in two places (shown well in the GoLite Jam2 REVIEW). When the system is used, the Pinnacle is comfortable even when carrying just a handful of items. The Compaktor system eliminates the need for a daypack and makes the Pinnacle an extremely versatile pack.

Golite Women’s Pinnacle Backpack REVIEW - 5
When over tightening the top strap, the buckle started to pull from the seam. Despite continuing to reef on the strap, no further damage occurred.

The only durability issue we experienced when testing this pack was a top strap attachment that started to pull from the seam. This occurred when the strap was cinched very hard and probably over tightened.

While not as light as the silicone nylon used in some ultralight packs, the Dyneema Gridstop fabric of the Pinnacle is much more durable. This makes it a good choice for scrambling, mountaineering, and bushwhacking due to its increased durability, tear resistance, and abrasion resistance. While this fabric still needs to be treated with care, it is far more robust than lighter nylon fabrics.

At 1 pound 7.4 ounces, the Golite Pinnacle is very lightweight when considering its capacity, Dyneema fabric, and features. While the Pinnacle gains 5 ounces over the Golite Gust, we feel the benefits far outweigh the moderate increase in weight.

At $130 for either the men’s or women’s versions, the Golite Pinnacle is very fairly priced. It offers a tough exterior fabric, a comfortable suspension system (for loads under 30 pounds), and a highly versatile compression system. This is a highly versatile pack that we expect to use for many seasons.

What’s Unique

When it comes to high volume lightweight loads, the Pinnacle does a marvelous job of handling the task with a weight of less than 1.5 pounds. Further, the Compaktor system makes the Pinnacle able to quickly shrink from deep winter backpacking to a very small daypack. This is an extremely adaptable pack.

Recommendations for Improvement

While the Golite Pinnacle is a pack that we would recommend highly, we would offer the following recommendations for improvement:

1. Reinforce the center strap so it won’t pull at the seam when being over tightened.

2. While we had no issues, a heavier weight fabric on the bottom of the pack would increase the pack’s durability in a spot that is prone to abrasion.

A Virtual Pack (Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008)

The Backpacking Light Outdoor Retailer Team outfits an entire lightweight pack for a long winter weekend using only gear found at the show. Join us throughout the trip for updates as we add gear to our hyper-linked Outdoor Retailer Virtual Pack.

The Show

This year over 900 exhibitors are displaying their new products at Outdoor Retailer – from ACR Electronics to Zumfoot. The breadth of offerings here is staggering. Almost every kind of outdoor gear imaginable can be seen in clothing, electronics, skis and snowboards, camping equipment, etc.

The Backpacking Light Outdoor Retailer Team (BLORT!) is taking on the task of building a complete lightweight hiking kit, solely with gear found at the show. The challenge is to sort through the myriad of six-pound packs, eight-pound tents, forty-ounce jackets, and eight-pound ski boots to find gear that satisfies our passion for both light weight and functionality. We’re looking for the newest, lightest products, of course. But, we’re sure to include some long-time staff favorites, as well as some heavy pieces where we just couldn’t find better alternatives. After all, Outdoor Retailer favors larger manufacturers producing more mainstream products, so many of our preferred cottage industry lightweight gear makers are unfortunately not exhibiting here. Nevertheless, we are on a mission to build the ultimate lightweight Outdoor Retailer pack.

The Hike

Meet Bob P. Lightfoot, our virtual hiker. Bob is an experienced lightweight hiker who recently lost all his gear in an unfortunate encounter with an ill-tempered marmot. Coincidently, he is currently serving the remainder of a thirty-day sentence at the Gallatin County Jail on a “disturbing the wildlife” charge. As he is thus unable to gear shop personally, he desperately asked for our help to put a new kit together for his upcoming hike. As Bob is a long-time, though often misunderstood, friend of Backpacking Light, we could not refuse to re-equip him. He is planning a three-day/two-night winter mountain hike in the Beartooths over snow in temperatures ranging from 0°F to 25°F (-18°C to -4°C). He’ll be hiking with two other people, and though he may share a shelter with his group, wants his kit to be as self-sufficient as possible. He is 5 ft 9 in tall, weighs 150 pounds, has a size 9 shoe, and wears size medium in most clothing.

The Plan

When we’re done loading the pack, Bob should be completely equipped for a long weekend of winter trekking in fine lightweight style – even down to a planned lightweight menu. Please join us throughout the show as we add new items to our hyper-linked Virtual Pack. The BLORT will also be checking the attached forum thread daily to try to incorporate your suggestions.

Jan 22 update by Mike Martin:

We spent today at Backcountry Base Camp demoing gear and ski touring. Stay tuned: we’ll begin our search tomorrow for products to add to the pack at Outdoor Retailer.

Jan 23 update by Mike Martin:

We added a pack, sleeping pad, first aid kit, whistle, and hat to the virtual pack today. The hat is a brand new item from Outdoor Research, while the rest are favorites that have been available for a while. We’ve also taken some of Bob’s idiosyncrasies into account when making our choices. In addition, we corrected a crucial omission from the gearlist categories – we never included any way to start fire! Bob would undoubtedly have been unhappy without it.

Jan 24 update by Mike Martin:

We found some good stuff for Bob today. We added some insulated shoes, warm pants for in-camp use, and a balaclava to complete his on-the-go headwear. Thank you to everyone who added their comments to the forum! It’s been a long day at OR – I’m writing this update at 1:30am. So, good night. I’ll check back in tomorrow.

Jan 25 update by Mike Martin:

Today we equipped Bob with with a new stove from Snowpeak, a torso base layer, a water purification system, some cool shades, a warm sleeping bag, an…umm…innovative personal hygiene device, and a complete menu. I’m hoping Bob’s trust fund wasn’t depleted defending his recent court case as the cost of his gear is becoming impressive.

Jan 26 update by Mike Martin:

While today was the last day of Outdoor Retailer, we’ll continue to add to the pack as we catch up from our other show duties over the next few days. Today, we added both warm and shell parkas, trekking pants, eating utensils, stuff sacks, and avalanche equipment. We also added a new category: “shell mitts” on Will Reitveld’s handware advice. Bob’s full skin-out weight is up to almost 16 pounds, while his wallet is over $2600 lighter. Such is the nature of our task of limiting our choices to gear found at the show. Given latitude to choose items outside of Outdoor Retailer, we could certainly lighten Bob’s pack further. But without discount shopping and some make-your-own-gear projects it’s still expensive to build a complete lightweight kit from scratch. Purchasing (even virtually) all the gear at one time just highlights the sticker shock.

Jan 27 update by Mike Martin:

Today we gave Bob an extremely robust and powerful headlamp as he’s a bit paranoid in the dark. We also added some tights for warmth under his shell pants and a long-time favorite winter water bladder. Finally, we found several other creative uses for natural materials as a windscreen and tent stakes.

Jan 28 update by Mike Martin:

We’re almost, but not quite done with the Virtual Pack gear list. We completed the kitchen with a pot and fuel, finished off Bob’s handwear system, added his first pair of socks, and gave him trekking poles and snowshoes. Stay tuned – we’ll add the last few remaining items soon.

Final update by Mike Martin:

The Virtual Pack is complete! We were able to find items at Outdoor Retailer to fit every category on our gear list. Sometimes, we stretched a bit, such as our choices for hygiene and bear protection, but we did it. While some of our entries are on the whimsical side, we generally took this project seriously and selected the best equipment we could find at the show. We looked for synergy where possible (like using the sleeping pad for a pack frame), and tried to find multiple uses for items wherever we could. Nevertheless, there are some lessons to be learned from this project:

  • The final cost of the pack is staggering at over $4400. This is due to the fact that Bob started with absolutely nothing – not even the clothes on his back. Also, we used retail pricing for every item and tried to equip Bob with the best gear we could find, regardless of price. In the real world, costs could be reduced by buying items at “street price”, purchasing used gear, using existing gear in your closet, making some make-your-own-gear projects, etc.
  • The final full-skin-out weight of the Virtual Pack is just over 32 pounds. This includes all Bob’s clothes and carried items, all the gear in his pack, and even his food and water. This is a very respectable weight for a winter hike, especially if you consider that the base pack weight is only 16 pounds. Yes, we could have gone lighter by using gear that was not available at the show, but that would have defeated the purpose of this project. Also consider that Bob is the mule for his group as we’ve added the full weight (and cost) of shared group gear like kitchen and shelter to his pack. His base and full-skin-out weights would each be over two pounds lighter if we distributed this gear equally among his group.
  • Our personal packs evolve and are fine tuned over many hikes. None of the gear in Bob’s pack has been tested. So there are sure to be items that don’t work together as well as some small things that we didn’t get into the pack. I’d advise Bob to take this kit on a test hike in safe conditions to sort out the gear before heading out to a remote area.
  • We didn’t consider availability when choosing gear. Some of the items shown by vendors won’t be available until next fall. So, Bob may have to wait until next winter for his hike.

The Gear

Here is the gearlist we’ve prepared for Bob. Be sure to click through the links in the “selection” column to view information on each item.

Gear List
Clothing Worn While Hiking WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
shoes or boots Keen Growler 39.2 1,111 $125
socks, 1st pair Lorpen Primaloft Light Hiker Sock 2 57 $20
socks, 2nd pair Lorpen Primaloft Light Hiker Sock 2 57 $20
hiking torso base layer Terramar Terramawool Crew Shirt 4.5 128 $65
hiking torso insulation layer Patagonia R1 Hoody 10.9 309 $130
hiking leg base layer Golite Speed Demon 3/4 Tights 6 170 $70
trekking pants Rab Bergen Pants 12 340 $175
shell jacket Wescomb Specter LT Hooded Jacket 11.2 318 $299
gaiters Outdoor Research Cascadia Gaiter 6.9 196 $50
warm hat Outdoor Research Highpoint Cap 2.3 65 $35
warm gloves/mittens Manzella Tahoe Glove 2 57 $15
Other Items Worn or Carried WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
bear spray Light My Fire SL3
trekking poles Komperdell Nature Sticks 10.6 301 $160
snowshoes Crescent Moon Magnesium 9 56 1,588 $260
avalanche beacon Pieps DSP Avalanche Beacon 7 198 $450
Other Clothing WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
camp torso insulation layer Golite Inferno Jacket 25 709 $275
camp leg insulation layer Montbell UL Down Inner Pants 6.7 190 $130
shell mitts Outdoor Research Endeavor Mitt 3.9 111 $69
liner glove Ibex Wool Liner Glove 1.4 40 $25
thin balaclava Outdoor Research Ninjaclava 1.8 51 $24
Shelter and Sleep System WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
sleeping bag or quilt Montbell Ultralight Superstretch Down Hugger #1 36 1,021 $370
sleeping pad Therm-a-Rest Ridge Rest Deluxe 19 539 $30
tent/tarp/bivy Nemo Nano 56 1,588 $299
stakes Improvised Tent Stakes 0 0 $0
Packing WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
backpack Golite Pinnacle 25 709 $130
dry bag for insulated gear 65L Sea to Summit eVac™ Drysack 5.2 147 $40
stuff sacks Outdoor Research Helium Quick Sack #2 1 28 $11
Cooking and Water WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
stove Snowpeak Gigapower LI Backpacking 10.4 295 $160
pot Primus EtaExpress Pot 1L 10.5 298 $45
fuel container Primus PowerGas 450g Canister 7.7 218 $8
windscreen Snowballs 0 0 $0
water bottle Nalgene 1.5 Liter Flexible Canteen 2.3 65 $9
water treatment Steripen Journey 5 142 $129
eating utensil GSI Outdoors Rehydrate Spoon 0.4 11 $2
food storage 10L Sea to Summit Trash Dry Sack 3.5 99 $30
Other Essentials WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
map Garmin Mapsource Topo 2008 0 0 $117
compass/GPS Garmin eTrex Vista HCx 6 170 $321
LED flashlight Petzl MYO XP Headlamp 5.9 167 $70
shovel CAMP AT Fix Shovel 15.9 451 $28
avalanche probe CAMP CarbonLight Avalanche Probe 4.4 125 $70
whistle Adventure Medical Kits Rescue Howler 0.5 14 $10
first aid kit Adventure Medical Kits Ultralight .3 3.5 99 $11
sunglasses Numa Sport Optics Lo-Pro 0.8 23 $80
firestarter Light My Fire SL3 2.7 77 $38
personal hygiene items Snowballs 0 0 $0
knife Light My Fire SL3
Consumables WEIGHT MSRP
Type Selection Ounces Grams USD
fuel Estimated Fuel Consumed, Including Snow Melting 15.9 450 $0
water Average Weight In Water Bottle 26 750 $0
day 1 menu (lunch, dinner) Day 1 Menu 11.1 315 $14
day 2 menu (breakfast, lunch, dinner) Day 2 Menu 22.2 629 $25
day 3 menu (breakfast, lunch) Day 3 Menu 8.6 244 $3
Cost and Weight Summary
Cost and Weight Summary Pounds Kilograms Dollars
(1) Total Worn or Carried While Hiking 10.79 4.90 $1,874
(2) Total Base Weight/Cost in Pack 16.28 7.40 $2,530
(3) Total Weight/Cost of Consumables 5.27 2.39 $42
(4) Full Skin-Out Base Weight/Cost (1) + (2) 27.07 12.30 $4,404
(5) Total Initial Pack Weight/Cost (2) + (3) 21.55 9.79 $2,573
(6) Full Skin-Out Weight/Cost (1) + (2) + (3) 32.33 14.70 $4,446

Light My Fire SL3 (Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008)

Virtual Pack: Light My Fire SL3

This product feature was published in conjunction with the Virtual Pack Project from Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008. Click here for more information about the ORWM 2008 Virtual Pack Project.

Light My Fire SL3 (Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008) - 1

The 2.7 ounce SL3 Swedish Firesteel® from Light My Fire is a neat little device incorporating a serrated 3.1″ blade and a sparking device that stores in the handle. I have to admit, though, that the choice to use it in the virtual pack is a bit whimsical. There are knives and multi-tools that are better suited to winter camping. There are better firestarters and stove lighters. And, there are certainly better bear protection devices available.

Nevertheless, this is the last item to go into the Virtual Pack and it gets extra points for being a multi-use item. Bob can use it to start fires by shaving tinder with the knife and igniting with the striker. He can use it to light his stove. And, simply because we could not find any bear spray vendors at Outdoor Retailer, Bob gets to defend his food cache with its 3.1″ blade. (That thought should keep him alert when cooking his meals.)

MSRP: $37.95. Weight: 2.7 oz. Available Now.

(Bear protection usage is meant in jest. Backpacking Light does not recommend or endorse using a small knife for bear protection.)

Garmin eTrex Vista HCx with Mapsource Topo 2008

Virtual Pack: Garmin eTrex Vista HCx with Mapsource Topo 2008

This product feature was published in conjunction with the Virtual Pack Project from Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008. Click here for more information about the ORWM 2008 Virtual Pack Project.

eTrex Vista HCx (Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008)
We selected the Garmin eTrex Vista HCx GPS over the new Colorado 400t due to the proven technology, lighter weight, reliability, and battery life of the eTrex. Available Now.

Garmin Topo 2008 (Outdoor Retailer Winter Market 2008)
We chose Garmin MapSource Topo 2008 Topographic Maps. With it Bob can load maps into his Garmin GPS no matter where he hikes in the US. Available Now.

Bob is a glutton for punishment. Nothing is going to stop him from making mega miles per day. Not white out. Not short winter days. He’s going to hike if he can’t see six feet in front of him. He’s going to hike hours after the dark. With all his warm clothes and headlamp, he might hike all night.

Bob is not the most astute route-finder. He’s going to need some serious navigational help to prevent him from getting desperately lost in these difficult conditions. A good mapping GPS with some spare lithium batteries is what he needs.

We were tempted with the new Colorado 400t with its large, high resolution screen and nifty 3-D visualizations and shaded topographic maps. But the Colorado is only a few weeks old and we don’t know enough about its operation or its battery life in cold weather. At over 7 oz it’s a bit on the heavy side for ultralight, even with all its promised assets.

We decided to go with the proven technology, lighter weight, reliability, and battery life of the venerable mapping eTrex series. The new Garmin eTrex Vista HCx GPS with a high performance receiver that will work reliably in trees is just what he needs. Bob may very well take the Colorado 400t next year once it is thoroughly field tested and proven itself reliable.

To be useful Bob’s GPS needs internal topographic maps. Since he’s using a Garmin GPS there’s only one choice that will load into his GPS, Garmin maps. “Garmin MapSource Topo U.S. 2008” Topographic Maps covers the entire US at 1:100K resolution. (If Bob is lucky and in a National Park or surrounding area he could load MapSource US TOPO 24K, National Parks, East and West topographic maps into the eTrex Vista HCx).