When less is more

William- you do have an issue. I've noticed that a lot of the "known" names on this site are people with builds "less" then yours, i.e. some where around 5'7 to 5'10" and 140 lb to 160 lbs.

Comparing them to you in weight and height, their numbers are about a 20% to 40% difference in weight and height from yours. So for argument sake you are around 30% “larger” then some of those “known” individuals and their pack weights.

With this in mind you can add that 30% to your pack weight if it will ease you mind.

Remember that clothing weight doesn’t go up percentage wise just because you are “bigger”. In other words a MB inner Down Jacket is listed at 6.9 oz for a size medium. The XL is 8.5 oz, that is a 19% difference. Other clothing types are even less. But your shoes are 1 whole pound more (that equals 6.5 lbs of pack weight) so I think the 30% number is a decent bench mark to go from.

So for those who get excited about a sub 5 lb pack you can get excited about a sub 6.5 lb pack. A sub 10 lb could be a sub 13 for you. Conversely, a "smaller" guy should have a 11.9 lb pack to match your 17 lb pack.

This is all subjective but it should make you feel better- or maybe the “smaller” guys won’t feel quite so good next to you?

Tad, that was very well put and along the same lines that I was thinking. You just said it more elegantly than I ever could.

Thats true,
Its shows the randomness of the UL/SUL/XUL categories.
Most SUL list I see just barley make it under 5 lbs.
But if you "sized up" all of their gear it would no longer be in that magical SUL range anymore.
For instance I need a tarp at least 9 ft long to really be comfortable, I also like a large bivy and lots of my cloths are sz. XL. I can some times fit into a L but I have a 42 INCH chest and long arms- according to gear manufactures if you have a 42 inch chest they assume you must have a 42+ inch waist! So I have to choose between clothes that fit in the arms and chest but are super baggy in the middle or a tight chest and short arms that fits in the middle.
I believe others in the past have called for a "handy cap" according to size.
This is one reason you may never see a SUL list from me, besides that I dont care much for SUL fragile packs.

I wanted to down size the volume of gear that I had accumulated and stored but which was seeing little if any use.

I posted my FS: FREE STUFF list and within a short time, More Was Less. :)

I have often thought along the same lines too. What about the the larger hikers? Less is more is right according to your given size= Height and Weight. I would see a SUL list and would think I could do that too but SUL hikers are Skurkas and Jordan size= 5'8 and 150 lbs soaking wet. If you have a larger size there is no way you can tell me that you would be comfortable on 3/4 inch torso pad- NO way Jose!! A bigger size means bigger gear for your size. I am 6'3 235 lbs and I have friend that is even bigger that I hike with and he is pushing 300 lbs. He needs a bigger sleeping pad and bag. I believe his base weight is around 25 lbs . SUL and UL is all relative to your size unless you are a complete SPARTAN. To each is there own, I always sleep very comfortable with my Prolite 4 (24oz) sleeping pad. Because I sleep better I hike better the next day.

IMO it is more constructive to think in terms of pack weight as a percentage of body weight. I'm kind of an odd size, I'm 6' 1.5" tall but I weigh 165 lb. I find that pack weights of 15% relative to body weight have minimal impact on my strength or endurance. So around 25 lb. total pack weight. At 10% pack weight relative to body weight, or around 16 lbs., I don't notice it at all.

My feeling is, if your pack weight is light enough that the pack stays on your back most of the day, and it doesn't really tax your strength or endurance, then why worry about it? On most trips now, I'm comfortable with the pack weights I'm carrying, and it doesn't really slow me down or leave me sore the next day. My new gear purchases are driven by increasing functionality or comfort now, although weight is always a concern, and I'll decrease it where I can. It's just not the over-arching concern anymore.

Well put Scott- I like that. I am really taxed at 35-40 lbs at my size. Multi-use items should be on everybody's to buy list..Less is More!!

It's kind of the same for those of us who are smaller.

I'm only 5'3". Smaller clothes don't necessarily weigh all that much less, and my tent/tarp/cook pot etc. is going to weigh exactly what everybody else's is going to weigh. I NEED lighter gear just to get closer to even with people who are bigger and stronger.

Last summer on the PCT, with food and water for the desert I was carrying close 1/3 my body weight. For almost any guy, my stuff would have been closer to 1/4 his body weight.

> Last summer on the PCT, with food and water for the desert I was carrying close 1/3 my body weight.

Not good. 25% should be the limit for physiology reasons.

Cheers

I've found that after you get your base pack weight under 10 lbs or so it's easier and cheaper just to lose some body weight. I can lose 2-5 lbs a lot more cheaply and easily (up to a point, of course) than I can reduce my pack weight. This may not work for those folks with less than 10-12% body fat, but I'm guessing a lot of us aren't there. And hiking a lot is a great way to lose some weight. Just my 2 cents.

I think there is too much fixation on Sub 10 or sub 5.

There is a point of diminishing returns. The bottom line is: can you hike the number of miles you want without your gear making you tired, sore, uncomfortable or inefficient? What do you gain by loosing that last 12 oz, 2 lbs, 3 lbs, etc.

I am one of those 5'10" 150 lb guys, so my clothing really is light. My just received Bearthooth Hoody is a small and weighs 7.5 oz, which is less than the stated 8.3 oz medium spec. And it goes about the same for a lot of gear. The smaller you are the lighter everything is, including less food and water. Smaller packs, shoes, shelters, sleeping system, guylines, qty of stakes, etc. You eat less food, so you need a smaller pot and less fuel. You drink less water so you need less water storage.

It was easy to get my base below 10 lbs. 7 lbs is easily attainable and comfortable for most trips. 6lbs not too hard for short trips. To get below 5 lbs is another matter. But I could easily do it if I want to spend some money. Here is what it would take:

– Replace my Conduit with a Murmur or a Revelation to save 12 to 14 oz. And if I fall on a rocky surface, I have probably ruined my pack. Plus I will lose a really efficient waist belt and convenient hip pockets, which make a light load seem even lighter.

– Replace my 8.8 oz poncho/tarp with a super light fragile one, to save 4.9 oz. Now I have to be more careful pitching it and am going to be constantly worried when hiking cross country that it might tear on something. Guess I would have to stick to trails more often. Plus it will be a smaller shelter than my current equipment.

– Replace my expensive down bags with an equally expensive quilts to save 5 oz.

– Replace my MLD Soul Bivy Side Zip with a superlight and more fragile one to save 4 oz.

I have a 3 day trip planned for the end of the month, and my base will be 6 lbs 10.3 oz (6lbs 2.4 oz if I don't anticipate need for the bivy).

Here is what I could spend to get it down to 4 lbs 15.8 oz:

MLD SpectraLite Poncho/Tarp = $155
MLD Revelation Pack = $170
MLD LiteSoul Bivy = $245
Nunatak Arc Edge Quilt = $328

Total Cost = $898 plus shipping and handling

There are other options, brands, prices to get down below 5lbs. But here is my point… at what threshold do you get diminishing returns? The above scenario will reduce my base weight by 26.5 oz, at a cost of $34 per oz.

But more importantly, this gear will create a need to change how I function by using more fragile equipment and learning how to use a quilt. I have used sleeping bags for the past 50 years, and I just don't want to change.

But I could post pictures and weights here on BPL to impress everyone with my sub 5 lb system. :)

Please don't take the last statement wrong!!!!!!!!

I have been digesting and absorbing a lot of valuable information here on BPL for the past 6 months, and have replaced a lot of gear, reducing my base weight by about 8 to 10 lbs. The sub 5 people have given me a lot of great ideas. I have a lot of respect for them.

I was below 20 lbs, but now my 6 – 7 lb base weight is a significant difference. I am thrilled with my new and improved base weight, but don't feel additional paring will make any noticable difference in my adventures.

I must say I have to agree with you here, as we seem to be in just about identical places in regards to gear and pack weights. I too can drag myself below that 5 lb barrier, but it is going to be a lot of money for those last few ounces, and I am definitely at the point of diminishing returns.

Cheers,

William, I can feel your pain as well. At 6'4" 180 lbs, sleeping bag has to be longer, bivy is longer, tarp is longer, tent's need to be longer and taller, clothing is almost impossible to come by…

There's no way i'd fit inside a gatewood cape, maybe a poncho/tarp if it is custom made for my height.

That's the other part of it. Anything we want ultralight really needs to be custom made for our body size! We can't just go buy the next thing off the shelf.

At 180 lbs, i'm a lightweight compared to you, but I think in some ways that makes it harder to find clothing. Like Brian was saying just cause you have a 42 inch chest doesn't mean you have a 42 inch waist. I have a 40-42 inch chest and a 32 inch waist. Most XL and XXL and even some L clothing fits me like a poncho. I've found some that works, but spent a fortune on clothing and not liked them because I have to just accept them as is. One thing for sure is that I like my clothing to be more fitted… for two reasons. 1. It feels better on me and it saves on weight for all that extra material that is floating around.

I'm getting to the point of wanting to make my own gear just because of my body size. I can't keep spending money on gear that doesn't fit me right.

The older I get, the more I find that is definitely worth spending double the money and getting the better quality clothing and equipment if they fit right and work better.

BTW, my son's name is William and it looks like we might be neighbors… Live in SLP and work in Mtka. Speaking of work, I should get back to work.

Nick,

A few options:

>>> Replace my Conduit with a Murmur or a Revelation to save 12 to 14 oz. And if I fall on a rocky surface, I have probably ruined my pack. Plus I will lose a really efficient waist belt and convenient hip pockets, which make a light load seem even lighter.<<<

Have you looked at the Z-pack Blast 18 in cuben fiber? For 6 ounces you can still have a padded winged hipbelt with pockets. And while the heavy cuben fiber Joe uses might not be as tough as a Conduit, I think it's pretty close. Especially considering the mesh on the Conduits isn't too hard to damage.

>>>Replace my MLD Soul Bivy Side Zip with a superlight and more fragile one to save 4 oz.<<<

You can get a nice bivy from TiGoat and with the full bug net and half zipper options it weighs 7.25 ounces.

About $145 for the pack and $135 for the bivy.

Edit to fix prices