UL Fail

Good example of why I stopped subscribing to BP many years ago.

Vastly oversimplified filler.

The writer should be embarrassed at his laziness… or perhaps it was part of a larger, general effort to convince readers not to stray from the trad gear marketers who comprise the vast majority of their advertisers?

Doesn't seem like a complete coincidence that the take-home message is "Buy more gear."

I got a different vibe from the article. I agree it's a fluff piece, but the message I took away from it was that lightening up your kit by taking less stuff is a good thing, just don't get stupid about it. There's nothing in it about buying more gear or using traditional gear.

Well, that was a few minutes of my life that I won't get back. Nothing here, just a silly rant.

I saw that. Covers stupid journalism rather than stupid light. "Gee, I left ALL my gear at home and it didn't work." Duh. What they need is a good natural toilet paper article :)

My only takeaway from the "Vastly oversimplified filler" was that was no way to treat a dog.

Ah, the in-depth insightfulness of “backpacker” (ahem) magazine. Let’s have someone who has never tried UL before write our UL article because, you know, there are no experienced UL people available. None. In all of North America, nay, the entire world.

HJ
Adventures In Stoving
Hikin’ Jim’s Blog

As a follow-up article, perhaps he could try SCUBA diving without any training and while leaving 80% of the gear behind.

+1 Doug. I read it as satire.

Methinks some of you think too highly of your chosen passion.

"….there are no experienced UL people available. None. In all of North America, nay, the entire world."

HA! Their stove articles must really get you going, Jim :)

Someone needs to fill in the pages between the endless advertisements!

Their stove articles must really get you going, Jim

Therein lay the genesis of my blog.

I mean it’s not like I could do worse…

HJ
Adventures In Stoving
Hikin’ Jim’s Blog

> I mean it's not like I could do worse…
But you cheat – you actually test/use the gear in the field.

Cheers

Destined to fail. However adding just a cuben shelter, light pad, custom 50°F quilt with maybe a serape hole, and wispy frameless light pack to put it all in would have made the trip alright. Might be something to ponder. (oh yeah, doggy pack and foam too).

I don't really give a hoot about labels like UL or SUL or whatever. I think we just need to recognize that there are many ways to enjoy hiking — and a lot of it is actually dependent on how we are wired — our personal priorities.

SUL — Some people like the challenge (and/or bragging rights) for being able to tackle hikes with the least encumbrances. Others prefer a high degree of comfort.

But if you look at the audience that Backpacker Magazine addresses — it's generally the mainstream backpackers. And for them, if 10-15 lbs base weight is more than light enough — it does make sense NOT to cut further.

I think it is NONSENSICAL for UL / SUL folks to "fail" mainstream backpacking — and vice versa. HYOH and all that, remember?

It would be curious to see a distribution of base weights for backpacker magazine readers.

Ive never looked at it. Magazines are mostly utter garbage designed to sell ads.

From what ive seen, many will fail on a hike of any length with their normal gear.

Overnight camping, and long distance backpacking, are vastly different.

"+1 Doug. I read it as satire."

agree that he was going for the humor, but he didn't quite pull it off.

"agree that he was going for the humor, but he didn't quite pull it off."

As someone who often goes for humor and nearly as often doesn't quite pull it off, I'll agree with that!