I have to buy Ber Canisters…. Crap

Pouring water isn't hard — if you have marked containers handy.

Weighing is easy too — if you have the scale handy (and who among us doesn't?).

Formula is easy — if your bear container is perfectly cylindrical. No good for Garcias, etc. with distinct shapes.

Gentlemen, pick your poison.

I see that my comment engendered more discussion than I had anticipated!

What was on my mind when I suggested weighing the water (rather than some other method) was that it is easy to be accurate with that. If anyone is going to publish numbers here, it would be good to be accurate and reproducible. For that matter, unless some public spirited one of us has all possible bear cans, then we want some method of getting data from the several people who collectively do own the cans of interest while being sure the figure is reliable and reproducible.

Weighing does not really have variables other than perhaps the density of water with temperature (I have not bothered to see whether that is a big enough effect to care about), assuming you can weigh it accurately. Since many people on this forum can accurately weigh full packs, I would think they can weigh a bear can full of water.

Pouring has minor issues — spillage, splashing, water left behind in nooks and crannies, how accurately can you measure the water you pour out — it is pretty good, but I doubt it is to the precision you can weigh the water.

Measuring has all kinds of issues, such as Bob G pointed out above. One other one is that accurately measuring the inside measurements is easier said than done for some people and some geometries. With measuring, it will be hard to allow for the rounded corners, etc. I think that by the time you sort all that out, it is easier and more confidence inspiring to just weigh the darned thing.

–MV

Bear Can Volume = (weight of can full of water – weight of empty can) x (12 x 12 x 12) x (1/62.4)

Notes:
1. Calculated volume is cubic inches.
2. Canister weights are pounds.

Michael,

I hate the fact that RMNP now requires canisters. One of the few refuges I had from the nanny state this country is creating has now succumbed. I haven't gone overnight camping in the park since they forced this insulting rule on people.

I thought about buying a Bearicade but they're too expensive and not worth it to me to use just in the park. After thinking about it, I decided to just stop camping in RMNP altogether(kind of out of protest). They're are still plenty of other (less crowded) places in CO to backpack that don't force me to carry these heavy monstrosities.

I'm with Jason. Always wanted to go to RMNP, forget it now. A solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

Crap indeed. But is it really a non-existent problem? Methinks too many people either don't bother with proper food hanging — or do a lousy job at it — so many bears have associated campsites with food.

OTOH, if you are actually carrying a bear container the whole friggin' day — chances are you will actually use it.

RMNP –
As someone pointed out earlier, official web pages are sometimes wrong…

But currently canisters are only required if you are "below treeline". That leaves a fair amount of room to wander through. Hike low, sleep high.

"I see that my comment engendered more discussion than I had anticipated!"

Indeed, and an interesting discussion it has been. However, there is one aspect of this whole issue that has been left out, IMO: The volume of the food that will go into the canister. I am curious as to how many people have a handle on the volume of their food, either on a daily basis or a trip basis. If anyone does, I'd be interested in knowing how they go about calculating the volume. Absent that, the whole discussion about accounting for the nooks and crannies, etc, down to the last cubic inch seems like a pointless exercise, interesting and fun, but pointless nonetheless.

I keep notes.

From one trip I see that 6 days of food went into a stuff sack that was 8" in diameter, and 15" tall when closed, or ~750 ci.

I crammed eight days of food (for a nine-day trip) into one Garcia canister one time. I figured that the food was so thin that I lost one pound of body weight per day.

–B.G.–

IMO, asking people about the volume of their food per day is like asking about the volume of their gear or pack space. Not very useful.

As an example, I use Mountain House dinners — whereas I know Tom only prepares cold meals. Given the same container, I am pretty sure he can cram a lot more days' worth.

As well, I eat like a pig — and many folks I know — Tom included — eat like birds.

Methinks figuring out a container's objective volume and then applying it to our own needs (we only have to do it once) is better than using other people's subjective packing/eating habits and trying to apply to ourselves.

I think the best solution for me is to do a dry run on packing the food. I make all of my own dehydrated meals and I should be wrapped up at the end of this week with all of the packing and assembling. The hardest challenge that I have is the logistics of doing this for 9 people and the only way I will know for sure is to get it in the can.

Thanks to everyone's help. My approach was to buy 2 BV 500's and they will be here Tuesday (Ordered from the Winterfix.com 20% off coupon Andy at Campsaver posted). So if at the end of the test pack I'm short, I will have time run out and get another one.

Jason – I hear you on the RMNP restrictions. The location that I had reserved still has over 2 feet of snow (found that out from a scouting hike today) so we are going to relocate the trip to Comanche Peaks Wilderness.

So now my thread should read "I didn't have have to by 2 Bear Canisters, but I did anyway… CRAP!!!"

Oh, don't you just love irony!

Anyway – this is a great thread and I really appreciate everyone's input.

Mike

"From one trip I see that 6 days of food went into a stuff sack that was 8" in diameter, and 15" tall when closed, or ~750 ci."

I notice that you measured it. ;-) And derived the volume after the fact by measuring the filled container. I was referring to the volume of the food, itself, before putting it in a container of known volume, which could as well be a canister. Knowing the volume of the food in advance would provide some predictive capability. My point is that it seems to be trial and error up to the point of actually filling a container, which means the benefit of knowing the volume of the container in advance is academic, unless you are switching to a new container of the same volume. Using Greg's example, what good would it do to know that the volume of canister "x" is 750 c.i. unless you had already gone through Greg's exercise? Sure, the manufacturer will state that the canister holds 6 person days of food, but individual results will vary all over the map for reasons along the lines of Ben's last post. Which brings me back to my original point: Why get into a "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" volume calculation exercise when the only sure way to know how much of YOUR food the container(stuff sack, canister, whatever) will hold is to start stuffing? That said, it's been an interesting thread.

For the record, I can fit 10 days food quite nicely in my Ursack. I could probably squeeze a couple more in, if necessary, but I don't go out more than 10 days anymore, so why bother.

I am curious as to how many people have a handle on the volume of their food, either on a daily basis or a trip basis.

I think that knowing the volume is worthwhile. I am assuming a linear relationship between cubic inches and days of food — i.e. days = K * cubic inches, where K differs both for individuals and type of trip. (FWIW: I have noted that most manufacturers seem to be using K =~ 0.01 — i.e. 100 ci/day — for their capacity estimates.)

I have also noted that some here on BPL have posted about doing better than that figure. Anyone who uses a bear can very often can figure out what works for them before too many trips have gone by. Once you have a good idea of K for your upcoming trip, you have a good idea of how much bear can is needed.

From time to time we get questions like "I'm going on an N-day trip. Is my XXX bear can big enough? If not how many bear cans do I need?" A rule of thumb for cubic inches per day gives a base point to start from.

Paying attention to cubic inches also allows comparing two different brands in terms of carrying capacity.

–MV

Tom – I absolutely see your point. I actually highlight your point given the fact that I make my own meals and they are never the same size. Many off the shelf meals are standardized (or close to) and that can be an estimation, but mine are dependent on what I have on hand when I make the meals.

Anyway – I think it would be wise for anyone to do a few test packs and get comfortable with what you have once you get a container or bag. The more you use it, the more you know what you can do with it.

My point is that it seems to be trial and error up to the point of actually filling a container, which means the benefit of knowing the volume of the container in advance is academic, unless you are switching to a new container of the same volume.

Not really. You do not need to get bogged down in the details. You can do things like "I know from experience that my normal food takes N cu in per day. How much bear can capacity do I need for my upcoming D day trip of P people ?". It will not be precise, but it should give at least a starting point.

–MV

I'm more interested in counting beer cans than bear cans.

–B.G.–

"I know from experience that my normal food takes N cu in per day."

That was my original question, Bob. Does anyone here have a method for determining the volume of their daily food ration, other than trial and error? If, in fact, one does know what that volume consistently is, than your statement holds true. As for lack of precision, that is true for sure and exactly what led me to argue that getting hung up on measuring the exact volume of a canister is an academic exercise.

"I'm more interested in counting beer cans than bear cans."

OK. How many beer cans does it take to hold your food for a 7 day trip?

It's more like how many beer cans it takes to sustain me on a 7 day trip.

I know that I cannot pack one day of food into less than 100 cubic inches without suffering a body weight loss.

For that matter, for one upcoming trip, I have myself budgeted for 4.5 pounds of food for a 6 night trip.

–B.G.–

"For that matter, for one upcoming trip, I have myself budgeted for 4.5 pounds of food for a 6 night trip."

That sounds like a recipe for serious weight loss, unless it doesn't include the weight of the beer. ;}

"For that matter, for one upcoming trip, I have myself budgeted for 4.5 pounds of food for a 6 night trip."

That sounds like a recipe for serious weight loss, unless it doesn't include the weight of the beer. ;}

Even if none of that weight is beer, that sounds like weight loss — how many in this group can go for 0.9 lbs/day and not lose weight?

–MV

Does anyone here have a method for determining the volume of their daily food ration, other than trial and error?

I would think that anyone who uses a bear can very often has an idea of how full it usually is for how many days, and can get a volume from that. For others, I agree with your remark — that's something they would have to pay attention to, if they cared.

–MV

"I would think that anyone who uses a bear can very often has an idea of how full it usually is for how many days, and can get a volume from that"

Yup. That's how I figured it out, too, by experimentation. It certainly wouldn't have done me any good to spend a lot of time trying to figure out the exact volume of my Ursack in advance, though, hence my original comment. Where things got interesting for me was when, upon receiving my Ursack, I quickly found out that it would only hold 8 day's worth of my food as I was packing it at the time. So, the problem for me to solve, if I was to use it for my typical 9-10 day trip, was finding ways to reduce the internal dead space in my food packing system.
The first thing I changed was to stop packing each day's rations in a 1 quart ziploc baggie, and pack the individual items separately in a way the utilized their ability to conform to the contours of the Ursack or other items not necessarily in that day's ration. This required a certain amount of thought to avoid hassles locating a day's food items in the field, but it was manageable. The second thing I did was to reduce the dead space within individual items, e.g. crushing nut, chips, crackers, etc, or pricking sealed items like bars or Perpetuem packets with a needle to eliminate whatever gas was trapped within the packaging. There are a number of other possibilities, but these two yielded the biggest reductions. By the time I finished the exercise, I was able to get 10 day's worth of food in the Ursack, and I think I can squeeze another day or two in if I really get anal about the whole thing. I think this is really worth paying attention to, because otherwise one may find himself faced with either limiting his trip duration, or going to a larger, heavier canister that will take up more room in his pack and possibly force him to use a larger, heavier pack. My 2 cents.