Sub 5 pound – does it really matter?

the math doesn't add up imo

I go on a 200 mile hike with a 7.9 pound base.
I can do this hike with this base in 5 days.
With 9 pounds of food and a starting pack weight of say 18 pounds make the 5 day hike doable.

the 3 extra lbs of base makes no difference to me, of course ymmv

Well the OP asked if it "matters" which is subjective and only he can answer that. I refined the question some to "does it have an impact" to which the answer is yes. I can go on the same 200 mile trip wearing lightweight hiking boots but trail runners make more sense to me for a number of reasons.

This is one of those rabbit holes that can go on forever. Someone can say that a sleeping pad is a luxury item and that you can use forest duff to insulate yourself from the ground.

So does it matter? Only you can say.
Will it have an impact? Yes.
Is 5lbs something worth worrying about? Again, only you can say.

Well, if the difference is between 27 pounds and 15 then yeah, the 15 pounds is way better. But if the pack weight gets below 15 it doesn't make much difference for me performance or enjoyment-wise. My feet give out just from the walking well before I'm actually tired from the load. In fact, a 15 pound or so load doesn't really tire me out at all compared to no load at all. I couldn't hike 40 miles a day even if I tried. I couldn't do it as a PCT hiker and I couldn't do it now.

I think it would be awesome to be able to do a backpack trip with only 5lbs of gear, but I don't have that kind of money and even if I scrimped and saved I'm not sure it would add much more value than bragging rights.

Depends on the context. The expected load is more important than the base-weight.

If I was carrying lots of food into the wilderness, then yes, gram-counting matters.

If I am going to be hauling anything out of the bush, like cleaning up other people's mess such as old tires abandoned on public land, then yes, it does matter.

But if we are talking about a weekend hike? Not really.

When I first started cutting pack weight I was all about getting my kit as light as possible. But before I even took a trip, I realized that was kind of dumb. I would end up with a bunch of flimsy (generally) gear that I would have to replace after a season or two. So I thought for a bit and realized that I wanted my gear to be as light as possible within reason. I need my gear to last several years, so I do my best to pick gear that strikes the right balance of weight and durability.

So yeah, I still strive to have the lightest pack possible. It's just that it's the lightest pack that's possible for ME. And I'm really quite happy where it's turned out.

Of course I still want all the SUL cuben gear and such, just because it's new and shiny more than anything, but the balance my gear strikes is just right for me.

Piper: "In fact, a 15 pound or so load doesn't really tire me out at all compared to no load at all…I think it would be awesome to be able to do a backpack trip with only 5lbs of gear…"

It's funny how we can reach a point that we don't really care about the weight any more, but still want less!
When my pack weight hits the low 20s, it's the same as having no pack at all. Getting it any lighter isn't going to make me any faster. With the warm weather here, I'm carrying <12lbs on my almost weekly 1-2 nighters, so it just doesn't matter.

That stuff really "added down" when it meant a sub-30lb pack weight on day 1 for a week in the mountains last fall, though!
A couple of decades plus a lot injuries past my prime, 30+ miles in a day with even an ultralight pack is nothing more than a fantasy, but all day comfort on the trail AND all night comfort in camp is a pretty sweet combo.

5 lbs does not matter to me…at this pt…but it may be fun to try further on.

i think the key is, if youve ever lugged a heavy 'oldschool' load, and have cut that load in half or better, and really enjoy the difference, thats what matters.
also, for the long distance thru hiker, doing 20-30+ daily, i'd bet that each pound matters with each step as the day wears on, and the diff b/t 5 & 15 starts to magnify…

On other planets with different anatomies and among the Polydactyly community, they distinguish between pack weights at 6, 12, and 18.

Some take this to an extreme and call 16 pounds "Ultralight", but I think that's cheating.

Good idea, Dave.

Lets switch to base 6. And the majority of the population can use it too, just use a fist as the 6th digit and the other hand as the units. I vote the senary system to replace the decimal system. Heximal sounds much sexier that decimal. Pus, prime numbers and perfect numbers are more fun in base 6.

While were at it, lets dump meters and grams. And parking meters too. However, I do like gram (sp) crackers.

Nick, you should try Octal some day.

–B.G.–

"On other planets…" thats how I and many europeans feel looking up in tables the F, lbs, oz etc. conversions… ;)

So, for me its 5.51lbs SUL and those .51lbs are one load of chocolate that I hold very dearly! ;)

"those .51lbs are one whole bar of chocolate that I hold very dearly! ;)"

Doesn't count toward pack weight if you're holding it…

It is an arbitrary benchmark and the real jist of it is the continued evolution of UL systems. At this point, lowering base weight to under 5 pounds means lighter materials, or leaving yet more gear off the list.

The bottom line for me? I will happily carry a couple more pounds to be more comfortable— and safe. I can tolerate an 8lb summer kit and 12lbs is a more realistic 3-season system for me; either is a far cry from the loads I carried in the 1970's.