Beartooth Wilderness 6-day list

Mike wrote:

>Now, I enjoy going thru these gear lists. People ask for advice, and I chime in. I also like giving BOLD advice. I've found that the benefits of a light pack are hugely rewarding for me personally. And it seems like I play the role of the zealot.

Please keep doing it! Sam too! Constant envelope pushing and challenging of accepted norms are what make light backpacking, BPL, and its community exciting!

"In any event, lets leave this side track alone and I apologize to Dave (CamperDave) for the digression."

Don't worry about me. I'm new to this site and it can be a bit intimidating at times. Call me a loser but I feel some sense of pride that somehow it was "my" thread that got a good discussion going. :-)

-Dave

The comment about the pack weight isn't much different than a requirement that the "Footwear" for the "Lightweight Backpacking (WS1-LWB) 3-Day" has a "Max Weight" of 28 ounces.

My Northface Light Hiking footwear weigh 30 ounces a pair. Better than that high weight my strange feet like the way they fit. Would I give them up for something 2 ounces lighter that hurt my feet, I don't think so.

Give me a total weigh not to exceed and I expect I could shave 1/3 of the weight off your total.

Mike and Sam (and others!) –

Do keep it coming. Earning a living makes me at best an infrequent backpacker, and I welcome whatever advice you true outdoorsmen provide.

A few comments, then I promise to get back to the OP…

Mike, I just want to say "Thanks" for your greater introspection lately. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like you've put… if not more thought, then more reasoning behind your thoughts in recent posts. It just feels like you've been more open and sharing of why you say things. The additional insight is great, and it makes it "easier" to read things than straight-blunt "No, you're wrong" stuff. It is good to re-think the paradigm. So, seriously, thanks. And you're right, ultimately this stuff is about FUN.

The reason I called out the "a 37 oz backpack is too heavy for backpacking" comment Sam made and the "traditional weight" comment isn't because I have an issue with anyone expressing their opinion, or even because I disagree, but because it was such a blanket statement. One of the things I most value about BPL is its relative objectivity. Broad sweeping generalizations like that fly in the face of reason, rationale, and balanced appraisal. I try to keep things tempered. There's a difference between helping someone save weight and making blanket, "always true" statements. If Sam still has "dozens" of Granite Gear products and ULA, then I find it hard to believe that even he finds those "too heavy for backpacking." It all depends on the circumstances.

The "traditional" thing caught my ire because there's no way a two-pound pack is a "traditional" or, to borrow from farming, "conventional" weight pack. It's just false given the things available on the market. I do appreciate and encourage challenging the paradigm, but I try really hard to keep it real. That said, some of you may recall a pack I've mentioned in earlier threads… an old Gerry pack, around 60 or 70 liters, a bunch of zippers, framed but super basic suspension, leather patches… in short, a 30-year old pack that weighs a hair over 2 pounds. Interesting.

For the record, yeah, I'd shoot for a pack around 2 pounds or less… just not if it doesn't fit as well. I'm completely enamored with the ULA Ohm, framed and 21 ounces. The packs I'm "building" now (boy, when you're learning to make them they sure come out ugly!) are all framed and 24 ounces or less. My base is under 10 pounds.

To the OP: No amount of convincing could make me believe you need two headlamps. Ditch one. (And here's where I come across all blunt and "rude" like I used to think Mike C was being… but he was just trying to be efficient, like the pack lists…) Paracord, you probably don't need two mini-biners. Seems like a lot of hand sani. The sleeping bag is good, but still over two pounds. Big investment to make a change, but switching to a WM Ultralite could save you about a half pound. I used to think I needed a 15-20 degree bag for three-season use, but have found that a good, conservatively rated 30-35 degree bag is good for just about all but winter. (Especially if you wear some clothes to bed.) Point being, you could easily drop your bag weight to 16-20 ounces. Generic briefs? That scares me a little. Please tell us you're not wearing cotton. You have a quarter pound in TP and baby wipes. Ouch! I can't remember the last time I carried TP. Actually went "public" with that on a local TV interview about backpacking and reducing our footprint. They seemed to be fascinated with the concept. But using leaves is a simple deal. I love wet ones! I'll admit that on some long trips I've pack a few baby wipes as a luxury. But I do mean a few wipes, and it's only been on a few trips. If you insist, limit yourself to a Luxury .5-1 ounce. Lastly, I'm not a bladder person, but since I can carry a 1-L bottle for about 1.5 oz, 3.5 oz seems "really" heavy for a 3.5oz bladder. Could you use a bigger bladder and ditch the other bottle?

Incidentally, it could be worth checking out an Ohm or Circuit, maybe a Mariposa Plus… it'd save you nearly a pound, but add a frame and, to me, add comfort while saving weight. I'd also consider switching to spectra line, could save you another couple ounces easy. Your first aid kit might be perfectly reasonable, but take a real hard look at it and the rest of your gear, and see if you have any multi-use items you could take out of that kit. For example, a re-used plastic baggie is great for wound irrigation and could replace an irrigation syringe if you had one. I'd consider switching to toothpowder instead of toothpaste… cut 90% of that weight potentially.

I'd consider your not-crocs and GPS luxuries. It's a personal decision. Neither are really necessary. It'd be an easy way to cut nearly a pound out of your pack. But if one or both brings great pleasure to your life, by all means keep one or both of the items.

Peace-

A 37-oz backpack isn't necessary for a six day trip in the Bob Marshall Wilderness. Please don't mistake a specific comment made about a specific trip as a blanket statement.

Perhaps I need to be more specific and mention my opinions and suggestions in this thread were devoted to the questions raised in this thread.

Reading this thread took me alot longer than I ever expected (after going to some of the other links mentioned). but eventually I felt like most everything got said. Except I never saw anyone question two (2) bandanas. One should suffice I should think, although I don't personally see the need for any at all. Enjoy your trip, and tell us a bit about it when you return. Also, whether you're leaving anything home next time that you took along with this time.

If all a person has is a 'heavy' 2 lb.,5 oz pack for their 6 day Marshall trip ( sounds heavier listed as 37 oz ), are they supposed to run out and buy a lighter pack? I'm wondering what the negative effects of going with the 2 lb., 5 oz pack would be (this of course is not heavy at all). Many people get lighter packs and gain nothing but tormenting discomfort. I'm thinking the negative effects might be so minor that a person could use that weight pack forever and and a day. I can understand the unbearable crushing psychological weight, however, if one of my buddies on the trip had a 31 oz pack. The 'heavy' pack may be unnecessary but is it necessary to change it? Is the tipping point physical need? I don't think so.

Also, the OP admitts to never backpacking out west, never for more than 3 days and considers himself inexperienced. This seems to go unheard by the some here. Besides, a few extra items of clothing can sure help make a better pillow. I'm impressed by the overall rationality I see in this thread