Discussion on Pack theory, poles, and shoes

Hmm…Maybe from now on I'll just use one pole.

One of the primary things I "get" out of backcountry travel is photography. But photo gear is heavy, and I didn't like having it in my pack because then it was never accessible when I wanted it. For the past ? years I've used a chest pack for camera gear and really like the arrangement. Foot placement can be dicier, but I slow it down a bit and read the trail kind of like skiing. Done plenty of rock hopping across rivers, through muck and up/down trails with such system. Definitely preferable on-trail, but works either way. And boy, can I tell a difference in COG with that chest pack–I can walk totally upright! For really rough travelling or if I need to make great time the chest pack gets stowed in my main pack.

Huzefa – do you own an Aarn pack? I looked at them online a while ago and came kind of close to buying one. Too bad they don't have a US distributor, so there is no way to test fit without shelling out some serious moolah. I'd love to read your review.

No, I dont own one.

There are plenty of reviews on the internet including some on this site as well.

Hey Brad – What kind of chest pack do you use? I really like my home made one but last weekend I was told I look like a suicide bomber!

Sometimes I wonder if some of the posters here have ever actually backpacked. Packs with a high center of gravity tend to sway back and forth as you hike. I find it highly uncomfortable. If having your shoulders sway back and forth is what wets your whistle, by all means pack up your backpack so your food and water are at the top and see how long you can take it before going nuts. It will become obvious after about two hours of steady hiking whether the center of gravity should ideally be at the top of your pack or the bottom.

The Aarn Backpacks diagrams are obviously a marketing tool. Only extremely overweight individuals have bulbous backs like that and even if the theory were sound, the fact is that the things you need to pack into a backpack are not going to pack into a crescent-shaped cavity very tightly. It's the two little narrow corners that defeat it. Food stuffsacks, water bottles/bladders, ditty bags, sleeping bags, nothing is going to fit into those narrow areas. It's just going to be wasted space, extra weight, and ultimately not useful in the least, just like Osprey's Atmos backpacks' protruding backpanel. Just a waste of pack space..

Poles are there for people who don't want their legs to get tired so quickly. There's not much more to it than that. Hike one day with poles and hike another day without them. If you don't understand their advantage by then, then you're too fit of an individual to be counting ounces or worrying about ultralight backpacking theory, or you're not hiking far enough in the day to need them. I'm a reasonably healthy individual; I don't need poles to get from point A to point B. Yet I use them because they make hiking easier and easier hiking allows me to hike farther in a given day and hurt less the following day. Some people don't like poles. Their loss I say.

I wear the shoes that I feel are the most comfortable to hike in, which happen to be trail runners. Boots are heavy, clunky, and heat up my feet. I'm not interested in hiking barefoot because I don't want my feet to get torn up by rocks or to step on a thorn and deal with my foot hurting all day. Sandals are for people with tough feet, IMO. I get more blisters from hiking in sandals than I ever got from mis-fitted boots.

Just try a few things out. If you feel pain somewhere, then change what you're doing. If you don't feel pain anywhere, then stop worrying about it. If you're still in doubt, consult the scientific method and experiment, experiment, experiment!

I hiked 1500 miles last year on the PCT. I packed my pack with my sleeping bag at the bottom, my jacket and odds-and-end in the middle and my food on top. My water went in the area you say is totally wasted space in an Osprey pack.

I bought the Osprey at about mile 450 into my journey, after traveling with an old Jandd skiing pack. With my old Jandd I packed everything the same way, but without a special place for the water, I tied it to the top. It was by far more comfortable having the water on top than it was having it in the back of my pack in a mesh pocket I had fashioned.

Now I have a G4. I have been packing it the same way with the food on top and the water against my back. I feel like I'm day hiking. Nothing sways. I hardly notice the pack at all. It works best for me.

If you think that it's better to put the heavier things lower then groovy. But don't say that the rest of us have no idea what we are doing. Being able to hike without back spasms is good enough for me to know that I'm doing something right.

I prefer to have the heaviest items not too far above my body's center of gravity, which on me (large-hipped female) is quite low down. I have found that putting heavier items up high tends to make the pack go where it wants to rather than moving with me, and throws me off-balance. However, everyone is different! I suggest that everyone do some experimenting to see what works best for him/her. I haven't yet hiked in locations where I've had to carry lots of water, and I carry my water in the outside side pockets of my pack.

I do recommend that it's best to have the heavier items close to one's back to keep the pack from pulling on the shoulder straps.