Body SIZE and gear weight

Alison,
After a long period of inactivity I started hiking in 2004 at a body weight of 102kg. I found that I needed far more water per day, that my brand new MacPac Torre would slip off my hips due to my oversize and extra sweating when walking 8 hours per day (I was carrying 23 kg). I had it on so tight that it hurt my pelvis!!! So, I sold it and went to a pack that fit my size better (better hip belt). I found the hip belt uncomfortable. I also found that I was eating far more than thinner people who travelled with me.
Now I am at 90 kg and can wear many packs without the discomfort of a big gut. I do get colder and have found that my larger fleeces do not fit so well. I manage on much less water and manage on a thinner mattress. For what it's worth, I think that moving from a 3.5 kg backpack to a 2 kg (or less) pack does make a difference, but not nearly as much as losing body weight. I hike with a load between 10kg to max of 18kg now. Had to buy new thermals and trousers as the others are too loose.
I hope this helps. Pieter

Well I thing that the whole base weight guidelines are merely that, guidelines. For me I'm a large, muscular man with type 1 diabetes. I need to carry larger gear, diabetic supplies, and of course more food and water to accommodate my size and medical condition.

When I read about people saying that I should be able to get my base weight down to 8 pounds or that I shouldn't have to carry more than 1.5 pounds of food per day I just take it with a grain of salt. People need to realize that everything is subjective. In the long run who really cares if you're carrying more weight than the next person? As long as you're having fun it doesn’t matter.

You shouldn't have to validate your pack weight to anyone, just have fun and get in some miles.

>You shouldn't have to validate your pack weight to anyone, just have fun and get in some miles

Agreed 100%. I was thinking more along the lines of how things that ARE within the control of many of us (such as being overwieght, type 1 diabetes is not, nor is height, etc…) affect our gear choices and thus final pack weight. With over half of westerners "overweight" I don't think this is a rare or obscure line of discussion on a site decicated to lightening one's load, yet some people find the topic offensive (as though I'm calling people fat or something)?

For me, the weight I've shaved off my pack weight by going "UL" has been overshadowed by the extra (unecessary and unhealthy) bodyweight I have accumulated. I am actively addressing the issue for myself. I hoped to seek support from within this community for others in my situation who may be lacking time, motivation or knowledge about how to make the change. I figured that since most of us are motivated by gear and gear weights, that showing a tangible decrease in gear needed to be carried (aside from the obvious benefits of carrying less bodyqweight) might help motivate others like myself. I just can't put a good number on the weight differences in my gear (especially clothing, sleeping bag, pot sizes, and maybe less so food, fuel and water) that I would see by losing a size in bodyweight. I suppose I could take my scales down to an outdoor shop and measure weights on different sized garments to give me an idea, but I was hoping others on this forum might already now, whether they've lost or gained a size, or have a partner who wears a size larger or smaller in the same gear.

i have to agree with chad. medical conditions sometimes dictate what you carry and what you leave behind. i was always told to keep weight down to 1/4 your body weight, so of course, a bigger person could carry more weight verses a smaller person. going ultralight just gives you a differant perspective. it's all in what you really need….

>I suppose I could take my scales down to an outdoor shop and measure weights on different sized garments to give me an idea, but I was hoping others on this forum might already now, whether they've lost or gained a size, or have a partner who wears a size larger or smaller in the same gear.<

Well you have your answer right there, go out and document the gear weight savings yourself. If you're serious about losing the weight that you're concerned about then this should be a good way to further motivate yourself. Besides you could always use your computer and the internet to check weight differences between sizes.

The weight penalty isn't huge. My wife can use a short sleeping bag, I use a regular. She wears men's XS clothing, I wear a medium. I'd say through all the gear it's doubtful she carries a pound less in stuff due to her size.

But she weighs under 110lbs and I weigh 155lbs so it's not exactly a problem for me to carry an extra pound.

Ultralight is a style, the absolute weight of you kit doesn't mean squat. Getting out and USING it is far more important. I've gone sub 3, 4 etc but who cares. If planning a fun trip with my wife I'll undoubtedly have a base weight closer to 10lbs than 5lbs so we have cards to play with in the tent, good food and wine to drink and plenty of warm clothes to huddle up in and watch the stars.

Point being, don't sweat the extra pound or two. Get as light as your environment, body, skills and wallet dictate and get outside! :D

Allison,
You’re not offending me. I am what I am, and that’s all that I am.
I can’t remember whether it’s in Karen Berger’s book, or in “Lightweight Backpacking and Camping,” but the discussion was about why women’s equipment wasn’t significantly lighter than men’s equipment even though women are, for the most part, smaller. Therefore women typically carry a greater proportion of their body weight. The reason was that the weight is in the hardware, and not in the material (per se) of the equipment. I don’t know if you are going to realize a great weight savings in your gear by dropping a size.
In March of this year, I thought of all of the hundreds of dollars I was spending on UL gear to drop a few pounds and the fact that I was easily 30 lb. overweight. I decided to drop at least my base weight off of my gut before doing the JMT this year. I dropped even more weight than my target.
So, the ludicrousness of the situation was my motivation. I also remembered Jardine’s regression of pack weight to energy output, and figured if I was lighter, I could go further with less fuel. It worked.
Jim

Are you still doing the JMT in ’09?

> I thought of all of the hundreds of dollars I was spending on UL gear to drop a few pounds
> and the fact that I was easily 30 lb. overweight. I decided to drop at least my base weight
> off of my gut before doing the JMT this year. I dropped even more weight than my target.
> So, the ludicrousness of the situation was my motivation.

Brutally honest, and totally true.

> figured if I was lighter, I could go further with less fuel. It worked.

Payoff!

Cheers

Allison, just for sake of comparison, a large (UK 14) womens Haglofs fleece zip-T pullover weighs about 6 oz, while a mens medium (which translates into a 16 or 18 I would guess) weighs about 10 oz. This is probably for 200 weight fleece. So the weight of the garment will go up or down depending on the size and of course the density of the fabric.

Lots of variables to your question. For instance, I seem to "go off feed" at altitude and end up bringing about half my food back. I could probably shave off quite a bit of weight if I planned better, but extra food is always good.

My husband is about a foot taller than me. We could get as skinny as Hollywood starlets and still? His gear will always be heavier than mine. As for me, my gear weighs the same – if I lost weight for example the weight loss in my pack would be minimal – my main gear wouldn't change. The only to shrink would be my pant size. For him, even if he was skinny he would still require extra tall gear – which is at the heaviest of gear no matter what you buy

I don't have an issue with what you wrote but what doesn't make much sense is at the end:
"are actively trying to reduce, their total SKIN-OUT weight by reducing the size of gear they need to carry (especially garments, cooking and sleeping systems)."
Well…even if a person dropped 30 lbs weight on body their cooking system is not likely to change. And oddly, you might need more food as you drop weight – due to your metabolism revving up ;-)

Not that there is anything wrong with getting in shape though! It won't always save pack weight though ;-) I'd say get in shape to be in shape. Nothing more, nothing less.

James, still planning on the JMT next year. One of the BIG reasons I started this thread. I figure to give myself as much time as I can to shed some weight.

I am not unfit by any means (thus I doubt that losing weight will increase my food requirements), I've just gained some fat due to A)an aging metabolism (partly damaged by extreme dieting for bodybuilding competitions); B)An ankle injury that left me in plaster for 5 months and ultimately has left me with osteoarthritis; and C)the fact that my appetite did not change in spite of the above factors.

I acknowledge that downsizing isn't likely to dramatically reduce my pack weight, but on a forum where some folks will agonise over whether or not to buy a new stove to drop their stove weight from 1oz to 0.5oz, I think it is worth talking about. The real motivation will be that I end up weighing less (less stress on arthritic ankle) and feeling better. I shouldn't really need any other motivation!

Thanks folks